Lend Lease and Trade Unabstraction!

[Bullfrog]

In HoI2 the USA had lend lease events that fired randomly. The event commands gave the recipient IC and supplies automatically. Bam! The vital material teleported to London or Moscow or Chongqing! I found this a bit too abstract. For that matter, all international trade was abstract as well.

In HoI3 would it not be possible to have the engine directly deal with Lend Lease/trade via convoy transports and actual material that was subject to enemy attack?

If Germany's main reason for declaring war on the USA was to be able to freely attack the supply ships to the UK, should it not be a major issue in the game as well?

I think that HoI3 certainly has the capacity to simulate the Lend Lease and realistic trade overseas. We already know that the logistics is massively improved...so can trade be unabstracted, as an offshoot of your own supply and logistics?

I am sure that everyone knows what I mean, but to clarify: If I am the USA and I have a 'decision' to implement Lend Lease, can I not decide what to send, and have that material actually sent abroad in my transports? Can I give the UK transports? Can I send the UK weapons that I make with my own IC? How about the IC increase command of the Lend Lease events...I think that this was a very nebulous way of simulating the sale of equipment.
Can we have a revamp?

Similarly, international overseas trade should be on ships as well, right? I am sending material that is perhaps vital to the economy of an allied nation, could my enemy intercept/sink it?

 

[unmerged(131989)]

I would also like to see this!

 

[unmerged(34050)]

I wonder if lend-lease of units could be simulated as a "license" where US pays the fee, UK builds the unit (sherman tank, P-40, whatever) for free, just supplying the manpower?

I definitely like the idea of supply convoys from the US to the UK that can be interdicted.

I never liked the free IC thing--unless there's a way to make it variable, i.e. US can reduce or cut the UK free IC depending on conditions.

 

[Kernest]

Well in theory you can drop UKs trade deals to very low effiency, but i doubt if you can drop it all the way to 0.
I don't think there should be US building with UK supplying manpower, because then it would have to be deployed in the US (or Canada) because it involves training of the troops, not only arms.
I too think that Lend-Lease should be changed from randomly arriving free IC and stuff, but how would China receive Lend-Lease caravans? That there is a problem i don't see a solution to.

 

[Black Lotus]

I would like this too.

 

[Alex_brunius]

I wonder if lend-lease of units could be simulated as a "license" where US pays the fee, UK builds the unit (sherman tank, P-40, whatever) for free, just supplying the manpower?

Perhaps an allied special power. Everyone with say +50 relations and not enemy can request "lend lease" licences. UK/USA pays the IC cost and divisions are delivered with the same strenght that you have in trade efficiency with them.

 

[Luka]

The problem with unabstracting lend-lease is that equipment is still abstracted. Heck, I'd get the game to model and track every bullet individually but I know that's not practical.
In order for it to be 'interceptable' it has to be transportable by convoy, so we seem kind of stuck as we know there are only a limited number of things that are transportable via convoys. So it can't be represented realistically through the convoy mechanism, but perhaps, if this will be moddable/scriptable, a division with near 0 man power can be shipped via transports from the US shores to their destination. Once arrived it is offloaded and built up and populated with men from that county's pool. The divsion would be of US construction so it would be Sherman tanks or whatever and retain the US 'flavour', then either given to the destination country upon arrival or created belonging to them in the first place. This way it's interceptable by uboats, aircraft, etc.
Does this make sense?

 

[unmerged(97780)]

I would love to see events combined with the Arctic Convoys that US sent to USSR, you could choose to send PQ 1 to PQ 6 and so on, and perhaps refuse to send PQ 17 (which was almost utterly destroyed by the german submarine wolfpacks due to the allies fear of losing their warships to Tirpitz).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_convoys_of_World_War_II#List_of_Arctic_Convoys

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoy_PQ_17 <-- really good read if you got the time.

 

[Bullfrog]

The problem with unabstracting lend-lease is that equipment is still abstracted. Heck, I'd get the game to model and track every bullet individually but I know that's not practical.
In order for it to be 'interceptable' it has to be transportable by convoy, so we seem kind of stuck as we know there are only a limited number of things that are transportable via convoys. So it can't be represented realistically through the convoy mechanism, but perhaps, if this will be moddable/scriptable, a division with near 0 man power can be shipped via transports from the US shores to their destination. Once arrived it is offloaded and built up and populated with men from that county's pool. The divsion would be of US construction so it would be Sherman tanks or whatever and retain the US 'flavour', then either given to the destination country upon arrival or created belonging to them in the first place. This way it's interceptable by uboats, aircraft, etc.
Does this make sense?

Perhaps the US decision to go ahead with Lend Lease sets up a constant supply depot in foreign ports? Or a one sided trade agreement?
I suppose the biggest issue is the trade convoys being brought into the game as units...
As far as Lend Lease and equipment, I suppose it might not be possible. If there is no separation of unit sale and equipment sale then the mechanism would be awkward at best. If there is such a thing as equipment sale, or a new version of the unit sale, then it might be possible.

I would love to see events combined with the Arctic Convoys that US sent to USSR, you could choose to send PQ 1 to PQ 6 and so on, and perhaps refuse to send PQ 17 (which was almost utterly destroyed by the german submarine wolfpacks due to the allies fear of losing their warships to Tirpitz).

Actually this is what I would like to avoid. I would rather not see events for specific convoy sailings, but rather have this all implemented into the engine itself, to avoid excessive events...though it depends on the realism of the trade system I suppose.
In other words, the Lend Lease decision would set up trade deals or supply lines from the US to its recipient nations....but the individual convoys would not be events themselves.

