Development Diary #19 - 4th of March 2009

[Devout]

I think the process of licensing technology from countries is going to depend a lot on the situation.

i wanted to take the example of a Fascist Bulgeria that has 18I, 24E, 0O, 3R, 21M. So to support manufacturing process, the country needs to import 3I, 18E, and 7.5R. That's a lot of money to spend on resources. If they want to buy a German tank...

1. They need to spend the IC (about 1/2 year full production). This is pretty pricey, and they could get something like 6 infantry divisions for the same price.
2. They must spend the money for the license. If they don't have enough money, they potentially sacrifice gaining resources to feed their production (or at the least sacrifice building up stockpiles)
3. Have a unit they most likely can not upgrade later in the war since they are probably not reseaching heavily into armor.
4. Require more oil, which in turn means more trading and less money.

Not a very likely occurance.

Although a country like Romania might be in a better situation to license tanks with more resources, more manufacturing, and the ability to generate money via excess oil.

 

[Cardus]

I think the process of licensing technology from countries is going to depend a lot on the situation.

i wanted to take the example of a Fascist Bulgeria that has 18I, 24E, 0O, 3R, 21M. So to support manufacturing process, the country needs to import 3I, 18E, and 7.5R. That's a lot of money to spend on resources. If they want to buy a German tank...

1. They need to spend the IC (about 1/2 year full production). This is pretty pricey, and they could get something like 6 infantry divisions for the same price.
2. They must spend the money for the license. If they don't have enough money, they potentially sacrifice gaining resources to feed their production (or at the least sacrifice building up stockpiles)
3. Have a unit they most likely can not upgrade later in the war since they are probably not reseaching heavily into armor.
4. Require more oil, which in turn means more trading and less money.

Not a very likely occurance.

Although a country like Romania might be in a better situation to license tanks with more resources, more manufacturing, and the ability to generate money via excess oil.

I guess that if ROM is allied with GER the licence should not be expensive at all.

Please see http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9410477&postcount=254

 

[unmerged(54763)]

How about if you play Romania and are good allie to Germany,lets say a fair number of battles against common enemies,than license to be cheaper and probability to get licence higher?
I mean imagine Romania doing nothing when Germany requested their atack on USSR?The will not get a single helmet from Germans.

 

[Neomann]

How about if you play Romania and are good allie to Germany,lets say a fair number of battles against common enemies,than license to be cheaper and probability to get licence higher?
I mean imagine Romania doing nothing when Germany requested their atack on USSR?The will not get a single helmet from Germans.

Why not, anyway Germany NEEDED Romanian petrol for his war.... So Why romania did join Axe after Wiena's Dictat is more to do be annexed by Germany and counter the thread of USSR.... So Romania needed Germany help and armement to counter russia, in exchange of cooperation and petrol....

 

[unmerged(54763)]

Why not, anyway Germany NEEDED Romanian petrol for his war.... So Why romania did join Axe after Wiena's Dictat is more to do be annexed by Germany and counter the thread of USSR.... So Romania needed Germany help and armement to counter russia, in exchange of cooperation and petrol....

Ok,OK,I choosed wrong example.
Damn this oil.o

 

[Neomann]

Well actually romanian oil is exploited by austrians now So in fact, germans are still using romanian petrol .... Romania is a 'special' case in WW2, the only country that fough on the both sides, From Romania tu Stalingrad 41-44, and from Romania to Prague 44-45 ....

 

[Crookback]

Well actually romanian oil is exploited by austrians now So in fact, germans are still using romanian petrol .... Romania is a 'special' case in WW2, the only country that fough on the both sides, From Romania tu Stalingrad 41-44, and from Romania to Prague 44-45 ....

Surely there are other examples?

For example, I think that technically Italy also fought on both sides, though how one defines the Italian state/government after the invasion of the peninsula is a matter of debate.

 

[Alex_brunius]

You actually expect me to remember the update word by word, I bet you didn't quote that off the top of your head!

However, it does seem odd it would work that way. I wonder how that is justified.

Well I did know what was in there because I think its wrong aswell and unjustified. I brought it up on page 5

But you pay for every single division built this way. The IC cost for building it + the IC for getting the money + supply/oil upkeep and logistics for whatever you built + manpower for it, I wouldn't worry about Romania suddenly roaming around with Panzerarmees.

That assumes the money price is fixed. If its negotiateable Germany would most likely give free licences to close allied. Manpower for tanks? No nation (much less a minor) got enough IC to build tanks from all its MP.

What Im against is that just because I recieve some paper licence (and a few good advice) my say chinese production lines instantly and magically work as good as some high tech nation that have spent 5 years of dedicated tank research and building to perfect the process.

Practical knowledge is also supposed to represent or replace gearing....
For me these things just doesn't make sense.

If these things don't change expect seeing Japanese "Panthers" and "Me262s" dominating Asia as well as German "Shokakus" and "Yamatos" sinking the Royal navy.

 

[Alsadius]

The real question here isn't so much "Did it happen" as it is "If it didn't, why not?". After all, I'm sure Germany and Japan could have come to a tech-sharing deal and sent each other blueprints if they'd wanted to. The Allies sure managed enough of them. It seems like doctrines and practical experience were the deciding factors. Even if the Japanese shipped Shokaku blueprints(licensing), or even physical Shokakus(unit sales), to Germany, the Germans still wouldn't be especially good at using them until they were suitably experienced at the theory and practice of running them, unless the Japanese supplied crews as well(expeditionary force). They certainly couldn't build them as quickly as a Japanese shipyard could.

