Historical Improvement Project

[jowe01]

Take a Pz III, the DD resources needed build it, make up 1.25% of total cost of the tank, that's nothing. Or take steel, it costs 10 to 20 times more than iron ore, here again iron ore cost relative to steel cost is rather small. HIP won't overstate the value of resources, just because Paradoc does that.

First of all, I do not mean any offense, you have made an excellent mod there.
Concerning resource values: The resources stand for the gross domestic product output of the region they are produced in. In the game, GDP of a region can be defined as

GDP = Value of IC - Value of Resources necessary for IC + Value of Resources produced

(Value of resources necessary for IC = 4 coal, 2 steel, 1 rare)

If we had the breakdown of GDP numbers for let's say the German Ruhr region, we could deduct the part of GDP produced by the second (production) and third (services) sector of the economy and would end up with the value of the resources/raw materials produced by the primary industry sector (extraction) (Remark: steel production arguably would even be part of the second sector's GDP contribution, thus further boosting the relative value of resources). That would be a good way to estimate in the game the true value relationship between IC in money terms (by multiplying IC with the money per IC generated by overproducing consumer goods) and the value of the raw materials produced.

For example, in my HIP game on September 1, 1939, Dortmund produces 71 Coal and 3,95 rares. It also operates 17 ICs which produce finished goods. With 1 IC, I can approximately generate 50 $, i.e. 17 IC generate 850 $. If now for the Dortmund region, historical GDP was split evenly between extraction (coal) and refinement (steel, rares) activities on the one hand and production of finished goods (IC) on the other hand, than the value of the coal and rares produced should also be 850$ in game money terms, e.g. 8 $/coal unit and 71$/rare unit.

Of course, these values are purely fictitious , I do not know the historical breakdown of GDP (being born in Dortmund, however, I guess that 50%/50% is not too far from reality) and furthermore my calculation is grossly simplifying. However, my point is just that current HIP values for raw materials seem way too low.

 

[unmerged(12544)]

GDP = Value of IC - Value of Resources necessary for IC + Value of Resources produced

We have two different levels, the national level with GDP and the unit cost one. Unfortunately can we not compare the cost of an armor division versus GDP or the military budget, because IRL the armor units would have to be way cheaper than in HOI2/DD. There are too many factors, which are part of a military budget, but not part of HOI2, that do not allow a realistic relation. The cost level of units was set in way, that there are not too many units out there. HIP uses the unit level for resource pricing, meaning total cost of resources to manufacture a tank versus total cost of the tank. If we would use the GDP level for resource pricing, then they would have to be even cheaper.

I think, I can give you two examples, German yearly copper demand was in 1942 about 250.000 tons (about 4.7% copper content), at a cost of 6 million Reichsmark, that equals about half a destroyer. Chrome demand in 1943 about 160.000 tons (about 50% content) at a cost of 8.4 million Reichsmark. Compare that to 1943 military budget of 112.000.000.000 RM.

 

[jowe01]

We have two different levels, the national level with GDP and the unit cost one. Unfortunately can we not compare the cost of an armor division versus GDP or the military budget, because IRL the armor units would have to be way cheaper than in HOI2/DD. There are too many factors, which are part of a military budget, but not part of HOI2, that do not allow a realistic relation. The cost level of units was set in way, that there are not too many units out there. HIP uses the unit level for resource pricing, meaning total cost of resources to manufacture a tank versus total cost of the tank. If we would use the GDP level for resource pricing, then they would have to be even cheaper.

I think, I can give you two examples, German yearly copper demand was in 1942 about 250.000 tons (about 4.7% copper content), at a cost of 6 million Reichsmark, that equals about half a destroyer. Chrome demand in 1943 about 160.000 tons (about 50% content) at a cost of 8.4 million Reichsmark. Compare that to 1943 military budget of 112.000.000.000 RM.

It is probably difficult to determine the most suitable relation between game money and game raw materials "bottom-up" by looking at historic prices for specific materials. Raw materials represent such a vast variety of real world goods: coal, wood, stone, iron, steal, oil, aluminium, etc., etc..

I would rather look at it top-down: in the game, GDP or the part of GDP that is available for military spending and government "bread and games" (meaning the overspending on consumer goods to reduce dissent) is represented by raw materials and IC. The question is, what should be the exchange rate between IC and raw materials? In my above post, I argued that
1) We know in-game GDP (IC and net raw material output) and its breakdown into a) [IC - raw material consumption for IC] and b) [Gross raw material output]
2) If we knew how historic GDP was distributed into a) and b) (approximated by primary sector value creation on the one hand and secondary/tertiary sector value creation), we could also fix the exchange rate between a) and b) in the game (and given that the value of IC can be directly expressed in money when playing with the consumer goods slider we would fix the exchange rate between raw materials and money, too).

At least I do not have this historic data. But even conservative estimates like only 33% of production in German Ruhr area being dedicated to extraction and steel (i.e. b)) would yield much higher in-game values fo raw materials.

 

[unmerged(12544)]

First HIP does not use steel, as it is a finished product and part of the IC production process and not a raw material.
The value of money was simply reduced to make it a trading currency, as supplies are too expensive for that.
I don't know, if my point was clear enough, as you say HIP uses buttom-up currently, going to top-down would lower the resources value even further.

