Allowing ALLIED On-Map Production

[oldman45]

I am not sure that the allies, and I only play allies, need to increase the number of aircraft factories. In the back of our minds we need to remember that the Pacific was the bastard step child when it came to getting men, materials and reinforcements and we need to live with that. If in a two player game things are going south for the Allied player, what I would recommend is the ability to make more ships needed to win the amphibious war, put in the carriers that were canceled and add in the DD's and DE's that also were canceled. Lets face it, in 1944/45 the US aircraft production was amazing and its that way in the game.

[DOCUP]

Oldman does have a point.  But this is a what if mod.  Also didn't you all decide that North Africa went differently.  Of course this depends on if it is possible.  Good luck finding a way to make it work.
 
doc

[inqistor]

I was actually thinking about additional "supplies" of planes available for purchase by PP. Adding additional airgroups would not fix the problem, because those groups could be used operationally, and player can change model anyway, but...

Is it possible to put planes into LCU? Similar to Convoys, but without withdraw date. Put such LCU into off-map base, in restricted command. Player would be able to buy such unit, load it on transport, and get it to large city, which allows disband of LCUs, so releasing those planes to pool. Maybe adding lots of support, or whatever is worth more PP wise, will allow setting price high enough?

[wdolson]

You can't buy planes for PP, though you could place a new group to arrive at the same time as a convoy and have it set to disband into the pool.  You would have to disband it.

Bill

[inqistor]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

You can't buy planes for PP, though you could place a new group to arrive at the same time as a convoy and have it set to disband into the pool.  You would have to disband it.

I think there are some Convoys which arrives with Hurricanes, so you CAN put planes into it.
If this Convoy is same as LCU, you CAN release LCU into un-restricted command for PP.

Airgroups can disband anyplace, and with enough supply planes will get back to pool, so that fixes nothing.

[wdolson]

The groups may arrive at the same time as the convoys, but they aren't contained in the convoys.  The equipment that arrives in convoys are part of a special LCU.  You can't put aircraft in an LCU.

Bill

[Andy Mac]

The convoy LCU's can have aircraft assigned that will add to pool as one off injections

[Shark7]

The only advantage I see to moving all Allied production to on map locations is that you can start each factory to a very low number on Dec. 7, 1941 and have it 'ramp up' naturally over time.

For instance you put a P-40 factory in Los Angeles (or whever they were built) with 10 factories and 140 disabled, in about 6 months they are producing 150 airframes/month. Then again getting this to work out right would be difficult, especially with the R&D airframes. You don't want Corsair production to start at 180/month, so it would really depend on how the game actually handles R&D repair (or require a house rule as to when an Allied player can start repairing facilities).

[darbycmcd]

John, what effect do you want to achieve? we can see from all these suggestions that various people have various ideas about what the desired result is. Some are going for ramp up, some want PP cost, some supply cost, some construction focus options for additional aircraft. there are some really creative and innovative ideas on here to leverage the game mechanics.

What do you want to show with having allied production on-map? without having that focus it seems a bit... well unfocused!

[el cid again]

[quote]ORIGINAL: darbymcd

While I understand (and feel) the urge for the Allies to have on-map production, as I was trying to work it out for a personal mod, I came to believe it isn't worth it. Really the only thing you can achieve is the 'ramp-up' effect. You can't change models or increase beyond pre-determined levels set by the scenario. And the idea that it would cost supply is nice, but for the allies just really irrelevant, they are positively swimming in it after the first few months, on CONUS. So for all the effort, what do you gain? not too much.

COMMENT: There is no need for the Allies to be so supply independent. It is entirely possible to put much supply on the map in the form of industry. In some cases, they get more supplies if they move oil (say to AUS or NZ) - or if they move resources (say to the USA). Also the PLAYER investment stragegy early war matters: if he does not repair damaged HI or LI or refineries early - his supplies will be less later in time (because he bought all airplane plants for example). If he buys the HI and LI - he indeed gets more supplies later - at the cost lf less airplane expansion early. You can have industry grow for years at some locations - but only if you invest supplies to that purpose.