The "One license is one build" thing confuses me slightly though. Is the assumption here that the licensor is supplying manpower as well? I'd assume it'd mostly be blueprints and such, things that don't expire after one use. I suppose if they're supplying things like machine tools and technical advisors it would make more sense, but it still sounds a touch gamey. If it wasn't too micro, I'd suggest splitting it - sell blueprints, which allows infinite builds at the licensee's practical, and selling technical advice as well, which costs more and limits runs, but allows use of the licensor's practical(if better), and/or transfers some practical from licensor to licensee(to represent manpower migrating to the licensee's factories).

Have to see how it looks in the final version, but for now, I think I like it. Certainly an interesting change.

 

[zeekater]

"One license is one build" is because licensing usually had a limit on how much you could produce (like copyright )

The 'why didn't they' is a very good point, although I think the devs already know that and have some way of controlling it

 

[Cardus]

The "One license is one build" thing confuses me slightly though. Is the assumption here that the licensor is supplying manpower as well? I'd assume it'd mostly be blueprints and such, things that don't expire after one use. I suppose if they're supplying things like machine tools and technical advisors it would make more sense, but it still sounds a touch gamey. If it wasn't too micro, I'd suggest splitting it - sell blueprints, which allows infinite builds at the licensee's practical, and selling technical advice as well, which costs more and limits runs, but allows use of the licensor's practical(if better), and/or transfers some practical from licensor to licensee(to represent manpower migrating to the licensee's factories).

In my opinion one licence to build means:
1) up front cost + a fee per each "equipment" built (if the countries are allied should not be expensive)
2) the IC dedicated to that build should not be available for some time (you need time to adapt the plants to the new build, you need time to train the workers, etc)
3) some skills and IC in the licensed country => no way that Oman could build under licence rockets...

 

[Van der Gent]

Surely there are other examples?

Bulgaria, France("Vichy"), Iraq and Finland.

 

[vertinox]

Wasn't this excatlly the kind of exploit your were trying to prevent when introducing practical values? With this system Germany doesn't even have to research to convert to naval production, just formally ally with Japan and magically all their factories can build high tech Carriers and CAGs at max effeciency.


Can you perhaps explain your thinking here? Because in my book it doesn't make sense to use someone else accumulated experience in your own inexperienced factories. Production experience is more than a few imported engineers. Its all from subcontractors, logistics flows, special tools & methods, optimized production lines, and so on.

Historically, Germany gave its tanks blueprints to Italy to produce Panther tanks. Italy did make some in its own factories but I believe this was around the time Italy capitulated to the Allies and Germany took their tanks back at the point of a gun.

Secondly, Germany did license out its small arms tech to the Chinese nationalists and sent some military advisers etc.

The idea was because a team comes in with the technical details and shows the locals how to build the factory.

In your example, if Japan wanted to (in the even Germany defeated USSR), they could license their aircraft carrier designs over to Germany. This would most likley include a team of Japanese engineers coming to Germany and advising on how to build the things.

Germany would provide the workers, materials, and shipyards.

Japan would get money in return and the hopes of Germany whooping on the US in the Atlantic with their new carriers.

 

[unmerged(131989)]

Will every single component (i.e. engines, anti-aircraft guns, etc...) need upgrading by one level each to enable you to access a new type/class of ship?? Or is it just certain components which enable a new type/class to come about??

Also, could you name an entire class of ship yourself, in-game?? That would be cool!

Any answer yet??

 

[GLENN]

License per unit is good for balance. I don't want to see exploits.

I think this still has the opportunity to askew balance.

As AI USA, why would they sell licenses to build Shermans? They don't need money or supplies. Oil well UK is not exactly rich in that area. Where is the incentive for the USA AI to sell?

You also don't want some one to que up two, three or 4 units months ahead of time and then right before they get built you buy a license. Then they pop out as top tech units. License would have to be for new units that start a build after the date of transaction.

 

[Bullfrog]

License per unit is good for balance. I don't want to see exploits.

I think this still has the opportunity to askew balance.

As AI USA, why would they sell licenses to build Shermans? They don't need money or supplies. Oil well UK is not exactly rich in that area. Where is the incentive for the USA AI to sell?

You also don't want some one to que up two, three or 4 units months ahead of time and then right before they get built you buy a license. Then they pop out as top tech units. License would have to be for new units that start a build after the date of transaction.

Part of Lend Lease?

Im sure that ongoing builds will not be in any way influenced by purchasing a license. Surely you must purchase before beginning construction.

 

[Alex_brunius]

The idea was because a team comes in with the technical details and shows the locals how to build the factory.

And how in gods name would the team be able to adapt to the new foreign enviroment (most likely even a new language), BUILD a factory and logistics flow from scratch AND still get the tank division out after the same 2-3 months it takes Germany to build a new batch at the same IC cost?

Practical values do represent gearing aswell. Thats simply not compatable with "licencing" in its current form where they use the sellers practical values.

There is a huge difference in using existing optimized factories, optimized workers and flows to produce something you have trained at doing for years and going from no knowledge at all to full scale production, even if you have foreign experts available.

Even with full UK help, engineers, schools, exchange projects, the whole deal, it took Japan 30years to fully develop their naval industry between 1890-1920.

 

[Keioel]

It depends on the level of techonology I think as to whether they could conceivably get a license and boom start pumping them out themselves...however, at the right technology level you could easily reverse engineer the items and begin producing them.

Of course the first few you build won't be produced that easily or cheaply but eventually you'd get better at it.

 

[Bullfrog]

...Of course the first few you build won't be produced that easily or cheaply but eventually you'd get better at it.

Which is simulated by the increase in practical know how after construction. So the first time the license is purchased, construction should begin at the buyers practical level. Don;t you agree? Who still doesn't?

 

[Crookback]

Lend Lease will probably be a decision (or event) for the US anyway.