Are long term production line underpowered?

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Denkt

Left the forums permamently
42 Badges
May 28, 2010
15.763
6.369
I did run 2 test, both using Germany with all industral Techs, concentrated-flexible line. I used 10 military factories. In the first test I produced Panzer IV from 1936 to 1938 Before switching to Panther and stopped the test in 1940. The 2 year gap represent the 2 year gap in technology between the tanks.

In the second test I produced Panzer IV from 1936 to 1940, so the only difference between the test was the switch in production.

Here are the number of tanks I had in 1940 when I ended the tests:
  • Test with switch: 3.9k Pz IV and 3.8k Panther, total tanks 7.7k, total IC cost of the tanks 103.9k
  • Test without switch: 8.8k Pz IV, total IC cost of the tanks 114.4k
So the switch cost me 10.5k IC or about 1k IC per factory. This represent about 10% more production by not switching which in turn ment I ended up with 1.1k more tanks but that is also based on the fact that Panther cost 14 IC while Panzer IV cost 13 IC. However as time goes on the gap in production will get smaller and smaller since both lines will work at 100% efficiency and if we take account for the industrial Techs the gap would have been even smaller.

So even with concentrated industry you should switch production, Assuming you are not very desperate as the lost production is quite small while the quality gained is pretty significant. Obviously you have to consider stuff like research pritority.
 

Happy Trigger

Major
17 Badges
May 14, 2018
655
643
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Battle for Bosporus
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.
Don't you think that start the war in 39' with a 40 witdh in divisions of tank and infrantry looks anormal? I mean, with less exp, you would need to think what division you want to prioritise the reorganization. Then, the curve of change would be longer and natural. Nobody should be starting the war fully upgraded and reorganized.
 

Happy Trigger

Major
17 Badges
May 14, 2018
655
643
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Battle for Bosporus
I did run 2 test, both using Germany with all industral Techs, concentrated-flexible line. I used 10 military factories. In the first test I produced Panzer IV from 1936 to 1938 Before switching to Panther and stopped the test in 1940. The 2 year gap represent the 2 year gap in technology between the tanks.

In the second test I produced Panzer IV from 1936 to 1940, so the only difference between the test was the switch in production.

Here are the number of tanks I had in 1940 when I ended the tests:
  • Test with switch: 3.9k Pz IV and 3.8k Panther, total tanks 7.7k, total IC cost of the tanks 103.9k
  • Test without switch: 8.8k Pz IV, total IC cost of the tanks 114.4k
So the switch cost me 10.5k IC or about 1k IC per factory. This represent about 10% more production by not switching which in turn ment I ended up with 1.1k more tanks but that is also based on the fact that Panther cost 14 IC while Panzer IV cost 13 IC. However as time goes on the gap in production will get smaller and smaller since both lines will work at 100% efficiency and if we take account for the industrial Techs the gap would have been even smaller.

So even with concentrated industry you should switch production, Assuming you are not very desperate as the lost production is quite small while the quality gained is pretty significant. Obviously you have to consider stuff like research pritority.
With that results, you could argue that the main point of changing or not, production, is if your tank was upgraded. A Panzer 4 upgraded will be superior to the Panther recently researched.

But only 10% of loss looks oddly small. I thought it was bigger when you change production. (total numbers)
 

FindFloppies

Some Assembly Required
88 Badges
Jul 8, 2015
852
1.468
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Victoria 2
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
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.

The rough quote I've heard was "One of our tanks is worth 4 of theirs, but they always have 5..."...
Pretty much true, for the US and for the Soviets vs the Germans.
 

Denkt

Left the forums permamently
42 Badges
May 28, 2010
15.763
6.369
The rough quote I've heard was "One of our tanks is worth 4 of theirs, but they always have 5..."...
Pretty much true, for the US and for the Soviets vs the Germans.
Soviet mass production of stuff like t-34, while inferior to the german tanks on a 1 vs 1 basis and the Soviets very well knew this, Soviet doctrine needed enough tanks to cover the whole front and Soviet knew that there would be weak Point in the axis line and which they exploited and became good at it in 1943-1944. In fact the soviet doctrine would be quite similar to what the german doctrine is described as but Soviet one had a larger scope and more focus on the operational rather than the tactical level.
 

mursolini

Field Marshal
16 Badges
Feb 1, 2014
3.353
3.539
  • Darkest Hour
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II
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.
You don`t have to upgrade anything other than tanks and fighters.
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.
Depends on difficulty/other factors. Often, tanks and fighters are the only things that are updated before 1943, If I need to push synthetic techs, and so on.
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.
When Germany faced new Soviet tanks like T-34 and KV, Germans simply put on a bigger gun (and more armor) on their Pz4 and thus could continue to mass produce a very cheap tank while largely neturalizing the Soviet investment into more expensive and heavier tanks that were notoriously unreliable. And then in 1943 had to rush a new line of tanks, because issues cost and reliability issues tend to get sorted out over time.

