Economic Upgrade thread

Please post here for questions and discussion about scenario design, art and sound modding and the game editor for WITP Admiral's Edition.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
User avatar
Bliztk
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 am
Location: Electronic City

Economic Upgrade thread

Post by Bliztk »

First, I want to thank JWE and MichaelM for taking up time for answering my PM plea and coding my humble request. Three hurrah for them [&o]

Second on business, I asked JWE if we could modify the supplies amount needed to repair devices, and after a brief delay the wizards come with:
This requires the latest beta tweak 1108m9.

Devices from 518-Oil to 528-Refinery can adjust the supply cost, to repair 1 point of damage, up to 5000 per point by entering the desired number into the Load Cost field. If Load Cost remains = 0, the repair cost will simply default to the normal value.

Originally some of these devices could have their repair costs decreased, but a way was found to get them to increase, and it was extended to all Devices in the list. Only thing you can't tweak is aircraft factories.

So just put 5000 into the LC of Device 521-HI and there you go. Don't forget this will apply to all HI everywhere, and for both sides.

Main ideas

Allies

I would like to increase the production, CONUSA should start in 1941 with little supplies/fuel surplus, and peak in late 43/early 44. The way of doing this is adding damaged resources/oil/HI to CONUSA. I could add some in Britain to boost CBI theater late in war.

Japan

Here lie the main problem, and adjustments. Basically by all accounts Japanese Economy was run on a shoestring, but in AE, managed properly is on steroids, and no trade offs are needed, because you can out-produce the Allies, while accelerating all the important capital ships.

I want to crunch the numbers backwards, but didn´t have time to do it, but what I want to do is to calculate a “reasonable production levels” and put the needed factories around.

Japan should produce X airplanes and Y ships, thus needs Z HI points, not the currently way is done.

Correction Measures (Proposals)

OIL/FUEL

The refinery supply production needs to be eliminated.
As JWE suggested, until 60s or 70s you couldn´t get 1 ton of POL from a ton of oil.
Currently 10 oil is 1 supply and 9 fuel.
An approach could be 60% so the result would be
10 oil = 6 fuel

Increase the oil production and refineries to compensate. A plus is to have Japan to use his tanker fleet more.

Aircraft/shipyards
I would put all the R&D airplanes and engines at 0x1, Japan must pay for any R&D.

Increase the supply costs for repairing Aircraft/Engines/Merchant/Naval shipyards

HI/LI
While maintaining (or increasing) the supply production I think that the mix of LI/HI should be changed to favor LI.

Second, I feel that Japan has too much HI to work. After 2-3 months, you can stop armament industries and run on a surplus accumulating HI from day 1.
Third currently LI expansion is not profitable. Players only expand HI. Make LI expansion profitable.

I have thought about increasing the input to the HI, but not the HI point output.
Something like 5x the input, and an HI output of 4x. This would need a reduction of 80% of HI to match the production.

I want to make the LI expansion profitable. The rationale is while LI is less optimal production wise, also it requires less supplies to setup.

After the brainstorming, I need input and ideas !

Image
User avatar
Bliztk
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 am
Location: Electronic City

Current todo list / package

Post by Bliztk »

To do:
Calculate the Japanese HI needs according to its production

OIL/FUEL
Change the output from oil to fuel 10 to 6. Eliminate the 1 supply output.
Increase the oil production to match (temporally measure, until we can integrate the barrel production)
Oil point repair = 1000 supplies
Refinery point repair = 1000 supplies

Resources
Unchanged
Resource point repair = 1000 supplies

Armament/Vehicle Industry
Unchanged
Armament/Vehicle Industry repair = 1000 supplies

Light Industry
LI repair = 500 supplies (from 1000)

Heavy Industry
Input increased 5x times. HI points output increased 4x times.
Nº adjusted to 20%
HI repair = 5000 supplies (to take in account increase)
Image
User avatar
Bliztk
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 am
Location: Electronic City

Economic Upgrade thread - Discussion

Post by Bliztk »

Thread open for contributions !
Image
fcharton
Posts: 1112
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 5:51 pm
Location: France

RE: Economic Upgrade thread - Discussion

Post by fcharton »

Hi,

About oil and fuel, I think it could be interesting to incorporate coal. A significant part of the Japanese fleet (merchants mostly) ran on coal, as did most of asian heavy industry. Now, if you extend oil/fuel to mean petrol and coal based products, fuel production areas will change, and you will have more production centres, with less output each.

