Optimal industry distribution - which do you people use?

[Grim Deadman]

So, I've found myself wondering about how you place your factories across states. I personally prefer to have bits of everything everywhere, just in case a sudden downturn causes massive layoffs and skyrocketing unemployment in a single state. Does anybody do that? Is it better to concentrate an industry in a single state? Does placing input industrial goods production in the same state as the industry that consumes them do any good? What do you guys think?

 

[MfgLuckbot]

There is a tradeoff of efficiency versus robustness. If you distribute everything equally you are very robust, no lost state can harm your economic stability, no infrastructure issue scares you.

But it's much much more efficient to stack the throughput bonus.

I personally follow a mixed approach. I build a few medium size stacks and try to place very important ressources in states that are unlikely to see a lot of harm.

 

[Dogesleg]

You get up to a bonus to throughput if you build more of the same factory in the same state, 1% per level up to 50% at level 51. That means the level 51 factory will take in as much input goods and put out as much output goods as about 76~ individual factories.

Shipyards, for some reason get a 10% throughput with the "Natural harbor" state trait. If you have a "natural harbor" state, always build all shipyard there.

Some states also have throughput bonuses, but nearly all of them only apply to RGOs, not factories.

-

Besides that, it doesn't matter at all for factories where they are built, what resources are available in the same state or anything else.

 

[MfgLuckbot]

Besides that, it doesn't matter at all for factories where they are built, what resources are available in the same state or anything else.

It can matter if you get infrastructure issues. For example if you are a british colony then you will get random times of low market connection when the UK fights a war.

When that happens it's very valuable to have your factory in the same state as it's input goods.

 

[Dogesleg]

There is a tradeoff of efficiency versus robustness. If you distribute everything equally you are very robust, no lost state can harm your economic stability, no infrastructure issue scares you.

But it's much much more efficient to stack the throughput bonus.

I personally follow a mixed approach. I build a few medium size stacks and try to place very important ressources in states that are unlikely to see a lot of harm.

Fun fact, military control in this game is just what color the map is painted. Controlled states still have your market access, maybe a little less with devastation, all factories in that state will still work fine and arms factories can still even supply your army.

 

[Grim Deadman]

Fun fact, military control in this game is just what color the map is painted. Controlled states still have your market access, maybe a little less with devastation, all factories in that state will still work fine and arms factories can still even supply your army.

Sounds like something a future patch will probably fix

 

[MfgLuckbot]

Fun fact, military control in this game is just what color the map is painted. Controlled states still have your market access, maybe a little less with devastation, all factories in that state will still work fine and arms factories can still even supply your army.

I know, my point is devestation, convoy raiding, and losing a state in a peace Deal (especially in multiplayer where your opponents will specifically aim for your industrial centers)

 

[Grim Deadman]

There is a tradeoff of efficiency versus robustness. If you distribute everything equally you are very robust, no lost state can harm your economic stability, no infrastructure issue scares you.

But it's much much more efficient to stack the throughput bonus.

I personally follow a mixed approach. I build a few medium size stacks and try to place very important ressources in states that are unlikely to see a lot of harm.

But if you stack your industry, won't that lead to high SoL jobs be concentrated there instead of evenly, with consequent political repercussions?

 

[MfgLuckbot]

But if you stack your industry, won't that lead to high SoL jobs be concentrated there instead of evenly, with consequent political repercussions?

I stack one specific factory type per state to collect the maximum throughput bonus and maybe even 2-3 of those stacks depending on the building (Especially to be able to balance out PMs). That's usually enough to give all my high population states good job opportunities. (Stacking everything in one state would quickly run out of workers)

As an example in my current russia game I have Moscow focused on furniture, Ingria does clothing, Perm has my steel mills, Kiev is chemical industry and so on

 

[paulxiep]

It depends on the stage of the game. So far I've only ever started real small, with starting land of not even a whole or half a state. There is nowhere else for things to go but the capital. It's only later that I get more land that I make use of the economic of scale. The more states you have, the more you can make use of that.

Diversifying within same states has another important drawback besides lack of economic of scale too, and that is that of wages.
Different businesses tend to have different levels of profitability (which changes over the course of the game, with PMs, input prices, output prices).
If you mix less profitable buildings in the same state as more profitable buildings, the less profitable ones will be unable to hire as they'll pay lower wage, unless of course if you subsidize or if you're Qing.

There are other concerns too, like being prepared for revolutions. In my latest run I intentionally passed unthinkable law combinations (debt slavery - intelligentsia autocracy), and to do that I needed to let my IGs revolt. I had 2 states. I made sure the capital had arms and food, and that all army barracks are in the capital state. The other state had no army. That way I could crush revolt quickly with minimal disturbance.

(Stacking everything in one state would quickly run out of workers)

Not so if you get Qing's land, and to a lesser extent Japan's.

 

[MfgLuckbot]

Not so if you get Qing's land, and to a lesser extent Japan's.

No in that case you'll likely lose a lot of the efficiency bonus to infrastructure issues. If your capital isn't in asia at least

 

[Opanashc]

No in that case you'll likely lose a lot of the efficiency bonus to infrastructure issues. If your capital isn't in asia at least

1 state with 120 steel mills produces same amount of steel, as 2 states with 60 steel mills. Once you hit that 51 mark, economies of scale don't stack up anymore.

 

[Skuchney]

I stack one specific factory type per state to collect the maximum throughput bonus and maybe even 2-3 of those stacks depending on the building (Especially to be able to balance out PMs). That's usually enough to give all my high population states good job opportunities. (Stacking everything in one state would quickly run out of workers)

As an example in my current russia game I have Moscow focused on furniture, Ingria does clothing, Perm has my steel mills, Kiev is chemical industry and so on

I tend to do this too, each state specializes in one urban industry, plus whatever rural I need as that is based on what's available (prioritising states that have more of that thing available). It just feels so nice and organised.

