Industrial score

[unmerged(36774)]

After TheGeneral told his low industrial score as Russia in another thread, I did some testing to find out how the ind score is calcultated.

Example: One province minor Hamburg with level one railroad

-production efficiency 50% in that state, because of RR
-> this is also the average infrastructure in whole nation, because there is only one state
-ind score 234
-researched techs: 26

They get one industrial point from each tech. That is 26 points.

Every 1% addition to the average infrastructure in whole nation gives 20 industrial points. Without RRs the average infrastructure would be 40%, building level one RR in every province, changes the infrastructure to 50%.

10 * 20 = 200 ind points from 10 % addition in infrastructure.

234 - (200 + 26) = 8
This 8 points seems to be some kind of base industrial score. I saw it with other countries too.

So far it is very clear. But then I decided to check the effect of factories. This is really strange and unfair. There is no difference to ind score, if you have pops of 90000 or 900 in your factories The ind score from them is always the same.

In the beginning of the game as Prussia every pop in your factories give you 2 ind points. For Belgium, Usa, Austria and Switzerland a pop also gives 2 points. But for UK, Russia, France, Spain, Netherlands, Sweden and OE only 1 point. I don't really see a reason for this. Also all factories seem to give same amount of ind points.

Then I loaded my Austria game as UK and now UK also gets 2 ind points from each pop in factories. I wonder if there is an invention which changes this fact.

 

[november]

Check the Wiki for information about how factory scores are calculated. I don't think that part of the formula has been changed.

The bottom line: it's better (by far) to expand factories than build new ones.

 

[unmerged(36774)]

The forumula has been changed for sure. If Russia can't get ind score of tens of thousands but only 2000 or 3000 with level 20 factories it is changed. It is also stated here on the forums before that infrastructure has bigger effect on ind score than in 1.03c.

And expanding factories don't have no effect at all on ind score now. Only the amount of pops working in your factories.

Look at this:

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5167298&postcount=215


By the way, is Wiki down, because I have tried to open it today and yesterday, but it will not open?

 

[OHgamer]

By the way, is Wiki down, because I have tried to open it today and yesterday, but it will not open?

Wiki is back up

 

[Kliwarrior]

And expanding factories don't have no effect at all on ind score now. Only the amount of pops working in your factories.

I noted this too, and for me is a great step introduced in 1.04. Why building huge factories, when just a couple of POPs are working, should make you a more industrialized country? Are you producing more stuff and/or more effectively?

At a certain point I discovered that my ind. scores were so low just because i did't improve factories if I had no-one to put in them.. When I realized that, I started oversizing factories, but it always sounds to me as a sort of exploit.

 

[unmerged(36774)]

Yes overexpanding was a huge exploit

 

[unmerged(37096)]

Yes overexpanding was a huge exploit

I never knew about this exploit and now it's gone before I get a chance to use it

 

[Sleepyhead]

I never knew about this exploit and now it's gone before I get a chance to use it

:rofl:

You can always play on the older patch

 

[unmerged(23946)]

In the beginning of the game as Prussia every pop in your factories give you 2 ind points. For Belgium, Usa, Austria and Switzerland a pop also gives 2 points. But for UK, Russia, France, Spain, Netherlands, Sweden and OE only 1 point. I don't really see a reason for this. Also all factories seem to give same amount of ind points.

Then I loaded my Austria game as UK and now UK also gets 2 ind points from each pop in factories. I wonder if there is an invention which changes this fact.

At first I was going to say it was the literacy modifier, but then I noticed you said Sweden and UK get only 1 point and I know they start out with close to the highest literacy in the game.

 

[noddysseus]

I have two questions regarding Jaeger's findings.

First of all, why does the size of the pop not matter?

Second of all, why do some countries only get an increase in industry score of 1 with each addition of a pop and others 2?

 

[unmerged(36774)]

This is bad, very bad. Why not tie the ind score to production numbers of factories instead of pops? Or put different values for small and big pops like it was earlier. Do you think 900 people produce as much goods as 90000 does? This should be changed in next patch. Definetly. The system in 1.03c wasn't perfect, but it was better. If you avoided using overexpanding factories, it was perfect.

With this new system you want to ban full citizenship parties immediately, because you don't want any of your pops to assimilate.

 

[OHgamer]

This is bad, very bad. Why not tie the ind score to production numbers of factories instead of pops? Or put different values for small and big pops like it was earlier. Do you think 900 people produce as much goods as 90000 does? This should be changed in next patch. Definetly. The system in 1.03c wasn't perfect, but it was better. If you avoided using overexpanding factories, it was perfect.

With this new system you want to ban full citizenship parties immediately, because you don't want any of your pops to assimilate.

I'll have to check but I was under the impression that pop size reflected in output of factories (therefore efficiency) and that production was included in the industrial score. If not I'll definitely suggest that it be looked at again. What I suggested to Johan was to include infrastructure as an additional factor with weight, but not to change other elements. Then again, I've not seen that algorhythm so what it is actually composed of is anyone's guess outside the Paradox developers.

 

[unmerged(36774)]

You can easily test the effect. Add or remove different size pops to factories and look at the change in ind score.

 

[unmerged(38333)]

Jaeger is right.

I have tested it in SP and there is a serious issue with the calulation of the industry score and how this affect the gameplay, especially in MP games.

Industry score seems to be INDEPENDENT of :

1. The category of the factory.
2. The size of the pops.
3. The size of the factory.
4. The number of capitalists in the state.
5. The amount of production of the factory.

