Are long term production line underpowered?

[Denkt]

Many stuff during ww2 was in production for a very long time, bf109 was in production during the whole war and the later version was about as good as other late war Aircrafts. Shturmovik was in production from 1941 to 1945 and many other Equipment, like infantry Equipment was often produced Before the war and produced during the whole war.

In the game however how often will you keep production lines for like the whole game for Equipment that have technological upgrades like Aircrafts and tanks, in reality many of these Equipment was upgraded and stayed relevant up to 1945 while still being very much mass produced.

When Germany introduced tanks like Panther, Soviet simply put on a bigger gun on their t-34 and thus could continue to mass produce a very cheap tank while largly neturalizing the german investment into more expensive and heavier tanks that was notriously unreliable.

 

[valisk]

Some equipment didn't need much more that occasional tinkering and small improvements over time, Spitfire being a great example, lots and lots of tiny improvements kept the aircraft useful from '40 right to the end of the war and beyond. The Supermarine Spiteful, in game as t3 fighter, never saw more than a handful of test models produced and later morphed into a jet used by the RN on carriers.

But to simulate that sort of thing the devs would probably have to adjust the variant designer to allow much greater/infinite number of modifications, which isn't a necessarily a bad idea as it would allow players the opportunity to trade pure research time for improvements based on combat experience.

 

[Denkt]

Having ability to spend research on current Equipment is a quite interesting idea, like it could reduce variant xp cost, allow more levels or simply boost the stats and while less efficient compared to spend the research on researching the next Equipment Tech, the advantage would be in the industry which would work well for concentrated industry and stuff like the Deep battle doctrine who want as much Equipment as possible.

 

[SgtFancypants]

Perhaps there could be some mechanic that provides an automatic upgrade for lines of production that have been ongoing to a long period of time based on the number of factories assigned to the task. For example, if I keep the P-40 Warhawk line cranking away at 10 factories for years I receive a prompt for a “free” chosen upgrade (attack, engine, etc.).

Create a formula that’s based on factory investment over time, maybe including worldwide usage statistics (to account for lend/lease). I’m sure it can be balanced in a way that makes it worthwhile to keep production going to take advantage of production efficiency while maintaining the need to eventually upgrade to an entirely new platform.

 

[Cavalry]

the AI is easy and the regular production rate is too high so people often like to play with newest toys. I still can win fast with Elite diffficutly and -60% factory output combined.

The real war like playing is to mobilize almost all your manpower as quickly as possible, about 3 mil-5 mil troops, then use superior number force to crush the enemy in about 1-2 years.. But few people play like that.

If you can crush enemy in 1-2 year then you don't need to change production.

 

[Hemothep]

I think this issue will be resolved once we have a tank designer and a plane designer. You would research the Chassis like you do ship hulls. Any modification would be a variant.

You get choices like: Do I replace my 1939 tank production line with 1941 tanks or do I just modify it with better guns, armor and engine, giving me tanks that are almost as good but will have far less impact on my production efficiency?

 

[Denkt]

In reality it took alot of time to develop stuff and even longer to make it simple enough for mass production and reliable enough to be useful, Panther and Tiger tanks was expensive, often broke down and could not be produced in large numbers so if these tanks actually was any better than the Panzer IV on the strategic scale is probably pretty doubtful. Soviet and USA kept producing T-34 and Shermans who generally worked and could be upgunned which reduced the effectivness of the new German tanks and also could be produced in an enormous scale as both more T-34s and Shermans was produced than the total amount of German tanks during the war.

A early t-34 was rather expensive, maybe more than the Panzer IV but in the late war it had become so simplified it was a really cheap tank and if I'm not wrong Soviet industry was not much larger than the German, they achieved their production numbers by making their stuff very simple and developing advanced industrial Technologies such as automatic welding.

Only one German tank plant actually used the assembly line principle (Nibelungenwerke) from what I know and they did not have anything like the Detroit tank plant which had probably a production efficiency much higher than any German tank plant

 

[Emren]

You have quite a bit of retention when upgrading models through the XP system. I think that is supposed to simulate what you're asking.

 

[sekelsenmat]

One cause of the issue is that infantry soft attack grows enormously with tech, while in the real world the difference was really minor.

Tanks wasnt really the case, I think it is fine now for tanks.

 

[Denkt]

You have quite a bit of retention when upgrading models through the XP system. I think that is supposed to simulate what you're asking.

It however don't allow for stuff like bf109 K.

Tanks wasnt really the case, I think it is fine now for tanks.

The thing is that major countries produced what would be 1941 tanks in 1944-45 so something is maybe quite off here?

