Questions about factories

Share your best strategies and tactics with other players by posting them here.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

Post Reply
User avatar
Grotius
Posts: 5842
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 5:34 pm
Location: The Imperial Palace.

Questions about factories

Post by Grotius »

I have a couple newbish questions about factories.

1. If I strategically bomb a factory that is idle, does this bombing have any effect on the number of build points produced by the enemy that turn? The rules as written seem to imply that the enemy will lose a build point regardless of whether the factory is actually idle.

2. Japan often has idle factories. Should the Japanese player make sure those idle factories are on the perimeter (in China, say), and make sure the "busy" factories are further from enemy bombers?

3. Are there any other considerations that affect where one should choose to send resources? Obviously efficient use of convoys, resources and oil are crucial factors. I'm wondering more about military considerations.

Thanks.
Image
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Questions about factories

Post by composer99 »

Idle factories aren't a concern for strategic bombing.

RAC defines eligible targets for strategic bombing as follows:
A target hex can be any hex that contains an enemy controlled usable factory. A factory is usable if the controlling side could transport a resource to it and, if they did, it would produce a production point (see 14.6.1). Clarification: “Could transport” means that at the time of the strategic bombardment, a resource could be transported (e.g., a convoy pipeline is in position).
A target hex could instead be an enemy controlled oil resource hex. You can’t fly a strategic bombardment mission against a hex that only contains other resources.

If you could transport a resource to a factory, it can be bombed. A factory is only exempt from being bombed if it's been cut off from resources (e.g. a besieged Leningrad).

So to answer your questions:

1 - Yes, bombing a factory that has not (in Production Planning) been directed a resource affects production.

2 - It doesn't matter, unless Japan can cut off resource access to its own factories (which would rarely come up, I'm sure).

3 - The only military consideration, as far as I can see, about where to send resources is when you have to set up convoy lines to do it, keeping in mind that a convoy chain has to be defended, provides a bonus to enemy searches and, if you're playing with limited overseas supply, may have military implications in addition to affecting production.
~ Composer99
User avatar
Grotius
Posts: 5842
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 5:34 pm
Location: The Imperial Palace.

RE: Questions about factories

Post by Grotius »

Thanks, Composer. I thought maybe the rule meant that, but I wasn't sure.

So isn't it possible that a country like Japan (with excess factories) might sometimes prefer *not* to capture a factory if that factory will shortly be subject to strategic bombing? The new factory doesn't help Japan's production, and if it's a particularly easy bombing target, it might actually hurt it.
Image
User avatar
paulderynck
Posts: 8356
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:27 pm
Location: Canada

RE: Questions about factories

Post by paulderynck »

It's quite rare that that would be a big consideration. It costs the opposition an air mission, it's not automatically a success unless they send lots of bombers, and one fighter in range and able to intercept is usually enough to discourage them even attempting to bomb it.
Paul
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Questions about factories

Post by composer99 »

It is possible, although I dare say both an unlikely and infrequent consideration, at least for Japan. Keep in mind that only factories appearing red on the map are eligible targets for Japan to conquer, and there are five that it can reasonably expect to conquer in a game (although probably only 2 or 3 in any given game):

- Chungking
- Kunming
- Melbourne
- Calcutta
- Vladivostok

Germany, by contrast, frequently sees Lille and Paris getting bombed in what amounts to the situation you describe (especially Lille since it's in range for short-range Spitfires in the UK), but of course other considerations make not capturing those hexes unviable.
~ Composer99
User avatar
Grotius
Posts: 5842
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 5:34 pm
Location: The Imperial Palace.

RE: Questions about factories

Post by Grotius »

Thanks. I think I get it. Off to play. :)
Image
brian brian
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:39 pm

RE: Questions about factories

Post by brian brian »

In my opinion it is best to think of factories in clusters, or pockets. Where any factory has a valid rail path or convoy point path to a resource and another factory, they are all treated the same by the rules. Players can deny resources to one factory cluster or another, however, when they make decisions about having convoy points at sea in a given impulse, though that is far more of a theoretical construct than practical one. It is a challenge to sort out all the possible rules issues. It gets sticky when convoy points are being used to transport declared Lending, or in the fixed Trade Agreements. It is not explicit in the rules what to do if the only convoy point connecting a resource to a factory, making it an eligible bombing target, is also currently the only convoy point that could fulfill a Trade Agreement; all judged that impulse only. I'm sure MWiF's code had to make a decision on that.

