Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Soviet Production research

 
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] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Soviet Production research Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Soviet Production research - 8/1/2015 6:24:02 PM   
chaos45

 

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline
Okay I loaded historical campaigns 42/43/44 and just did some quick comparisons to try and figure out what mix of industry the Soviets will need to survive and take the war back to Germany.

Armaments= each 1 pt= 325 armaments per turn no matter the year 42/43/44

Heavy industry= each 1 pt = 550 Tons of Supply 1942, 650 TS 1943, 725 TS 1944

Now with the Armies in the field during each of those years you have varying production requirements tapping on your supply system. It would seem since armaments is a fixed amount losing heavy industry may be the main deciding factor in the overall strength of the Soviet army.

For example:
1942 Soviet Army- needs roughly 55.5 TS to do full production and another 50 TS to supply its field army and do full 100% fortifications. -- so historical 217 Heavy = 119k TS meets all requirements.

1943 Soviet Army- needs roughly 60 TS to do full production and another 50 TS to supply its field army and do full 100% fortifications.-- so historical 212 Heavy = 137.8k TS meets all requirements.

1944 Soviet Army- needs roughly 65 TS to do full production and another 60 TS to supply its field army and do full 100% fortifications.-- so historical 212 Heavy = 153.7k TS meets all requirements.

Now if you build a bigger army than historical pretty common in pvp play.....you wold thus need more supplies for your Army and full production. Now most players will reduce soviet aircraft production so that saves supplies right off.

So basically looking at the numbers and realizing you can economize for the Soviets you need to keep a minimum of about:

180 Heavy industry just for supply production.

For armaments every single point is good as each point = more combat power in the long run. Now if you lose armaments and go below 335 Historical armaments then you actually need less Heavy industry as you have less supplies being pulled to armaments production. Actually the Supply draw per point of armaments is low so even losing 30 points of armaments doesnt really save u much heavy industry is like 2-3k supplies per week.

So if you say end up with 300 armaments points after 1941 you would then only need around 175-180 Heavy.....basically dont drop below 180 heavy industry or you start needing to economize more.

I would say if the Soviets hit 170 or less heavy they have taken a negative economic impact from the German advance above that you will probably be fine but might have to keep your army to 7-8M men larger and you could easily run into supply issues or be forced to reduce production/fortification values.

So all told the best targets for the German Army are heavy industry if you think you can drop the Soviets below 180 if you cant drop them below 180 you need to just target any other industry and any manpower centers to slow the soviets ability to build combat power long run.

This helped me learn something to as basically it should help Soviets prioritize what they ship out and Germans to have a better idea of what is important. Was interesting to see that above 180 Heavy industry it really doesnt matter for the Soviets.




< Message edited by chaos45 -- 8/1/2015 7:33:36 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/1/2015 7:26:22 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10372
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline
I'd agree with your basic analysis, I used the 42 and 43 start scenarios as my template.

But you have to run them a bit, set both sides to 'human' and run through 12-16 turns then look at what has happened to the baseline supply position. You can then adjust that for supply-ammo, digging holes in the ground and production to fit your own estimates.

thats why I came to the view that 180 HI is cutting it fine and you're safer aiming at around 200, but that you are in trouble much under 180.

The thing to bear in mind is that this is a very dynamic system with a lot of trade offs. One simple one is: smaller Soviet army = less supply usage (good?), but a smaller Soviet army probably also means more German attacks (so that will increase ammo usage and probably the amount of digging you do ... as you lose your last hole in the ground ... so bad?). So maybe a slightly too large army is actually the safer position as it deters the Germans from making too many attacks (ie very oddly a bigger army takes up less supply to ammo and forts).

So any rule of thumb is just that, its a heuristic not an algorithm. But you're right the goal is to get a grasp on how to play 1941 in terms of army loss in return for industrial extraction.

I *think* you are wrong about the arms pts:HI relationship. There are two versions of having this ratio wrong and they have different causes.

One is if the game systems wants to produce x arms pts and you only have the HI to supply x-y, in that case you get the warning message that so many arms pts weren't produced due to supply constraints. But if the game system wants to produce x arms pts it won't produce more just because you have more arms pt factories, and it won't tell you that you have unused production. So you can extract too many arms pts for your HI and as such you never get told that you have surplus capacity.

Whether this matters is circumstantial, if you went and sacrificed an army to preserve and extract those 10 arms pts that are redundant, well that is a negative trade off. If the Germans never got to say Tula or Rostov and you pulled them out in the autumn mud turns, there is no negative trade off and its a sensible insurance policy.