Also one thing that is not represented is that during the war factories was built to maximize production of a certain Equipment like Willow Run was designed around producing B-24 on the assembly line principle. US and Soviet productivity was largely due to the automatization of their factories while German ones was more manual which was far less effective. Look at videos of the Detroit tank plant and compare it to German tank factories and the difference seems massive.

Just the Willow run built like 8500 Heavy bombers each maybe costing like 6 Shermans so if it produced Shermans at the same efficiency it would maybe produced 50k, more than the whole German tank industry managed to do.

 

[ETAIPOS]

The problem is that often the changes were bigger between variants of long produced equipment than between some types.

Like each later Bf109 mark was a massive upgrade in stats, and 109F was completely different plane from 109E. Sam with Spitfire - Mk. IX was massive, and quite unexpected upgrade in stats, much bigger than what you can get from XP variants.

On the other hand it was often difficult to introduce completely new type as that required not only designing the tank or plane itself but also new machines and tools for the production, train the factory crews in completely new construction methods etc and then, when you finally have production model, you need to train vehicle crews. Fe. Germans managed to completely break unit cohesion as they were introducing Panther - the best armoured battalions were pulled from the front, sent to half year training course and then sent back, very often to completely different front than their original division. And then within week or two, all Panthers broke down and units had to be retired again to wait for the next shipment.

 

[sekelsenmat]

The thing is that major countries produced what would be 1941 tanks in 1944-45 so something is maybe quite off here?

I rarely play into 44-45 but are 41 tanks really that inferior to 43 tanks in hoi4?

Also one thing that is not represented is that during the war factories was built to maximize production of a certain Equipment like Willow Run was designed around producing B-24 on the assembly line principle. US and Soviet productivity was largely due to the automatization of their factories while German ones was more manual which was far less effective. Look at videos of the Detroit tank plant and compare it to German tank factories and the difference seems massive.

Source?

Soviet tank factory:

German tank factory:

American tank factory:

The American looks superior and has some more "automation" (an anachronism which you introduced since I doubt it refers to this time period) in the form of some stuff moving along the line alone, but german and soviet is about the same to my eyes. I really doubted a soviet advantage here and I think I am right watching the videos.

I think what the game misses is that in the real world 10 MILs producing Shermans produce much more than 10 times as much as 1 MIL producing Shermans due to economies of scale.

Also americans had superior production tech, while in the game everyone has about the same industry tech level.

 

[Denkt]

Source?

Search on stuff like automatic welding.

The American looks superior and has some more "automation" (an anachronism which you introduced since I doubt it refers to this time period) in the form of some stuff moving along the line alone, but german and soviet is about the same to my eyes. I really doubted a soviet advantage here and I think I am right watching the videos.

I think the difference was later in the war, not right away. In 1940 Soviet is Before the war with Germany and at that time they was not particular productive.

I think what the game misses is that in the real world 10 MILs producing Shermans produce much more than 10 times as much as 1 MIL producing Shermans due to economies of scale.

Not really, it is not how stuff work in reality. Stuff get cheaper the more it is produced but that have to do with surplus vs demand but what make factories more productive is stuff like how well designed and organized they are for producing the stuff, like Detroit tank plant itself built about half the american Sherman tanks.

Also americans had superior production tech, while in the game everyone has about the same industry tech level.

More like they had a car industry with alot of experience with mass production, their actual arms industry was quite terrible at mass production. So that was why stuff like the willow run and Detroit tank plant was built by the car industry but the Equipments they produced was not their designs. This is however not really represented in the game and neither are specific factories like the Willow Run.

I rarely play into 44-45 but are 41 tanks really that inferior to 43 tanks in hoi4?

Yes the 1943 tank can be significantly better, especially if the difference mean you get or don't get the armor bonus, the extra speed can be a big deal and the better stats for no increase in combat width is also very useful and the cost is just 13 vs 14 + 1 iron, Obviously if you switch you do lose production efficiency but how much industry production you actually lose from the switch is Another question.​

 

[Cavalry]

I rarely play into 44-45 but are 41 tanks really that inferior to 43 tanks in hoi4?



Source?

Soviet tank factory:

German tank factory:

American tank factory:

The American looks superior and has some more "automation" (an anachronism which you introduced since I doubt it refers to this time period) in the form of some stuff moving along the line alone, but german and soviet is about the same to my eyes. I really doubted a soviet advantage here and I think I am right watching the videos.

I think what the game misses is that in the real world 10 MILs producing Shermans produce much more than 10 times as much as 1 MIL producing Shermans due to economies of scale.

Also americans had superior production tech, while in the game everyone has about the same industry tech level.

The Soviet has this Wonder of the World, UralVagonZavod , (Ural Railroad Car Factory) till this day still be the largest tank factory, with output comparable to the rest of the world. Of course it is hard to find a video inside it in WW2. The above video is about a small factory that cannot build the T34 so it is used to build light, obsolete tanks.