Although I have found later on I do get pop issues in some states, where I just need so much of that industry. At that stage probably a good idea to split some industries across multiple states as long as each one hits the 51 threshold for economies of scale. Especially if you have expanded to become quite large so have a bunch of states with peasants still sitting in them, and a dense industrial core with no spare pops.

 

[tom5675]

It's a trade-off between efficiency and adaptability.

Concentrating a building type in a single state gives you a throughput bonus as that industry gets bigger. (+1% throughput bonus per level of the same building, upto +50% with full tech unlocks).

On the other hand, spreading out industries across many states makes your country able to more easily adapt to problems.

When a state has infrastructure issues, it gets low market access, which limits it to buying and selling goods locally. If you have each industry concentrated in a specific state, that can absolutely cripple you, where as a balanced spread of factory types won't suffer nearly as badly.

Also, because you can only select one production method for factories of the same type in a single state, for example having all of your steel factories in a single state, will mean that you have to switch all of them to a new production method at the same time, this can be very destabilizing for a country's market. If you have spread them across several states, you can switch the production methods one state at a time, preventing it for causing severe shortages/surpluses on your market.

Finally, if you reach the point of running out peasants in a state, having a diverse spread of buildings in each state can be really helpful for auto balancing your economy. Since people will try to work in the industries that are the most productive, they will leave buildings with low productivity that are over producing, to move into buildings that are producing goods that are in short supply.

Ultimately, it's a matter of deciding how much you value maximising productivity, vs how much you value having a resilient and adaptive economy.

 

[Skuchney]

It's a trade-off between efficiency and adaptability.

Concentrating a building type in a single state gives you a throughput bonus as that industry gets bigger. (+1% throughput bonus per level of the same building, upto +50% with full tech unlocks).

On the other hand, spreading out industries across many states makes your country able to more easily adapt to problems.

When a state has infrastructure issues, it gets low market access, which limits it to buying and selling goods locally. If you have each industry concentrated in a specific state, that can absolutely cripple you, where as a balanced spread of factory types won't suffer nearly as badly.

Also, because you can only select one production method for factories of the same type in a single state, for example having all of your steel factories in a single state, will mean that you have to switch all of them to a new production method at the same time, this can be very destabilizing for a country's market. If you have spread them across several states, you can switch the production methods one state at a time, preventing it for causing severe shortages/surpluses on your market.

Finally, if you reach the point of running out peasants in a state, having a diverse spread of buildings in each state can be really helpful for auto balancing your economy. Since people will try to work in the industries that are the most productive, they will leave buildings with low productivity that are over producing, to move into buildings that are producing goods that are in short supply.

Ultimately, it's a matter of deciding how much you value maximising productivity, vs how much you value having a resilient and adaptive economy.

Hmmmm. If you prebuild infrastructure though and don't lift subsidies, don't overbuild etc, then you shouldn't have too much in the way of infrastructure issues, I would think. The concentration bonus is very strong, I'm not sure if too much would disrupt it, assuming sufficient planning.

I definitely think spreading too thin is the wrong move. But as to the right level of concentration, that could be quite variable depending on your nations situation, being population dependent etc. There is probably a happy medium there, a good robust balance. Building up and aiming towards groups of 51 in multiple states, making the most of the situation in any given game.

 

[tom5675]

Market access can be a big problem for countries part of a common market, and overseas states, when there is a sudden shortage of convoys, such as during a war that requires those convoys to be used to move troops. Reducing market access across all states not directly connected by land to the market capital.
For countries with continuous land access, that don't share a customs union with another country, it becomes less important.

Concentrated Industries can also be problematic if they are devastated in a war, taken from you in a war, harmed by a state specific event, or part of an uprising against you.

But yes, under entirely peaceful and stable conditions, when you aren't part of a customs union, and when you aren't updating production methods for new techs, concentration for throughput bonus is stronger.

 

[Less2]

1 state with 120 steel mills produces same amount of steel, as 2 states with 60 steel mills. Once you hit that 51 mark, economies of scale don't stack up anymore.

+20% industrial throughput decree, my friend.

 

[Fawr]

1 state with 120 steel mills produces same amount of steel, as 2 states with 60 steel mills. Once you hit that 51 mark, economies of scale don't stack up anymore.

Except that to get from one state with 60 to 2 states with 60 you are going through phases like 60/1, 60/2 60/10, all of which are less efficient. For some types of factories I know I'll need a mix so 60x2 is better, but for many I want to optimise my speed.

Two other things to consider:

• If you have enough authority it is better to have all your industry in one state to benefit from the decree.
• It's fastest to build in the state your construction industry is. If you have enough construction to max out multiple states then great, but if you can only max out one then it is fastest to build more factories there.
• Before you get railways spreading out is often essential due to infrastructure. Depending on which country you pick that could leave you quite spread out.
• If you get migration targets it will spread the people out to all adjacent states as well as the target state. This may mean its better to build a cluster of industry in adjacent states, rather than focus on just one state.

I've found the benefits of having steel production next to your iron/coal just in case of infrastructure problems to be limited. Unless my steel demand is in that state too I'm still going to be in trouble. Centralising steel production in the state with my tools, engines and construction industry (steel demand) may actually make me less vulnerable to infrastructure shocks.

 

[TheHostName]

I stack one typ of factory in one specific province to 50. After ive run out of factory typs i start again with things that you will need most of. So Tools, clothes...
If i have less states then factory typs to build, then i build 2 typs in states, starting with the highst pop one.
Some states though will get nothing at the beginning because they are my mining states.

 

[Opanashc]

+20% industrial throughput decree, my friend.

Arable land matters too. There are limits to pop growth.