In China, this will make a huge difference: the Gansu corridor (Sian, Lanchow, Urumchi) will lose some of its in-game importance, while Shanxi (Taiyuan, Tatung, and even Hohoot/Kweisui) will get some back (it was quite an important area during the war, in AE, it is just some backwater). Also, the current situation where all fuel is in the north, and the industry in the centre and south, will be more balanced, with (smaller) fuel sources more evenly distributed around the country. This will not make chinese supply problems disappear, but it will prevent the strangling of their industry, and reduce the all-importance of Sian (which I think it a bit exagerated).

On a more general level, I think scattering a bit oil/fuel/resource production would be a good idea: this would reduce the effect of early game strategic bombing (which most games correct via home rules), and discourage strategies revolving around "one base".

Finally, if you increase the cost for repairs, you might want to think about facility damage. Right now, the "percentage damage" which seem to be the rule, make it very easy to destroy large facilities in the early months of the war (by bombing or capture). I think it would be useful to make BOTH facilities harder to repair, and harder to damage. I understand this might pose a problem with late war damage to Japanese industry, so a design for effect special rule for Japan might be in order.

But then, perhaps just splitting the industry into smaller units (which seem to be more resilient) would solve the problem.

Francois
User avatar
treespider
Posts: 5781
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:34 am
Location: Edgewater, MD

RE: Economic Upgrade thread - Discussion

Post by treespider »

You may want to take a look at this thread and this thread.
Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910
User avatar
Bliztk
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 am
Location: Electronic City

RE: Economic Upgrade thread - Discussion

Post by Bliztk »

ORIGINAL: treespider

You may want to take a look at this thread and this thread.

I didn´t want to hijack your threads. Also now there is the latest patch change, that should open new ways of tweaking the economic model
Image
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9881
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: Economic Upgrade thread - Discussion

Post by ny59giants »

While you look at the economic side of things, how will your proposed changes effect the Allies ability to destroy those HI factories with B-29s?? In my limited experience, they are too easy to destroy by direct hits and out of control fires.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: Economic Upgrade thread - Discussion

Post by JWE »

btw - it was all michaelm. He's been messing with this since the 1106 exe.

Several people (Vettim, Spidey, LargeSlowTarget, others?) have some nice ideas on just how much damage the US industry should start out with. Increasing the repair cost won't change the repair time (so long as there is enough supply), but it will make it a bit more painful. Which is the idea, yeah? [;)]
User avatar
Bliztk
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 am
Location: Electronic City

RE: Economic Upgrade thread - Discussion

Post by Bliztk »

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

While you look at the economic side of things, how will your proposed changes effect the Allies ability to destroy those HI factories with B-29s?? In my limited experience, they are too easy to destroy by direct hits and out of control fires.

Well, we can always reduce the effectivenes of B-29, but the first priority is that Japan cannot field 1000 J7W1 in January 1945 [;)]

ORIGINAL: JWE

btw - it was all michaelm. He's been messing with this since the 1106 exe.

Several people (Vettim, Spidey, LargeSlowTarget, others?) have some nice ideas on just how much damage the US industry should start out with. Increasing the repair cost won't change the repair time (so long as there is enough supply), but it will make it a bit more painful. Which is the idea, yeah? [;)]

Of course, we can add more or less LI/HI to offset the repair costs. Also can add free supplies.

