Negative tech effect on IC

[unmerged(242130)]

OK this is starting to piss me off. I started with commie china and after two events I have a base ic of 27, and after researching much industry technology I looked up and saw

tech effect: -9.3(-35%)

What the fuck is this?? I checked that none of my industry techs are supposed to give negative IC efficiencies. Can anybody tell me what's going on??

 

[Conanteacher]

OK this is starting to piss me off.

What the f*** is this??

please calm down...

This has to do with the effect of wartime / peacetime economy:
If you work on Wartime economy you get Positive IC % while in peace, in order to prepare for war, and NEGATIVE while in war
If you work on Peacetime economy you get Negative IC % while in peace, but POSITIVE during wartime.

This is in order to represent where the country dedicates it's efforts for - kind of complicated, true.

 

[azedalis]

Also kinda of misleading...you would thitnk wartime would BOOst wartime economy and peactime would BOOST peacetime economy.

 

[JRHINDO]

Also kinda of misleading...you would thitnk wartime would BOOst wartime economy and peactime would BOOST peacetime economy.

No its just to simulate war or peace oriented economies.

 

[azedalis]

Right....so you would think which ever name you use is what is being boosted not put in a negative...

 

[piratefish]

Still, though, every economy I know of in history has gone into overdrive during a war. World War 2 arguably helped end the global economic crisis that had been pervasive throughout the 1930s.

To me, anything that drops Industrial Capacity during a time of war is about as unrealistic as it gets. The only ways IC should ever take a hit is through bombing (destroying factories), shortage of manpower, or lack of natural resources. And I believe these are already incorporated into the game.

Bad call, devs.

 

[unmerged(63881)]

Still, though, every economy I know of in history has gone into overdrive during a war. World War 2 arguably helped end the global economic crisis that had been pervasive throughout the 1930s.

To me, anything that drops Industrial Capacity during a time of war is about as unrealistic as it gets. The only ways IC should ever take a hit is through bombing (destroying factories), shortage of manpower, or lack of natural resources. And I believe these are already incorporated into the game.

Bad call, devs.

?? It is represented in Iron Cross. I think that the wartime/peacetime economies reflects very well the real life. If you have any suggestion this is the right place to do it

 

[piratefish]

?? It is represented in Iron Cross. I think that the wartime/peacetime economies reflects very well the real life. If you have any suggestion this is the right place to do it

What is represented in Iron Cross?

Could you please give an example of any nation's economy in history that actually decreased its industrial capacity when that nation went to war? (And I am not talking about incidental reductions that already happen through separate events built into the game, like industrial bombing, lack of resources from convoy attacks, manpower shortages from battlefield losses, the loss of previously held territories, etc).

I have never once seen ANY nation suddenly decrease it's industrial output when it entered a war, simply because it entered a war. I have seen factories converted, though, to provide more war materiel at the expense of producing consumer goods. But this element is already reflected in the game by the significant drop in consumer goods when war begins.

Please, show me even just one instance where a nation scaled back it's industrial production once it entered a war. Please.

 

[unmerged(63881)]

What is represented in Iron Cross?

Could you please give an example of any nation's economy in history that actually decreased its industrial capacity when that nation went to war? (And I am not talking about incidental reductions that already happen through separate events built into the game, like industrial bombing, lack of resources from convoy attacks, manpower shortages from battlefield losses, the loss of previously held territories, etc).

I have never once seen ANY nation suddenly decrease it's industrial output when it entered a war, simply because it entered a war. I have seen factories converted, though, to provide more war materiel at the expense of producing consumer goods. But this element is already reflected in the game by the significant drop in consumer goods when war begins.

Please, show me even just one instance where a nation scaled back it's industrial production once it entered a war. Please.

Hey, calm down
You didn't get me, I mean that any single country gets their economy boosted in Iron Cross while at war
On the other hand, wartime industry boost the economy +7% and peacetime boost it 4%, if you don't believe me take a look at the techs
What is happening to this guy, as Conanteacher said, has to do with the modifiers I guess.
We are here to talk or debate, not to fight

 

[piratefish]

Hey, calm down
You didn't get me, I mean that any single country gets their economy boosted in Iron Cross while at war
On the other hand, wartime industry boost the economy +7% and peacetime boost it 4%, if you don't believe me take a look at the techs
What is happening to this guy, as Conanteacher said, has to do with the modifiers I guess.
We are here to talk or debate, not to fight

I did not realize I was fighting, and I apologize to you if I have come across that way.

What I am referring to on the drop in Industrial Capacity has nothing to do with what awacs started this thread for. It has to do with the fact that as soon as any nation I am playing as enters a war, there is an immediate and significant drop in industrial capacity. I am simply asking for some (or really just one) real world example of such a phenomenon.

I suppose that I could buy a temporary decline in production while industry is re-gearing its focus away from consumer goods and toward producing war materiel, but that wouldn't be noticed over night, and it certainly wouldn't last beyond a few months at most. And it certainly would not be to quite the degree one notices in the game.

