Economic Modeling 1: Exporting Allied Resources

[witpqs]

Right, but I thought you were not doing the small quantity stuff? Anyhow, not a knock on your choice, it was just an observation.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Andrew,

Have a look at the economic aspects of Treespider's mod. Regarding Australia, I think he reduced resources there, requiring more stuff to be shipped in. Resource and oil have both been added at Cristobal (Panama Canal Zone) to simulate those available from the US to be shipped to Australia. Not sure if he touched Cape Town, but the changes to Australia and shipping resources & oil to there might be more significant to the game than shipping stuff back to Cape Town anyway.

I read about Treespider's mod. It is interesting but I prefer a different approach. As Australia was a net exporter of resources (tonnage wise) I prefer to model it that way, with the resources UK bound instead of to the USA. Most of the material shipped from Australia for the USA was, I believe, "supplies" for the US forces operating in the SWPAC (and maybe SOPAC??) areas, not raw resources, so I have Australia as a net supply exporter as well. What Australia imported, apart from oil/fuel, was military hardware, but as has been discussed that is not modelled in the game as things that need shipment - they just appear in the equipment pools. It's no easy matter to simulate things accurately given the crude tools at our disposal in AE!

Then again, if anyone does have information about raw resources being shipped from Australia to the USA during the war, I would be interested to see it.

Unfortunately spare time for me is in very short supply these days so work on my AE mod is painfully slow.

From the thread about my mod - my ideas about Australia.

Consequences - AUSTRALIA

With the best will in the world, Australia simply did not have resources for the tremendous effort required. Australian manpower, scant to begin with, had already been drained for her military forces and war industries. Her continental defenses were at rock bottom, the best of her troops and the bulk of her military equipment having been sent overseas. Her economy was already stretched tight by the demands of two years of war and was scarcely sufficient to meet her own requirements. While a large part of the basic U.S. Army ration, items of clothing, and the like could be obtained locally, only a brief survey was needed to convince Americans in Australia that the great bulk of military supplies—including construction equipment and construction labor would have to come from the United States.

-Global Logistics & Strategy 1940-43, p. 168
Leighton & Coakley

Australia and New Zealand were primarily agricultural, producing an exportable surplus of foodstuffs and raw materials, which in peacetime they normally exchanged with England for manufactured goods. Though their industry was increasing, and the pace of its development was vastly speeded by the war, it was far from sufficient in 1942 to maintain an essential civilian economy and provide equipment for the armed forces Australia and New Zealand could put into the field. The large American forces sent to the area promised an additional drain on the native economy. These American forces would be operating at the end of one of the longest supply lines in the history of warfare. If they could draw the bulk of their subsistence supplies from local sources, the saving in shipping would be immense. A fairly simple and direct exchange therefore suggested itself whereby Australia and New Zealand would furnish American forces with housing, subsistence, clothing, and miscellaneous supplies and services in return for which the United States would supply the marginal needs of both their military forces and civilian economy.

-Global Logistics & Strategy 1940-43, p. 497
Leighton & Coakley

In Stock-AE Australia has 3210 Resource centers producing 64,200 RP.

Australia also has 2770 LI and 1120 HI which require 63950 RP and 2240 fuel.

As such she has a 250 point RP surplus...no more resources need to be transported to Australia.

The Industry/Refineries produces 5010 points of supply.

She also has 55 Refineries which produce 495 Fuel and 55 supply.

So in the end Australia produces 250 RP, 5065 Supply points and has a -1745 Fuel Deficit.


With my changes:

In TGC DBB Australia has 3210 Resource centers producing 80250 RP.

An additional 412 damaged Resource Centers have been added to existing centers.

Australia also has 2770 LI and 1120 HI which require 90530 RP and 2240 fuel.

As such At start she has a -10,280 point RP deficit. However as the damaged Resource Centers repair Australia will be able to meet her and the US's needs. After approximately 200 days the 412 Resource centers will produce a further 10,300 RP eliminating the Australian RP deficit.

Early in the game RP will need to be transported to Australia for her economy to keep functioning at peak efficiency. I tend to think of these Resource Points as asphalt, asphalt producing plants, crushing plants, compressors, jack hammers, screening plants for gravel, explosives, landing mat; for transportation, rail and rolling stock, trucks, gasoline storage tanks, and operating personnel, etc. After the first 200 days she will be fully self sufficent.

The Industry will produces 5540 points of supply. She also has 55 Refineries which produce 550 Fuel.

So in the end Australia At Start will produce a -10280 RP deficit, 3540 Supply points (5540 - 2000 for Resource Center Repair) and has a -1690 point Fuel Deficit....assuming the US ships RP and Oil to Australia. Eventually the RP deficit will disappear and the damaged Resource center will not need supply for repair.

