Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries - 7/5/2013 5:47:56 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 10406
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panjack

Just to confirm: repairing one point of HI requires 1,000 supply points (and a minimum stock of 10,000 points is required in the city to do repairs). In turn, each point of HI generates 2 supply points. So it would take 500 days to break even if you repair HI.




You might search for threads where this is discussed in terms of opportunity cots. What you say is true as far as it goes, but the total system costs and benefits is not a simple decision. In particular, look at the costs of not repairing the HI in terms of what other costs are incurred to make up for it. Transport fuel, ship damage, risk of attack to additional transports, etc. Not to mention not having enough HI at the end of the game.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Panjack)
Post #: 31
RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries - 7/5/2013 5:49:03 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 10406
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Actually things will repair without the 10K in stock It is just their repair will just be slowed down if you do not have enough in the pool.


In my experience this is not true for industry. Having 10k supply in the base is a yes/no logic check in every case I've repaired industry. Do you have evidence this is not the case?

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 32
RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries - 7/5/2013 7:03:14 PM   
Mac Linehan

 

Posts: 1419
Joined: 12/19/2004
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline
Gents -

While this subject has been discussed before, this particular thread has been exceptionally useful to me and has cleared up several misconceptions.

I am most appreciative of your informed input.

Mac

_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 33
RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries - 7/5/2013 8:12:41 PM   
Panjack

 

Posts: 366
Joined: 7/12/2009
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
You might search for threads where this is discussed in terms of opportunity cots. What you say is true as far as it goes, but the total system costs and benefits is not a simple decision. In particular, look at the costs of not repairing the HI in terms of what other costs are incurred to make up for it. Transport fuel, ship damage, risk of attack to additional transports, etc. Not to mention not having enough HI at the end of the game.

You must be referring to
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=2855499

I imagine that the costs/benefits of repairing HI differ dramatically between the Japanese and the Allies.

For instance, the Allies don't need any more HI than they already start the game with in LA, SF, and Seattle (these cities give far more than needed to produce any on-map aircraft throughout the whole war).

Second...I think this is true...a single xAKL's worth of supply (say, 1750) is 875-day's worth of HI factory supply production. So if you don't repair the factory and send a single xAKL's worth of supply, this would be equal to repairing the factory and producing for 1,375 days! (And, frankly, I treat xAKLs as disposable units and don't bat an eyelash when one of my unescorted xAKL get sunk). Plus, instead of getting 2 supply points dripping out each day which might not make a difference, if you didn't repair the factory you'd have 1,000 supply points to use from day one (and then the 1,750 you'd get when the xAKL arrived). That might be helpful.

The decision to repair (or not) an HI factory seems a tricky issue. But my bet is that for the Allies this is not a major decision and one can just do what they feel like doing.

Of course, the issue of repairing factories in China (when cut off from ports) is somewhat different.

< Message edited by Panjack -- 7/5/2013 8:16:29 PM >

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 34
RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries - 7/5/2013 9:33:08 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 8750
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
I have played an entire campaign as the Allies and can say that you have no need to look over or touch any thing having to do with industry. This includes Australia. You will have plenty of supply and can produce any airplane that is allowed. So don't fool with it at all.

You may opt to turn off some HI in OZ for the first few months of the game as fuel is short. Do not send fuel to OZ but store it where needed at detached bases such as Hobart or New Zealand. You need fuel for your warships. However, I played the early years before the Allies had the option of turning off Industry with no problem. You have plenty of supply and fuel on the West Coast and a surplus of shipping that has nothing to do in the early months when you are getting creamed. Send supply to OZ. Lots of if in the first year of the war. After that when you are not so heavily based there OZ will make enough supply. You really should not send any fuel to OZ but can do so if you have the shipping and the sea lanes are not blocked. But don't ever turn anything off. You don't need to.



< Message edited by crsutton -- 7/5/2013 9:34:04 PM >


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 35
RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries - 7/5/2013 9:46:00 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 10406
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panjack

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
You might search for threads where this is discussed in terms of opportunity cots. What you say is true as far as it goes, but the total system costs and benefits is not a simple decision. In particular, look at the costs of not repairing the HI in terms of what other costs are incurred to make up for it. Transport fuel, ship damage, risk of attack to additional transports, etc. Not to mention not having enough HI at the end of the game.

