Tweaking the Japanese/Allied Economies

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Local Yokel

... because from what I can tell every mainland resource point east of Hankow that doesn't get grabbed by local industry gets sucked remorselessly to Dairen by the game's land transport mechanism - hence Dairen, rightly or wrongly, is a really good place to observe what is happening to mainland resources. And the pattern seems to be that within 3 days of the campaign's start all surplus resources have congregated at Dairen for onward transport to Japan. The image suggests that, with 77 ships applied to that transport task in four convoys, the glut is being reduced at a rate such that no surplus will remain to be lifted within 10 to 20 days, after which I estimate that up to half the ships currently dedicated to this Dairen-Moji shuttle can be released to other duties (to the Marquesas, Brazil and beyond!). If that's an accurate assessment, then finding an additional 26 vessels to lift the extra 16,000 resources becomes something that my existing arrangements would simply take in their stride.

Wonder what would happen if I put some breaks in the rail lines in China, Manchuria and Korea...hmmm..

[Blackhorse]

ORIGINAL: treespider

Anywho... that's my take on things...

Bottom Line:

1. Add 800 resource centers to Occupied China/ Manchuria
2. Set LI to 20 Resources IN - 2 Supply OUT
3. Set HI to 15 Resources IN , 2 Fuel IN - 2 HI Out
4. Set Refineries to 10 Oil IN - 10 Fuel OUT
5. Reduce Japanese At-Start Home Island Refineries to 610 with an additional 290 damaged.
6. Reduce NEI Refineries to 1200 Total and start out 20% of Total Damaged...so some could be completely toasted and others full strength
7. Spread 4000 Daily supply across the Japanese Home Island Bases.
8. House rule where a player cannot actively shutdown an industry.

Excellent research and analysis.

And while the extra 28 merchants/day from Darien may not add much strain to the merchant marine, don't forget the extra supply runs from Japan to SE Asia now that you've curtailed refinery production.

With the extra resources you are modding into China/Manchuko, would Japan ever need to import resources from Burma/Malaysia/DEI? (I could probably figure it out myself from the numbers you've posted, but since you're already doing the analysis, I can see no reason for both of us to work that hard. [:D] )

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

ORIGINAL: treespider

Anywho... that's my take on things...

Bottom Line:

1. Add 800 resource centers to Occupied China/ Manchuria
2. Set LI to 20 Resources IN - 2 Supply OUT
3. Set HI to 15 Resources IN , 2 Fuel IN - 2 HI Out
4. Set Refineries to 10 Oil IN - 10 Fuel OUT
5. Reduce Japanese At-Start Home Island Refineries to 610 with an additional 290 damaged.
6. Reduce NEI Refineries to 1200 Total and start out 20% of Total Damaged...so some could be completely toasted and others full strength
7. Spread 4000 Daily supply across the Japanese Home Island Bases.
8. House rule where a player cannot actively shutdown an industry.

Excellent research and analysis.

And while the extra 28 merchants/day from Darien may not add much strain to the merchant marine, don't forget the extra supply runs from Japan to SE Asia now that you've curtailed refinery production.

With the extra resources you are modding into China/Manchuko, would Japan ever need to import resources from Burma/Malaysia/DEI? (I could probably figure it out myself from the numbers you've posted, but since you're already doing the analysis, I can see no reason for both of us to work that hard. [:D] )

Now that I've got my 5 hours of sleep...

It depends...all of these numbers are based on the At-Start Japanese Values for the most part. So if the Japanese player wants to expand his HI he is going to have to find additional resources somewhere...

-------

On a side note all of the above analysis only looked at Petroleum based "FUEL". AS JWE pointed out earlier and as most of you are aware Ship Bunkering can also consist of Coal.

Not sure the best way to handle this would be.

Peak War-time Coal Consumption for Ship Bunkering was 2,517,000 tons in 1942.

That factors out to 6895 "points" per day. If you convert that to "Fuel", you need to make a 690 point oil/refinery complex. Unfortunately this would offset the calculated 6000 point fuel deficit in the standard Japanese economy. However it does account for COAL based Ship Bunkering I wonder if perhaps additional oil/refinery complexes would be in order to account for ships using coal.

Except that "throws" off the NEI Fuel Equation....Unless you incorporate another HOUSE RULE.