Every pop added to a factory gives 2 extra industrial points and that seems to be the only modifier taken into account. Infrastrucure does play a role but less than in 1.03c. THis is probably because although RRs increase factory output, increased factory output does not signify increased industry score.

 

[OHgamer]

So what would be an optimal solution would be to tie the computaion of part of the industrial score not simply to the number of POPs employed, but rather to the efficiency of the factories that exist. Something like sum total of (level of factory * efficiency of factories) so that if you have 6 factories, one a level two but only operating at 50% efficiency while the others are operating at 120%, 90%, 80%, 60% and 40% you would get that part of the score as

(2*.5)+(1*1.2)+(1*.9)+(1*.8)+(1*.6)+(1*.4) = 1+1.2+0.9+0.8+0.6+0.4 = 4.9

and then that can be factored by something else within the overall equation.

That way players would not be rewarded for building many levels with no staff (the big problem with 1.03C) but will not get same effect for employing a 900 POP and a 90000 POP.

 

[Kliwarrior]

Why not tie the ind score to production numbers of factories instead of pops?

to avoid overexpanding factory exploit?

According to wiki , the "old" formula was ( just the factory part)

(factory efficiency * 8 * factory level)

so level 1 Fact. filled with 5 pops

( 1 * 8 * 1 ) = 8

level 2 Fact. filled with 5 pops (half empty..)

( 0.5 * 8 * 2 ) = 8

level 2 Fact. filled with 10 pops

( 1 * 8 * 2 ) = 16

etc...

I think wiki was wrong for 1.03c, because of the oversizing exploit..

Now it seems correct.

Or put different values for small and big pops like it was earlier. Do you think 900 people produce as much goods as 90000 does?

What could be done could be "weight" the POP number in factories with a factor depending on their size. 1.04b

EDIT: exacty what OHgamer says in the post above

 

[noddysseus]

So what would be an optimal solution would be to tie the computaion of part of the industrial score not simply to the number of POPs employed, but rather to the efficiency of the factories that exist. Something like sum total of (level of factory * efficiency of factories) so that if you have 6 factories, one a level two but only operating at 50% efficiency while the others are operating at 120%, 90%, 80%, 60% and 40% you would get that part of the score as

(2*.5)+(1*1.2)+(1*.9)+(1*.8)+(1*.6)+(1*.4) = 1+1.2+0.9+0.8+0.6+0.4 = 4.9

and then that can be factored by something else within the overall equation.

That way players would not be rewarded for building many levels with no staff (the big problem with 1.03C) but will not get same effect for employing a 900 POP and a 90000 POP.

Sounds better than having pops effect the industry score solely.
It's a good idea for starters.

 

[unmerged(38333)]

The problem with the current industry score formula is that it virtually destroys the potential of many countries in MP games.

If in 1.03c I could achieve 80K ind score without overexpanding factories and now I can hardly reach 3000, then I assume ind scores cannot go beyond that. Especially since every single pop unit in a factory, no matter what the factory is, no matter the infrastructure, no matter the capitalists, no matter the production of the factory and no matter how large that unit is, adds only 2 ind points to your industry score....

Add to that the tremendous advantage of UK in building colonial claims early on in the game and that almost guarantees that UK ( and perhaps Germany ) will dominate the game, since they will easily get 4000+ prestige points.

 

[OHgamer]

It is possible the wiki was wrong on 1.03C - no one other than Paradox (not even the betas) have seen the exact formula for industrial score that I know of, so anything we come up with is our guess work and for all we know there may be weighting coefficients that are used we do not suspect.

I will say this, in 1.4 you do see industrial scores relatively close to each other given the number of factories vs degree of infrastructure. Russia having lots of factories but low-level infrastructure is not really (IMO) as strong an industrial power as say a Britain with perhaps somewhat less number of factories, but a much more developed infrastructure, including excellent infra in the colonies to extract raw materials. And when we were testing the new industrial score calculation I know I was looking at overall performance, and I personally felt that the new industrial score system seemed much more realistic than the hyper scores that esp the USA got in 1.03C when it was building level 8 factories staffed with only a few POPs.

 

[OHgamer]

The problem with the current industry score formula is that it virtually destroys the potential of many countries in MP games.

If in 1.03c I could achieve 80K ind score without overexpanding factories and now I can hardly reach 3000, then I assume ind scores cannot go beyond that. Especially since every single pop unit in a factory, no matter what the factory is, no matter the infrastructure, no matter the capitalists, no matter the production of the factory and no matter how large that unit is, adds only 2 ind points to your industry score....

Add to that the tremendous advantage of UK in building colonial claims early on in the game and that almost guarantees that UK ( and perhaps Germany ) will dominate the game, since they will easily get 4000+ prestige points.

Well the beta testing was focused on the single player aspects of the game. That Russia could get a ridiculously high industrial score in 1.03C suggests that indeed the industrial score compilation in 1.03C was flawed (80K!!... ) Does not mean that other things can not be looked at moving forward. Personally I think the whole system of prestige in basic Victoria is a big mess...and in VIP we have addressed this, but the negative reaction that the VIP experience got from the prestige changes led the beta process this round to not really evaluate prestige. And it does sound like the industrial score could use some further tweaking. But whatever the tweaking we do, it is unlikely to produce the massive industrial scores that characterized 1.03C because it was clear there were major flaws in that model.