Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost assets

 
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] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost assets Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost assets - 3/16/2014 3:23:44 AM   
BillSirKill

 

Posts: 71
Joined: 7/16/2013
Status: offline
Hi all...
Has anyone thought about assigning a value of each asset in the game. In WITP - There is a value to the opposing side for each asset that is destroyed.

I believe that if there was a way to quantify the expenditure per asset destroyed would be a great addition to the SIM.

For instance: a MiG-21MF Fishbed J shot down with an AIM-120D AMRAAM x 2 (deployed)- Cost ~$1.5mil x 2 = $3mil. However lets assume that the expenditure was an Aim-7E x 2 (deployed) Cost ~$125K x 2 = $250K... Big difference~!!

The Example above is currently scored the same-at whatever the author assigned points for the MiG Kill....However, if the assets had assigned values albeit $$ or points.. The scoring would have a much more meaningful impact. Also, the replay value would be greatly enhanced as you would attempt to retry the mission at a higher level efficiency.

Any thought?

thanks..Bill
Post #: 1
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 3:55:15 AM   
Coiler12

 

Posts: 1097
Joined: 10/13/2013
Status: offline
You can always just edit your scoring events to make certain targets more valuable.

(in reply to BillSirKill)
Post #: 2
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 4:53:35 AM   
BillSirKill

 

Posts: 71
Joined: 7/16/2013
Status: offline
Yes you can make the targets more or less valuable.. but to my point - at what expense did it take to kill that target?

If you kill a mouse with an elephant gun VS a mouse trap.. Mouse = 20 pts Elephant gun cost 10 pts to use; Mouse trap cost 2 pts to use... Net Points = Kill with elephant gun = 10pts; Kill with mouse trap = 18pts. I believe the mouse trap was more cost effective.. all other things being equal.

Mig = 25 mil
AMRAAM = 3 ml
Aim 7E = 250K

Mig killed by AMRAAM = Player nets 22 mil points
Mig killed by AIM-7E = Player nets 24.75 mil points

On a large scale operation: the Cost of war may be prohibitive of the objective if all AMRAAMS were used. Plus the scenario would be much simpler to use an elephant gun vs a well planned mouse trap.

(I played Battle of Tiran (The AIM 7E Sparrows have a coding glitch - so I changed out the ordanance with the AMRAAM).. Sure I decimated the Op-for air attack... but I used 34x AIM-120A AMRAAM to take out 6x MiG-21MF Fishbed J
18x Mirage 5E2 6x Su-20 Fitter C. Now if the AIM 7E was used (Assuming no code glitch) my total cost would have been only a fraction what was used.

The VALUE of the score would be more accurate

Bill


(in reply to Coiler12)
Post #: 3
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 4:56:27 AM   
BillSirKill

 

Posts: 71
Joined: 7/16/2013
Status: offline
Now I'm not advocating for a kill by kill assessment....but rather a lump total of Kills vs Ordanance used for each side...

it would make it a more in depth end of battle report... A player could drill down and see if the next attempt would be more efficient and cost effective

(in reply to BillSirKill)
Post #: 4
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 8:21:39 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4713
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Its not a victory point solution but one way of limiting expenditures is to limit availability of the ammunition stocks. Scenario designers do that now for play balance but you could certainly factor in cost. The difficulty is that its a judgment call of casualties vs expense. In you example above, if choosing only Aim 7's, you would save some $$ but lose some A/C because you would need to get closer with lower PKs and higher malfunction rates. OK, so you can factor in the cost of the AC into the victory points but you need to consider the cost of the pilot - who probably costs more than the A/C over time. I think that most designers factor that into the VPs by granting more VPs for a US/NATO A/C killed than for a Mig or other type.

If I were a pilot and my choice of ammunition was overly limited by cost, after I gave the comptroller a punch in the jaw - I'd go find work at an Airline.

B

(in reply to BillSirKill)
Post #: 5
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 10:15:06 AM   
dillonkbase

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 5/2/2009
Status: offline
Cost analysis in War is a dumb idea...