In practice, however, there were 1 reasons Soviets didn`t introduce newer designs, that they already had: They did in introduce new designs of higher priority, like IS-2 deployment was prioritized over T-43, and IS-2 transition was very hard, reliability and build quality were poor, and it took a tonne of time to sort out.

Then, you might find SVT-40 that was withdrawn for high cost, PPSH and similar SMGs, that were put in service, and of course their air force, that introduced and upgraded 3 main lines of fighter Yak-1 to 3 to 9, LAGG3 to LA5 to La7, and MIG, a vast array of new light armor and armored vehicles, T-60, T-70, SU-76, and various TDs and AGs.

T-34 is actually the exception for Soviets, not the rule, pretty much all other armor, which always get`s ignored for some god known reason was upgraded in 42, 43, and 44, it`s just T-34 hull that was kept through the war, while it`s turret was constantly redesigned.
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.
Yes, same as BF-109, only a few re-engines, and complete change of armament.
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.
Just replace Tigers and Panthers with Shermans and T-34, and T-34 and Shermans for Pz3 and Pz2.

It is just a reality of world, that USA and SU had more industry and manpower, and would produce more out of it.

The reason USA kept building Sherman, I know, shockingly, because it was a 1941 designed tank, and US had to fight with something in 1944, not spend another 1-2 years ironing teething problems of Pershing till war was over. Then, despite popular belif, Sherman performed very well, and there was no reason to replace it till 1944, at which point, as you might guess, such replacement would not be deployed till war was over.
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.
It was actually made more complex, as war progressed.
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.
It might have something to do with UVZ employing 29-31k workers over 1942-1945, while Nibelungenwerke started at 5k in 1941, and topped at 8k, even then it had to do with lost of labor being foreigners and "nonvolunteer" vorkers, as to stay within forum rules, which, obviously decreased productivity.
 

mursolini

Field Marshal
16 Badges
Feb 1, 2014
3.353
3.539
  • Darkest Hour
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II
Soviet mass production of stuff like t-34, while inferior to the german tanks on a 1 vs 1 basis and the Soviets very well knew this, Soviet doctrine needed enough tanks to cover the whole front and Soviet knew that there would be weak Point in the axis line and which they exploited and became good at it in 1943-1944. In fact the soviet doctrine would be quite similar to what the german doctrine is described as but Soviet one had a larger scope and more focus on the operational rather than the tactical level.
Soviet also mass-produced stuff like KV-1 and IS-2, that were superior to German tanks on 1v1 basis. And T-34 started superior to any German tank in 1941, while also being more numerous then Pz4. After all, how can you not call 15k of heavy tanks and SPGs not massive?! They had a 1 heavy tank or SPG for each German Pz4 and Panther. If you ever wondered why Germans were so desperate to upgrade their armor-piercing capabilities, it was not because of T-34.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:

Denkt

Left the forums permamently
42 Badges
May 28, 2010
15.763
6.369
Soviet also mass-produced stuff like KV-1 and IS-2, that were superior to German tanks on 1v1 basis. And T-34 started superior to any German tank in 1941, while also being more numerous. After all, how can you not call 15k of heavy tanks and SPGs not massive?! They had a 1 heavy tank or SPG for each German Pz4 and Panther. If you ever wondered why Germans were so desperate to upgrade their armor-piercing capabilities, it was not because of T-34.
On other hand I have heard soviet Equipment performed poorly due to lack of stuff like radios, good optics and often lackluster crew training compared to Germany.

