Tweaking the Japanese/Allied Economies

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
Might be able to address the ship resource capacity issue by creative math with the industry values that are available in the editor. How about:

1. Double resource output per resource center point (from 20 to 40).
2. Double Resource input to HI and LI but do not affect output.

Doubling everything effectively halves the capacity of ships to haul resource without affecting their ability to haul other stuff.

This doesn't sound bad to me either.

I hate to sound so wishy-washy, but I'm not a production freak. All I want to see is more ships being used in the role they are supposed to be used in.

And do it in a way that doesn't break anything else.

So any simple, straight forward, solution works just fine for me. Think I'll have the guys play with this one for a while.

I appreciate all the work that TS and others have done so much. That said, I am not comfortable saying that this or that should be changed just yet. One this I don't know about yet is HI vs industrial demand balance. Going back to the discussion a while ago about stockpiling one million points of HI or more, I think that area needs to be addressed also.

JUst Casually speaking, at present the USA produces 72k of supply a day through allotments and industry. The bulk of that is the 65k allotment at ECUSA. Why not replace that with a number of Resource/LI centers at various continental bases. Damage a portion of each of these bases to represent the US economy ramping up for war. I am at work so cannot figure out just how this would need to be done. It may be necesary to add a few more bases to represent the central US industrial centers (Chicago/Gary/Detroit/Pittsburg)

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Might be able to address the ship resource capacity issue by creative math with the industry values that are available in the editor. How about:

1. Double resource output per resource center point (from 20 to 40).
2. Double Resource input to HI and LI but do not affect output.

Doubling everything effectively halves the capacity of ships to haul resource without affecting their ability to haul other stuff.

If this works I much prefer this approach than futtsing with the ships carrying capacity.

IMO...its slightly more complicated than that.


The objective here is to cause the Japanese to use the Merchant Marine at something approaching historic levels...as I mentioned earlier the USSBS has some useful facts and figures that can be used to good effect.

Looking at 1942, total Japanese imports of several different commodities from Manchuria, China and Korea amounted to 12,074,800 tons (Report 54, page 73, Fig 54).

Using the Kakoritsu factor for 1942 which averages about 1.26 during this time frame for this area, means we divide 12,074,800 by 1.26 and we arrive at 9,583,174 tons of cargo capacity engaged on these routes in 1942.

Using Local Yokel's in game calculations of an 8 day round trip we have 365/8 = 45.625 trips per year...that works out to 208,219 tons per trip based on the 9583174 figure...or 44-45 Aden Maru's (as rated in game) per convoy.

However based on other data I estimate that the IRL turnaround time on this voyage should be 15 days and not 8. So 365/15 = 24.333 trips per year = 9583174/24.3 = 394369 tons per trip / 4670 per Aden Maru = 84.4 Aden Marus per trip. The IRL Japanese were not nearly as efficient as our in game stevedores.

So to bring in the historic amount of resources for an entire year should require 84.4 Aden Marus. However because our in game Aden Marus can complete the trip in 8/15ths of the time we only need 8/15ths the number of Aden Marus...or 44.8 Aden Marus. So how do we require the player to occupy the 84 Marus for a year?

JWE has suggested cutting capacity by 33%. Lets look at what happens:

The Aden Maru goes from 4670 to 3113 bulk capacity...a 33% decrease. This requires the player to use 33% more Marus to bring in the same amount of resources. 44.8 x 1.33 = 59.5 Marus. Good but still not up to the 84.4 Marus of history.


So how do we get to 84.4?

We're going to use JWE's new capacities because I like how they impact supply movement.

So let's multiply the resource center output and the LI Inputs and HI Inputs by 1.25...about the value of the kakoritsu factor.

Previously 5 resource centers would produce (5x20)= 100 RP...now they will produce 5 x 25 = 125 RP. So now the 125 RP would represent 100 tons or .8 tons per RP.

So let's look how many tons our new Aden Marus can bring in in a year from Manchuria/China.

In game they make 45.625 trips per year, they would carry 3113 points per trip, and each point equals .8 tons.

So if we used 84.4 Marus x 45.625 trips/year x 3113 points/trip x .8 tons/point = 9,589,907 tons/year... IRL they brought in 9,583,174.

