Michael and I were talking on the phone today as I was driving through what appeared to be a blizzard in Loveland and the subject came up about the American economy starting out on Dec 7th. In RA we have scaled back a bunch of the American production so it has to be repaired by all that supply coming in from DAY ONE. The reality is that the American economy took some time to spin up into the juggernaut it would become.
It was/is Michael's opinion that the economy could be scaled back even more because East Coast USA produces SOOOOOOOOO much supply immediately.
Does anyone have thoughts on this topic? Could there be a way to reflecting the spinning up of the American economy? SHOULD this be something looked at and/or done?
I, personally, don't have a a strong opinion here and would like some thoughts from players or ones familiar in one way or the other with the Mod.
THANKS!
RA 6.3 US Economy
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
RA 6.3 US Economy
Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
RHS mod has a disabled US economy at start, simulating its buildup after December 7. It is an easy way of toning down the excessive US supply present in the stock game.
-
ny59giants
- Posts: 9902
- Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
I hope both Symon (John) and Damian jump in here. I did reduce 'some' of the American Industry by 1/3 to 1/2, but the huge daily supply at Eastern USA base didn't seem to do much to slow the ability of the Americans to load up transports as they arrived on west coast with supply and fuel. Does it need to be more disabled?? If so, by how much??
Meanwhile, with Refineries not producing any supplies, what increase in at start Light Industry should Japan have now??
Meanwhile, with Refineries not producing any supplies, what increase in at start Light Industry should Japan have now??
[center]
[/center]
[/center]
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
Don't know. Don't play GC so don't pay much attention to the economy. Damian is your huckelberry.ORIGINAL: ny59giants
I hope both Symon (John) and Damian jump in here. I did reduce 'some' of the American Industry by 1/3 to 1/2, but the huge daily supply at Eastern USA base didn't seem to do much to slow the ability of the Americans to load up transports as they arrived on west coast with supply and fuel. Does it need to be more disabled?? If so, by how much??
Japan has 1035 refineries, DEI has 1910, China has 130, Burma has 370, India has 20.Meanwhile, with Refineries not producing any supplies, what increase in at start Light Industry should Japan have now??
There's more, but would be a waste of time, since there's enuf supply there already and they ain't likely to be captured: 55 in OZ, 80 in USSR, 110 in Canada, and 2500 in US.
Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.
Yippy Ki Yay.
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
ORIGINAL: Yaab
RHS mod has a disabled US economy at start, simulating its buildup after December 7. It is an easy way of toning down the excessive US supply present in the stock game.
How far back is everything disabled? Maybe Michael simply didn't go far enough in doing this for RA?
How does one reduce the amount of supply produced along the East Coast? Not really something I've played with. Think I'll pull up the game and look.
Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
Most locations start 25-40% disabled. There are some locations that start 70% disabled. All kinds of industry can be repaired.
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
That is what I am thinking.
Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
My understanding of RHS is that not only are the factories damaged but to be repaired the allies have to provide resource imports into the USA from the pacific and off map for the facilities to rebuild. These resources are considered to be strategic war materials that the USA must have to build up the war infrastructure. So be very careful how you use your xAKs.ORIGINAL: Yaab
Most locations start 25-40% disabled. There are some locations that start 70% disabled. All kinds of industry can be repaired.
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
Where does the bulk of US supply come from ? Its free right ? Maybe lower the free daily amount and add a bunch of LI that starts as disabled and has to be repaired - then they can repair it if they want the production later or not. But you may have to tweak the resources in the US then to accommodate the new LI.
Or can you change the amount of free supply at certain dates ? Or add it in other bases by dates ?
Or can you change the amount of free supply at certain dates ? Or add it in other bases by dates ?
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
This is essentially what I did in my mod (never to be completed with the time constraints I have right now), but I also tweaked the supply build requirements for all industry and engines. Which also means you have to rebalance the Japanese econ too. That is what I was play testing with Fionn before he got busy too ....ORIGINAL: Xargun
Where does the bulk of US supply come from ? Its free right ? Maybe lower the free daily amount and add a bunch of LI that starts as disabled and has to be repaired - then they can repair it if they want the production later or not. But you may have to tweak the resources in the US then to accommodate the new LI.
Or can you change the amount of free supply at certain dates ? Or add it in other bases by dates ?
Anyway, when it was sand boxed I had the US economy starting at about 20K supply building up to its usual level. I also had LI/HI factories repairing at different levels so that the jump in supply available was incremental. Also, you have to be mindful of opportunity cost. If the US player decides not to repair there is still a load of supply that is available but not as much ultimately if they repair.
eg.
