Suggestion:Factories for Chassis and Equipment

[leiferik123]

Suggestion:

Instead of making x amount of light tank (insert any equipment) with y amount of Metal and IP with a single click. It would be an excellent addition to add chassis factories, that actually have to produce these war machines.

The one thing the otherwise arcady Hearts of iron 4 does well is the equipment manufactoring.
Another game that does it a bit more realistically is Gary Grigsbys War in the East.

It could look something like this:
By adding it as resources? "Factory": X Metal ,Y Oil, Z Machines, makes N light tank chassis per round?
"N light tank chassis is added to the SHQ stock"

it would create a deeper "resource" Chain.

I know nothing about game design, wheter this is possible to apply to this game or not?

But i am making the suggestion nonetheless.

[Voker57]

How would that improve gameplay? Micromanaging every single type of chassis production doesn't sound fun, as well as adding another item to every list.

[mroyer]

How would that improve gameplay? Micromanaging every single type of chassis production doesn't sound fun, as well as adding another item to every list.

I haven't thought this through at all, but what could be fun is instead of having factories create IP that accumulate until used en-masse, adopt a contract system along the lines of the MTH. Something like you contract a factory to build Wolf III medium tanks for 6 rounds.

I don't know, sounds cool and potentially micro-managerish at the same time, but perhaps a good balance could be struck.

-Mark R.

[Dampfnudel]

That would be an interesting economic aspect.

Especially when we can build in the concept of streamlined mass producing versus flexible artisan quality production.

Like researching a new tank is one thing. Having a factory building it on scale is another. Retooling should be a also thing.

(A bit off topic: I also want to see consumer goods being a thing)

[Seristal]

I like the idea of this, too.

I do think the current system of just spending IP to do most things construction and production related is a little too abstracted. Factories tooled for particular chassis (or even parts and components!) would add to the strategic importance of these locations as well make logistics involved more interesting.

For example, building a factory on top of a resource required for input (e.g. metal/rare metals) would create very little or zero strain on internal supply lines while facilities on opposing sides of an empire could be more problematic. That latter problem could be alleviated by having stocks of resources stored in specific hex locations through depots and distributed throughout a territory, but I realize that's a whole other can of worms.

Additionally and as previously mentioned, I think the potential for production contracts would be interesting. There could be a differentiation between "private/commercial" factories and "public/state" factories. There's already something like this in-game with assets and general, but it could be further modified through regime profiles such as commerce/government/enforcement/etc.

The suggestion is also somewhat reminiscent of another I've seen on the forums. Specifically that when designing models the player should not necessarily choose the particular characteristics of a model (100mm steel armor/40mm HV gun/light diesel engine/etc.), but rather that they should give more general guidelines and those specific components would be rolled for with the other attributes in model design. You could even go as far as negotiating production licenses with other regimes, reverse-engineering captured designs, or recovering GR-era model plans in ruins. I recognize that this is not necessarily the same thing as the original suggestion of "chassis-specific factories", but I would argue it is related and the two ideas could be implemented in concert. I think you could also have the ability to produce models on an "as needed" basis like you can with the artisanal production of machinery, but this would be less efficient than serial production lines (again, compared to something like the heavy industry assets for machinery).

Because you'd be manufacturing these vehicles at potentially large scales, they probably shouldn't take up manpower until they're released into a unit or out of the storage pool, as population can be just as important as metal or energy. You might even go as far as having "crew size" become a model design option. This might offer stat bonuses for larger crews or partial manpower refunds (smaller crews) like you have with buggies and APCs, but I digress.

Lastly, while I would agree that this would lead to a more complicated game mechanic, that is not necessarily a bad thing. I feel this would allow the player to become more immersed in the economy of their game and add additional nuance to SE. After all, I believe people look to the games published under Matrix for complexity. There are already plenty of studios who appeal to their audience through simplified systems but fewer who seek to do so through the opposite.

Hope to see this in the future!

Edit: After thinking on the topic further I've come up with several other ideas. In regard to the "more general guidelines" given to the Model Design Director, the player would still have the option to request specific design characteristics such as that 40mm HV gun, but would do so at the cost of PPs or a malus to that particular roll in the design process to represent "political interference" or some such.

In general, you could even go as far as breaking down the model design system into particular components. Guns, engines, or chassis could all be their own designs with their own scores. The unit model scores would represent the ability to successfully combine those pre-existing components into a working concept. After all, why shouldn't I be able to take that really nice AT gun I already came up with and mount it on some tracks to provide the basis for my new tank destroyer model? I think this would also promote a more lateral placement of industry, or at the very least less centralized, and therefore (arguably) be more realistic.

If you wanted to stay with the theme of "general" mechanics like the proposed model design changes, a similar method might be applied to said industry. A more organic growth of these factories could be conducted through a Director of Industry/Council position where the player doesn't necessarily specify which factories to build, but rather sets quotas and the AI will build new assets or retool old ones according to its budget. This system would be similar to private asset construction or even an extension of it. Private factories could be built by the "Corporation" and could even be nationalized when needed. This automation or at least the option to delegate factory construction to the AI would solve the issue of those not interested in the additional micromanaging or those who feel it may bog down the game.

Ultimately there are a myriad of forms expanded industry mechanics could manifest in or become incorporated into the game. While geopolitics and diplomacy are represented to some degree in SE (and I'd be happy to see those embellished as well), I think the bread and butter of the game are still primarily the warfare and industry aspects. Considering that, I believe the aforementioned suggestions would be a natural progression towards the marriage of those core themes.

[Chronic]

Just as a general post in agreement to what's been laid out here, I do believe that expanding the logistical system would have benefits for the game. Nothing too kafkaesque, but creating centralized areas of production that can themselves be upgraded, and modified - wherein specific parts can be requested individually strikes me as a good addendum to a wonderful game.