The rate should be controlled by the nº of bases, and the extent of damages, but CONUSA has enough bases to easily adjust the numbers
Image
User avatar
Bliztk
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 am
Location: Electronic City

At start numbers

Post by Bliztk »

Currently (DBB)

HI= 6950
LI= 9340
Refinery = 1035
Armament = 620
Vehicle = 72
Engines = 443
Engines(R&D)=206
Aircraft = 443
Aircraft(R&D)= 503
Naval Shipyard= 1384
Merchant Shipyard= 807

Supply Production = 24275
HI Production = 13900

Image
User avatar
inqistor
Posts: 1813
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 1:19 pm

RE: Economic Upgrade thread

Post by inqistor »

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

Basically by all accounts Japanese Economy was run on a shoestring, but in AE, managed properly is on steroids, and no trade offs are needed, because you can out-produce the Allies, while accelerating all the important capital ships.
Well, you have deficit of Naval Points, but since Submarines are quite expensive (which seems actually quite historical), by disabling them, you get lots of extra production. But you can not accelerate anything, and normally produce the rest.
Currently 10 oil is 1 supply and 9 fuel.
An approach could be 60% so the result would be
10 oil = 6 fuel
That way there is NO reason to transport oil, because you can get almost TWICE as much fuel, with the same number of ships.
While maintaining (or increasing) the supply production I think that the mix of LI/HI should be changed to favor LI.
Agree
Second, I feel that Japan has too much HI to work. After 2-3 months, you can stop armament industries and run on a surplus accumulating HI from day 1.
That is, because there is something HORRIBLY WRONG with Armament Points. Historically Japan was unable to rearm into new rifles through whole war, so that in-game means, they were not producing enough armaments.
User avatar
n01487477
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:00 am

RE: Economic Upgrade thread

Post by n01487477 »

To do this properly more options need to be opened up in the editor & fractions allowed for in/out ... something T has said won't happen.
User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 4800
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

RE: Economic Upgrade thread

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

ORIGINAL: inqistor

That is, because there is something HORRIBLY WRONG with Armament Points. Historically Japan was unable to rearm into new rifles through whole war, so that in-game means, they were not producing enough armaments.

According to Bergerud's "Touched with fire", in 1939 the Japanese started production of a new Model 99 Arisaka rifle which was shorter and lighter than the Model 38 and fired a .303 round. Most Model 99s went to troops in Manchuria because in the open plains of Manchuria the longer range of the Model 99 was more important than in the jungles of the SRA, although some units in the South Pacific received Model 99s later in the war. The main reason why there was no complete change-over was that the 38 fired the same round as the standard light machine guns, and switching rifles would have complicated ammo supply. So it seems the failure to rearm was a deliberate choice for logistical reasons rather than the inability to do so production-wise.
User avatar
Bliztk
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 am
Location: Electronic City

RE: Economic Upgrade thread

Post by Bliztk »

I plan to calculate the monthly production requeriments, and adjust the at start HI/LI.

But this weekend, when I have more time
Image
User avatar
inqistor
Posts: 1813
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 1:19 pm

RE: Economic Upgrade thread

Post by inqistor »

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget
According to Bergerud's "Touched with fire", in 1939 the Japanese started production of a new Model 99 Arisaka rifle which was shorter and lighter than the Model 38 and fired a .303 round. Most Model 99s went to troops in Manchuria because in the open plains of Manchuria the longer range of the Model 99 was more important than in the jungles of the SRA, although some units in the South Pacific received Model 99s later in the war. The main reason why there was no complete change-over was that the 38 fired the same round as the standard light machine guns, and switching rifles would have complicated ammo supply. So it seems the failure to rearm was a deliberate choice for logistical reasons rather than the inability to do so production-wise.
You have to rearm whole Division in one shot, so logistics was surely main reason (and you should also change LMGs to use same caliber, as rifles), but it also shows interesting trend:
In larger land-mass rearming was probably easier, as you could send more rifles, and there was more possible units to benefit from this, but it can also suggest, that whole Pacific Adventure was considered secondary importance for Empire defence.
Also, stronger cartridge should actually behave better in dense foliage of jungle, so in one way it is more important, in other way, less important.

And, the main problem is, that most of the army arms were in some phase of rearming. Divisional artillery was supposed to get long-barelled Type 90, AT units, should rearm into 47mm. None of this was achieved during war completely.

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

I plan to calculate the monthly production requeriments, and adjust the at start HI/LI.
Remember to include expenses for pilots training. It greatly increases with time.
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design and Modding”