Sherman on the other hand was pretty excellent in most ways and was relevant in 1944-45 because it was a pretty good design to begin with.
 

mursolini

Field Marshal
16 Badges
Feb 1, 2014
3.353
3.539
  • Darkest Hour
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II
On other hand I have heard soviet Equipment performed poorly due to lack of stuff like radios, good optics and often lackluster crew training compared to Germany.
Soviet equipment and training improved by 1944, some of more critical deficit was covered by LL. Then, German equipment also typically performed poorly in 1945, due to poor crews, lack of fuel, spare parts, and overall logistical capacity.
Sherman on the other hand was pretty excellent in most ways and was relevant in 1944-45 because it was a pretty good design to begin with.
Yeah, nothing was particularly bad about Sherman, other than poorly trained and led troops in Africa in 1942 earning it a bad reputation.
 

Secret Master

Covert Mastermind
Moderator
95 Badges
Jul 9, 2001
36.655
20.095
www.youtube.com
  • 200k Club
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • March of the Eagles
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Pride of Nations
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Limited Collectors Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • The Kings Crusade
I rarely play into 44-45 but are 41 tanks really that inferior to 43 tanks in hoi4?

They are much more superior, when you factor in the fact that I can get Panthers into production before Barbarossa, or modern tanks into production in 1943 using various national focuses.

There are even strategies people use that involve skipping the production of 39 and 41 tanks to go straight to 43 production.

If you had to wait until 43 to production 1943 tanks, there would be less value in the higher tier tank, since numbers are important, too. But if I only swap production lines over 1 time in 3 years to get to the 1943 tank, it's all good.

So even with concentrated industry you should switch production, Assuming you are not very desperate as the lost production is quite small while the quality gained is pretty significant. Obviously you have to consider stuff like research pritority.

The rule of thumb I follow is that no production line (with a few January 1st of 1936 exceptions) has more than 15 MIC allocated.

When the time comes to produce higher tier equipment, I swap production lines over one at a time (unless I'm full up on that equipment). Once I have decent (not necessarily maximum) production efficiency, I swap another over.
 

Cavalry

Field Marshal
8 Badges
Jul 24, 2001
5.356
1.384
Visit site
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
I did run 2 test, both using Germany with all industral Techs, concentrated-flexible line. I used 10 military factories. In the first test I produced Panzer IV from 1936 to 1938 Before switching to Panther and stopped the test in 1940. The 2 year gap represent the 2 year gap in technology between the tanks.

In the second test I produced Panzer IV from 1936 to 1940, so the only difference between the test was the switch in production.

Here are the number of tanks I had in 1940 when I ended the tests:
  • Test with switch: 3.9k Pz IV and 3.8k Panther, total tanks 7.7k, total IC cost of the tanks 103.9k
  • Test without switch: 8.8k Pz IV, total IC cost of the tanks 114.4k
So the switch cost me 10.5k IC or about 1k IC per factory. This represent about 10% more production by not switching which in turn ment I ended up with 1.1k more tanks but that is also based on the fact that Panther cost 14 IC while Panzer IV cost 13 IC. However as time goes on the gap in production will get smaller and smaller since both lines will work at 100% efficiency and if we take account for the industrial Techs the gap would have been even smaller.

So even with concentrated industry you should switch production, Assuming you are not very desperate as the lost production is quite small while the quality gained is pretty significant. Obviously you have to consider stuff like research pritority.

Don't forget a tank in year 3 can be much more worth than a tank in the last month of year 4.

the gap is reduced because there are 2 industrial tech boost in 1937 and 1939. So in the first case the production didn't have peak efficiency at start.
When war start I often has tank inventory very low (less than 150), most of tank go quickly to the front.
Uusually if you can maintain armor bonus on the tank divisions then you are fine and don't need change.

But the test has proven the disperse industry looks too strong, especially in the case you can win fast in 1942-43.
 

KDEstroy

Captain
38 Badges
Feb 23, 2018
499
446
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Darkest Hour
Don't forget a tank in year 3 can be much more worth than a tank in the last month of year 4.

the gap is reduced because there are 2 industrial tech boost in 1937 and 1939. So in the first case the production didn't have peak efficiency at start.
When war start I often has tank inventory very low (less than 150), most of tank go quickly to the front.
Uusually if you can maintain armor bonus on the tank divisions then you are fine and don't need change.

But the test has proven the disperse industry looks too strong, especially in the case you can win fast in 1942-43.