An f-15 costs more than a mig-21 and can use an AMRAAM, so it wins the fight against the mig-21... just because downing the plane with a sidewinder is cheaper does not make it a better idea.

And we are not even talking about the people of both sides, or in the target area, or whatever.

As a soldier the most important score for me is the number of casualties. War should be the last resort because human lives are worth so much.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 6
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 11:16:14 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 8070
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline
Actually, Baloogan & co did that in his scenario...was quite impressive $ figure...and US/NATO side only.

I think the engagement cost 265 mil US$, ammunition etc...AMRAAMs, Tomahawks etc.

< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 3/16/2014 12:21:12 PM >


_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to dillonkbase)
Post #: 7
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 12:29:31 PM   
Marder


Posts: 241
Joined: 10/25/2013
Status: offline
Just add a field for "Price" in the DB :-)

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 8
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 2:38:26 PM   
RoryAndersonWS


Posts: 1789
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Actually, Baloogan & co did that in his scenario...was quite impressive $ figure...and US/NATO side only.

I think the engagement cost 265 mil US$, ammunition etc...AMRAAMs, Tomahawks etc.


Took out a 400 mil russian S-400 site! and without losing a single A/C!

The S-400 isn't invulnerable. Its just tricky.

_____________________________


Command Developer, Warfare Sims.

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 9
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 2:51:03 PM   
jdkbph


Posts: 339
Joined: 2/11/2007
From: CT, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillSirKill

Now I'm not advocating for a kill by kill assessment....but rather a lump total of Kills vs Ordanance used for each side...

it would make it a more in depth end of battle report... A player could drill down and see if the next attempt would be more efficient and cost effective


Economy of force is a valid principle, but it has nothing (directly) to do with money. Tallying the total cost of an engagement would be interesting, but not at all meaningful from a win/lose or efficiency perspective. It would also be very difficult to normalize the costs. Not impossible, just difficult.

For instance, how much does an AIM120 cost? Depends on when. How much does a MiG21 cost. Again, depends on when. And if you shoot down a MiG21 with an AIM120, do you have to factor the exchange rate?

But of course the most important factor is lives. If I "waste" an AIM120C on a an old decrepit MiG when I might have used an AIM9B, but reduced the risk to our pilot by doing so, should that result in a penalty of some sort?

JD

(in reply to BillSirKill)
Post #: 10
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 3:03:12 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3090
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline
Adding a point system would be somewhat useful for scenario balancing but in the end I prefer a scenario based in a good narrative and realistic balance.

(in reply to jdkbph)
Post #: 11
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 3:19:12 PM   
SSN754planker


Posts: 446
Joined: 10/2/2013
Status: offline
I remember playing Harpoon Commanders Edition, and in some of their DB entries, the unit had a money value, but that was all there was. It wasn't implemented for whatever reason. But i agree, scoring based on monetary value of a unit is not a good way of scoring as it is used in Command.

What id like to see is an ability to do SAR missions for downed pilots that survive getting shot down. After all, human life is priceless!

_____________________________

MY BOOK LIST
ST1/SS SSN 754

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 12
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 3:35:18 PM   
Mgellis


Posts: 2015
Joined: 8/18/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SSN754planker

I remember playing Harpoon Commanders Edition, and in some of their DB entries, the unit had a money value, but that was all there was. It wasn't implemented for whatever reason. But i agree, scoring based on monetary value of a unit is not a good way of scoring as it is used in Command.

What id like to see is an ability to do SAR missions for downed pilots that survive getting shot down. After all, human life is priceless!


One way to model that, with Command as it presently is...

* Rendezvous zone is created with relative reference points, around the downed pilot, so it moves even if he moves around

* Getting the rescue helicopter into the zone = a certain number of points (and the pilot is teleported out of the game zone to a "depot" somewhere else to represent being rescued)

* Losing the rescue helicopter = huge point loss, big enough that it does not matter if the pilot was aboard or not, the helicopter going down means the mission was a failure!


