Is it possible to destroy factories and infrastructure on purpose?

[Simon Marques]

It would be very useful if it were possible to dismantle or destroy factories, yards and infrastructure in order to hinder the enemy's advance in the event of an emergency. Especially for Russians and communists in general. The Russians and the Chinese could dismantle their factories from one state and reassemble them in another.

 

[shachazhul]

You can destroy buildings by clicking the "cross" button on their icons when the needed state is selected, in wartime only one building per month (per state) can be demolished. Only "shared buildings" can be deleted, i.e. the ones that take the state slots, so infrastructure, airbases etc cannot be touched, but can be damaged by certain "scorched earth" decisions and so on.

 

[GSP Jr]

You can remove buildings.
Click on the state, and in the lower right of each building is a little red X, the 'remove building' button.
You don't get to relocate them, they are gone.

 

[Simon Marques]

It would be interesting if it was possible to relocate the plants too, do you agree? It can be very useful to avoid that the enemy captures them and you lose the production of this one.

 

[shachazhul]

Yes, it could be interesting to be able to manually relocate, but I think it will be abused too much. So let's say you build a lot of stuff in level 10 infrastructure state, and use the war to evacuate it to other, mostly level 3-5 states (as USSR). You're saving A LOT of production this way, and I think that we won't get any "evacuation" decisions other than Soviets and Chinese currently have (may be someone else, not sure).

 

[DrowsyBuzzard17]

Yes, it could be interesting to be able to manually relocate, but I think it will be abused too much. So let's say you build a lot of stuff in level 10 infrastructure state, and use the war to evacuate it to other, mostly level 3-5 states (as USSR). You're saving A LOT of production this way, and I think that we won't get any "evacuation" decisions other than Soviets and Chinese currently have (may be someone else, not sure).

To help prevent that, it would probably be best to have a relocation cost (which makes sense anyways, even without this scenario.) Maybe it could be dependent on both distance and the infrastructure of the 'receiving' province, as that could make it worth more leaving it to be relocated until needed.

 

[shachazhul]

To help prevent that, it would probably be best to have a relocation cost (which makes sense anyways, even without this scenario.) Maybe it could be dependent on both distance and the infrastructure of the 'receiving' province, as that could make it worth more leaving it to be relocated until needed.

In this case, sure, it totally makes sense. The price of relocation can be, for example, the number of civilian factories used during evacuation as "special projects" in construction tab.

 

[Simon Marques]

Yes, it could be interesting to be able to manually relocate, but I think it will be abused too much. So let's say you build a lot of stuff in level 10 infrastructure state, and use the war to evacuate it to other, mostly level 3-5 states (as USSR). You're saving A LOT of production this way, and I think that we won't get any "evacuation" decisions other than Soviets and Chinese currently have (may be someone else, not sure).

Oh no, I mean only the factories, this really happened in the war, Chinese and Russians literally disassembled factories and reassembled them elsewhere. The Russians to prevent the Germans from capturing it or simply disabling it and the Chinese used this tactic against the Japanese if I remember correctly. I think it was a tactic exclusive to the communists.

 

[shachazhul]

Oh no, I mean only the factories, this really happened in the war, Chinese and Russians literally disassembled factories and reassembled them elsewhere. The Russians to prevent the Germans from capturing it or simply disabling it and the Chinese used this tactic against the Japanese if I remember correctly. I think it was a tactic exclusive to the communists.

I don't think the desire to save and evacuate equipment and factories from the advancing enemy is somehow related to being communist. By the way, Nationalist China cannot be considered communist in any way.

 

[Simon Marques]

I don't think the desire to save and evacuate equipment and factories from the advancing enemy is somehow related to being communist. By the way, Nationalist China cannot be considered communist in any way.

So, when I spoke Chinese, I didn't mean nationalist China, I meant Communist China.

 

[shachazhul]

So, when I spoke Chinese, I didn't mean nationalist China, I meant Communist China.

I thought about that, but I don't remember if communists ever have decisions to evacuate industry, because they're enabled only for nationalists through their special focus. I didn't play as them, but I sure saw something like this in their focus tree.

 

[squid_hills]

Before LaR and 1.9x landed, destroying factories to deny them to the enemy was the meta for winning the Spanish Civil War as Republican Spain. The strategy was to pause the game just before the War starts, dismantle every single factory in Nationalist territory (before it became Nationalist, obviously) and then see if Franco can win with no MILs to produce rifles and no CIVs to produce MILs.

The answer is: yes. Yes he can. But it did make beating him easier once I learned to micro everything and not rely on frontlines.