Place the Oil/Refinery Complex in Manchuria and only allow xAKL's and xAK's to cargo load "Fuel" from Mainland Asia. Ships could refuel there, however Tankers would have to schlep south to load liquid cargo.

[oldman45]

With out trying to sound patronizing, this is the most interesting set of posts I have read in a long time. My question is, with the new demand put on Japanese shipping, will the allies be able to now have an effect on industry by sinking the merchant fleet?

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: oldman45

With out trying to sound patronizing, this is the most interesting set of posts I have read in a long time. My question is, with the new demand put on Japanese shipping, will the allies be able to now have an effect on industry by sinking the merchant fleet?

Just throwing this out here. And might it be advisable to "VET" and add in those Japanese merchant ships Buck found not making it into the game both built before and during the war?

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: treespider

Except that "throws" off the NEI Fuel Equation....Unless you incorporate another HOUSE RULE.

Place the Oil/Refinery Complex in Manchuria and only allow xAKL's and xAK's to cargo load "Fuel" from Mainland Asia. Ships could refuel there, however Tankers would have to schlep south to load liquid cargo.

For one thing, too many house rules drives players bonkers. But more to the point, why this house rule? What would it achieve? I'm thinking that oil must be moved by tankers anyway, so any oil brought from the DEI will be in tankers. I know you said otherwise the NEI fuel equation is thrown off, but I'm not understanding.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: treespider

Except that "throws" off the NEI Fuel Equation....Unless you incorporate another HOUSE RULE.

Place the Oil/Refinery Complex in Manchuria and only allow xAKL's and xAK's to cargo load "Fuel" from Mainland Asia. Ships could refuel there, however Tankers would have to schlep south to load liquid cargo.

For one thing, too many house rules drives players bonkers. But more to the point, why this house rule? What would it achieve? I'm thinking that oil must be moved by tankers anyway, so any oil brought from the DEI will be in tankers. I know you said otherwise the NEI fuel equation is thrown off, but I'm not understanding.

This house rule because of limitations within the game engine...the "new" oil and refineries in Manchuria are not really liquid.... they are a simulation of coal bunker fuel. However as JWE pointed out the game engine just sees FUEL and doesn't distinguish. So i suggested this HOUSE RULE as a partial way to distinguish this set of Fuel from the Fuel produced in Japan, the NEI etc...

By sticking 6000 points of FUEL in Manchuria ... it also defeats the purpose of schlepping 6000 fuel from the SRA in tankers to keep the economy running...so to "compensate" we force the player to use xAK's and xAKL's which IIRC can transport Fuel as cargo however at a reduced capacity....and in this way we simulate it as COAL.

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: treespider

Pre-War NEI Oil Production

Total = 65,100,000 barrels /7= 9,300,000 points /365= 25,479 oil points per day /10 = 2,548 Oil centers.


Peak Japanese NEI Production

Total = 49,626,000 barrels /7 = 7,089,428 points /365 = 19,423 oil points per day /10 = 1,942 Oil Centers.



Refinery Throughput Pre-War was almost if not the same as crude production.

Refinery throughput during the war was roughly 50% of Crude production.

In 1942 after occupation Refinery throughput:
13,870,000 barrels /7= 1981428 points /365= 5428 points = 542 refineries

1943
23,398,000 barrels /7= 3,342,571 points /365= 9157 = 916 refineries

916 - 542 = 374 refineries repaired in 365 days. Spread out over several refineries is easily doable.

1944 saw peak Japanese refinery throughput with the equivalent of 1050 refineries producing.

So my suggestion is to start the NEI refineries partially damaged... with perhaps a total potential of 1200 present to be generous.

Currently there are 1960 refineries present in the NEI, as well as 2275 Oil Centers ...fairly historical.

This chart brings up an interesting point. Looking at the refinery throughput at its peak pre-war levels: of the 63 million barrels produced only 17 million barrels was what in AE we would call fuel. That is 11 million tons of throughput with about 3 million being fuel. The other 8 million tons would be AE supply. So the RL to AE numbers should be roughly 3000 oil centers putting there production into 821 Refinery centers to get the net output.

Going back to the original AE economic model each oil center produces 10 oil/day ===> Refinery Center producing 9 fuel and 1 supply. By my figuring, it should be oil center produces 10 oil/day ===> Refining center producing 7 supply and 3 fuel. Hows that for putting the world on its ear

To incorporate that reality, the entire Japanese Economic system would need to be redone

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: oldman45

With out trying to sound patronizing, this is the most interesting set of posts I have read in a long time.