So in the end use JWE's new capacities and multiply Resource Output and Industry Input by 1.25.

And if you want to go further and make the Japanese import 20 million tons versus 17 million then implement my other change regarding LI and HI In puts and outputs...which with the new math would be:

LI - 25 Resources In - 2 supply Out
HI - 19 Resources, 2 fuel In - 2 HI Out
Refineries - 10 Oil In - 10 Fuel Out
Resource Center - 25 Out.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: vettim89
I appreciate all the work that TS and others have done so much. That said, I am not comfortable saying that this or that should be changed just yet. One this I don't know about yet is HI vs industrial demand balance. Going back to the discussion a while ago about stockpiling one million points of HI or more, I think that area needs to be addressed also.

JUst Casually speaking, at present the USA produces 72k of supply a day through allotments and industry. The bulk of that is the 65k allotment at ECUSA. Why not replace that with a number of Resource/LI centers at various continental bases. Damage a portion of each of these bases to represent the US economy ramping up for war. I am at work so cannot figure out just how this would need to be done. It may be necesary to add a few more bases to represent the central US industrial centers (Chicago/Gary/Detroit/Pittsburg)

Comfort level for anything ain't gonna happen for quite some time, so you gots a long time to think about anything that gets brought up here.

MY particular imperitive is a bit different from Spidey's imperitive. I'm looking at 'least marginal effort, in' vs 'most marginal effort, out.'

The Babes thing is conceptual, it does not require historical levels of much of anything. What it likes is probabalistic, historical, results. Since the game engine is based on determination of probabilistic results, seems to me if you dick with it, it should be under the model umbrella.

Spidey is way smarter than me, and can tweak the production model to suit his convenience. Me, I'm just a concept puke and want to see simple things, done in a simple way, by simple minds, to make freakin merchies work harder. It ain't gd rocket science for crikey's sake.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: vettim89
I appreciate all the work that TS and others have done so much. That said, I am not comfortable saying that this or that should be changed just yet. One this I don't know about yet is HI vs industrial demand balance. Going back to the discussion a while ago about stockpiling one million points of HI or more, I think that area needs to be addressed also.

JUst Casually speaking, at present the USA produces 72k of supply a day through allotments and industry. The bulk of that is the 65k allotment at ECUSA. Why not replace that with a number of Resource/LI centers at various continental bases. Damage a portion of each of these bases to represent the US economy ramping up for war. I am at work so cannot figure out just how this would need to be done. It may be necesary to add a few more bases to represent the central US industrial centers (Chicago/Gary/Detroit/Pittsburg)

Comfort level for anything ain't gonna happen for quite some time, so you gots a long time to think about anything that gets brought up here.

MY particular imperitive is a bit different from Spidey's imperitive. I'm looking at 'least marginal effort, in' vs 'most marginal effort, out.'

The Babes thing is conceptual, it does not require historical levels of much of anything. What it likes is probabalistic, historical, results. Since the game engine is based on determination of probabilistic results, seems to me if you dick with it, it should be under the model umbrella.

Spidey is way smarter than me, and can tweak the production model to suit his convenience. Me, I'm just a concept puke and want to see simple things, done in a simple way, by simple minds, to make freakin merchies work harder. It ain't gd rocket science for crikey's sake.

Thanks for the compliment but I wouldn't say that.

I like the reduced bulk cargo capacity angle and can't wait for the new cls file...particularly because it addresses supply movement.

For my model I'm making certain assumptions that require different things to change to fit those assumptions. Others might not agree with those assumptions and that's their prerogative, but the assumptions work for me.

So for instance - due to the ship capacity change and my assumption that the load/unload rate is too fast in game compared to history, I felt that altering the other side of the equation as well, in the form of resource outputs and industry inputs, was also necessary.

One might disagree with that assumption, so the simple change in cargo capacity might suffice for them, afterall it requires 33% more shipping to achieve the stock result. IMO however history required more shipping than that.

[vettim89]

Still that approach is the least "intrusive" of all the solutions proposed so far. It is simply a 1:1 exchange as far as LI and Resource Centers input/output. The only thing that changes is how much needs to be moved to Japan.