 

[jowe01]

Seems we just have different views on how the importance of raw materials compared to IC (=money; the two are nearly equivalent as money can be directly produced by IC) should be modelled in the game. That is no problem for anybody, as I guess it should not be too difficult to increase the exchange values to Paradox defaults or something like that (will have to loo into that, I have not done any significant modding so far). So I might do this and enjoy the rest of your nice work as it is.

Thanks for your explanations, you are really putting in a lot of work.

 

[rook749]

Guy's,

I just started a new game as the CW to look at the leader changes (V59) the last version I played was V56.

Were changes made the ship graphics, between V56 and V59? Or did I not have the mod loaded correctly before? There used to be a Graphic that showed DD30 and Icon of the DD, now there it shows DD30 but has a cool image. If this is new I like it a lot.

I also noticed that the 1918 model ships were added back in, do you want me to look at the ship classes I had done for the US, Japan and the UK and re-do them?

Rook

 

[unmerged(12544)]

Seems we just have different views on how the importance of raw materials compared to IC

My opinion is, that Paradox is seriously wrong on resource prices and has not thought enough about the ratios. Example, they have from IC to supplies/money

4 supplies = 0.2 money

from the resource values file, we get

8 supplies = 12 money

mathematically this won't work and you won't find that mistake in HIP.

Were changes made the ship graphics, between V56 and V59? Or did I not have the mod loaded correctly before? There used to be a Graphic that showed DD30 and Icon of the DD, now there it shows DD30 but has a cool image. If this is new I like it a lot.

They were in v0.58 Graphics and were made by Cpack.

I also noticed that the 1918 model ships were added back in, do you want me to look at the ship classes I had done for the US, Japan and the UK and re-do them?

Sure (they were never out).

 

[Golwar]

This might be reviewed. Spy costs should be lowered relative to diplomatic cost as a first idea.

That is really necessary. Any idea when this could be realized ?

 

[unmerged(12544)]

Spy cost (counter espionage) will be cut to 13500 in the next version. The other actions should remain expensive.

 

[TheBob]

Hi,

I just wanted to say I love this mod and you guys are doing a wonderful job.

I have a few concerns though. Human or AI Germany always seems to stomp the Soviets. It seems that Germany's IC is too large because of occupied France and other countries. Maybe Germany should have an event that lowers its occupied province IC or some partisans in France to simulate the underground. Finally, Germany seems to have too much access to oil from events and favorable trades all through the game, so its never running low.
Although I guess I could fix both these problems myself by playing on hard or very hard, I prefer Normal.

Thanks,

TheBob

 

[unmerged(12544)]

The German - Soviet situation is under review and has made slight progress. Germany is too strong from Poland on and its army needs to shrink a bit.

 

[Der Bismarck]

Is there any way to fire (and remove from the leader pool) unwanted Officers?

Alternately, could you consider incorporating Hollstein's "old Guard" mod which sleeps the less useful Old Guard Officers?

 

[unmerged(12544)]

Is there any way to fire (and remove from the leader pool) unwanted Officers?

You can delete them in the leader files.

Alternately, could you consider incorporating Hollstein's "old Guard" mod which sleeps the less useful Old Guard Officers?

Probably not, they are a kind of a reserve or excellent to command headquarters.

 

[Barkdreg]

I started an AAR with HIP.
Hope this will lure more people to this wonderful mod.

Link can be found in my signature

 

[unmerged(12544)]

Very interesting, looking forward for more.

 

[unmerged(19841)]

I started an AAR with HIP.
Hope this will lure more people to this wonderful mod.

Link can be found in my signature

This Mod is already one of the most popular mods for HOI 2,it really should of had its own thread along with core ,HSR and the other big ones..

 

[Alan deLane]

Hi to all!

I just wanted to say that HIP gives you a new feeling when playing HOI2. Give it try.

To the team: Many thanks and continue your work.

Enjoy HOI2, DD & HIP!!

 

[Zakouski]

50 pages of discussions !!






A sub-forum ? when ?


Great mod indeed.

 

[unmerged(15262)]

Playing US 1.3DD V.59

Really like your graphics. Very early in game one thing when you get around to OoB here some numbers on Destroyers by Nov 1942 game; 1930, Farragut, 8: 1936, Porter 7, Mahan 15, Gridley 1, Bagle 6, 1938, Somners 5, Sims 7, Benham 10, Benson/Cleaves 21, 1941, Bristol 72, these are the numbers that were still aflote by Nov 15, 1942. Fletcher 175;
1918 destroyers OK 1930 1 division; not 11 that game shows. 1936; 5 divisions, not the 15 game shows. 1938, 8 divisions not the 4 game shows, 1941 14 divisions gome shows none. Destroyers under construction as of Nov 15 1942 all 41' class, commision times: 3 divisions Dec 1942; 3 divisions Jan/Feb 1943; 5 divisions spring 1943; 3 divisions summer 1943; 2 divisions fall 1943; 2 divisions Jan 1944; 1 division spring 1944

 

[unmerged(12544)]

Changed and development added up to summer 1943, the rest comes too late. Now we have
model_0 18
model_1 1
model_2 5
model_3 8
model_4 14