Germany Buildup - CIC run comparisons

[porta80]

You obviously did not follow in the point of these runs: If I build AA, I build it in every Run. Because it's not only about maximizing industry, but finding the best way to do it. If you don't want to build AA, that's fine, but shouldn't affect my findings.
And the AA Investment costs 3.47 MIC, to be exact, which won't produce a lot of fighters in late 1939.

Your AA math is wrong.
2x7x2500 = 35000 cic
AA doesnt benefit from infrastructure, not from autarky and not from war economy, MIC does. so the same civs do more then double the cic output on a mic then on aa.
cic output on 39 tech for aa is 120cic for 15 civs, 2500/120 = 21 days to produce 1 AA *14 = 294 production days.
Cic output in MIC is in a lvl 6! province is 240cic * 294days = 70560 / 7200 = 9,8 mic

my first estimated guess was even to low...

 

[Zauberelefant]

So, just finished with 24 NIC, 115 CIC and 98 MIC, with 2x collab in poland (60%) and 1x collab in France.
Focus order was as per the other runs, advisors/laws:
Hess, Bormann, Free Trade, Schacht, Attachee, War Economy, Krupp, Guderian, Canaris, Tank designer, Chief of army, Limited exports, 3x Chief of staff, air designer. Agency with 4x Crypto upgrades started in mid 37, built 6 NIC, 10 synths, 13 airfields, 7x2 AA and 10 radar.
Despite doing only 3 collab instead of 4, I came some 8 CIC and 4 MIC short of the limited export only run.
That is close, but not close enough in my book.
Good things: taking both silent workhorses is a winning strategy, I got more advisors than I could possibly justify, and without trade law switching, would have got everything filled except 2. Remarkable!
Will do that for sure next time round.

I did keep to the old focus order with historical dates to have a better comparability. Next time will see me Experiment with Autobahn/infra building.

 

[Zauberelefant]

Your AA math is wrong.
2x7x2500 = 35000 cic
AA doesnt benefit from infrastructure, not from autarky and not from war economy, MIC does. so the same civs do more then double the cic output on a mic then on aa.
cic output on 39 tech for aa is 120cic for 15 civs, 2500/120 = 21 days to produce 1 AA *14 = 294 production days.
Cic output in MIC is in a lvl 6! province is 240cic * 294days = 70560 / 7200 = 9,8 mic

my first estimated guess was even to low...

You are in fact correct. State buildings do not benefit from infra. However, that does not invalidate the tests.

 

[porta80]

You are in fact correct. State buildings do not benefit from infra. However, that does not invalidate the tests.

You missunderstand me I am not questioning your test result if you do it everytime.
I am questioning the use of AA in general.

Just to tell you my result 108 mils, 137 civ, 23 nic =268 2 fuel silos 9 synth( more in production) on 22. September (fall of poland was on the 17.09. split already with sov)
Na AA just lvl 3 radar in moselland.
I did build 14 airfields.
2 colabs on poland, 2 on france last one will finish in dezember.

 

[Zauberelefant]

You missunderstand me I am not questioning your test result if you do it everytime.
I am questioning the use of AA in general.

Just to tell you my result 108 mils, 137 civ, 23 nic =268 2 fuel silos 9 synth( more in production) on 22. September (fall of poland was on the 17.09. split already with sov)
Na AA just lvl 3 radar in moselland.
I did build 14 airfields.
2 colabs on poland, 2 on france last one will finish in dezember.

Well, that doesn't sound too bad, does it? I will check if AA really is that bad.

 

[porta80]

Well, that doesn't sound too bad, does it? I will check if AA really is that bad.

Do you normally put up fighters for defense? Then yes against ai you dont need additional ground AA. 300-400 fighters per region on interception mission is enough to keep ai bombers away. they will try to contest you shortly from time to time but as soon as your fighters join they will stop it.

 

[Secret Master]

Do you normally put up fighters for defense? Then yes against ai you dont need additional ground AA. 300-400 fighters per region on interception mission is enough to keep ai bombers away. they will try to contest you shortly from time to time but as soon as your fighters join they will stop it.

You are quite right.

I want to throw something else into the discussion of state level AA, though.

If you choose not to commit air forces to defend your homeland, state level AA benefits substantially from AA gun techs and RADAR techs. You don't have to actually build RADAR, but the 1940+ RADAR techs help state level AA out. The AA gun techs help as well. This does not cost IC. So, the relative value of the CIC invested in AA guns can vary based on technological commitments.

I've seen the AI initiate strategic bombing of air regions with decent static AA defenses with tech upgrades, lose some planes, then stop the bombing (or choose a different region with worse air defense).

The AA gun method of interfering with strategic bombing is not my favorite, but it is a good way to use CIC to deter air attack instead of MIC (which is required to build planes). The techs are easier to research than aircraft techs, too.

In MP, Germany using static AA to defend the Reich is an acknowledgement that they are losing the war. That doesn't mean it's all over, but the Allies should always keep an eye out for massive increases in static AA. That's a clear indication that Germany no longer has the appetite to commit the Luftwaffe in the west and feels its losing the air war.

(You know the Axis isn't going to win when the players on Germany say, "There is no Luftwaffe" in Discord. )

 

[porta80]

You are quite right.

The AA gun method of interfering with strategic bombing is not my favorite, but it is a good way to use CIC to deter air attack instead of MIC (which is required to build planes). The techs are easier to research than aircraft techs, too.

In SP and MP the most up to date tech you want to have is Airforce and Tanks as Ger, so this argument is kind of pointless. AA tech is just nice to have especially when you need to focus on land air and navy in SP.
And to be honnest all AI is doing on strategic bombing missions is using mostly some old starting tactical bombers to do it, have not seen any real bombing trys with 2k+ strat bombers like you can see it in MP Games.
Static AA comes when I really have nothing better to build anymore in the queue.

 

[Zauberelefant]

I just finished the run with limited exports, both silent workhorses and Autobahn and German war economy focuses instead of the two small naval focuses and synthetic rubber.
22 NIC (I built 11 to cover for the Missing focuses), 115 CIC, 103 MIC.
But a buttload of advisors! All Except one filled in october 1939, and if I hadn't sent 2 attachees, i could have had all slots filled!

Another good thing is that German war economy yields 6 MIC in your CIC buildup phase, which translates into ~400 more fighters when the war starts.
The omission of synth Rubber lets me use all my synths, so no excess there. Also appreciated.

On AA: i had switched Tags to check from the other side. 3 wings x 150 planes, the basic IW TAC, attacking into Germany, against 600-800 basic Fighter I and 5 AA.
Radar was giving max detection.
After 1 month:
102 were lost, 70 shot down by fighters, 30(!) By 5 AA, 2 by accident.
Note that these bombers were unescorted.

1 AA is worth some 40 fighters in a given area, If we break down losses by number of units. It does not consume fuel, needs no rubber, or Aluminium.
Unfortunately, I was unable to determine the disruption ratio between fighters and AA.

But given that a close to max efficiency dispersed industry Mic makes .2 FTR/d, and takes 125% of AA to build before war, I would make a case for late AA against FTR MIC.
If you need air defence now, or cannot afford the rubber, take AA, provided you tech that radar and AA.

 

[Black_Shade]

You missunderstand me I am not questioning your test result if you do it everytime.
I am questioning the use of AA in general.

Just to tell you my result 108 mils, 137 civ, 23 nic =268 2 fuel silos 9 synth( more in production) on 22. September (fall of poland was on the 17.09. split already with sov)
Na AA just lvl 3 radar in moselland.
I did build 14 airfields.
2 colabs on poland, 2 on france last one will finish in dezember.

When did you stop building civs? You've got about 10 more than I had in either run and I felt like I let them go on a bit long (stopped adding them to queue in ~march '38).

 

[porta80]

When did you stop building civs? You've got about 10 more than I had in either run and I felt like I let them go on a bit long (stopped adding them to queue in ~march '38).

I usually let them build until late 38 after Sudetenland.

 

[Zauberelefant]

I usually let them build until late 38 after Sudetenland.

That maximizes factory count, sure, but what about equipment? How many FTR and MARM do you get that way, with only one year max to gear for war?