_____________________________


(in reply to chaos45)
Post #: 2
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/1/2015 8:17:12 PM   
chaos45

 

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline
Loki- Understand your points but basically each point of armaments only takes 65 Supply to produce its 325 armaments points. So one heavy industry point in effect supplies 5 armaments points alone. Yes the heavy is also being taxed by ammo, troop supply, other production supply, and munitions supply. Overall though what matters is how many supply points your heavy industry is generating unless there is something else under the hood...I'll give it a test run real quick and find out.

So as long as you dont run short of supply you will be fine. Which is why I said 180 heavy industry is your minimum to prevent supply shortages. My Supply tonnage useage included what the historical forces were burning for ammunition/fortification as well which is highly variable but in in general you have some turns where you use less on forts/ammo and others where you use more.

Plus as the Soviets you can always just move an airplane factory to save supplies on construction of new units. U2s are a prime example where you can save supplies. Just move 1 plane and bam you save a bunch of supplies for months.

From what I saw from my looks 180 Heavy industry should easily allow you about 100% production and to maintain 7-8M troops in the field. Obviously more troops by 1944 but slightly less in 1942...but you burn through alot of troops in 1942 typically.

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 3
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/1/2015 9:26:56 PM   
chaos45

 

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline
Just tested the theory in 1941.

Reduced Soviets to 180 Heavy industry and 339 Armaments points to see if it would still continue full armaments production.

There was no change to the armaments production other than for losing armaments points. So it seems as long as you are making enough supply you will get no reduction to armaments production.

So really save all your other factories you can once your sure you have secured at least 180 heavy industry. If you can get more heavy out do so but as long as you get out 180 you should be fine supply wise short of building a massive Soviet army.

(in reply to chaos45)
Post #: 4
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/2/2015 6:30:29 AM   
loki100


Posts: 10372
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline
Hi

I think you are missing part of the dynamic. The production routine decides it needs x,000 arms pts in a turn, I think this is derived from how many it needs (ie higher at one of those phases when the Red Army is re-equipping), what your other production demands are (so there is a cap to how much goes to production and how much to on-map actions such as unit supply, ammo production and digging). If you then set the production priorities to <100%, two things happen. First globally less supply goes to production and secondly you tilt the relative balance between aircraft/arms pts etc in the allocation routine.

So there are variables here, but basically once it can produce the x,000 its seeking to, it will ignore any excess arms pts factories as it doesn't need them. If it can't produce x,000 and the problem is that it lacks supply to run those factories it will tell you ... the message y arms pts weren't produced due to lack of supply (but you only get that message IF the specific issue is lack of HI, not if the issue is an excess of AP capacity).

I've attached a little chart below showing 2 games from T40-T50. Both were under 1.08.03. I've noted which production variables I had <100% and picked that period as it is typically a phase of high arms pt demand due to the shift to the 1942 OOBs. Army sizes were pretty much equal and I'd done similar things like depressing Pe-2 and Il-4 production by moving the factories.

So you're right that an arms pt is produced for every 5 supply pts allocated (1942 variables) but nore that in the second instance my arms pts factories are more 'efficient', ie each appears to produce more arms pts.

The reason for that is in the first instance I have too many arms pts for my HI base, in the second the ratio is slightly better. I could have a more efficient arms pt production ratio if I had less factories (in other words I evacuated too many).




Note that in the top instance, not only is my productivity lower but also so is total production of arms pts ... so actual production is not simply determined by the number of arms pts factories (ie you can have too many for a given HI base). In this respect an important bit of info is in your first post, each AP factory pt can produce 325 arms pts as a maximum.

In my tables above, I never reach that but in the second instance (with the lower AP/HI ratio), it comes close on a few turns

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by loki100 -- 8/2/2015 8:33:56 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to chaos45)
Post #: 5
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/2/2015 11:47:15 AM   
gingerbread


Posts: 2987
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline
So if any of the production levers are set lower than 100%, ARM production becomes demand driven?
Supply stock does not matter and no ARM will be stockpiled?

I'd be very interested to see some of the saves from the sandbox game from which the numbers in the table are taken.

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 6
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/2/2015 12:14:48 PM   
chaos45

 

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline
Hmm you dont think maybe its because you are playing with the production percentage levers?

In my quick test games I didnt mess with the production % levers at all and the each point of armaments was making 325 points.