(in reply to SSN754planker)
Post #: 13
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 3:51:04 PM   
Mgellis


Posts: 2015
Joined: 8/18/2007
Status: offline

A practical reason for not doing any of this...I would rather the database editors spent their time adding new platforms instead of going back and tracking down the costs for all the platforms already in the game. :)

However, where it is possible to add the information, I don't see any harm in doing so. I see it mostly in terms of curiosity rather than game design. There are too many variables here for it determine the point value of the engagement. If an F-15 destroys a Mig-23, or vice versa, obviously, the relative costs of the aircraft matters, but what about the cost of the aircraft as a part of the nation's total economy (to a poor country, each MiG-23 might be worth more, in a relative sense, than an F-15 is worth to us)? And the value of the pilot? And the strategic value of completing the mission, even if there are losses? And the political value of "getting beaten," as opposed to "getting beaten by a country we really dislike," etc.?

In short, if the costs can be added easily (i.e., you look it up on Wikipedia and just type it into a database field), then, sure, add them when it is convenient to do so. A priority? No.



(in reply to Marder)
Post #: 14
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 5:04:06 PM   
RoryAndersonWS


Posts: 1789
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline
What we could do is a community effort!

If we could, say, set up a file that has dollar value info in a big txt file; say something like

db3000_cost.txt
Aircraft_1004, 300000
Ship_103, 140000000
Weapon_512, 59000
Facility_132, 590000000
etc...

I could write a program which looks at the losses and expenditures from the currently open file in Command to present this information.

It would take quite a bit of work to get the db3000_cost.txt ready; but if someone wants to take on the cost data collection side of things I'll write a program to display it.



_____________________________


Command Developer, Warfare Sims.

(in reply to Mgellis)
Post #: 15
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 5:05:37 PM   
RoryAndersonWS


Posts: 1789
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline
Kinda think about this like the amazing community database images!


Here is a bit of text I found elsewhere on the internet that might get people started!

quote:

Ground Units
Tanks and other armored units
NOTE: T-80 production has ceased. You have to get Ukrainian T-84s if you want them now.

* T-90A 'Vladimir' MBT: $4.15 million (based on Russian MOD)
* T-90M MBT: $3.5 million - (based on Indian purchase)
* T-90S MBT: $3.9 million - (based on Cyprus purchase)
* BMPT Tank Support Fighting Vehicle: $3 million - (educated guess based on the cost of a T-90)
* BMP-3M IFV: ~$3.5-4 million - (based on how dumbed down Greek vehicles were, and South Korean press release)
* BMP-3 IFV: $3.2 million for basic unit (based on Greek purchase)
* BMD-4 ACV: ~$4 million
* BMD-3 ACV: $3.5 million
* 2S25 Sprut-D: $4.5 million - (guess based on the cost of the BMD-3)
* BTR-90M IFV: ~$2 million (more guessing)
* BTR-90 IFV: ~$1.5 million (educated guess based on a statement that it costs half as much as the Stryker)
* BTR-82A IFV: ~$1.4 million - (See below)
* BTR-80A IFV: ~$1.2 million (guess based on relation to BTR-90)
* BRDM-3 Recce: ~$1.2 million (guess based on it being a BTR-80A variant)
* BTR-T APC: $700,000 on Russian-supplied T-55 (based on costs for similar vehicles)
* BTR-80 APC: $400,000 (guess based on prices for surplus units in late-90s)

