Arms Trade Tycoon - Tanks

[Sir Slash]

I think the best example of corporate interests creating military design would be Fascist Italy under Mussolini. The well-connected Party supporters got all the contracts to build military weapon systems and there was no competition among them. The result was inferior weapons when Italy needed them to fight a real war. The corporations simply built whatever was cheapest and easiest for them regardless of whether it was what was actually needed. Then they had to scramble to catch-up when their systems were proven inferior.  #:-)

[matt3916]

And let's not forget the Brewster Aeronautical Corporation.

[Destraex]

'Arms of Krupp' too.

Yep, good book.

Krupp, Henschel, MAN AG, and many, many others continued to defraud and siphon millions from the Reich for substandard products they knew were defective or had serious issues. The same goes for the Sherman and Cromwell manufactures and their subsidiaries. They avoided fixing key issues with their vehicles because it was too expensive and because defective or substandard assets means more capital for them with regards to parts and or factory repairs.

Shades of grey.

Not really.

Read, "War is a Racket" by retired USMC Major General Smedley D. Butler.  He is one of only a handful of US Military services members to have been the recipient of the Medal of Honor...twice.

His experience in his career is summarized as follows:

War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

During his decades of service (1898 - 1931) in the United States Marine Corps, Butler confesses:

I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

The book is based on a speech he gave and was published in 1935. I believe you can find a copy online easily for free.

So you don't see any nationalism in that or in any of the books, any care for the countries soldiers lives or the war effort at all? No pride or morals? None?
You cannot find any companies that had more than a passing interest in anything but running rackets? That is just depressing. In peace time I get that but in war time I would have hoped they would get on with the job with so much at stake. A little haggling and trying to corner the market is fine, but good intentions is what I would have expected from at least some manufacturers. Not even a small shade of grey, all deep black huh.

Jar's on point here.

It's the antithesis of nationalism. He (Butler) points out, and rightly so, how American foreign policy was dictated by corporate interests and Wall Street. I mean Jesus, America fought a nearly 30 year war to keep Chiquita Banana in business. That's just absurd. Keep in mind that Butler is still celebrated as a Marine Corps hero, though I never heard about any of his essays in boot. Ever. At all. It wasn't until I had found myself on my second deployment to Iraq that his works were circulated amongst the platoon.

This is nothing new, however. The Third Reich protracted it's war-machine towards to the east for slaves, farmland, oil, and molybdenum. The British Empire waged wars over slaves, tea, and opium. Rome waged wars over slaves, marble, port access, and wheat.

The purpose of war is meant to achieve only three objectives:

• A political outcome.
• An economic outcome.
• A combination of the two above aforementioned aspects.

This is the crux of every war since man first picked up a branch, sharpened it into a spear, saw that their neighbor was better off than them, and decided to kill them for what they have.  I have no qualms about this, period. I witnessed this firsthand as a young Marine (2001-2005) and became far more acquainted with it as a Soldier (US Army, 2008-2017). Out of my eight deployments to combats zones, my three Purple Hearts, my seven ARCOM's (three for valor), and my completely non-deserved Bronze Star (absolutely didn't deserve it) I've come to a conclusion. We weren't there to liberate or free anyone. We were there for Textron, Sinopec, Lockheed, BP, Glencore, and many others.

This is not to say I'm not proud. I'm very proud of my troops and the platoons that I lead and that we kept each other alive. I'm proud that we killed those that were trying to kill us while avoiding civilians in the process. I'm proud that we never purposefully targeted anyone that wasn't a threat. I'm proud that we killed or captured HVT's/HVI's that were no shit, an Islamic version of a radical Nazis. But at the end of the day, I still understand why we where there and how it came about.

Naivety doesn't suit you.   

First of all. I appreciate your well thought out comments and respect you for your service. You sound like a pretty amazing individual and a humble one at that. All attributes I have the utmost respect for.

I would say you are right when you imply I am not so naive about the goings on when it comes to arms manufacturers taking more time and thus spending more government money on weapons projects than is needed. As well as pushing war agendas to make more money selling the finished products. Anybody who has been around the computer wargaming scene for as long as most members here would have some inkling of these arms tycoons facts, which is why I was saying I hated the term in this games name. I don't want to be that guy, I wanted to find some niche in history that was a bit cleaner than the worst of the worst.  There is good gameplay in designing the best and most efficient weapon for your troops. Less so for one that is good for repeat business while your country dies.

It is always going to be the case that powerful people will want more power and it is natural for them to try to deal with potential threats and secure the future of their incomes. By extension it is natural for a country to want to secure itself and it's supply lines as well. Because if you don't, you end up in a corner being dictated to by those that did.

What I don't like though, is that there is a perception that "nobody" making weapons in ww1 when the tank arrived had the survival of their nations troops and the end of the war at heart. What I am imagining is from a British and French perspective as a war was being fought on their very doorstep and their countries very fate was at stake, their way of life. That their was no nationalistic fervor by not only the owner, but the designer, factory workers and everybody else involved under these conditions. Did none of them have family dying in the war, no feeling at all for anything but money which they probably already had in spades? Were there no Christian values? Where was this cultural superiority complex people keep ranting about? The pride in ones work? Was there nothing binding the weapons designers and makers to their peoples plight? People are complex but realistically of course, your primary concern as the person who runs the company would be money.
I hope that people are reading the worst sensationalist material that of course gives the worst impression of the whole industry. 

Remember the very first scenario in the demo for this game is one which would have taken place in Britain during ww1 while people were dying a few miles away across the channel. I would have a major problem personally with running a company that spat out sub standard faulty weapons while siphoning off money on the side while I already had a lot of that. A lot of people would not, I know. I'd play the game from the perspective of proudly giving the troops what they needed while turning a reasonable profit. I am sure there were a few companies like that, especially among the smaller ones that turned their companies from things like building Buses or Boilers to building trucks and tanks. Could they be described as Tycoons? Quaker industrialists ever into arms, I suppose not?

In the end I guess I would prefer that the games focus be on the design and production of the tanks and not the money tycoon behind it all. As usual the man at the top is probably not the one doing the heavy lifting, as is the same with the players of this game. We will be playing everybody, primarily the heavy lifters. I am interested in the invention and mechanics of the tanks themselves.

I really should pick up those books you guys mention and have a read. I imagine it is a very depressing read. I wish we humans could organise ourselves better so that all these shenanigans did not have to happen. But that is life from the single celled organisms up I guess.

[Ian C]

In the meantime there's this:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/1674170/Sprocket/

RECENT REVIEWS:
Overwhelmingly Positive (303)

ALL REVIEWS:
Very Positive (3,209)

[Sir Slash]

Very cool!  :bd: