Continuing production of obsolete equipmeant

[paddy1966]

HI all
As Great Brittan, would it be beneficial to keep producing obsolete equipmeant so as to give it to alllies in the form of lend lease. Example, Playing as Uk send my Gladiators ,to Poland, Greece, Norway etc , while keeping Hurricanes for myself. I have level 3 inf equipmeant ,keeep producing some level 2 as aid for my allies .Does this sound practicle

 

[Issac1709]

HI all
As Great Brittan, would it be beneficial to keep producing obsolete equipmeant so as to give it to alllies in the form of lend lease. Example, Playing as Uk send my Gladiators ,to Poland, Greece, Norway etc , while keeping Hurricanes for myself. I have level 3 inf equipmeant ,keeep producing some level 2 as aid for my allies .Does this sound practicle

Why not produce level 3 for allies too?

 

[Bob the Biro]

Why not produce level 3 for allies too?

I believe that the older equipment can be made in larger quantities than the newer stuff. So it may be beneficial to use level 1 when trying to arm civil wars etc than the more valuable level 3 stuff. However if you are playing as GB you should not have a problem with IC and therefore should just produce all the best stuff. If you were Poland then I can see why more equipment would be more beneficial because of the small industrial base.

 

[Mirage2k]

Instead of producing level 2 equipment to give to allies, I would just produce more level 3 equipment to upgrade my forces and give the equipment I thus replace to allies. You produce slightly less in the short term, but over time this builds up level 3 efficiency which you will need anyway.

Basically, the wisdom goes like this: If you have so much IC that you can afford to produce extra equipment to allies, why not start producing higher level equipment and build up efficiency in that? I think the only reason to build lower level equipment than possible is if you are really struggling to have enough equipment to your own forces.

 

[Nicolas I]

I believe that the older equipment can be made in larger quantities than the newer stuff. So it may be beneficial to use level 1 when trying to arm civil wars etc than the more valuable level 3 stuff...

Yes, older equipment can be made in larger quantities, but its principally because it is less expensive than the newer (IIRC). Because the maximum gearing bonus can be reached in a few months for newer lines of production, particularly if your make the same type of equipment.

So it can make sense to drop your surplus of old equipment to allies or your side in a civil war, even to produce some. But I personally would switch to newer equipment (which bring sizeable combat bonuses) as soon as possible, if I can afford it.

 

[Marfach]

If playing co-op I foresee a meta in specializing your production, e.g. as a UK and France team you could specialize in aircraft and artillery production while France specializes in Tanks and AT equipment (just as an example) and then lend lease the excess to one another. This would allow each nation to drastically increase their tech specialization resulting in higher numbers of more up to date equipment and an overall better equipped nation.
Effectively, you would have a nation with 6 research slots instead of 4 (subtracted 2 arbitrarily because industry and doctrine techs must be done by both nations)

 

[jalapen0]

If playing co-op I foresee a meta in specializing your production, e.g. as a UK and France team you could specialize in aircraft and artillery production while France specializes in Tanks and AT equipment (just as an example) and then lend lease the excess to one another. This would allow each nation to drastically increase their tech specialization resulting in higher numbers of more up to date equipment and an overall better equipped nation.
Effectively, you would have a nation with 6 research slots instead of 4 (subtracted 2 arbitrarily because industry and doctrine techs must be done by both nations)

That sounds like such a good idea, it could be called an exploit.

 

[Marfach]

That sounds like such a good idea, it could be called an exploit.

It is not an exploit as much as it is historically accurate.
The UK imported most of its tank chassis in favour of developing its Air force and Anti-Tank capabilities, similarly the UK shared with the USA its knowledge of Radar and Decryption (first in the Tizard mission and later piece-wise throughout the war) As well as ballistics and Gunnery.
I see it as a meta more than an exploit.

 

[Denkt]

The disadvantage is the dependency on convoys.

 

[Nicolas I]

The disadvantage is the dependency on convoys.

Or losing a partner and ending up with huge holes in your research/production.

