Allied Heavy Industry (HI) and Refineries

[Cpt Sherwood]

You picture is not visible. But, the red X means it did not produce last turn. The red requirements mean that there is not presently enough to produce next turn, but things might move and fix that during the turn resolution.

[Panjack]

ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood

You picture is not visible. But, the red X means it did not produce last turn. The red requirements mean that there is not presently enough to produce next turn, but things might move and fix that during the turn resolution.

Thanks!

[Panjack]

Is it ever worthwhile to repair damaged HI factories?

[Numdydar]

Yes. At least until near the end as Japan. Even if you do not need th HI, the on site supply generation is very handy in many cases.

[wdolson]

For the Allies every point of supply generated nearer the front is one less point needed to be hauled from the US.

The red on the screenshots doesn't render very well because the specific red used in game confuses JPEG compression algorithms. If you look just about all screen shots have blurry red.

Bill

[Yaab]

ORIGINAL: Panjack

Is it ever worthwhile to repair damaged HI factories?

Only if you have fuel for them. There are some damaged HI factories in Allied China, but the Chinese cannot produce enough fuel to the repaired HI factories.

[sandman455]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

The red on the screenshots doesn't render very well because the specific red used in game confuses JPEG compression algorithms. If you look just about all screen shots have blurry red.

Bill

Thanks for solving that mystery. I thought it was just another issue with this gamer growing old. [:)]

[Panjack]

ORIGINAL: wdolson
The red on the screenshots doesn't render very well because the specific red used in game confuses JPEG compression algorithms. If you look just about all screen shots have blurry red.

Bill

That is odd. The problem can be easily solved via photoshop (using as the first step Select -> Color Range)...as was now done in the image above.

[Panjack]

Just to confirm: repairing one point of HI requires 1,000 supply points (and a minimum stock of 10,000 points is required in the city to do repairs). In turn, each point of HI generates 2 supply points. So it would take 500 days to break even if you repair HI.

[Numdydar]

Actually things will repair without the 10K in stock It is just their repair will just be slowed down if you do not have enough in the pool.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Panjack

Just to confirm: repairing one point of HI requires 1,000 supply points (and a minimum stock of 10,000 points is required in the city to do repairs). In turn, each point of HI generates 2 supply points. So it would take 500 days to break even if you repair HI.

You might search for threads where this is discussed in terms of opportunity cots. What you say is true as far as it goes, but the total system costs and benefits is not a simple decision. In particular, look at the costs of not repairing the HI in terms of what other costs are incurred to make up for it. Transport fuel, ship damage, risk of attack to additional transports, etc. Not to mention not having enough HI at the end of the game.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Actually things will repair without the 10K in stock It is just their repair will just be slowed down if you do not have enough in the pool.

In my experience this is not true for industry. Having 10k supply in the base is a yes/no logic check in every case I've repaired industry. Do you have evidence this is not the case?

[Mac Linehan]

Gents -

While this subject has been discussed before, this particular thread has been exceptionally useful to me and has cleared up several misconceptions.

I am most appreciative of your informed input.

Mac

[Panjack]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
You might search for threads where this is discussed in terms of opportunity cots. What you say is true as far as it goes, but the total system costs and benefits is not a simple decision. In particular, look at the costs of not repairing the HI in terms of what other costs are incurred to make up for it. Transport fuel, ship damage, risk of attack to additional transports, etc. Not to mention not having enough HI at the end of the game.

You must be referring to
fb.asp?m=2855499

I imagine that the costs/benefits of repairing HI differ dramatically between the Japanese and the Allies.

For instance, the Allies don't need any more HI than they already start the game with in LA, SF, and Seattle (these cities give far more than needed to produce any on-map aircraft throughout the whole war).

Second...I think this is true...a single xAKL's worth of supply (say, 1750) is 875-day's worth of HI factory supply production. So if you don't repair the factory and send a single xAKL's worth of supply, this would be equal to repairing the factory and producing for 1,375 days! (And, frankly, I treat xAKLs as disposable units and don't bat an eyelash when one of my unescorted xAKL get sunk). Plus, instead of getting 2 supply points dripping out each day which might not make a difference, if you didn't repair the factory you'd have 1,000 supply points to use from day one (and then the 1,750 you'd get when the xAKL arrived). That might be helpful.

The decision to repair (or not) an HI factory seems a tricky issue. But my bet is that for the Allies this is not a major decision and one can just do what they feel like doing.

Of course, the issue of repairing factories in China (when cut off from ports) is somewhat different.

[crsutton]

I have played an entire campaign as the Allies and can say that you have no need to look over or touch any thing having to do with industry. This includes Australia. You will have plenty of supply and can produce any airplane that is allowed. So don't fool with it at all.

You may opt to turn off some HI in OZ for the first few months of the game as fuel is short. Do not send fuel to OZ but store it where needed at detached bases such as Hobart or New Zealand. You need fuel for your warships. However, I played the early years before the Allies had the option of turning off Industry with no problem. You have plenty of supply and fuel on the West Coast and a surplus of shipping that has nothing to do in the early months when you are getting creamed. Send supply to OZ. Lots of if in the first year of the war. After that when you are not so heavily based there OZ will make enough supply. You really should not send any fuel to OZ but can do so if you have the shipping and the sea lanes are not blocked. But don't ever turn anything off. You don't need to.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Panjack

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
You might search for threads where this is discussed in terms of opportunity cots. What you say is true as far as it goes, but the total system costs and benefits is not a simple decision. In particular, look at the costs of not repairing the HI in terms of what other costs are incurred to make up for it. Transport fuel, ship damage, risk of attack to additional transports, etc. Not to mention not having enough HI at the end of the game.