10(10)
10(20)
10(30)
So, after 10 turns the first batch would be complete and the supply avail would jump from not having to repair.
I was also working on having the US having to use its shipping a little more to import and export raw materials .... but that was going to be more phase two.
If I get my prep done early today - I'll post what I have to Michael. Damn it, hearing all this makes me want to get my mod out again. Michael and I came up with some good ideas about ship building / aircraft guns / air groups etc too.
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16984
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: Problems in WITP & AE US Economy
There is a fundamental problem with the game design in terms of the US economy. Basically,
a scenario designer must either give the US enough supplies to feed its late war forces -
and have vastly too many for 1941/1942 - OR design it with start of war quantities - and have
vastly too few by late war - OR compromise and pick an intermediate value - too big in 1941,
not big enough in 1944. This is NOT new to AE and was structural in WITP days.
One forum member - who also lives in my city but whom I never have met - suggested a real solution -
which was adopted by RHS in WITP days and continues in AE. That solution is to give the Allies
"damaged" industry which, as it is repaired, "grows" the rate of production of supplies (and other things)
so that the significant growth of the US economy during WWII is simulated. [The manual for AE says
that the economic system was redesigned to permit a "realistic simulation" of the wartime economy. So it
isn't outside the game to try - at least not according to the official manual. But somehow it was not
done in fact - and official scenarios do not feature the growth that really happened.]
Another advantage of "damaged" factories is that, when on map, they can be affected by enemy action.
They can be bombed or bombarded, or shut down by enemy land units in the hex, or even captured (often
reduced in number and sometimes changed in form, but still - captured). Free supplies at the map edge
also ought to be limited by the nature of the infrastructures entering the hex. But they need to be set
to a single value - they won't grow over time.
In some cases, there are significant things built during the war in a hex -and not always on the map edge.
The player can not decide to build even what was historically built: ONLY IF we put it in as damaged can
we let the player get what really was there.
Basically the economy works by different systems depending on if the side is run by a computer or by a human?
According to a senior programmer, the AI just "does what it wants and ignores the rules." But a mod designer
does not know which side will be run by a human and must assume some humans will sometimes play either or both
sides. So both sides need to be set up to actually work. If you want to do that without "cheating" (say
putting massive resource centers in resource poor Japan so industry does not shut down) you need to do an analysis
point by point at every defined location. Figure out what is needed to generate realistic outputs at that location? Do so over time - can San Francisco (and adjacent hexes) become the base complex it did - and support the units and loading of supplies it really did by 1944? How do you facilitate that? It turns out it is a seaport for cause. It needs to import some of its resources by shipping - the rail lines are not sufficient.
Australia is similar - the resource rich locations cannot feed the industrial locations by rail adequately. Without shipping the economy will not produce to full capacity. And the amount of shipping will grow over time -
as the industry grows - so you need more in 1944 than you did in 1942.
Close attention to these matters solves the problem that used to be called "AKs to burn." In RHS - and any mod that considers the economy in detail - you always have multiple things you can do with every one. You need to figure out which option is more efficient and more germane to your present situation and strategy? You will never
have everything you want moved where you wish it was perfectly. RHS has attempted to increase the options for players by giving them more shipping - and more ways to use that shipping - resulting in a strategic situation not entirely predictable by the other side. What specifically you do with your shipping affects what is available where and when - and that might not be what was expected?
For the US - the player has many locations which can grow for 1000 or even more days - more or less three years - for one or several kinds of industry at a given location. You do NOT have to repair everything every day. If you do NOT you gain 1000 supply points you can use some other way - per type of industry you didn't repair - every day. But you will end up with a lot less supply (and other things) later in the war. In RHS a light industry center makes two supply points a day - a heavy industry center makes three. So the payoff - just in supply terms - is fairly large - but delayed in time. And oil refineries are more complex - producing 16 fuel points and 3 supply points per day (from 20 oil points consumed). [Note there is not perfect efficiency - 5% of the oil is lost in the refining process.] Still - you pay supply points to repair a refinery and it makes fuel and supplies in great quantity if you do? How do you measure the value of output for the cost? Its up to you - but it is very like IRL. You may not like getting resources (from repairing a resource center) as a payoff for spending supply points - but you don't have to ship those resources (if they are in the right hex where they will be consumed) - so they make it more likely HI and LI will be productive there. If you are growing HI and LI it is a good idea to grow Recourse Centers to the extent you can in the same place - to reduce demands on shipping and even on rail lines to import what the bigger industry is going to demand when repaired.