Nothing is better for an economy (at least in the short run) than a war. Just ask any first year economics student at any university around the world. It's pretty fundamental.

 

[am300307]

Its my understanding that its a game balance issue. If Germanys IC went up then it would be unbalanced because they had bonus IC during the pre war build up. Realistically Germanys IC wouldnt drop i think, but this isnt real life. Or is it?

 

[piratefish]

No, but it should at least do a reasonable job of trying to simulate real life to the extent possible.

I think the whole idea of separate "peacetime" and "wartime" IC should be scrapped. The IC system in AoD/HoI2 was sufficient.

 

[Garmorn]

I think the ideal works.

The drop in Germany's IC's represent that it is already at max and you are pulling trained manpower out of the factories. There is no slack to take up for the lost of workers.

For the so called Peace Economies, they are moving factories over from civilian use to military production. The lost of man power is off set by the slack (in military production) that has been producing civilian goods.

This is realistic and historical.

 

[JRHINDO]

I think the ideal works.

The drop in Germany's IC's represent that it is already at max and you are pulling trained manpower out of the factories. There is no slack to take up for the lost of workers.

For the so called Peace Economies, they are moving factories over from civilian use to military production. The lost of man power is off set by the slack (in military production) that has been producing civilian goods.

This is realistic and historical.

+1

 

[piratefish]

I think the ideal works. The drop in Germany's IC's represent that it is already at max and you are pulling trained manpower out of the factories. There is no slack to take up for the lost of workers.

Really? So who are the troops that already make up the division strengths? And who are the "extra" available people in the manpower pool from which the military units are directly formed? At least in the beginning, most armies were recruiting 18 to 24 year olds for their fighting units, not skilled factory workers (at least not until they were forced to do so in the later years of the war). I did not realize that IC also represented manpower, and if so, why also have the separate score for manpower? And historically, it wasn't until the last 2 and a half to 3 years of the war that Germany began to face any real manpower issues - from about mid 1942 onward. They certainly weren't pulling people out of the factories in September 1939 (nor even in September 1940 for that matter).

For the so called Peace Economies, they are moving factories over from civilian use to military production. The lost of man power is off set by the slack (in military production) that has been producing civilian goods.

What? This doesn't even make sense. Especially from a historical standpoint. The total value of goods produced when switching from a consumer goods oriented production to a war materiel oriented production was huge! I don't have the exact figures handy, but production increased enough to literally finish pulling the U.S. out of its longest economic slump in history. And the U.S. (a supposed peacetime economy for game purposes) was one of those nations that drained its industrial manpower pool the most (remember Rosie the Riveter)? We went from only having around 250,000 active duty personnel in 1939 to well over 12 million by 1945 - an increase of more than 4800% (we had a total of more than 16.1 million men serving during the war when the U.S. population was only a little more than 130 million people in total). Yet our factories outproduced any three other nations combined (indeed, the U.S. GDP grew by more than 75% in just 6 years) - even with this huge drain on available workers. So how does that translate into the game system?

This is realistic and historical.

Ummm, no. Not even close. Take a good look at world economics in the 1930s and 1940s and you will see just the opposite in nearly every single case.

 

[eleven_west]

Hi I got to throw my lot with piratefish here, it's a nasty surprise when you get the IC hit as wartime economy once the war starts - not real.

Both economy types should be getting the same IC-overdrive boost once the war starts. However what each branch does to the economy can be different, for example, in a wartime economy I would lower the IC cost considerably for unit production and upgrades but increase it for money, infrastructure and supply production. The opposite for a peacetime economy.

So in a way both branches would get the wartime overdrive, but they would be able to do some things better and some things worse with it based on their initial choice.

 

[unmerged(242130)]

Umm...guys?
I checked the event files and there was one which gives -50% efficiency bonus so that solves the problem....

 

[piratefish]

Umm...guys?
I checked the event files and there was one which gives -50% efficiency bonus so that solves the problem....

What? I am not clear on what you are trying to say here. What problem is being solved, and who gets the 50% decrease penalty in efficiency? Could you please spell out what you mean a little more clearly for me?

And also, how is a negative 50% efficiency hit a "bonus"? If I got a 50% reduction in my salary as a "bonus", I would be one pissed off hombre!

 

[unmerged(227777)]

I don't have IC, but the same event is in mod34, which I do have.

Quick explanation: There is an event for Communist China to increase technological research. What this event does is essentially add offmap IC to double your base IC, while implementing a -50% industrial efficiency to balance it out. The net effect is that your effective IC is about the same, but you now have enough base IC for another tech slot. There's nothing wrong with the event as it is.

The only problem with this is that if you manage to unify the rest of China, you're forever stuck with the -50% efficiency penalty (at least in mod34, I don't know if it's been fixed for IC.)

 

[Conanteacher]

If I got a 50% reduction in my salary as a "bonus"...

As a greek employee I had a 10% decrease this year, probably more to come.
Pissed off, yes, but also dissapointed because a socialist revolution is less than probable.

Back on Topic, I think ComChi is a very interesting and better than ever balanced country to choose.

Try out everybody!