Once I get my next turn back from pelton will check the numbers and see how my production is doing in that game. In that game I have had no issues with supply and the only lever I pulled to reduce supply consumption in 1941 was to move some plane factories at just 1 plane.

(in reply to gingerbread)
Post #: 7
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/2/2015 3:39:32 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10372
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline
I don't think its because I have changed the relative allocation rules. If you look at the top spreadsheet, oddly more supply went to arms pts when I increased the air share.

I think that is because the production routine allocates a fixed batch of supply produced to production. If you lower any of the production lines (planes vehicles, arms pt or elements) then (a) that reduces the global production share (ie more goes to unit supply etc) and (b) influences the relative shares within the production options. In turn changing fort digging will influence global allocation to non-production (unit supply, ammo and holes in the ground) and the relative shares between these.

I'm uploading 6 saves to a public dropbox here, 3 are for an AI game (and labelled that way), 3 for a PBEM game (if you want to poke around in these pm me and I'll send you the password).

The saves are for T40, T45 and T50 respectively and map onto the data above (each is for the position at the end of the Soviet turn). Would be interested in seeing more data on this as I think its very easy to misunderstand when you are working off assumptions as to how it really works and very limited evidence bases - which will persist till we see more AARs that started under 1.08.03/4 actually reach 1943 (beyond that doesn't really matter, either the Soviet player is constrained by a supply lack or has plenty).

< Message edited by loki100 -- 8/2/2015 4:41:04 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to chaos45)
Post #: 8
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/2/2015 6:40:40 PM   
gingerbread


Posts: 2987
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Please check link, I get: '/public does not exist'.

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 9
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/2/2015 7:06:06 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10372
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline
ah, try this version 0r should go direct to the zipped saves



< Message edited by loki100 -- 8/3/2015 8:26:46 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to gingerbread)
Post #: 10
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/2/2015 7:29:27 PM   
gingerbread


Posts: 2987
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Zipped saves worked. Thanks!

I really suggest you reevaluate exposing your @address. Use PM's.

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 11
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/2/2015 7:46:53 PM   
chaos45

 

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline
Your chart is interesting, Im not sure messing with the economy really changes much though.

I also dont understand how you are getting lower than 325 Armaments production, with 3 game loads 1942/1943/1944 the armaments production was exactly 325 per armaments point on each scenario start for the first couple turns. As well Armaments production used approx 22k or abit over in supplies in all 3 games per turn.

I really think this is coming from you playing with the production percentages. As I didnt mess with production percentages in any of my tests.

Either way I think we can agree that 180 is really the lowest Heavy Industry the Soviet player needs. Which was the key fact from what I was trying to figure out. Get 180 heavy out and then its all about how much of other factories your evacuating and extra Heavy is just icing to speed up your recovery and make life easier.

(in reply to gingerbread)
Post #: 12
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/2/2015 7:49:32 PM   
gingerbread


Posts: 2987
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline
I had a brief look at AI40, and noticed that a lot of ARM & HI factories are damaged. I started to write how they produce under the old rules, but realized that said rules might have changed. In any case, I doubt they produce 100%, so the variation seen in the table could very likely be dependent on rolls made or failed. The later turns increase is logical since repairs take place, and it at least used to be that probability to produce was dependent on damage level.

So the data is not reliable enough for a conclusion. I'll ask morvael if he has changed the code for how damaged factories produce, he might even see this thread.

EDIT: Old and perhaps present rules: Dam 50+ produce 0, dam <50 will produce full with a probability of 2% per point less than 50 damage.

< Message edited by gingerbread -- 8/2/2015 8:53:09 PM >

(in reply to gingerbread)
Post #: 13
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/2/2015 8:04:56 PM   
chaos45

 

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline
That most likely explains his chart then, as damage does effect if a factory produces or not and would explain why his chart is changing each turn due to dice rolls.

(in reply to gingerbread)
Post #: 14
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/2/2015 8:20:28 PM   
gingerbread


Posts: 2987
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Production rules as before, #shown in log includes all not destroyed.

(in reply to chaos45)
Post #: 15
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/3/2015 7:27:16 AM   
loki100


Posts: 10372
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline
interesting, ok that explains some things that I was mis-interpreting

_____________________________


(in reply to gingerbread)
Post #: 16
RE: Soviet Production research - 8/5/2015 4:03:25 AM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline
Great job!
Thanks for sharing!

(in reply to chaos45)
Post #: 17
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Soviet Production research 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

0.298