I think this and the cargo capacity changes are a nice incremental approach

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: JWE


MY particular imperitive is a bit different from Spidey's imperitive. I'm looking at 'least marginal effort, in' vs 'most marginal effort, out.'

I'm not qualed to get involved in this thread, but I am following it with interest. Many different approaches being considered, which is good.

I tend to think, from my limited experience with the production system in two GC AI games as Allies, that the new LI mechanism caused more problems than it fixed versus WITP, although the attempt had its heart in the right place. My historical readings have always pointed hard at POL as being the Achilles heel of the war (in the ETO too), and the motivation for 75% or more of Japanese expansion moves and seaborne decision-making. LI makes supply too "free." As you've pointed out, making detailed, spare part-level military supply using the LI system in places like deepest Sumatra is a bit crazy, and untethers the Japanese LCU base from the Home Islands, leaving them open to take Oz or India while self-funding their logistics.

I don't know how you ultimately fix/tweak the econ models, but I think making oil king again, and making the HI the necessary center of the Japanese universe, is the macro skeleton to the thing.

[JWE]

It's basically one or the other for me. "Least is Most" is my biggest hot button. Leaning way over towards Don's solution for my purposes. That allows nominal "stuff" to port across everybody's mods. This way, Babes and RA and TS, and even stock can share database elements.

Yeah, think for DBB will take Dons suggestions as a basis. Two little data element changes? as opposed to a gazillion tweaks? Don has too much hair; and it's much short and much too blonde for him to play God in a Charlton Heston movie, but still ... "AND THE FIRST COMMANDMENT SHALL BE - KEEP YO STUFF 'TOGETHER' BRO'. And it was righteous, and it was good. And all was set forth in the World according to the Word.

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: JWE

It's basically one or the other for me. "Least is Most" is my biggest hot button. Leaning way over towards Don's solution for my purposes. That allows nominal "stuff" to port across everybody's mods. This way, Babes and RA and TS, and even stock can share database elements.

Yeah, think for DBB will take Dons suggestions as a basis. Two little data element changes? as opposed to a gazillion tweaks? Don has too much hair; and it's much short and much too blonde for him to play God in a Charlton Heston movie, but still ... "AND THE FIRST COMMANDMENT SHALL BE - KEEP YO STUFF 'TOGETHER' BRO'. And it was righteous, and it was good. And all was set forth in the World according to the Word.

I assume this would include the elimination of supply from refinery centers. I think that is pretty much a given at this point.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: vettim89
I assume this would include the elimination of supply from refinery centers. I think that is pretty much a given at this point.

Yes, Sir. I take that as a given too.

[witpqs]

JWE,

I agree that makes the most sense. It solves the main problem and I acknowledge it does not address supply movement (which Treespider wants to address). I do understand that supply movement and spoilage is also an issue in terms of things being too good vs IRL. Obviously the best solution to that is code, so let's put that aside (if Santa shows up, I will put out milk and cookies every Christmas from now on). Cutting capacity has lots of side effects (which I abhor), so a partial way to address supply is the 'big ramp up' (henceforth BRU [:D]). Some damaged heavy industry in the US that by agreement must be left 'Repair=Yes'. No effect on anything else because the Allies don't use the HI pool so it doesn't matter what's in there. This will only affect Allied supply for the first X months but that alone will have a meaningful impact on early Allied capabilities, which just improves DBB further.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

JWE,

I agree that makes the most sense. It solves the main problem and I acknowledge it does not address supply movement (which Treespider wants to address). I do understand that supply movement and spoilage is also an issue in terms of things being too good vs IRL. Obviously the best solution to that is code, so let's put that aside (if Santa shows up, I will put out milk and cookies every Christmas from now on).

You and me both...

Cutting capacity has lots of side effects (which I abhor),

Unless one opts to ignore the Specials and only tweaks the capacities of the Prime Movers...ie AKA, AK, AKL, xAK, xAKL's.

so a partial way to address supply is the 'big ramp up' (henceforth BRU [:D]). Some damaged heavy industry in the US that by agreement must be left 'Repair=Yes'. No effect on anything else because the Allies don't use the HI pool so it doesn't matter what's in there. This will only affect Allied supply for the first X months but that alone will have a meaningful impact on early Allied capabilities, which just improves DBB further.