Upgrades to existing tanks and armored units

* BMD-4 ACV: $500,000 upgrading from BMD-3 to BMD-4.
* BTR-T APC: $400,000 as an upgrade of existing stocks, $700,000 if you dont have any T-55s to upgrade (based on costs for similar vehicles)
* BMPT Tank Support Fighting Vehicle: $1.4 million as an upgrade to existing T-72 stocks - (based on BTR-T upgrade costs and T-72 modernization projects)
* T-55M5: $700,000 as an upgrade of existing stocks. This modernization kit adds convex explosive reactive armour "Kontakt-5" panels around turret front, armour panel on glacis plate, a longer hull, a new style fire control equipment with stabilized TVK-3 and TKN-1SM sights for the gunner and commander, an improved V-55U engine (or V-46-5M) and a main gun stabilization system. The original 100 mm D-10T2S gun is maintained
* T-55M6: $1.8 million as an upgrade of existing stocks ($2.4 million with options). A more radical upgrade with longer chassis with 6 road wheels each side, a 690 hp V-46-5M diesel engine and with the complete turret with automatic loader and 2A46M 125mm main gun of the T-72BM. Also the protection was increased to T-80U level. Optionally the tank can be equipped with the 1A40-1 fire control system with ATGM system 9K120 "Svir" (as T-72B) or with the 1A42 and 9K119 "Refleks" systems (as T-80U).
* T-72BM: $800,000 as an upgrade of existing stocks. This adds a new 125mm gun, 1,000 hp diesel, a thermal gunners site, new camouflage, and Relikt ERA (which is supposed to be twice as effective as Kontakt-5)
* BMP-1P: $600,000 as an upgrade of existing stocks. Adds a 9P13M Konkurs launcher on an exposed pintle.
* BMP-1PG: $350,000 as an upgrade of existing stocks. Adds an AGS-17 auto grenade launcher.
* BMP-1MS: $920,000 as an upgrade of existing stocks. Adds a new turret with 2 2A42 30mm autocannons, 1 Kornet launcher and 1 PKTM coax machine gun.

Artillery, rockets and missiles

* BM-30 300mm MRL: $12.1 million (based on very recent sale to India)
* 2S19 152mm SPH: $2.25 million (based on 2000 price)
* 2A65/MZ-146-1 152mm towed howitzer: $800,000 - (based on the costs of the French 155mm SP and towed howitzers, and the 2S19)
* 2S31 120mm SP Gun/Mortar: $1 million (based on 2000 price)
* 2S23 120mm SP Gun/Mortar: ~$750,000 (based on 2000 price
* 9K720 Iskander: $120 million per battery (6 launch vehicles, 24 missiles, command and support vehicles) - (wild guess)

Missile systems

* S-400 (SA-21): $400 million per fire unit (8 launchers, 112 missiles, command and support vehicles) (estimate based on performance figures, larger missile load, etc)
* S-300PMU-2 - (SA-20B): $200 million per fire unit (6 launchers, 48 missiles, command and support vehicles) (guess based on below)
* S-300PMU-1 - (SA-20A): $160 million per fire unit (6 launchers, 48 missiles, command and support vehicles) - (based on VERY recent Iranian order and other sales)
* Buk-M1-2 (SA-17): ~$120 million per battalion with 6 TELARs, 6 transloaders, & 36 missiles (pretty much a guess)
* Tor-M1 (SA-15): $25 million (based on possible future sale)
* Pantsir-S1: $16+ million (based on sale to Algeria)
* Bastion-P Coastal Defense Battery: $150 million for radar, control center, 6 launchers, & 36 missiles - (based on Syrian buy)

Aircraft
Fighters (multirole, air superiority, strike)

* Su-35: $75+ million - (most legitimate claims were $65 million, but the Su-30s real price makes it clear the Su-35 should be significantly higher than that)
* Su-30MK series: $60-70 million - (contract prices vary widely, from $50 million to Malaysia to over $80 million per unit for the Algerian trade-in)
* Su-33: ~$60-70 million - (based on relative prices of other Russian aircraft)
* Su-32: ~$60-65 million - (based on relative prices of other Russian aircraft)
* MiG-35: $55-60 million (assuming this is just referring to flyaway)
* MiG-29K: ~$50-55 million (Indian acquisition was $46+ in 2004, should be slightly more expensive than MiG-29M, which has most of the improved features but is not reinforced for carrier operations)
* MiG-29M: ~$50+ million ($5-10 mil more than SMT)
* MiG-29SMT: $45+ million (various contracts at between $40 and $45 million, some as low as $37. But, cheaper ones, as shown in the last link, arent quite new-build)

Helicopters and ground attack aircraft

* Ka-52: ~$40-50 million (based on below)
* Ka-50N: ~$35-45 million (based on Mi-28 cost)
* Mi-28: ~$35-40 million (based on sale of used units to Turkey)
* Mi-35: $16+ million (based on sale to Venezuela)
* Ka-60/64: $12 million (based on sale to India)
* Mi-17/Mi-8: $9 million (based on sale to Venezuela)
* Ka-27: $12 million - (based on the costs of the similar in size Mi-17)
* Mi-26M: $18 million - (guess based on military-today, adjusted upwards 50%)
* Su-25TM/Su-39: $40 million - (rough estimate)



September 5th, 2012 #2
hamidreza

Transports, tankers, AEW&C aircraft and trainers
In late 2009, Dmitry Medvedev announced that Russian production of the An-124 will resume, making the aircraft available from a Russian manufacturer.