Doesn't the test show that Concentrated Industry is actually better? Over the course of two years you only lose 10% of your IC, but with max techs concentrated gives 25% bonus to factory output. Of course, their test used concentrated industry both times, but in the case where they don't upgrade for four years, I don't think dispersed will help much.
 

Cavalry

Field Marshal
8 Badges
Jul 24, 2001
5.356
1.384
Visit site
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
but in the case where they don't upgrade for four years, I don't think dispersed will help much.

Players get much more new MIL in the later years and these new MIL will start at higher efficicency in dispersed.

If changing production is not much bad then players will change more.

The test can give us a tip, if the war will start in 2 years or more then it is ok to change productions as the cost of 14% less tanks.
 
Last edited:

Denkt

Left the forums permamently
42 Badges
May 28, 2010
15.763
6.369
Doesn't the test show that Concentrated Industry is actually better? Over the course of two years you only lose 10% of your IC, but with max techs concentrated gives 25% bonus to factory output. Of course, their test used concentrated industry both times, but in the case where they don't upgrade for four years, I don't think dispersed will help much.
I have not run the test with dispersed industry. However if you wonder it take about 420 Days with streamlined to reach 100% production but only a few Days to go from 10% to 30%.
 

Col.Klink

First Lieutenant
17 Badges
May 6, 2019
245
205
  • Victoria 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Lead and Gold
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
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


Germany didn't focus on volume simply because it was not an option. For a myriad of reasons they did not capture the russian oil supply in 1942 which meant that they didnt have the fuel for a larger mechanized force for continued maneuver warfare. And their supply lines were so bad they might not have been able to deliver the fuel had they had it. Units advancing on Stalingrad 1942 suffered that issue and command had to pick which vehicles would have fuel to advance and which would have to wait in the rear.

From this perspective the german approach makes more sense. They cannot win this by numbers and the days of vast maneuver lighting war are over. So what they focused on was quality, dig in and make the enemy bleed as much hoping for their chance to turn the tide. Thus the tiger series and the panther series.

The negative reputation of those tanks reliability comes from two things. 1) they needed the heavier armor and guns NOW so an appropriate testing period was not allocated. The troops tested it and as the war went on the tanks were improved based on field experience. 2) their reputation for poor reliability is from the american perspective. Us tank design was conservative and careful, our biggest issue was the fact everything had to be shipped to europe. Tanks couldnt be sent back to be refitted and the supply chain of parts may be spotty. So more than anything the tanks were tested and built to be reliable. In short our view was that a war winning tank was something that could always be counted on to be there. Something the European powers did not have. T-34 had a notoriously bad transmission as an example.

A good example of this are the British vs Germans in north africa. Both sides suffered more vehicular losses to breakdowns than to enemy action. When the british desperate for any weapons to fight with received the m3 light tanks from the usa they loved them. The little tank was absolutely no match for a pziii that the germans mainly used but the american tank just kept running when everything else broke down.

Anyway that aside, germany focused on production elsewhere. Like with every other country they focused on making infantry kit, small arms cheaper and easier to make. The mg34 became the mg42 and so on. Hell at the end of the war they were looking at replacing the stg44 with a rifle that took only like 5 hours machine time to make. A rifle whose roller delayed system essentially evolved into the modern cetme and g3 rifles.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:

balmung60

Field Marshal
101 Badges
Jan 20, 2013
6.515
2.764
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Humble Paradox Bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • Victoria 2
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
And T-34 started superior to any German tank in 1941,
This is true
while also being more numerous.
This is absolutely not

The T-34 was more numerous over the course of the entire war. Through the end of 1941, total T-34 production was under 3150. The vast majority of the USSR's tank park when the war broke out was made up of badly obsolete T-26 tanks (roughly 10,500) and somewhat less obsolete BT tanks (roughly 8000). By the end of the same year, Germany had produced nearly 5900 Panzers of relatively modern models (III, IV, and 38(t)), as well as nearly 3500 older Panzers I and II, and an estimated 2500 reasonably modern captured French, British, and Czech tanks.

Soviet tanks outnumbered German tanks in 1941, but T-34s did not, and modern tanks like T-34s and KV-1/2s only made up about a quarter of all tanks in the Soviet inventory. Now, on the other hand, over the next year, T-34 production would actually eclipse all German tank production put together, but the T-34 certainly didn't start the war both superior and more numerous.