Might do some High Level work on that this evening using Munitions Budget as an index basis...idea being current game level (72K ish) = 1943 level = 100.

So US Munitions Budget:
1942 = $30.168B = 58
1943 = $51.745B = 100
1944 = $57.594B = 111

Adjusting At-Start Daily Supply and then adding in damaged Resource Centers and LI that need to repair so that in the middle of 1942 the US is producing 42K supplies by the middle of 1943 the US is producing 72K supplies and by the middle of 1944 the US is producing 80k supplies.

Seems simple but you have to factor in the supply consumed to repair facilities.

Just a thought....

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: treespider

Might do some High Level work on that this evening using Munitions Budget as an index basis...idea being current game level (72K ish) = 1943 level = 100.

So US Munitions Budget:
1942 = $30.168B = 58
1943 = $51.745B = 100
1944 = $57.594B = 111

Adjusting At-Start Daily Supply and then adding in damaged Resource Centers and LI that need to repair so that in the middle of 1942 the US is producing 42K supplies by the middle of 1943 the US is producing 72K supplies and by the middle of 1944 the US is producing 80k supplies.

Seems simple but you have to factor in the supply consumed to repair facilities.

Just a thought....

I think you will be hard pressed to make the US economic ramp up that fine grained, but hey I could be wrong (its happened before[:D]). As every LI center can only repair one point per day, the most you can achieve in increased supply production (minus the 1000 points per LI center repaired) is 365 points per year. To achieve you 30,000 point jump between '42-43, you'll need 82 centers in ContUS. Thats a lot of LI centers. Even if you kept the HI producing supply you would need 28 HI and 28 LI

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: vettim89

ORIGINAL: treespider

Might do some High Level work on that this evening using Munitions Budget as an index basis...idea being current game level (72K ish) = 1943 level = 100.

So US Munitions Budget:
1942 = $30.168B = 58
1943 = $51.745B = 100
1944 = $57.594B = 111

Adjusting At-Start Daily Supply and then adding in damaged Resource Centers and LI that need to repair so that in the middle of 1942 the US is producing 42K supplies by the middle of 1943 the US is producing 72K supplies and by the middle of 1944 the US is producing 80k supplies.

Seems simple but you have to factor in the supply consumed to repair facilities.

Just a thought....

I think you will be hard pressed to make the US economic ramp up that fine grained, but hey I could be wrong (its happened before[:D]). As every LI center can only repair one point per day, the most you can achieve in increased supply production (minus the 1000 points per LI center repaired) is 365 points per year. To achieve you 30,000 point jump between '42-43, you'll need 82 centers in ContUS. Thats a lot of LI centers. Even if you kept the HI producing supply you would need 28 HI and 28 LI

It'll take me an evening but I think I can do it...I'll be using my new system so only LI produces supply....however it requires resources[;)]

Still 1000 sup to repair 1 point of industry?

[witpqs]

I think the ramp up from repairing facilities really comes from the well known head-banging effect: it feels so good when you stop! The amount that you get from any repaired facilities (0 if you use only HI) is not the main issue, it's the amount of daily supply that you stop using at 1,000 per day every time a facility is fully repaired (100% functional and therefore stops eating that 1,000 per day).

[witpqs]

TS,

It is still 1,000 supply to repair unless it changed in a patch and I missed it.

BTW, I remember El Sid got bases set up with delayed arrival in his later RHS scenarios, the point being that those came in with daily supply. Not sure if that's a tool still available in AE or if you like the notion.

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I think the ramp up from repairing facilities really comes from the well known head-banging effect: it feels so good when you stop! The amount that you get from any repaired facilities (0 if you use only HI) is not the main issue, it's the amount of daily supply that you stop using at 1,000 per day every time a facility is fully repaired (100% functional and therefore stops eating that 1,000 per day).