* A-50 AEW&C: ~$250-300 million as upgrade of existing Il-76, +$30 million for Il-76 aircraft - (extremely rough estimate based on 15-year-old joint Russian/Israeli program for China)
* Il-78M Tanker: $35 million (based on 2001 contract and inflation)
* Il-76MF: $50 million - (based on Jordanian purchase)
* Il-76MD-90: $40+ million - (based on MF cost)
* An-124-102: $195 million (based on this data)
* An-124-200: $160 million (based on this estimate)
* An-124-100M: $150 million (based on this estimate)
* Tu-214: $40+ million - (estimate based on Wikipedia and Il-76 costs)
* Il-112V: $20 million - (estimate based on Il-76 costs)
* Sukhoi Superjet 100: $30 million - (based on this contract)
* Yak-130: $13 million - (based on 2007 sale)

UAVs

* Yakolev Pchela UAV: $22 million per system (mobile ground control station, technological truck, loader/transporter, 10 Pchela with expendables)
* ZALA 421-12 UAV: $340,000
* ZALA 421-06 helicopter UAV: $380,000
* ZALA 421-8 micro UAV: $172,000 per system (2 UAV, portable ground station, 2 spare power supply, backpack)
* Dozor 600 UAV: $4 million per system (mobile ground control station/truck, 6 UAVs)

Aircraft Upgrades
* MiG-21-93: $4.5 million as an upgrade of existing stocks. Adds a new radar (MiG-29 class), upgraded avionics, improved cockpit egonomy, and the capability to fire Vympel R-27 (NATO: AA-10 'Alamo') and Vympel R-77 (NATO: AA-12 'Adder') missiles, along with airframe life extension.
* MiG-21-97: $5.5 million as an upgrade of existing stocks. Includes the MiG-21-93 package, plus the Klimov RD-33 engine. Evaluations place this in the F-16 class.
* MiG-23-98: $6 million as an upgrade of existing stocks. Adds a new radar, new self-defense suite, new avionics, improved cockpit ergonomy, helmet-mounted sight, and the capability to fire Vympel R-27 (NATO: AA-10 'Alamo') and Vympel R-77 (NATO: AA-12 'Adder') missiles, along with airframe life extension.
* MiG-29SMT: $21 million as an upgrade of existing stocks.
* Su-27SM2: $37 million as an upgrade of existing stocks. Avionics and weapons upgrades to Su-35 class, plus the Salyut AL-31F-M1 engine.
* MiG-31BM: $7 million as an upgrade of existing stocks. Avionics upgrade, HOTAS, cockpit update, upgrade to the NIIP Zaslon radar. Adds ability to use R-77/RVV-AE (AA-12 Adder) missiles, and the full range of air-to-ground weapons. Price based on 2007 contract to upgrade Kazakh MiG-31s
* Su-30MKIB Super 30: $12 million as an upgrade to existing Su-30MKI. Adds the Zhuk ASE AESA radar, modernizes the onboard computers and ECM to Su-35 standards, adds the ability to use the BrahMos missile.