One aspect of industrial growth has two different solutions in RHS. Aircraft production in "standard RHS" (odd numbered scenarios) requires management - even by the Allies. Management in the sense of deciding what to repair? Players who don't want to do that - or who want to play vs computer - should use "simplified RHS" (even numbered scenarios)- which feature simplified ramp up of production and no need to manage it. [Essentially, if the number of planes isn't tiny, initial production will be delayed by a month, but will start at full value; normally it starts at start of production and ramps up as factories are "repaired"]
a scenario designer must either give the US enough supplies to feed its late war forces -
and have vastly too many for 1941/1942 - OR design it with start of war quantities - and have
vastly too few by late war - OR compromise and pick an intermediate value - too big in 1941,
not big enough in 1944. This is NOT new to AE and was structural in WITP days.
One forum member - who also lives in my city but whom I never have met - suggested a real solution -
which was adopted by RHS in WITP days and continues in AE. That solution is to give the Allies
"damaged" industry which, as it is repaired, "grows" the rate of production of supplies (and other things)
so that the significant growth of the US economy during WWII is simulated. [The manual for AE says
that the economic system was redesigned to permit a "realistic simulation" of the wartime economy. So it
isn't outside the game to try - at least not according to the official manual. But somehow it was not
done in fact - and official scenarios do not feature the growth that really happened.]
Another advantage of "damaged" factories is that, when on map, they can be affected by enemy action.
They can be bombed or bombarded, or shut down by enemy land units in the hex, or even captured (often
reduced in number and sometimes changed in form, but still - captured). Free supplies at the map edge
also ought to be limited by the nature of the infrastructures entering the hex. But they need to be set
to a single value - they won't grow over time.
In some cases, there are significant things built during the war in a hex -and not always on the map edge.
The player can not decide to build even what was historically built: ONLY IF we put it in as damaged can
we let the player get what really was there.
Basically the economy works by different systems depending on if the side is run by a computer or by a human?
According to a senior programmer, the AI just "does what it wants and ignores the rules." But a mod designer
does not know which side will be run by a human and must assume some humans will sometimes play either or both
sides. So both sides need to be set up to actually work. If you want to do that without "cheating" (say
putting massive resource centers in resource poor Japan so industry does not shut down) you need to do an analysis
point by point at every defined location. Figure out what is needed to generate realistic outputs at that location? Do so over time - can San Francisco (and adjacent hexes) become the base complex it did - and support the units and loading of supplies it really did by 1944? How do you facilitate that? It turns out it is a seaport for cause. It needs to import some of its resources by shipping - the rail lines are not sufficient.
Australia is similar - the resource rich locations cannot feed the industrial locations by rail adequately. Without shipping the economy will not produce to full capacity. And the amount of shipping will grow over time -
as the industry grows - so you need more in 1944 than you did in 1942.
Close attention to these matters solves the problem that used to be called "AKs to burn." In RHS - and any mod that considers the economy in detail - you always have multiple things you can do with every one. You need to figure out which option is more efficient and more germane to your present situation and strategy? You will never
have everything you want moved where you wish it was perfectly. RHS has attempted to increase the options for players by giving them more shipping - and more ways to use that shipping - resulting in a strategic situation not entirely predictable by the other side. What specifically you do with your shipping affects what is available where and when - and that might not be what was expected?
For the US - the player has many locations which can grow for 1000 or even more days - more or less three years - for one or several kinds of industry at a given location. You do NOT have to repair everything every day. If you do NOT you gain 1000 supply points you can use some other way - per type of industry you didn't repair - every day. But you will end up with a lot less supply (and other things) later in the war. In RHS a light industry center makes two supply points a day - a heavy industry center makes three. So the payoff - just in supply terms - is fairly large - but delayed in time. And oil refineries are more complex - producing 16 fuel points and 3 supply points per day (from 20 oil points consumed). [Note there is not perfect efficiency - 5% of the oil is lost in the refining process.] Still - you pay supply points to repair a refinery and it makes fuel and supplies in great quantity if you do? How do you measure the value of output for the cost? Its up to you - but it is very like IRL. You may not like getting resources (from repairing a resource center) as a payoff for spending supply points - but you don't have to ship those resources (if they are in the right hex where they will be consumed) - so they make it more likely HI and LI will be productive there. If you are growing HI and LI it is a good idea to grow Recourse Centers to the extent you can in the same place - to reduce demands on shipping and even on rail lines to import what the bigger industry is going to demand when repaired.
