Permanent damage?

[Prufrock451]

Let's say I conquer Germany as the Soviets, rumbling to a halt on the Rhine after a grueling campaign that flattens everything in its path. I don't think that I should be able to restore Germany to its prewar output after a couple of months of occupation.

Would it be possible to assign bombers to a "logistical" mission or something, that would cause less immediate damage but a smaller amount of permanent, non-recoverable damage (to production, infrastructure, or resources)? Could fighting trigger a random chance of causing permanent damage to a province- which would increase if there's lots of artillery and bombing or if the fighting continues for weeks? Could you choose to inflict this damage on your own provinces- to throttle down production or deny use of an oilfield to the enemy?

 

[unmerged(11486)]

I don't think there should be any permanent damage... everything that is broken can be fixed, but strategic bombing raids and such should cost something to be repaired.

Steele

 

[unmerged(9076)]

Permanent damage? That makes no sense. If you invest enough money and capital equipment into any area, it can be rebuilt. Look at Germany after World War II. Flattened, rebuilt in less than a decade, and economically more powerful than before.

 

[King of Men]

The key word is "decade." There were still ruins and rebuilding in Berlin in 1970. Prufrock is objecting to the repair time-scale of a few months.

 

[Prufrock451]

Exactly. Large parts of Europe were completely levelled during the fighting. In HoI, a million men could die in a province, in a battle lasting six months, and the week after the enemy is expelled the province is operating at full blast again.

 

[unmerged(11439)]

i agree that it should take investment from the owner of that province to get the province back up to production. I guess something like the Marshall Plan that you could use to rebuild.

 

[unmerged(11486)]

But conversely, there were areas of Germany that were repeatedly subject to massive bombing raids-raids which destroyed nearly everything of value-that were still producing tanks right up until their occupation (the Ruhr, for example). The Germans invested huge amounts of resources to bring these industrial facilities back online. So, nothing should be permanent, but the investment required to fix stuff should be higher, as to prevent someone just repairing everything destroyed.

Steele

 

[unmerged(11439)]

perhaps if it worked the same as reinforcement?

example

US 8th Airforce bombs berlin. it destroys 5 ic's and to repair (reinforce) it will require 1500 supplies. If you don't (can't) pay then you don't get those 5 ic's back.

 

[unmerged(11117)]

I don't think there should be any permanent damage... everything that is broken can be fixed, but strategic bombing raids and such should cost something to be repaired.

Steele

Not permanent damage, because you are right what is broken can and was fixed.

But the combat causing damage is an interesting idea, and in some cases the recovery time for infra & ic should be longer.

 

[unmerged(11486)]

perhaps if it worked the same as reinforcement?

example

US 8th Airforce bombs berlin. it destroys 5 ic's and to repair (reinforce) it will require 1500 supplies. If you don't (can't) pay then you don't get those 5 ic's back.

Good idea. I think resources (steel and coal) should be required as well...

Steele

 

[Prufrock451]

Neat. My main point in starting this was to start a discussion, and I'm glad I did that.

Perhaps you could tie the length of time needed to your ministers' stats, as well- an administrative genius would get the trains running again faster than a corrupt kleptocrat...

 

[unmerged(23231)]

perhaps if it worked the same as reinforcement?

example

US 8th Airforce bombs berlin. it destroys 5 ic's and to repair (reinforce) it will require 1500 supplies. If you don't (can't) pay then you don't get those 5 ic's back.

YES, this is very good!

However, to prevent the inevitable frustrating micromanagement, the player should have the option to have the necessary resources invested automatically, if they are availible. (Or up to a certain, player-defined point, since I don't think you want to deplete your entire resource pool on infrastructure)

 

[unmerged(24763)]

I agree totally. It should cost something to repair the province that was war ravged and I should be able to do a scorched earth policy if I so wanted. Of course, doing scorched earth should raise dissent if taken place in a home province. Regardless, something like this should be coded.

 

[aejira]

well honestly, I think the best idea would be to tie in two values in determining how fast a region repairs itself. i think many of the ideas presented are good, but I think the last thing we should need are additional buttons for repairing provinces. instead, let the provinces logistical value determine how fast it is built back to speed. this means that regions with little access to other cities and little infrastructural development will logically see less recovery on the basis of time. but i do agree that regions overall should take much longer to run back to normal.

secondly, make it so that economic problems in a region recover slowly and gradually instead of a sudden high industrial output. this seems to be much more logical imo

 

[fsp]

I am definitely for repairs lasting longer and not coming for free any more. The fact, that German war production reached its height has not so much to do with strategic bombardment being ineffective, but with Germany reaching full war economy only late in 43. Imagine war production in a Germany not being bombed. The numbers would be much higher.

 

[Dievs]

The idea is good.
Just make sure that the repairs are automatic and don't require excessive micromanagement.

 

[unmerged(11486)]

The idea is good.
Just make sure that the repairs are automatic and don't require excessive micromanagement.

If repairs are automatic, then they won't cost anything. It should require an input of resources and IC/factory effort to rebuild a province.

An auto-rebuild option would of course be in order...

Steele

 

[jacob-Lundgren]

a small amount of strategic bombing should be temporary though. effects from rubble and power lose and workers being delayed etc.

making it all permanent, no matter how low the cost to rebuild would start to work towards strategic bombing being too strong. some lose of ic would be the general disruption of strategic bombing, and if its permanent and a prov is a really low on ic one, what if it runs out? we dont want people targeting all your little ic 5 and under provs so you have a lot of provs with no industry.

 

[King of Men]

Maybe strategic bombing could be abstractified? Put so many resources into bombing, your enemy loses so many IC, with a random factor, obviously.