Naval Units

Submarines

* Borei Nuclear Submarine: $1.4 billion+ - (rough estimate)
* Graney Nuclear Submarine: $1 billion+ - (rough estimate)
* Akula II Nuclear Submarine: $800+ millon - (based on suggested cost of finishing 2 and estimated cost in '07)
* Amur 1650 Submarine: $450 million (based on statement that theyre $100 million cheaper than contemporaries)
* Amur 950 Submarine: ~$400 million (mostly an educated guess)
* Improved Kilo (636) Submarine: ~$300 million - (contracts vary from $250 to $350 million each, but the Algerian sale hits right in the middle)

Surface warships

* Sovremenny I/II Destroyer (956EM): $800+ million - (based on 2002 sale to China)
* Gorshkov Frigate: $400 million - (based on this estimate)
* Krivak III Frigate: $400 million (based on 2006 Indian purchase)
* Gepard Frigate: $150-200 million, depending on variant - (no good links, but Vietnam appears to have paid $300 million for 2)
* Tigr Corvette: ~$150+ million - (based on globalsecuritys statement. Its also a development of the Stergushchy)
* Stergushchy Corvette: $150 million - (based on this figure at current exchange rates)
* Tarantul Missile Corvette: $65+ million (based on estimates for a sale to Libya)
* Molniya Missile Corvette: $60+ million (based on sale to Vietnam, and the fact that its basically just a Tarantul with different missiles)
* Buyan Corvette: $60 million - (based on the price of the similarly-sized Tarantul. The Buyan is not as heavily armed, but does include stealth features, so this seems a reasonable compromise cost.)
* Ivan Gren landing ship: $45 million (based on the cost of the similar Frank S. Besson class LSV)
* Zubr class heavy LCAC: $79 million (based on a recent sale to China)

Munitions

* P800 Yakhont: - $2.5-3 million - (estimate based on Syrian buy)
* Kh-31AM: ~$1.5 million - (estimate based on US purchase of target drone version with no guidance or warhead)
* Kh-31PM: ~$1.3 million - (estimate based on above)
* Igla-S (SA-24) MANPADS: ~$1.6-1.8 million for 1 launcher and 10 missiles - (based on below)
* Igla (SA-18) MANPADS: $1.4 million for 1 launcher and 10 missiles - (based on this source for cost and this for number)
* Kornet-E (AT-14) ATGM: $875,000 for 1 launcher and 10 missiles - (based on recent Turkish buy)
* Metis-M (AT-13) ATGM: ~$500,000 for 1 launcher & 10 missiles - (based off unconfirmed data and inflaition compared to Kornet price)

FUTURE SYSTEMS
Russias often hard to gauge on future equipments because it has a history of suppressing information until theyre ready to be demonstrated. Thus, its mostly supposition as to whats coming next, but we do know of a few things that are definitely in the works.

Ground:
T-95 MBT: $5.2 million estimate. Russian military involvement was cancelled April 2010, but it could still be developed and marketed as a private venture. IOC probably 2013-2016 if continued.
S-500: $450 million as a very rough estimate. Little is known other than that it's NOT a development of the S-400, and is intended to provide better ballistic missile defense. Expected for an IOC of 2012.

Air:
*PAK-FA: Russia claims $80 million, Insiders say easily $100-120+, maybe even as high as $135 million. Ill assume that the higher ones are export price, though even that very well may not be. First flight in 2010, and based on delays, were probably looking at service in 2014-2016.
Il-214: $40 million rough estimate. Joint venture with India, IOC expected around 2016.

Naval:
New Carrier: ~$3-5 billion each. Some sources state a new class of 2-4 carriers is in the works, with construction starting 2013-2014. May or may not amount to anything.
New Amphibious Ship: ~$300-800 million each, depending on specs. See above.
Pauk replacement: Theyll start needing it soon. Nothing in the works that I know of though, and they may just be left unreplaced due to increasing blue-water emphasis.


_____________________________


Command Developer, Warfare Sims.

(in reply to RoryAndersonWS)
Post #: 16
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/16/2014 7:01:12 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3090
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline
Then there's stabilizing at-the-time costs with constant dollars based on a given year. In the fifties a B-52 cost $3 million to build.

(in reply to RoryAndersonWS)
Post #: 17
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/17/2014 10:34:40 AM   
tommo8993

 

Posts: 116
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline
Seems a good idea but the cost of an F-4 phantom in 1965 and one in 1995 is completely different and would mean editing every DB entry. Still a good idea i'm just not sure if its do-able

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 18
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/17/2014 9:01:59 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline
Definitely doable and might make sense for some things we're looking on the civilian and pro side.