 

[HugsAndSnuggles]

Of course it is hard to find a video inside it in WW2.

It's not like television was the thing back in the day; and for a newspaper few photos here and there was more than enough. So, stuff like this or this is, probably, best you can get.

The above video is about a small factory that cannot build the T34 so it is used to build light, obsolete tanks.

If voiceover is to be believed, it's not even a factory, just some truck depot/workshop, where workers repaired those BTs after their shift was over.

 

[Louella]

are 41 tanks really that inferior to 43 tanks in hoi4?

iirc, there's some overlap - a medium tank 2 with several upgrades to 5, has superior stats and is cheaper, than a medium tank 3 base model, or a medium tank with only a couple upgrades. The medium 3 will become superior with more and more upgrades, but there is a point during which it's sensible to keep building medium 2s instead of upgrading to 3s right away.

This is not the case for aircraft - any aircraft base model has superior stats to the previous tier.


Anyway, the problem with using the Bf-109 or Spitfire as examples, is that they were not the same aircraft. A Bf-109 E was a different aircraft to the F, G, or K series. And Spitfires too, were significantly different between the different models (early Merlin, later Merlin, Griffon powered versions etc). The airframe construction, and the wing profiles were significantly altered between the different models. A Bf-109G-3 could be modified into a G-6, but a Bf-109F could not be modified into a G.

They looked similar, and used the same name, but they were very very different.

 

[Denkt]

The Soviet has this Wonder of the World, UralVagonZavod , (Ural Railroad Car Factory) till this day still be the largest tank factory, with output comparable to the rest of the world. Of course it is hard to find a video inside it in WW2. The above video is about a small factory that cannot build the T34 so it is used to build light, obsolete tanks.

Factory 183 produced nearly 30k t-34 by itself (even more than Detroit tank arsenal in terms of pure numbers), the most modern German factory, the Nibelungenwerke produced only like 5000 Panzer IV + 500 other vehicles, but it was only ready in like 1942 but Soviet tank production also only started to ramp up in 1942 due to having to move much of the industry and losing much of their workforce.

Interesting is how few tanks Germany managed to produce early in the war but on the other hand the late war tanks was probably pretty poorly produced given all their reliability and other issues on the other hand Soviet tanks seems to have been the opposite and generally improved over time as Soviet situation became less desperate.

If voiceover is to be believed, it's not even a factory, just some truck depot/workshop, where workers repaired those BTs after their shift was over.

Many factories was converted over to war time production but some of the most famous one like Willow run or Detroit tank plant was built during the war and many hours had gone into planing their layout to maximize production according to the assembly line principle. In fact the Detroit tank plant was the first tank plant in USA capable of mass production. I don't know how the largest Soviet factories actually looked like, I suspect they was also quite well planed and modern given some of them was as productive as the most advanced American ones.

Spoiler: Detroit tank plant

Spoiler: Willow Run

 

[Happy Trigger]

Looking to the game, without the need of any new feature, the problem might be in the quantities of military (army, air, navy) experience that we receive in game. It's too easy to get 500 air exp in Spanish Civil War, and to get even more if you send volunteers to China. What is the sense of having a fully modified BF-109 in 38'? Not only that, but having oil, like the U.S., you can gather infinite numbers of navy exp. I think the japanese had a lot more of experience than the U.S. at the start of the war.

You should to be at war, to get so huge figures so fast. In peace time, military exp should be hard to get, even with volunteers and/or lend-leases.

With a low amount of exp being gathered, you would have to prioritize what units in your army should be reorganized, what upgrades you want in your planes, and what kind of navy you will have. Or if you will expend everything researching technology and doctrine.

Another think important, lend-leases should have a cost to the nation receiving them, like being paid in civilian factories for a X amount of time. This could be reduced to puppets. A change like that would make people have more control over their production. People would be forced to have their on air forces, not just send every single plane to the air controller in MP.

 

[Denkt]

Yes being able to save up and use xp instantly on newly researched stuff is maybe something that should be looked at. Obviously the whole economy may need a look, like addition of "supply factories" which was a huge part of the war industry but is not represented at all and would help against the division spam.

 

[sekelsenmat]

You should to be at war, to get so huge figures so fast. In peace time, military exp should be hard to get, even with volunteers and/or lend-leases.

I could live without the 500 air XP from SCW, but without army XP the game grinds to a halt. And is very boring.

One easy fix for Air XP would be to make it receive when fighting top-tech enemy fighters (defined by the tech year, so in 40-43 fighting against fighter 40 would give xp). Not while massacrating obsolete stuff.