Making Industry Matter

[dankhippos]

I'm proposing that with industry becoming a prominent part of the game, the game will become better than it already is.

1.Currently the Soviets have no reason not to rail high exp/ morale divisions from the southwest front, to Leningrad or Smolensk, in GC 41. If instead the soviet player had to choose between railing divisions or industry out, I think it would lead to more interesting southern gameplay for both sides, as I believe the soviet would be more likely to attempt to hold on to one of the most economically important parts of the Soviet Union.
2.Lack of fuel industry mattering does the game a disservice especially in the 1942 stage. I do not believe pilots not training in TB accurately reflects the state of an entire nation's war machine being without fuel. If fuel did go towards MP for units/ offensive CV, the axis would have more drive to recreate a historical 42 offensive instead of just blasting units with the hope of keeping the Soviet OOB down.
3.Real Strategic Objectives. This section is more up for debate, but taking all of Ukraine, and Caucuses brought Soviets to brink of collapse. There is no reason why taking Stalingrad shouldn't severely hamper/ interdict soviet oil supply. The loss of Leningrad probably deserves more than just the chance of a Finnish reinforcement Corps.

[Alsadius]

Yeah, this is one of the big oversights of the War In The ___ games, IMO. WitP did a very small amount of it for Japanese plane production, but I haven't really seen any since then. You don't want it to be too big a part of the game, but it should be bigger than it is now, IMO.

Here's a hypothetical model that I think could work.
1) Keep oil/fuel/resources/heavy industry/manpower as they are now. Those parts work fine.

2) Move away from the Armaments Production/__ Airframe/__ Chassis model for weapon production. Instead, break the factories down as Rifle/Gun/Vehicle/Airplane/Support. Rifle is for infantry weapons, Gun is artillery/AT/AA, Vehicle is trucks and tanks, Airplane is airplanes, and Support is ammo/supplies/support squads.

3) Each factory would have its own specialization, so the gun factory in Berlin might switch from the 37mm Flak36 to the 88mm Flak18, at some point. This would use the same system of timed change-overs that gets used for transfers to/from theatre boxes.

4) As with Enhanced TB Control, give players a choice at game setup over whether they want added control of their industry. If they take added control, they will gain the ability to cancel those transitions, or implement their own. Naturally, transitioning a factory over has drawbacks - heavy "damage" to reflect the difficulties of retooling, with the exact amount dependant on how big a jump it is (so going from a Panzer 3 to a Stug III is maybe 10-20% damage, while going from trucks to King Tigers would be 100%).

There's a few optional extras you could throw in here, if you wanted to.
A) Engine factories as their own category, instead of abstracting that into airplane/vehicle.
B) Research as its own thing, either a separate factory type or a job option for normal factories.
C) Efficiency gains if multiple factories in a single hex are doing the same task.
D) The ability to build more factories.
E) Maybe split up resources and heavy industry into specific types, if you want to make it extra-detailed. (I don't think this would be a good idea as part of WitE, but it's an option.)

This could easily be the kind of feature that could anchor a complete expansion pack. I'd be much more likely to buy that than Steel Inferno, which TBH seems completely uninteresting to me. Take the above, improve the UI on this side of the game a bit (e.g., when you look at your production of 7.92mm machine guns, have it say basically "You'll make 500/week at full production, you made 400 last week, you use 200/week for fighter production and 50/week for tank production, and your ground units have a shortfall of 3000 right now"), and I'd happily buy that expansion.

[Aurelian]

I'm proposing that with industry becoming a prominent part of the game, the game will become better than it already is.

1.Currently the Soviets have no reason not to rail high exp/ morale divisions from the southwest front, to Leningrad or Smolensk, in GC 41. If instead the soviet player had to choose between railing divisions or industry out, I think it would lead to more interesting southern gameplay for both sides, as I believe the soviet would be more likely to attempt to hold on to one of the most economically important parts of the Soviet Union.
2.Lack of fuel industry mattering does the game a disservice especially in the 1942 stage. I do not believe pilots not training in TB accurately reflects the state of an entire nation's war machine being without fuel. If fuel did go towards MP for units/ offensive CV, the axis would have more drive to recreate a historical 42 offensive instead of just blasting units with the hope of keeping the Soviet OOB down.
3.Real Strategic Objectives. This section is more up for debate, but taking all of Ukraine, and Caucuses brought Soviets to brink of collapse. There is no reason why taking Stalingrad shouldn't severely hamper/ interdict soviet oil supply. The loss of Leningrad probably deserves more than just the chance of a Finnish reinforcement Corps.

So, you want the hunt the factory sub game like the first one has?

Taking Stalingrad was not the origional objective, but bringing the Volga under artillery fire was. At one point, IIRC the city was 90% occupied. Didn't stop/hamper/interdict oil flow.

Moving the factories was not the purview of STAVKA anyway.

[dankhippos]

Yeah, this is one of the big oversights of the War In The ___ games, IMO. WitP did a very small amount of it for Japanese plane production, but I haven't really seen any since then. You don't want it to be too big a part of the game, but it should be bigger than it is now, IMO.

Here's a hypothetical model that I think could work.
1) Keep oil/fuel/resources/heavy industry/manpower as they are now. Those parts work fine.

2) Move away from the Armaments Production/__ Airframe/__ Chassis model for weapon production. Instead, break the factories down as Rifle/Gun/Vehicle/Airplane/Support. Rifle is for infantry weapons, Gun is artillery/AT/AA, Vehicle is trucks and tanks, Airplane is airplanes, and Support is ammo/supplies/support squads.

3) Each factory would have its own specialization, so the gun factory in Berlin might switch from the 37mm Flak36 to the 88mm Flak18, at some point. This would use the same system of timed change-overs that gets used for transfers to/from theatre boxes.

4) As with Enhanced TB Control, give players a choice at game setup over whether they want added control of their industry. If they take added control, they will gain the ability to cancel those transitions, or implement their own. Naturally, transitioning a factory over has drawbacks - heavy "damage" to reflect the difficulties of retooling, with the exact amount dependant on how big a jump it is (so going from a Panzer 3 to a Stug III is maybe 10-20% damage, while going from trucks to King Tigers would be 100%).

There's a few optional extras you could throw in here, if you wanted to.
A) Engine factories as their own category, instead of abstracting that into airplane/vehicle.
B) Research as its own thing, either a separate factory type or a job option for normal factories.
C) Efficiency gains if multiple factories in a single hex are doing the same task.
D) The ability to build more factories.
E) Maybe split up resources and heavy industry into specific types, if you want to make it extra-detailed. (I don't think this would be a good idea as part of WitE, but it's an option.)

This could easily be the kind of feature that could anchor a complete expansion pack. I'd be much more likely to buy that than Steel Inferno, which TBH seems completely uninteresting to me. Take the above, improve the UI on this side of the game a bit (e.g., when you look at your production of 7.92mm machine guns, have it say basically "You'll make 500/week at full production, you made 400 last week, you use 200/week for fighter production and 50/week for tank production, and your ground units have a shortfall of 3000 right now"), and I'd happily buy that expansion.

Alsadius thank you for your contribution towards making the game better. I agree with you and mostly would like to point out your subject 2), 4), as being well thought out and deserving an implementation in the game. Moving away from armaments points and into facotries could make more interesting choices for an attack on the soviet union. I will also point out I agree I would buy a DLC focused on production, or a revamp of the VP system to be less like a boardgame and more like a titanic struggle between two industrial powerhouses.