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to tommo8993)
Post #: 19
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/18/2014 6:05:34 PM   
BillSirKill

 

Posts: 71
Joined: 7/16/2013
Status: offline
Thanks for the input and banter.. True $$ would need to be equated as to time period.

I believe it was Bush that said "I'm gonna be patient, about this thing, and not go firing a 2 million dollar missile at a 10 dollar tent just to hit a camel in the butt".

So, adding some perspective of efficiency or semblence of economy may add to some of the authors reality of the situation AND add a alternative scoring system that enhances the current code.

Bill

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 20
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/18/2014 6:47:19 PM   
Marder


Posts: 241
Joined: 10/25/2013
Status: offline
I would like to see another DB- Field added: "Humans per Unit"
e.g. F16 Falcon = 1.
BMP = 9 (or so)

< Message edited by Marder2075 -- 3/18/2014 7:49:47 PM >

(in reply to BillSirKill)
Post #: 21
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/18/2014 7:02:03 PM   
RoryAndersonWS


Posts: 1789
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Marder2075

I would like to see another DB- Field added: "Humans per Unit"
e.g. F16 Falcon = 1.
BMP = 9 (or so)


Command does have that field in the database, for ships, subs and aircraft.
http://wiki.baloogancampaign.com/index.php/DataAircraft?ID=590


Edit: All the land facilities crew count is 1 it seems.


< Message edited by Baloogan -- 3/18/2014 8:29:25 PM >


_____________________________


Command Developer, Warfare Sims.

(in reply to Marder)
Post #: 22
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/18/2014 7:26:12 PM   
Marder


Posts: 241
Joined: 10/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Baloogan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marder2075

I would like to see another DB- Field added: "Humans per Unit"
e.g. F16 Falcon = 1.
BMP = 9 (or so)


Command does have that field in the database, for ships, subs and aircraft.
http://wiki.baloogancampaign.com/index.php/DataAircraft?ID=590

Doesn't seem to have it for land facilities though; would be cool if it did!




Thanks.
Is it an extra-field which could be counted as casualties in the "Losses/Expenditures" -window seperately?

(in reply to RoryAndersonWS)
Post #: 23
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/19/2014 11:55:13 AM   
Bazza042

 

Posts: 100
Joined: 1/11/2012
Status: offline
Am I the only one here who thinks that the accountants are taking over....

I imagine an accountant, complete with calculator, next to the Admiral in charge of the CAG, saying:

"Um I don't think you ought to try downing that incoming plane with a missile, best way is to wait till the plane is
closer and use your guns: far more cost effective. He has only got a 0.6% chance of sinking the carrier, so lets use the
gu.........."

(in reply to Marder)
Post #: 24
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/19/2014 6:57:08 PM   
kaburke61

 

Posts: 224
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline
Agreed. I think of all the changes/additions to CMANO the devs could work on, this IMO is low on the list. I'm not sure I've ever seen or read things like "Time to take out that Panther across the valley, but load up the HEAT rounds 'cause the AP rounds are more expensive" (and no, I don't know which is actually more expensive, just illustrating the point!). If I was a soldier (or sailor, or Captain, etc.), the last thing on my mind when my life is on the line is "hmmmmmm....how can I save the US government some money"

(in reply to Bazza042)
Post #: 25
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/19/2014 9:03:57 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Bazza042
Am I the only one here who thinks that the accountants are taking over....

I imagine an accountant, complete with calculator, next to the Admiral in charge of the CAG, saying:

"Um I don't think you ought to try downing that incoming plane with a missile, best way is to wait till the plane is
closer and use your guns: far more cost effective. He has only got a 0.6% chance of sinking the carrier, so lets use the
gu.........."


quote:



kaburke61
Agreed. I think of all the changes/additions to CMANO the devs could work on, this IMO is low on the list. I'm not sure I've ever seen or read things like "Time to take out that Panther across the valley, but load up the HEAT rounds 'cause the AP rounds are more expensive" (and no, I don't know which is actually more expensive, just illustrating the point!). If I was a soldier (or sailor, or Captain, etc.), the last thing on my mind when my life is on the line is "hmmmmmm....how can I save the US government some money"



Costing would be valuable if you're trying to build a OOB or fleet builder or something like that.