You must be referring to
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=2855499

And others Alfred has participated in, with much better words.

I imagine that the costs/benefits of repairing HI differ dramatically between the Japanese and the Allies.

Sure.

For instance, the Allies don't need any more HI than they already start the game with in LA, SF, and Seattle (these cities give far more than needed to produce any on-map aircraft throughout the whole war).

Repairing HI is, to me, for the Allies, completely a supply generation issue.

Second...I think this is true...a single xAKL's worth of supply (say, 1750) is 875-day's worth of HI factory supply production. So if you don't repair the factory and send a single xAKL's worth of supply, this would be equal to repairing the factory and producing for 1,375 days!

Let me know when that ship arrives at Chungking, OK?

(And, frankly, I treat xAKLs as disposable units and don't bat an eyelash when one of my unescorted xAKL get sunk). Plus, instead of getting 2 supply points dripping out each day which might not make a difference, if you didn't repair the factory you'd have 1,000 supply points to use from day one (and then the 1,750 you'd get when the xAKL arrived). That might be helpful.

You are being too geographically lazy.

Of course, the issue of repairing factories in China (when cut off from ports) is somewhat different.

To say the least. The decision to repair/not repair in China can significantly affect 1943 there. If the Allied player intends to abandon China, or pull far, far back then the decision is different again. I just tire of these threads where people say "Always . . ." In AE there is no always, except it always depends.



_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Panjack)
Post #: 36
RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries - 7/5/2013 10:30:12 PM   
Panjack

 

Posts: 366
Joined: 7/12/2009
Status: online
Mr. Moose,

I think we can agree that China is a special case. But I'm not sure that just because we can't drive an xAKL to Chungking that we should repair HI in, say, Calcutta.

And we can agree that general rules ("always do this") are not always valid. Yet, I think it reasonable to say that IF you can supply LCUs by sea (directly or indirectly over land) then it might not be a good idea to repair a damaged HI complex that could also supply the LCUs.

I agree opportunity costs shouldn't be forgotten. But it might be noted that repairing HI today has an opportunity cost: you can't use 1000 supply today to supply units/upgrade units/etc today. There's no such thing as a free K ration!

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 37
RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries - 7/5/2013 10:37:16 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 10406
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Panjack

Mr. Moose,

I think we can agree that China is a special case. But I'm not sure that just because we can't drive an xAKL to Chungking that we should repair HI in, say, Calcutta.

And we can agree that general rules ("always do this") are not always valid. Yet, I think it reasonable to say that IF you can supply LCUs by sea (directly or indirectly over land) then it might not be a good idea to repair a damaged HI complex that could also supply the LCUs.

I agree opportunity costs shouldn't be forgotten. But it might be noted that repairing HI today has an opportunity cost: you can't use 1000 supply today to supply units/upgrade units/etc today. There's no such thing as a free K ration!


I agree with most of this. Over the years I've personally (with my play style) come to think that China is really the only toss-up for the Allies.

BUT, I think the issue is far more fraught for the Japanese. Places like Java, with long over-water LOCs, have different costs/risks than more interior-line HI depots when opportunity costs are averaged in. It might not be xAKLs at risk. It might be fat, modern xAKs with the range to make Java. (I also don't think of any ship as expendable for no gain, but I play for VPs.) Holding Java after fuel is dear might depend a lot on local supply sources that allow forts to be rebuilt in a siege. Many Japanese players have never gotten past mid-game, so they might not see a three-year pay-back as reasonable, given how dear supply is in the rapid expansion and construction phases they have played over and over. And it's a hard wall to climb given the initial cost, no question. But it's still an area that shouldn't be tossed off without thinking it through.



< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 7/5/2013 10:38:47 PM >


_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Panjack)
Post #: 38
RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries - 7/5/2013 11:35:15 PM   
Panjack

 

Posts: 366
Joined: 7/12/2009
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
BUT, I think the issue is far more fraught for the Japanese. Places like Java, with long over-water LOCs, have different costs/risks than more interior-line HI depots when opportunity costs are averaged in. It might not be xAKLs at risk. It might be fat, modern xAKs with the range to make Java. (I also don't think of any ship as expendable for no gain, but I play for VPs.) Holding Java after fuel is dear might depend a lot on local supply sources that allow forts to be rebuilt in a siege. Many Japanese players have never gotten past mid-game, so they might not see a three-year pay-back as reasonable, given how dear supply is in the rapid expansion and construction phases they have played over and over. And it's a hard wall to climb given the initial cost, no question. But it's still an area that shouldn't be tossed off without thinking it through.