 

[porta80]

That maximizes factory count, sure, but what about equipment? How many FTR and MARM do you get that way, with only one year max to gear for war?

I have 4k figthers, 700 tac, 600 cas now in septemper.
3 tank divisions 40 width with a mix of light and mediums (~1.5k lights and ~750 meds). I will changed to mediums only in the next few month while waiting, i normally play a historical winter sitting war. I hardly build Medium 1s i normally start building Medium 2s but i didnt get them before march i think. The few med 1 i did build will be upgraded to med 2 spaa.

 

[ladner]

Would like to thank the forum and the original poster for this thread. Have been looking for better information and this fits the need. Had been looking at videos, which in hindsight don’t provide enough depth or detail and mainly are a platform for the video maker as opposed to providing meaningful content.

 

[Secret Master]

Would like to thank the forum and the original poster for this thread. Have been looking for better information and this fits the need. Had been looking at videos, which in hindsight don’t provide enough depth or detail and mainly are a platform for the video maker as opposed to providing meaningful content.

You are quite welcome. You've been registered here a long time, so I hope you believe a fellow old timer on this forum that the community is still as helpful as it was back in the early 2000s.

 

[Black_Shade]

That maximizes factory count, sure, but what about equipment? How many FTR and MARM do you get that way, with only one year max to gear for war?

I typically don't field any MT for Poland/France, and go with 12 20 W LT divisions (6 LT 4 MOT), which does the job well enough, neither will last more than a week or two. The key is controlling the skies, if you've got 4-5k fighters at the start it doesn't matter what divisions you have in the army. I don't start building MT until I get the PZ4 done, which typically happens in early '39 and it's difficult to get those done in large numbers in time for Poland and France. Better to focus on fighters to start with and then dump 100 factories on MT once France and Poland fall, you'll have 20k meds in the field in time for the Soviets.

 

[Simon_9732495]

Would like to thank the forum and the original poster for this thread. Have been looking for better information and this fits the need. Had been looking at videos, which in hindsight don’t provide enough depth or detail and mainly are a platform for the video maker as opposed to providing meaningful content.

If you look for strategies for economic buildup of Germany, you might like also this thread:

1.9 German Economy Benchmark Thread

There were some changes to economy in Husky and I'd like to optimize my Germany Buildup 1936-1939 again. To see where I stand I would like to compare my builds with others. Therefore I'd suggest the following benchmark: Date: 1.6.1939 (Short...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

 

[MR2]

Advisors/Laws: Hess, Krupp, Schacht, War Economy, Armour designer, Canaris, Theorist, Chief of Army, Funk (after Sudetenland),, Chief of Staff, Chief of Staff, Navy Designer

Thank you for the testing, analyses, and clear writing. For Theorist - why Saalwächter instead of Guderian?

 

[Zauberelefant]

Thank you for the testing, analyses, and clear writing. For Theorist - why Saalwächter instead of Guderian?

Because I hadn't figured out the speed bonus of Guderian (he works as a Designer!) and with attachees, his XP are not as valuable, and the Research speed bonus pales next to XP expenditure and 100% bonuses from NF.

Navy XP, on the other hand, is hard to come by and 20% research speed bonus is huge.

That is, if you need to make the Kriegsmarine actually a threat.

 

[porta80]

Because I hadn't figured out the speed bonus of Guderian (he works as a Designer!) and with attachees, his XP are not as valuable, and the Research speed bonus pales next to XP expenditure and 100% bonuses from NF.

Navy XP, on the other hand, is hard to come by and 20% research speed bonus is huge.

That is, if you need to make the Kriegsmarine actually a threat.

I don't know about you but for me there is no limit on Land XP i can get before war. Most important doctrine is Landdoctrine for Germany followed by Air and Naval is last important.
You need like 3 Naval doctrines and your Navy is already a threat, but i want to have all 10 landdoctrines researched by 41 and therefore i would always go with guderian.
Btw the net gain is just 7 days/tech in favour of researching naval doctrine with saalwächter compared to researching land with guderian in place as the base cost of landdoctrine is already 50% higher...
Bad choice imho.
And navy xp is easy to ger send those old subs and destroyerrs to training will give you 0.25 navy xp/day and cost only 350 fuel daily.