Thanks!

Mike

< Message edited by mikmyk -- 3/19/2014 10:05:04 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to kaburke61)
Post #: 26
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/20/2014 12:37:52 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4713
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kaburke61

Agreed. I think of all the changes/additions to CMANO the devs could work on, this IMO is low on the list. I'm not sure I've ever seen or read things like "Time to take out that Panther across the valley, but load up the HEAT rounds 'cause the AP rounds are more expensive" (and no, I don't know which is actually more expensive, just illustrating the point!). If I was a soldier (or sailor, or Captain, etc.), the last thing on my mind when my life is on the line is "hmmmmmm....how can I save the US government some money"


Costs do count but not in the direct way your describing. Cost of ammunition is definitely a factor in training but also in stocking - You won't get the accountant on the Bridge advising the admiral but you will get him in the ports advising on how many of which weapons can or will be loaded - its a lot more complex than that but cost does count. However, I don't advocate that it be a DB item, it's the scenario designer's call on how he balances the game, I'm doing just that in an upcoming scenario where AMRAAMs are in very short supply an the F-15's will have to load up Sparrows or go home.

Interesting discussion.

B

(in reply to kaburke61)
Post #: 27
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/21/2014 8:41:07 PM   
TonyAAA


Posts: 140
Joined: 2/7/2008
From: Arlington, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98


quote:

ORIGINAL: kaburke61

Agreed. I think of all the changes/additions to CMANO the devs could work on, this IMO is low on the list. I'm not sure I've ever seen or read things like "Time to take out that Panther across the valley, but load up the HEAT rounds 'cause the AP rounds are more expensive" (and no, I don't know which is actually more expensive, just illustrating the point!). If I was a soldier (or sailor, or Captain, etc.), the last thing on my mind when my life is on the line is "hmmmmmm....how can I save the US government some money"


Costs do count but not in the direct way your describing. Cost of ammunition is definitely a factor in training but also in stocking - You won't get the accountant on the Bridge advising the admiral but you will get him in the ports advising on how many of which weapons can or will be loaded - its a lot more complex than that but cost does count. However, I don't advocate that it be a DB item, it's the scenario designer's call on how he balances the game, I'm doing just that in an upcoming scenario where AMRAAMs are in very short supply an the F-15's will have to load up Sparrows or go home.

Interesting discussion.

B


Pretty sure this exact type of nonsense happened during the Vietnam war.

If a pilot fired an AGM-45 Shrike at an enemy SAM, that was viewed as proper procedure/ a good thing.

If he fired a AGM-78 Standard ARM at one, he'd have to fill out a purposely lengthy amount of paperwork and pray they ruled his actions were justified.
You know, because getting shot at by a SAM isn't necessarily excuse enough to fire a more expensive (and effective) missile


(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 28
RE: Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost ... - 3/21/2014 10:15:33 PM   
kaburke61

 

Posts: 224
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:



Pretty sure this exact type of nonsense happened during the Vietnam war.

If a pilot fired an AGM-45 Shrike at an enemy SAM, that was viewed as proper procedure/ a good thing.

If he fired a AGM-78 Standard ARM at one, he'd have to fill out a purposely lengthy amount of paperwork and pray they ruled his actions were justified.
You know, because getting shot at by a SAM isn't necessarily excuse enough to fire a more expensive (and effective) missile




Kinda back to my original point (nonsense). As I said IMO, the devs should focus on other items
needed(i.e. strike mission planner). I myself could care less about the costs. If it's available, I'm
gonna use it. If it's too expensive, then severely limit quantity available.

Each to their own....


< Message edited by kaburke61 -- 3/21/2014 11:16:58 PM >

(in reply to TonyAAA)
Post #: 29
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Cost of War: Put a $$ value on Expenditures & Lost assets Page: [1]
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

0.164