I agree. And I note that many of the posters are "old hands" with years of WIPT/AE experience - several being AE development folks that have long since earned my respect. I am eagerly looking forward to this "economic" mod and will incorporate it into my personal mod.

My question is, with the new demand put on Japanese shipping, will the allies be able to now have an effect on industry by sinking the merchant fleet?

Excellent question. The goal, in my opinion, is to replicate the difficulties both sides had in logistics. The Allies should be able to starve the Japanese by cutting the inports and the Allies should have to move supplies from rear areas and be very short for the first year or so. If this is accomplished, the game will have improved.

I am also interested in the additional research in ships, but with some limitations. It is well known that I am an OOB "nut" and want every single unit/ship that was there historically to be in the game. But in this case I think the most important thing is to balance the hauling capability of both sides so the game reflects the limitations experienced by both sides.

The ideas (somewhere above) of altering capacities or load costs, or of spoilage during load/unload or enroute, seems a good one. Spoilage, especially in tropical regions, was a major issue. Refrigerated capacity was at a premium and the SWPAC permanent fleet literally begged for more during the New Guinea campaign.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: oldman45

With out trying to sound patronizing, this is the most interesting set of posts I have read in a long time.

I agree. And I note that many of the posters are "old hands" with years of WIPT/AE experience - several being AE development folks that have long since earned my respect. I am eagerly looking forward to this "economic" mod and will incorporate it into my personal mod.

My question is, with the new demand put on Japanese shipping, will the allies be able to now have an effect on industry by sinking the merchant fleet?

Excellent question. The goal, in my opinion, is to replicate the difficulties both sides had in logistics. The Allies should be able to starve the Japanese by cutting the inports and the Allies should have to move supplies from rear areas and be very short for the first year or so. If this is accomplished, the game will have improved.

I am also interested in the additional research in ships, but with some limitations. It is well known that I am an OOB "nut" and want every single unit/ship that was there historically to be in the game. But in this case I think the most important thing is to balance the hauling capability of both sides so the game reflects the limitations experienced by both sides.

The ideas (somewhere above) of altering capacities or load costs, or of spoilage during load/unload or enroute, seems a good one. Spoilage, especially in tropical regions, was a major issue. Refrigerated capacity was at a premium and the SWPAC permanent fleet literally begged for more during the New Guinea campaign.

Altering/introducing spoilage during loading/unloading is a great idea. Altering capacities of ships as JWE points out messes with the the troop loading balance = bad idea.

BTW, Treespider's proposal for spoilage upon loading/unloading would exempt the loading process in the continental USA. I think it is the act of loading/unloading that gets the spoilage, so loading in the continental USA should not be exempt.

[oldman45]

I would have to argue against the loading/unloading spoilage unless there are modifiers for later in the war. I assume spoilage to mean how the ships were loaded and unloaded before the US learned how to combat load ships and supplies were just packed in as they fit and unloaded the same way. There are countless stories, both in the pacific and atlantic of problems getting the supplies off the beach but as the war went on, this improved greatly. As far a loading in the US or any major port for that matters should be exempt. I would think the greatest chance for spoilage would be at the invasion site or the "new" forward deployment site.

[Shark7]

I realize you are trying to get the economy more historic, but TBH, in all of my games I have never had a fuel shortage as Japan. It really comes down to proper management of your merchant fleet (which Japan failed at miserably) and not trying to sail all over the globe looking for fights with massive fleets. Probably need to talk to other IJN players to see if this holds true across the board.

On paper, the numbers are different than in practice in game is what I am saying.

Again the real problem with the merchant fleet sitting idle is two-fold:

1. A player isn't stupid. We aren't going to send out a convoy to a resource area carrying supplies and not utilize it to bring in resources on the return trip. Personally I use a system where small ships are used to bring the resource/oil to a central point, and from there a large convoy hauls it back to the HI.

Example: In the DEI, I might pick up from Singapore and Palembang. Instead of hauling the oil resources from Java all the way to Japan, I send it to Palembang where it is picked up with the Palembang production in a series of large convoys. You set up 4-6 of these large convoys, along with all the other stuff going to the main load point, and you can get a convoy arriving at Tokyo once a week etc. All of these carry suppleis back to their resource load points for the return trip. The Japanese didn't do that, but would have shipped the resource from Java in 2-3 ships going to Japan, and may not load supplies on the return trip etc.