 

[Alex_brunius]

Well if trade over the board is improved to go from abstract "efficiencies" to real convoys alot of troubles would be fixed.

This is not a hard thing to do really, just set up a foregin owned depot in the closest port city if no land connection is present. HoI2 convoy routines will then automatically bring home (or try to bring home) the supplies or resources the trade deal was giving to the buyer.

 

[Luka]

But what I'm saying is that lend lease did supply certain things that cannot currently be properly represented. Supplies - yes that's fine. But tanks, aircraft, etc? Nope.

Ooo, I just had an idea about moving divisions. Probably can't be implemented, but it's interesting:
Currently we can move divisions manually using transports, which is fine an all, and utterly necessary for amphibious invasions. But consider if Paradox introduced a new 'resource' - the division element. the division element would represent a % of a division that is transportable via regular convoys.
When you wish to transport a division in this way you put it a port and set up the convoy, or maybe an option on the division itself. Maybe you have to dismantle the division into a stockpile of a division element (then it could be added the resources of whatever province it is in). It is then transported to it's destination, perhaps with the convoys suffering losses along the way and it is reassembled at the other end.
So it goes

Division in Province A --> Select 'transport to' -->select overseas province B
Many convoy trips later
Division is deposited in province B and reassembled, minus whatever was lost along the way.

So for lend-lease the US could have a special unit type, a lend-lease division, that takes less time to build and less IC (to represent the fact that it's not training troops, it's just equipment). It's transported across the Atlantic and reassembled and it then takes supplies and mp to get it into fighting shape.

The division element idea could also be applied to strategic redeployment. Your troops are physically transported via the logistics system rather than abstractly appearing somewhere a certain amount of time later. This also means that strategic redeployment is effected by everything that already effects the logistics system.

 

[Balesir]

I completely agree with making trade work via convoys - and making goods on intercepted/sunk convoys lost! The Arctic Convoys and Norwegian Coastal ore shipments (from Swedish iron mines to Germany via Norway) were major aspects of the military struggle.

As for lease lend, etc., I think there is a conceptually simple solution - make IC output tradable. E.g. US has a deal with UK including 5 IC traded; US loses the use of the 5 IC, UK gets the use of 5 extra IC provided the convoys shipping them don't get sunk. This lasts as long as the deal is in place.

 

[zeekater]

I completely agree with making trade work via convoys - and making goods on intercepted/sunk convoys lost!

I seem to remember one of the devs stating that this was going to be the case in one of the DD threads, but can't provide a link

As for lease lend, etc., I think there is a conceptually simple solution - make IC output tradable. E.g. US has a deal with UK including 5 IC traded; US loses the use of the 5 IC, UK gets the use of 5 extra IC provided the convoys shipping them don't get sunk. This lasts as long as the deal is in place.

You can already trade IC's, if the USA gives 20 IC's worth of supplies to england in a daily trade, england can use those 20 IC's to build tank brigades for example.
So you are in a way transporting tanks from the USA to england

 

[Alex_brunius]

and making goods on intercepted/sunk convoys lost! The Arctic Convoys and Norwegian Coastal ore shipments (from Swedish iron mines to Germany via Norway) were major aspects of the military struggle.

This is already confirmed, in one of the replies to the logistics dev diary IIRC.

For the Swedish arctic convoy to work the iron ore need to end up in Narvik however. That might be a litte more tricky to program, even more so if you wan't to provide a logical and dynamic solution without "events" or special case coding.

 

[Luka]

This is already confirmed, in one of the replies to the logistics dev diary IIRC.

For the Swedish arctic convoy to work the iron ore need to end up in Narvik however. That might be a litte more tricky to program, even more so if you wan't to provide a logical and dynamic solution without "events" or special case coding.

I just re-read the logistics dev diary. I can't find anything that says that items being transported are lost when convoys are attacked.

 

[Luka]

You can already trade IC's, if the USA gives 20 IC's worth of supplies to england in a daily trade, england can use those 20 IC's to build tank brigades for example.
So you are in a way transporting tanks from the USA to england

That's what is known as a hack

 

[Markusw7]

I just re-read the logistics dev diary. I can't find anything that says that items being transported are lost when convoys are attacked.

Johan or King definitely said that somewhere

 

[unmerged(131221)]

I just re-read the logistics dev diary. I can't find anything that says that items being transported are lost when convoys are attacked.

It wasnt a comment not a DD IIRC

 

[Utopiar]

I completely agree with making trade work via convoys - and making goods on intercepted/sunk convoys lost! The Arctic Convoys and Norwegian Coastal ore shipments (from Swedish iron mines to Germany via Norway) were major aspects of the military struggle.

Finally a reason to station some subs in Norway!

 

[unmerged(52507)]

I completely agree with making trade work via convoys - and making goods on intercepted/sunk convoys lost! The Arctic Convoys and Norwegian Coastal ore shipments (from Swedish iron mines to Germany via Norway) were major aspects of the military struggle.

As for lease lend, etc., I think there is a conceptually simple solution - make IC output tradable. E.g. US has a deal with UK including 5 IC traded; US loses the use of the 5 IC, UK gets the use of 5 extra IC provided the convoys shipping them don't get sunk. This lasts as long as the deal is in place.

Scandanavia is often very quite in game compared to the situation irl. Trying to push convoys through to the Russians would spice it up, but I'm not sure about how the equipment issue can be dealt with. It is a whole new layer of complexity that the devs haven't gone near.