The cardboard player is allowed control only over where the convoy points are, but can't say Lille or Paris is idle just because the Germans have one more factory than total resources. Once the turn ends Partisans can appear and change the valid rail connections to resources or factories, the player can still make Return to Base decisions for Convoy Points and change things again. There are only two penalties in the rules for not moving resources on Convoy Points - specific ones for Japan or the USA breaking their Trade Agreement; and the loss of some resources, somewhere if you promised to lend X amount of resources but then can't deliver some or all of them. And Convoy Points must be used for this if they are at sea, before they can be used for your own resources. Say a Murmansk convoy is wiped out in Nov/Dec 41 (Arctic zone has no Allied CP at end of turn), and the Axis control Syria and Iraq but the CW had loaned one resource to the USSR. The CW could then declare that it lost one of their resources in Malaya, even if they had no convoys in the Bay of Bengal or the South China Sea. However if they had a convoy in the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf, they would have to move a resource from India to the USSR (or via CP in the East Med from Cyprus or elsewhere the East Med might connect to), and could not use those CP for anything else.

Only the state of the board during the Strategic Bombardment Phase, and Production Phase matter in the rules. (Playing with the Construction Engineers optional does give a conquering power the option of simply never fixing a captured Red factory likely to be easily exposed to enemy action).

This idea of factories in disparate clusters affects the CW, Japan, and any otherwise cohesive land Major Power with enemy units occupying their Home Country, or a Major Power with disjunct aligned minors with factories, or disjunct areas with a captured red factory. Perhaps using those clusters a little more in a new improved production interface could simplify things both for the players, and the programming logic, rather than matching each single resource to a single factory, or declaring some individual factory idle. But an idea that reads simply might not be so simple when writing a computer program, and just reading the FAQ on these issues should reveal to anyone a lot of complicated decisions Steve likely had to make for all this.
User avatar
Grotius
Posts: 5842
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 5:34 pm
Location: The Imperial Palace.

RE: Questions about factories

Post by Grotius »

just reading the FAQ on these issues should reveal to anyone a lot of complicated decisions Steve likely had to make for all this.

Well said. The more I learn about this game, the more I appreciate how complex it must be to translate it into code.
Image
User avatar
paulderynck
Posts: 8356
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:27 pm
Location: Canada

RE: Questions about factories

Post by paulderynck »

ORIGINAL: brian brian

It is not explicit in the rules what to do if the only convoy point connecting a resource to a factory, making it an eligible bombing target, is also currently the only convoy point that could fulfill a Trade Agreement; all judged that impulse only.
I would say it is explicit. Yes I know you meant that CP must, by the rule, be only carrying something outbound, but the wording is: "if the factory could produce". And the fact is, at that moment, it indeed could produce, because no one knows what other CPs could be in place to fulfill the trade agreement by the end of the turn. Even if you claimed all the CPs on your side were at sea, I could claim that it's possible you could return and re-org some to make up the deficit! Then we get to look for unused HQs and ATRs all over the world? I think not.

The funniest situations arise when the factory city has an oil stored in it.
Paul
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Questions about factories

Post by composer99 »

Basically, at the point of strat bombing, the factory is Schrödinger's factory unless it really couldn't be used for production. You only decide whether it's actually producing or not in the production step.
~ Composer99
brian brian
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:39 pm

RE: Questions about factories

Post by brian brian »

I just peeked and the problematic word "could" in these rules won't be used in the future.

But you all might enjoy this probably old joke:


Heisenberg and Schrödinger get pulled over for speeding.

The cop asks Heisenberg "Do you know how fast you were going?"

Heisenberg replies, "No, but we know exactly where we are!"

The officer looks at him confused and says "you were going 108 miles per hour!"

Heisenberg throws his arms up and cries, "Great! Now we're lost!"


The officer looks over the car and asks Schrödinger if the two men have anything in the trunk.

"A cat," Schrödinger replies.

The cop opens the trunk and yells "Hey! This cat is dead."

Schrödinger angrily replies, "Well he is now."
User avatar
paulderynck
Posts: 8356
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:27 pm
Location: Canada

RE: Questions about factories

Post by paulderynck »

Contemporary photo of Heisenberg...

Image
Attachments
heisenberg.jpg
heisenberg.jpg (54.92 KiB) Viewed 149 times
Paul
User avatar
Grotius
Posts: 5842
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 5:34 pm
Location: The Imperial Palace.

RE: Questions about factories

Post by Grotius »

LoL, Schrodinger's factory. I love this forum. :)
Image
User avatar
AxelNL
Posts: 2389
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 12:43 pm
Location: The Netherlands

RE: Questions about factories

Post by AxelNL »

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I just peeked and the problematic word "could" in these rules won't be used in the future.

But you all might enjoy this probably old joke:


Heisenberg and Schrödinger get pulled over for speeding.

The cop asks Heisenberg "Do you know how fast you were going?"

Heisenberg replies, "No, but we know exactly where we are!"

The officer looks at him confused and says "you were going 108 miles per hour!"

Heisenberg throws his arms up and cries, "Great! Now we're lost!"


The officer looks over the car and asks Schrödinger if the two men have anything in the trunk.

"A cat," Schrödinger replies.

The cop opens the trunk and yells "Hey! This cat is dead."

Schrödinger angrily replies, "Well he is now."

My wife loved this one, as a physics teacher with more than normal interests in quantum mechanics!
tnx
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”