I have zero, zip, nada insight into the Japanese supply situation...I'm struggling to figure out the much simpler Allied situation! But now that I'm 300+ days into the war I'm finally trying to learn some of the stuff you can't just learn by trial-and-error and casual perusal of the manual and the forums.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 39
RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries - 7/6/2013 1:45:23 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 10406
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panjack

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
BUT, I think the issue is far more fraught for the Japanese. Places like Java, with long over-water LOCs, have different costs/risks than more interior-line HI depots when opportunity costs are averaged in. It might not be xAKLs at risk. It might be fat, modern xAKs with the range to make Java. (I also don't think of any ship as expendable for no gain, but I play for VPs.) Holding Java after fuel is dear might depend a lot on local supply sources that allow forts to be rebuilt in a siege. Many Japanese players have never gotten past mid-game, so they might not see a three-year pay-back as reasonable, given how dear supply is in the rapid expansion and construction phases they have played over and over. And it's a hard wall to climb given the initial cost, no question. But it's still an area that shouldn't be tossed off without thinking it through.

I have zero, zip, nada insight into the Japanese supply situation...I'm struggling to figure out the much simpler Allied situation! But now that I'm 300+ days into the war I'm finally trying to learn some of the stuff you can't just learn by trial-and-error and casual perusal of the manual and the forums.


True. You have some fun times ahead. You're through the worst.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Panjack)
Post #: 40
RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries - 7/7/2013 2:49:17 AM   
bigred


Posts: 3094
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar


As the allies ther is no reason to ever turn of industry? Why on earth would you want to. anyway? The Allies have piles of everytrhing so there is no shoratage like there is as Japan. Plus the Allies do not 'build' anything. All their planes are based on a fixed schedule/month. The Allies never have to mess with any production as it is totally unlike Japan's. The two systems are totally different.

As the Allies, you cannot expand AC factories, shipyards etc. What you have is what you get is just one example as to how the two sides are totally different.

IIRC ElCid has created a supply production issue for the allies in his RHS mod. Alot of starting allied factories are 50% damaged at start also.

_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 41
RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries - 7/7/2013 8:22:06 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16081
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar


As the allies ther is no reason to ever turn of industry? Why on earth would you want to. anyway? The Allies have piles of everytrhing so there is no shoratage like there is as Japan. Plus the Allies do not 'build' anything. All their planes are based on a fixed schedule/month. The Allies never have to mess with any production as it is totally unlike Japan's. The two systems are totally different.

As the Allies, you cannot expand AC factories, shipyards etc. What you have is what you get is just one example as to how the two sides are totally different.

IIRC ElCid has created a supply production issue for the allies in his RHS mod. Alot of starting allied factories are 50% damaged at start also.


There is considerable truth in this. In some locations, it is in fact understated. It was presented as a suggestion in WITP days as a mechanism so that mod designers are not forced to compromise between starting the Alies with late war production levels, or with much lower early war production levels. It was further developed because of the RHS design concept that we need to have jobs for AKs ("AKs to burn" was an WITP comment still germane in the AE era - leading some modders to eliminate huge fractions of the AKs). In RHS we created the need to feed industry with oil and resources in some locations, and the ability of players to invest in the growth of industry in others. Some places (notably Eastern USA) can always have "repair" turned on for all industry (except aircraft - a special case - in standard RHS). They have enough supplies, resources, oil and fuel to grow everything all the time. Other places require management between investing in growth and loading ships as well as feeding units. In some cases, some industries grow for three years - so that IF one invests in expanding them the 1945 output is much larger than the start of game was.

[Aircraft are different. In RHS "standard" or odd numbered scenarios, Allied planes not yet in production model "ramp up" by starting at 1 and needing to repair "damaged" factories. These factories should NOT be repaired until the start of production month has arrived. In RHS "simplified" or even numbered scenarios, ramp up is simulated by a crude mechanism (delay of start of production) - and no damaged factories exist to repair in most cases. (Where it does exist, it is a start of game ramp up situation. Also, in some cases, where a line replaces one type with another, there is no ramp up at all - this being built into code.]


(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 42
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.117