Due to other changes in the US economy which cause Supply to be much scarcer it may be beneficial for the US to ship RP in addition to supply to Australia in the beginning until Australia's economy can fully meet its RP requirements.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: bigred

Without this dimension, playes probably need far fewer ships - and have "AKs to burn" -
no doubt for battle fanboys - but hardly realistic.

No wonder Nemo121 is able to kick ass using xAKs as cannonfodder...talk about cheap victories. There should be some hard code to force transport TFs to travel in 5 pack convoys to stop these kinds of gamey play.

The hard code is the other way around. I just found out why? Japan has ORGANIC supply - up to 960 resource centers per location!
Who needs to import? And Manchuria and Korea will run out of resources - and need to import to sustain production - they really
are major industrial areas - but they EXPORT most of the coal and iron (copper etc too) to Japan. Kill the resource centers in Japan,
add em to Manchukuo/Korea - and the Japanese must import.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Nice to see that others think along the same lines. [/align] [/align]In my personal mod the US has to import ressources from the rest of the world in order to run its industry at full capacity.[/align] [/align]The Allies have to repair between 50% and 66% of the industry and ressources in US, Australia / NZ and India, in order to model early "shoestring" conditions and rising production over time.[/align] [/align]I have reduced "free supplies" at USA bases to a level that repairs will consume most of them, while the bases on other continents will need to draw the supplies from industry production and/ imports.[/align] [/align]Furthermore, I have added ressources at the Canal Zone and Capetown, plus some oil at the Canal Zone (Venezuela), plus light industry in England and Eastern US (lots).[/align] [/align]This will keep much of the merchant fleet well occupied (I also use the "stockpile" option to 'force' the use of coastal shipping from ressource centers to industry centers in Australia and NZ). [/align] [/align]I must admit that my approach is not overly scientific but seat-of-the-pants and that the values I have chosen may cause problems with under- or oversupply in the long run.[/align] [/align]I'm currently playtesting how all this turns out, but like Andrew spare time for me is in short supply as well... 

I put Oil at Colon - Cristobol Colon is my name (as IRL) = oil from Venezuela - rewarding those who dedicate ships to move it to U K, Eastern Canada and
Eastern USA - where there is not enough free oil to run full bore - although the Eastern USA comes close -

I don't put resources there - but am thinking about converting Port Stanley to Recife - to be a point ships from various places appear - and so do various resources.

I think South Africa ought to be a CONSUMER of resources - so put industry there - but not enough resources to feed it all - thus rewarding those who export from AUS.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Nice to see that others think along the same lines. [/align] [/align]In my personal mod the US has to import ressources from the rest of the world in order to run its industry at full capacity.[/align] [/align]The Allies have to repair between 50% and 66% of the industry and ressources in US, Australia / NZ and India, in order to model early "shoestring" conditions and rising production over time.[/align] [/align]I have reduced "free supplies" at USA bases to a level that repairs will consume most of them, while the bases on other continents will need to draw the supplies from industry production and/ imports.[/align] [/align]Furthermore, I have added ressources at the Canal Zone and Capetown, plus some oil at the Canal Zone (Venezuela), plus light industry in England and Eastern US (lots).[/align] [/align]This will keep much of the merchant fleet well occupied (I also use the "stockpile" option to 'force' the use of coastal shipping from ressource centers to industry centers in Australia and NZ). [/align] [/align]I must admit that my approach is not overly scientific but seat-of-the-pants and that the values I have chosen may cause problems with under- or oversupply in the long run.[/align] [/align]I'm currently playtesting how all this turns out, but like Andrew spare time for me is in short supply as well... 

I don't see the justification for requiring the US to import resources, though.

The justification is they needed to do just that.
In particular, ores from New Caledonia were critical to the war effort. Not all of them were trace ores - you do not need much
antimony no matter how critical it is - but in this system - with generic resources - that is well simulated by simply rewarding
imports. But NC is a major source of many ores - a peculiar bit of geography - that really are needed by the shipload. The
same thing could be said for Banka Island - re just tin - but the Allies are going to lose that. More generally, AUS is not credited
by most with her rightful place as a supplier - but was highly regarded at the time. There is no glamour in logistics - so this
is not a topic for lots of books that sell well. But it remains true. AUS increased production not so much for its own and
CW industry - as for the USA. The USA became its main defender - and it repaid as it could - in kind.

[Pascal_slith]

A good study on the strategic importance of SE Asian resources is "To Have and Have Not: Southeast Asian Raw Materials and the Origins of the Pacific War" by Jonathan Marshall. It is available for free here (this is the publisher's website):

http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpresseboo ... and=eschol

This should help in this discussion.