Well, he nailed it now didn't he. Using my LI/HI model above, you would need 56,000 points a day just to maintain the repairs. If you went with your no supply from HI but two supply from LI, your number of units increases to 41 LI but no HI and you don't have to feed the HI fuel (which is a good thing). Also your supply consumed for repair drops to 41,000/day. I have a work around for that should work

To have those 41 LI Centers produce 30,000/day by mid 1942 the need to each be 512 LI Centers. Backtracking, they would be 332 each on 7 December 1942. You will need 7,380,000 supply points to expand them from 332 to 512 and an additional 14,760,000 to expand them from 512 to 877 by mid-1943. The LI would need to be 975 each to produce 80,000/day. I will leave that final calculation out for now because the questions is when do you want the last 8000/day. It would about 3 months to do it if all the resource centers could expand to 975. If, on the other hand, you wanted it to take a full year then make 30 LI 877 max and 11 LI have 1269 max. That would actually take 13 months; numbers could be fudged a little more to make it 12 if you wanted.

For the sake of argument, lets say the Allied player has to pay for the last 8000 a month himself (i.e with supply he is producing) So we need a total of 22 million and change in suppy points to take the US Economy from producing 27k on 7 December 1941 to 42k on 1 June 1942 to 72k on 1 June 1943. That means that each resource center needs 540k to accomplish to growth.

Three possible work arounds:

1. Put 540k supply at every US base with an LI center. Player may say I couldn't possible need that much supply in the whole war and not spend a dime as it were on repairing LI

2. Have convoys arriving at each LI base on a regular basis to dump enough supply to just accomplish the needed repairs. This would be a nightmare to plug into the DB and still be subject to the above but it wouldn't be a huge lump sum.

3. Start the LI centers at 100% damage but a lower max. The give each base a supply allowance of 1332/day. Then play with a HR that all ContUS LI centers must have repairs set to all. This woul actually cause a complet recalculation as the extra 1000 points would become available once the LI was repaired. Let me refigure that

[witpqs]

vettim,

Your #1 and #2 sound awful. #3 with a simple "leave repairs on" has promise.

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

vettim,

Your #1 and #2 sound awful. #3 with a simple "leave repairs on" has promise.

The problem with #3 is that it eventually means there will be a 1000 point per day per center boost. Perhaps that would be okay if you just put it at the end of the game. I mean would it be that big of a deal if the ContUS supply went from 90k/day to 120k/day. By that point you would have more supply than you could shake a stick at and transport would by far be the limiter. Let me look at it again. Need to run a turn first

[witpqs]

Well I'm wondering why put extra supply at those bases at all? I was just thinking a very simple approach:

US produces X (xx,xxx) supply per day.

Put in Y number of damaged HI centers spread across Z locations that will eat up Z-thousand supply per day repairing. Make the spread of Y across Z heterogeneous if a staggered ramp up is desired.

I just looked at my spreadsheet of Scenario 28 bases and there are 39 Continental US and another 19 Canadian. Those do not count Alaska. So by working only with HI - which for the Allies will have no effect on anything else (unless Japan captures it & good for them) - so by working only with HI you can cause 58,000 supply to be eaten per day for as long as you want. You can have 58,000 supply eaten the first day, 57,000 the second day, etc. or have 58,000 eaten every day for three years.

From looking at your earlier post I think a reduction of 58,000 per day is more than you want, so you can safely ignore some of the remote Canadian bases that might be hard to get supplies to.

No need to give any base extra supply or worry about extra LI producing extra supply when the whole thing is done repairing.

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Well I'm wondering why put extra supply at those bases at all? I was just thinking a very simple approach:

US produces X (xx,xxx) supply per day.

Put in Y number of damaged HI centers spread across Z locations that will eat up Z-thousand supply per day repairing. Make the spread of Y across Z heterogeneous if a staggered ramp up is desired.

I just looked at my spreadsheet of Scenario 28 bases and there are 39 Continental US and another 19 Canadian. Those do not count Alaska. So by working only with HI - which for the Allies will have no effect on anything else (unless Japan captures it & good for them) - so by working only with HI you can cause 58,000 supply to be eaten per day for as long as you want. You can have 58,000 supply eaten the first day, 57,000 the second day, etc. or have 58,000 eaten every day for three years.

From looking at your earlier post I think a reduction of 58,000 per day is more than you want, so you can safely ignore some of the remote Canadian bases that might be hard to get supplies to.

No need to give any base extra supply or worry about extra LI producing extra supply when the whole thing is done repairing.

Can anyone say "supply sink" (just a different form)? But wouldn't those extra HI centers eat fuel and resources as the new centers rebuilt and also eventually add more to the already bloated economy?