One aspect of industrial growth has two different solutions in RHS. Aircraft production in "standard RHS" (odd numbered scenarios) requires management - even by the Allies. Management in the sense of deciding what to repair? Players who don't want to do that - or who want to play vs computer - should use "simplified RHS" (even numbered scenarios)- which feature simplified ramp up of production and no need to manage it. [Essentially, if the number of planes isn't tiny, initial production will be delayed by a month, but will start at full value; normally it starts at start of production and ramps up as factories are "repaired"]
RE: Problems in WITP & AE US Economy
I'm not an expert, so sorry if i'm out of the line here...
but wouldn't it be the simplest way to go to use the "off map convoys" in order to modulate the different quantities of supplies/res/oil/fuel etc at disposal of the US during the war?
I mean, you can have a HUGE convoy every 6 months appearing in East Coast in 1942, one every 3 months in 1943, 1 every 2 months in 1944 and so on...
I think the extra map convoys (already implemented for example with Cape Town) is the way that gives to the scen designers the biggest flexibility
but wouldn't it be the simplest way to go to use the "off map convoys" in order to modulate the different quantities of supplies/res/oil/fuel etc at disposal of the US during the war?
I mean, you can have a HUGE convoy every 6 months appearing in East Coast in 1942, one every 3 months in 1943, 1 every 2 months in 1944 and so on...
I think the extra map convoys (already implemented for example with Cape Town) is the way that gives to the scen designers the biggest flexibility
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
Not a bad idea.ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
I'm not an expert, so sorry if i'm out of the line here...
but wouldn't it be the simplest way to go to use the "off map convoys" in order to modulate the different quantities of supplies/res/oil/fuel etc at disposal of the US during the war?
Talked to Matt Norton yesterday - he says that supply was never an issue, the problem was transport. there was 500,000 tons of material on the docks at SFO for the PI on Dec. 7th. There was another 600,000 tons stacked up on the West coast for other destinations in the Pacific. Problem was no ships to deliver it. I tend to think supply is ok, just need to make it harder to get it to where it has to go.
Ciao. JWE
Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.
Yippy Ki Yay.
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
Besides, dinking with industry doesn’t buy jack. The US and Canada makes 2920 supply from LI, and 3300 supply from HI. That’s a total of 6220 supply from industry. An additional 2610 supply, from US and Canadian refineries, was removed 2 years ago.
You get 67000 tons from “daily supply” and have transcontinental RRs to move it. That’s over 10x what industry makes. If you shut all industry completely off it wouldn’t even show on the radar so far as supply is concerned. That much is lost every day, by wastage, as soon as a base gets stocked up to its headroom. And then, as GJ suggests, you get 6,710,000 tons through convoys. That’s the equivalent of another 5250 tons per day (in Babes; stock is over 8000). [8D]
You get 67000 tons from “daily supply” and have transcontinental RRs to move it. That’s over 10x what industry makes. If you shut all industry completely off it wouldn’t even show on the radar so far as supply is concerned. That much is lost every day, by wastage, as soon as a base gets stocked up to its headroom. And then, as GJ suggests, you get 6,710,000 tons through convoys. That’s the equivalent of another 5250 tons per day (in Babes; stock is over 8000). [8D]
Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.
Yippy Ki Yay.
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
Consistent with what I know as well. Pre-war, transport was the issue. Once transports were federalized though, transport wasn't all that difficult. Fundamental fact is that the US had a ton of everything. What they lacked early on was a clear plan of what/where to send it. In general, with hindsight, allied players do much better at this than IRL. Not much you can, and maybe should, do about this. After about May 42, the allies got their act together and things started to really move; as in landslide.ORIGINAL: Symon
...Talked to Matt Norton yesterday - he says that supply was never an issue, the problem was transport. there was 500,000 tons of material on the docks at SFO for the PI on Dec. 7th. There was another 600,000 tons stacked up on the West coast for other destinations in the Pacific. Problem was no ships to deliver it. I tend to think supply is ok, just need to make it harder to get it to where it has to go.
Ciao. JWE
Pax
RE: RA 6.3 US Economy
Babes (at least -C) already does a very good job of saddling the Allied player with tight transport resources early on. Of course there are lots of ships when the map as a whole is considered, but so many of them have to get to the US where they have something to pick up and move. And of course escorts are tight.
One small suggestion that I still would like to see in Babes - and I know this thread is RA not Babes per se - is to put some additional oil production in the US, or perhaps even at Panama. The purpose is for a player to use it to supply Australia. No, Australia does not 'need it' in-game, and some players won't bother. But it is a nice bit of chrome detail.
One small suggestion that I still would like to see in Babes - and I know this thread is RA not Babes per se - is to put some additional oil production in the US, or perhaps even at Panama. The purpose is for a player to use it to supply Australia. No, Australia does not 'need it' in-game, and some players won't bother. But it is a nice bit of chrome detail.
Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home