In the above example, it hits on something else...every ship making constant long trips caused maintainence problems. Players don't have that issue either.

2. We also aren't going to send them out in 1s or 2s without escorts, so we don't suffer the losses the IJN did during the war. The end result is lots of tonnage un-used.

I guess what I'm saying is that the real problem isn't that we have too much fuel or too little resource, a lot of it has to do with the playing have 20/20 hindsight and not making the historical shipping decisions.

I think what people forget with the un-utilized tonnage in game is that we are not making the same decisions the IJN did. Still, the idea of trying to get the player to use more of the merchant fleet, and need to leave the merchant build queue on is commendable.

Unfortunately we can't modify the game itself to do what would be best, which is have refineries able to turn a small amount of resource (to represent the bulk coal) into bunker fuel. Your solution may be the best. Since it seems we need to increase the number of resources that need to be hauled back to Japan to get a closer to historic use of the Japanese merchant fleet.

[oldman45]

ORIGINAL: treespider


Now that I've got my 5 hours of sleep...

It depends...all of these numbers are based on the At-Start Japanese Values for the most part. So if the Japanese player wants to expand his HI he is going to have to find additional resources somewhere...

-------

On a side note all of the above analysis only looked at Petroleum based "FUEL". AS JWE pointed out earlier and as most of you are aware Ship Bunkering can also consist of Coal.

Not sure the best way to handle this would be.

Peak War-time Coal Consumption for Ship Bunkering was 2,517,000 tons in 1942.

That factors out to 6895 "points" per day. If you convert that to "Fuel", you need to make a 690 point oil/refinery complex. Unfortunately this would offset the calculated 6000 point fuel deficit in the standard Japanese economy. However it does account for COAL based Ship Bunkering I wonder if perhaps additional oil/refinery complexes would be in order to account for ships using coal.

Except that "throws" off the NEI Fuel Equation....Unless you incorporate another HOUSE RULE.

Place the Oil/Refinery Complex in Manchuria and only allow xAKL's and xAK's to cargo load "Fuel" from Mainland Asia. Ships could refuel there, however Tankers would have to schlep south to load liquid cargo.

This makes a lot of sense but since the game does not "care" what fuel you are using, I think the temptation would be too great to use the fuel in Manchuria for reasons other than to "refuel" coal fired ships.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: witpqs


BTW, Treespider's proposal for spoilage upon loading/unloading would exempt the loading process in the continental USA. I think it is the act of loading/unloading that gets the spoilage, so loading in the continental USA should not be exempt.

Oh ...don't get me wrong... I didn't propose an exemption for the continental US...its just that the net effect is that there is no effect when loading in the US.

In other words supply would be debited from the US port...but since the US is such an overwhelming supply source the effect of the debiting is negated... if you get my drift.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: witpqs

BTW, Treespider's proposal for spoilage upon loading/unloading would exempt the loading process in the continental USA. I think it is the act of loading/unloading that gets the spoilage, so loading in the continental USA should not be exempt.

Oh ...don't get me wrong... I didn't propose an exemption for the continental US...its just that the net effect is that there is no effect when loading in the US.

In other words supply would be debited from the US port...but since the US is such an overwhelming supply source the effect of the debiting is negated... if you get my drift.

OK, but if you take measures to reduce the amount of supply exported by the USA during the first (whatever - 12 months?) part of the war, such as by having some damaged HI, then the spoilage when loading at the USA end will matter during that period.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: oldman45


This makes a lot of sense but since the game does not "care" what fuel you are using, I think the temptation would be too great to use the fuel in Manchuria for reasons other than to "refuel" coal fired ships.

It doesn't really matter...if the Japanese want to transport the 6000 fuel to Japan from Manchuria instead of the NEI to keep the economy running...let them...except by House Rule they have to use xAK's or xAKLs... and they still have to find a source of Fuel for their fleet.

In my Mod I put in 580 refineries along the coats of Korea/Manchuria (instead of the 690). But only installed 500 oil centers. So the Japanese will still have to transport in 800 oil points per day to keep the refineries producing Fuel.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: witpqs

BTW, Treespider's proposal for spoilage upon loading/unloading would exempt the loading process in the continental USA. I think it is the act of loading/unloading that gets the spoilage, so loading in the continental USA should not be exempt.