The integration of on map industry in general with on map aircraft industry is quite interesting. It indeed gives the Allies some control over what they get and when they get it?

As for control over types - you could put in MORE types - and say "you get to pick which" under certain guidelines/rules - making what the choices were not clear to the enemy? Since you cannot easily afford to develop all types - particularly if you also have to pay to expand supply production - it might be almost self enforcing too

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

The only advantage I see to moving all Allied production to on map locations is that you can start each factory to a very low number on Dec. 7, 1941 and have it 'ramp up' naturally over time.

For instance you put a P-40 factory in Los Angeles (or whever they were built) with 10 factories and 140 disabled, in about 6 months they are producing 150 airframes/month. Then again getting this to work out right would be difficult, especially with the R&D airframes. You don't want Corsair production to start at 180/month, so it would really depend on how the game actually handles R&D repair (or require a house rule as to when an Allied player can start repairing facilities).

Not too hard. Give the Corsair a new plant - and do NOT repair it until AFTER its initial rate of production. Some types CAN start high An F-6F replaces F-4Fs on the production line at the same rate (IRL) - and if you give it an extra plant starting at 1 - it will then ramp up from there. [Oddly the F-4 continues in production as FM-1 and FM-2 - but at new plants that ramp up again - if you follow history - this for use on carriers too small for later fighters]

The other advantage is that the Allies have to worry about supplies - assuming you don't give em free supplies in unlimited quantities. Maybe they even have to commit shipping to insure they get enough resources and oil to the right places?

Another advantage is that on map production can be bombed - if the enemy gets to the right place. It is at risk. This was real. A huge factory in So Cal was disguised as residences - with trees and houses on its roof - for fear of such raids.

[darbycmcd]

I think as a practical matter, the idea that supply is a limitation for the Allies really only applies for the first 4 months or so of the war. even the most restrictive mods get to the point around this time that supply will appear in such quantities that it is not a limiting factor. by the time any of the production lines are going to become operative, say at the earliest mid 42, there will be no practical limit to the use of supply to repair them in CONUS. even with treespiders mod, which is the most restrictive i have seen. and shipping is only a factor until around this point as well, seriously, does any allied player not have more than 100 xAK sitting in various ports doing nothing and more than 1 M supply in eastern US?

Don't forget that these on-map production choices would not happen until later in the war. you seem to be thinking about them in Dec 41 terms.

if the idea is to give the allied player the option to beef up select air craft lines, then as Sid said, add factories as damaged and HR that only one (or however many) can be set to repair.

[wdolson]

One thing you can do to increase production of a new type is to have a factory building an older plane that upgrades at rate x, then another factory that is set to build the new type at rate y.  The second factory will be idle until the new type is available.

While having full flexibility of Allied aircraft production would be welcomed by the AFBs, it would imbalance the game.

Bill

[darbycmcd]

Wdolson, what you say would work, but it is sort of what I have been saying, in that it doesn't achieve anything different than the way things are. Because you can't control the rate of conversion, and factories are either on or off, all you would get is replacement rate of x at such a date. but that is exactly what we have now, just not on the map. that is why i am curious about what the actual intent of on map production is, because your point is spot on about unbalancing. any effect that only serves to increase production, which i think nearly all of them would without houserules, would be a problem and not really achieve anything useful.

[John 3rd]

This is the whole point. I have no solid vision on this subject. Am simply trying to allow the AFB a chance to SMILE a bit more...

[kfsgo]

ORIGINAL: darbymcd

Wdolson, what you say would work, but it is sort of what I have been saying, in that it doesn't achieve anything different than the way things are. Because you can't control the rate of conversion, and factories are either on or off, all you would get is replacement rate of x at such a date. but that is exactly what we have now, just not on the map. that is why i am curious about what the actual intent of on map production is, because your point is spot on about unbalancing. any effect that only serves to increase production, which i think nearly all of them would without houserules, would be a problem and not really achieve anything useful.