IIRC there is a cap on how much you can lend-lease linked with ideology and world tension. That can be a way to limit exploits and can/will be balanced.

 

[JerkyJerry]

England is going to lend-lease to who? (Or is it to Whom?)
England receives Lend-Lease they don't give it
Giving anything to Poland is a waste as they (Poland) are gone in 60 seconds
Greece? Not worth the effort really and if there is no effort then all the more reason not to send anything to them. Bottomless pit
Norway? You can send it there but will it ever be used?

Nothing GB can send to anyone will make a bit of difference.
GB better spend its time on surviving itself rather than trying to help others survive.

 

[Nicolas I]

...Nothing GB can send to anyone will make a bit of difference. GB better spend its time on surviving itself rather than trying to help others survive.

I disagree. Helping minor allies resist a bit longer can delay some resources to your enemy and makes him pay a bit more to win (manpower).

But I also agree charity begins at home.

 

[Marfach]

The disadvantage is the dependency on convoys.

That shouldnt be an issue between UK and France, but yes in a lend lease between say Japan and Germany it won't be possible.

England is going to lend-lease to who? (Or is it to Whom?)
England receives Lend-Lease they don't give it

What an ignorant statement. The UK sent over £1b to the USSR in aircraft engines alone, on top of thousands of tanks, almost 8,000 aircraft, Radar and Sonar equipment, over 2,500 Universal carriers.
Before the USA ramped up its industrial base and lend lease program the UK was the primary source of military aid for the Soviet Union as well as being the primary supplier to French, Polish, Norwegian and Balkan partisans.

 

[JerkyJerry]

Well I suppose it all depends on how one would define "minor allies resist"

So who are these allies?
France gone in 1940 the latest
Poland gone in 1939 the latest
Brussels, Denmark, Netherlands?
By the time GB has obsolete equipment half if not more of their allies are wiped off the map and the other ones they don't have trade routes to

In theory it is a nice idea however in practice it will amount to nothing. If Germany wants those countries Germany will get those countries whether they have received outdated equipment or not.

 

[JerkyJerry]

What an ignorant statement.

I'm talking HOI4
NOT real life
Just like the OP posted

I know what was done in real life. Which is why I did not put Russia on my list.
And since the OP posted only European countries that is the route I went as well

So you read USSR into his post
I did not

I answered what I read
You responded in a real world way when we were talking about a game
Now I wonder who is ignorant?

 

[Marfach]

Well I suppose it all depends on how one would define "minor allies resist"

So who are these allies?

Minor allies traditionally would be the Dutch and Chinese fighting in East Asia, as well as the USSR.
Keeping France alive with a human player at the helm was never a difficult task, so in this circumstance the minor allies would likely be Belgium and Denmark. The OP isnt trying to give some all powerful strategy, but asking if its worth sending excess equipment to another country and the answer to that like so many other questions is: Well, it depends.
If you have divisions stationed in Greece and have loads of outdated Infantry equipment, it might be worth helping the greeks raise more divisions rather than diverting your own troops from Africa.

 

[JerkyJerry]

I will accept that response as an apology

 

[Marfach]

I will accept that response as an apology

I'm sorry if I offended you Jerry, but to be quite honest, I wouldnt trust the AI with my lend lease any more as the USA than I would as the UK so imo if its worth lend-leasing as the USA its worth it as the UK. I dont personally play the USA in HoI3 because of this.
The new production and lend lease systems look like they will make lend lease much more useful anyway as you can specifically lend your AT guns to the Russians and your small arms to the greeks.

 

[Bridger15]

It does take more IC to produce later game equipment (at least this is true for infantry equipment) so keeping a small line of 5 factories running at full efficiency while you switch most of your factories (and all new factories) to Level 2 or 3 wouldn't be without it's benefits.

Also consider that if you want your new units to "exercise" they will be spending equipment. Limit them to level 1 or basic equipment while they are learning, and when they are ready to deploy change them over to full highest level equipment.