You must be referring to
fb.asp?m=2855499

And others Alfred has participated in, with much better words.

I imagine that the costs/benefits of repairing HI differ dramatically between the Japanese and the Allies.

Sure.

For instance, the Allies don't need any more HI than they already start the game with in LA, SF, and Seattle (these cities give far more than needed to produce any on-map aircraft throughout the whole war).

Repairing HI is, to me, for the Allies, completely a supply generation issue.

Second...I think this is true...a single xAKL's worth of supply (say, 1750) is 875-day's worth of HI factory supply production. So if you don't repair the factory and send a single xAKL's worth of supply, this would be equal to repairing the factory and producing for 1,375 days!

Let me know when that ship arrives at Chungking, OK? [:)]

(And, frankly, I treat xAKLs as disposable units and don't bat an eyelash when one of my unescorted xAKL get sunk). Plus, instead of getting 2 supply points dripping out each day which might not make a difference, if you didn't repair the factory you'd have 1,000 supply points to use from day one (and then the 1,750 you'd get when the xAKL arrived). That might be helpful.

You are being too geographically lazy.

Of course, the issue of repairing factories in China (when cut off from ports) is somewhat different.

To say the least. The decision to repair/not repair in China can significantly affect 1943 there. If the Allied player intends to abandon China, or pull far, far back then the decision is different again. I just tire of these threads where people say "Always . . ." In AE there is no always, except it always depends.

[Panjack]

Mr. Moose,

I think we can agree that China is a special case. But I'm not sure that just because we can't drive an xAKL to Chungking that we should repair HI in, say, Calcutta. [:)]

And we can agree that general rules ("always do this") are not always valid. Yet, I think it reasonable to say that IF you can supply LCUs by sea (directly or indirectly over land) then it might not be a good idea to repair a damaged HI complex that could also supply the LCUs.

I agree opportunity costs shouldn't be forgotten. But it might be noted that repairing HI today has an opportunity cost: you can't use 1000 supply today to supply units/upgrade units/etc today. There's no such thing as a free K ration!

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Panjack

Mr. Moose,

I think we can agree that China is a special case. But I'm not sure that just because we can't drive an xAKL to Chungking that we should repair HI in, say, Calcutta. [:)]

And we can agree that general rules ("always do this") are not always valid. Yet, I think it reasonable to say that IF you can supply LCUs by sea (directly or indirectly over land) then it might not be a good idea to repair a damaged HI complex that could also supply the LCUs.

I agree opportunity costs shouldn't be forgotten. But it might be noted that repairing HI today has an opportunity cost: you can't use 1000 supply today to supply units/upgrade units/etc today. There's no such thing as a free K ration!

I agree with most of this. Over the years I've personally (with my play style) come to think that China is really the only toss-up for the Allies.

BUT, I think the issue is far more fraught for the Japanese. Places like Java, with long over-water LOCs, have different costs/risks than more interior-line HI depots when opportunity costs are averaged in. It might not be xAKLs at risk. It might be fat, modern xAKs with the range to make Java. (I also don't think of any ship as expendable for no gain, but I play for VPs.) Holding Java after fuel is dear might depend a lot on local supply sources that allow forts to be rebuilt in a siege. Many Japanese players have never gotten past mid-game, so they might not see a three-year pay-back as reasonable, given how dear supply is in the rapid expansion and construction phases they have played over and over. And it's a hard wall to climb given the initial cost, no question. But it's still an area that shouldn't be tossed off without thinking it through.

[Panjack]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
BUT, I think the issue is far more fraught for the Japanese. Places like Java, with long over-water LOCs, have different costs/risks than more interior-line HI depots when opportunity costs are averaged in. It might not be xAKLs at risk. It might be fat, modern xAKs with the range to make Java. (I also don't think of any ship as expendable for no gain, but I play for VPs.) Holding Java after fuel is dear might depend a lot on local supply sources that allow forts to be rebuilt in a siege. Many Japanese players have never gotten past mid-game, so they might not see a three-year pay-back as reasonable, given how dear supply is in the rapid expansion and construction phases they have played over and over. And it's a hard wall to climb given the initial cost, no question. But it's still an area that shouldn't be tossed off without thinking it through.

I have zero, zip, nada insight into the Japanese supply situation...I'm struggling to figure out the much simpler Allied situation! But now that I'm 300+ days into the war I'm finally trying to learn some of the stuff you can't just learn by trial-and-error and casual perusal of the manual and the forums.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Panjack

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
BUT, I think the issue is far more fraught for the Japanese. Places like Java, with long over-water LOCs, have different costs/risks than more interior-line HI depots when opportunity costs are averaged in. It might not be xAKLs at risk. It might be fat, modern xAKs with the range to make Java. (I also don't think of any ship as expendable for no gain, but I play for VPs.) Holding Java after fuel is dear might depend a lot on local supply sources that allow forts to be rebuilt in a siege. Many Japanese players have never gotten past mid-game, so they might not see a three-year pay-back as reasonable, given how dear supply is in the rapid expansion and construction phases they have played over and over. And it's a hard wall to climb given the initial cost, no question. But it's still an area that shouldn't be tossed off without thinking it through.

I have zero, zip, nada insight into the Japanese supply situation...I'm struggling to figure out the much simpler Allied situation! But now that I'm 300+ days into the war I'm finally trying to learn some of the stuff you can't just learn by trial-and-error and casual perusal of the manual and the forums.

True. You have some fun times ahead. You're through the worst.