I think (and this is just me) that the point of having them is as an 'oh god I need X aircraft' valve - the completely historical reinforcements kinda fall apart where one area receives extreme pressure, f.e with the invasions of India that have been attempted, but there's no way to know what need is going to arise that 'history' doesn't provide until months into the game. The need for house rules can be avoided by isolating the production base and providing just enough supply to activate X number of Y available options; I'm not sure why people are talking about putting all production on-map as that seems like a waste of effort - no harm in it, but not much point.

[ny59giants]

I doubled checked what Andy Mac said and you can add air frames to the monthly "CD" convoys that arrive at Cape Town (or anywhere else). This might be the simplest solution to the issue of Allied production.

[oldman45]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

This is the whole point. I have no solid vision on this subject. Am simply trying to allow the AFB a chance to SMILE a bit more...

I smile when I see any conversation of adding more allied ships [:)]

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: kfsgo

ORIGINAL: darbymcd

Wdolson, what you say would work, but it is sort of what I have been saying, in that it doesn't achieve anything different than the way things are. Because you can't control the rate of conversion, and factories are either on or off, all you would get is replacement rate of x at such a date. but that is exactly what we have now, just not on the map. that is why i am curious about what the actual intent of on map production is, because your point is spot on about unbalancing. any effect that only serves to increase production, which i think nearly all of them would without houserules, would be a problem and not really achieve anything useful.

I think (and this is just me) that the point of having them is as an 'oh god I need X aircraft' valve - the completely historical reinforcements kinda fall apart where one area receives extreme pressure, f.e with the invasions of India that have been attempted, but there's no way to know what need is going to arise that 'history' doesn't provide until months into the game. The need for house rules can be avoided by isolating the production base and providing just enough supply to activate X number of Y available options; I'm not sure why people are talking about putting all production on-map as that seems like a waste of effort - no harm in it, but not much point.

I think the ONLY production that should be off map is that that is - well - off map
IF it is on map, it is at risk to enemy attack, and to disruption of its LOC - operational considerations

More broadly, I think that even off map production can still often be simulated by industry in off map locations
and the only exceptions to that are things not in any of the off map locations. THOSE products can appear "free"
at the nearest location
Otherwise - industry needs oil and resoources - and can be used in various combinations
If a place has oil (say Eastern USA) - fine - it need not import any - and can export it too -
but if it needs oil or resources - reward those who dedicate shipping to that end
Forcing trade off decisions for Allied shipping - economic or operational uses - and if economic - over what route?
Distance affects efficiency

Even the USA needed resources of some kinds - tin probably is a good example - and had we not found some
in Peru and rationed and recycled the rest - we might have been in serious trouble. In all USN teaches every
basic trainee there are 76 such materials not found in adequate quantity in North America

Another dimension is - what do you invest in expanding? If industry is in defined locations - but much of it is
"damaged" - you CAN get more production later - but ONLY IF you invest supplies today - and do not use them
for operations. This benefits good strategic planning trade-offs

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

One thing you can do to increase production of a new type is to have a factory building an older plane that upgrades at rate x, then another factory that is set to build the new type at rate y.  The second factory will be idle until the new type is available.

While having full flexibility of Allied aircraft production would be welcomed by the AFBs, it would imbalance the game.

Bill

I see what you are saying.

P-40 line for a quick example:

Starting model is the P-40E in game. Produced in Buffalo, New York. One line only. Once one knows how many E models was produced before the next model (in game I think it is the N, so you take all models E-M and add them together to get production numbers) and when the N model goes into production it is a simple matter to find a nice average number for the E factory to ramp up to. The N model will have its own factory, plus (as you define the upgrade) the old E factory will upgrade to the N automatically

So you might start with a factory for the E model at 20(60) to build up. The N gets an R&D factory at 0(20), and the final Q model gets an additional 0(20) which gives you peak production of 120. (this is just an example after all).

In the case of the F6F which replaced production of the F4F it is simpler, you simply define the upgrade path. If more then a 1:1 conversion is required, you simply doas above and add in a new factory for F6F that is 0(number needed).