Oh ...don't get me wrong... I didn't propose an exemption for the continental US...its just that the net effect is that there is no effect when loading in the US.

In other words supply would be debited from the US port...but since the US is such an overwhelming supply source the effect of the debiting is negated... if you get my drift.

OK, but if you take measures to reduce the amount of supply exported by the USA during the first (whatever - 12 months?) part of the war, such as by having some damaged HI, then the spoilage when loading at the USA end will matter during that period.

I suppose...which is fine.

[oldman45]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: oldman45


This makes a lot of sense but since the game does not "care" what fuel you are using, I think the temptation would be too great to use the fuel in Manchuria for reasons other than to "refuel" coal fired ships.

It doesn't really matter...if the Japanese want to transport the 6000 fuel to Japan from Manchuria instead of the NEI to keep the economy running...let them...except by House Rule they have to use xAK's or xAKLs... and they still have to find a source of Fuel for their fleet.

In my Mod I put in 580 refineries along the coats of Korea/Manchuria (instead of the 690). But only installed 500 oil centers. So the Japanese will still have to transport in 800 oil points per day to keep the refineries producing Fuel.

I understand now, thanks.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

I realize you are trying to get the economy more historic, but TBH, in all of my games I have never had a fuel shortage as Japan. It really comes down to proper management of your merchant fleet (which Japan failed at miserably) and not trying to sail all over the globe looking for fights with massive fleets. Probably need to talk to other IJN players to see if this holds true across the board.

On paper, the numbers are different than in practice in game is what I am saying.

Again the real problem with the merchant fleet sitting idle is two-fold:

1. A player isn't stupid. We aren't going to send out a convoy to a resource area carrying supplies and not utilize it to bring in resources on the return trip. Personally I use a system where small ships are used to bring the resource/oil to a central point, and from there a large convoy hauls it back to the HI.

Example: In the DEI, I might pick up from Singapore and Palembang. Instead of hauling the oil resources from Java all the way to Japan, I send it to Palembang where it is picked up with the Palembang production in a series of large convoys. You set up 4-6 of these large convoys, along with all the other stuff going to the main load point, and you can get a convoy arriving at Tokyo once a week etc. All of these carry suppleis back to their resource load points for the return trip. The Japanese didn't do that, but would have shipped the resource from Java in 2-3 ships going to Japan, and may not load supplies on the return trip etc.

In the above example, it hits on something else...every ship making constant long trips caused maintainence problems. Players don't have that issue either.

2. We also aren't going to send them out in 1s or 2s without escorts, so we don't suffer the losses the IJN did during the war. The end result is lots of tonnage un-used.

I guess what I'm saying is that the real problem isn't that we have too much fuel or too little resource, a lot of it has to do with the playing have 20/20 hindsight and not making the historical shipping decisions.

I think what people forget with the un-utilized tonnage in game is that we are not making the same decisions the IJN did. Still, the idea of trying to get the player to use more of the merchant fleet, and need to leave the merchant build queue on is commendable.

Unfortunately we can't modify the game itself to do what would be best, which is have refineries able to turn a small amount of resource (to represent the bulk coal) into bunker fuel. Your solution may be the best. Since it seems we need to increase the number of resources that need to be hauled back to Japan to get a closer to historic use of the Japanese merchant fleet.

All very true...but why not try and bring Resource aand petroleum transportation into line with historical levels?

Then once that is accomplished you can CHOOSE to address game play style through the mechanism of a House Rule - such as handicapping the Japanese with a simulation of their historic convoy practices or lack thereof. One way to do this would be to limit the Japanese Cargo TF running oil and resources to say 5 ships total.


Of course MOST players don't want to be saddled with historic doctrine or politics.[;)]

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: treespider



Oh ...don't get me wrong... I didn't propose an exemption for the continental US...its just that the net effect is that there is no effect when loading in the US.

In other words supply would be debited from the US port...but since the US is such an overwhelming supply source the effect of the debiting is negated... if you get my drift.

OK, but if you take measures to reduce the amount of supply exported by the USA during the first (whatever - 12 months?) part of the war, such as by having some damaged HI, then the spoilage when loading at the USA end will matter during that period.

I suppose...which is fine.

And I should have added that I am lobbying for that early-war USA reduction in supplies available, as it does have a significant impact on the game by constraining early Allied strategic options (in a realistic way IMO).