Questions on IC building

[Pro_Consul]

It requires a bit of careful practical management to get optimal unit building results when IC whoring; that's for sure. The key lies in planning from the outset what you want built, then figuring how to balance the different types of practicals that mix of builds will require so that you don't overdo one at the expense of some other kind of practical you will also need. For example, it would be easy to overcommit to cooking mobile and light air practicals and neglect sub or infantry, resulting in those builds going too slow when you get to the major unit building push. Another stumbling point is figuring how many of what kind of unit to keep queued in order to generate the desired amount of practical. I still mess this up now and again when using experimental build strategies.

 

[21oliver]

Yeah i do much better when i sit down and plan, lately ive been just winging it as i go.

 

[Secret Master]

There's also the naval problem.

Capital ships take a long time to build AND they cannot upgrade guns, hull, and engines. Combine this with the fact that older ships are more or less obsolete at the start of the game, and you face a huge dilemma.

It can take forever to generate capital ship practicals and building older ships to generate those practicals is expensive. But you need practicals in order to speed up research. Except that the ships you build in 1936-37 might be second string at best by 1941. So "warming" practicals with capital ships ends up creating throw-away ships if you choose the SAG route.

The exception to this is going the cruiser route; because cruiser practicals are generated by CLs, you can cook practicals while still building cheap ships.

 

[21oliver]

I find that one good round of Capitals and maybe 2-3 rounds of escort types and the IC cost drops to reasonable status. I did so with the above game where i mixed in with my IC whoring. After that the first round of real investment will drop the IC cost down tremendously. For example it costs me say 12 IC for a BB as the Soviets, so i cook one, when that finishes maybe now its down to 7-8 or so, by then im ready to start my navy i may toss 4 BBs in the queue, when they clear the cost wont be an issue anymore. I really try not to spend too much on throwaways. For myself i use 1936 as a baseline. I want 1936 ships (1938 showing) to be the worst ships in my navy that i keep. Its just a routine i got into.

 

[jju_57]

You can build some BC's as you wait for the techs. These are good against the SU navy in the Baltic.

 

[21oliver]

The above builds, for my part anyway were playing as the Soviet Union. Myself i either go all in or dont bother. Ill either straight IC whore OR mix all types of practicals. Usually one or the other.

 

[Peter81]

Just hit the 200 Base IC mark as the USSR on September 29 1937 using your tips. To reproduce, try this:
I used the built scheme Charles provides (5 AB, 3-4 NB, then 139 IC for my final goal of 300 base IC). I used spies at home to raise NU and spies in Germany to raise their threat, i hit 60 NU and 70 neutrality on the beginning of October '36 so i could change to war economy. The first few IC were ready on January 1 '37 and after the purge i enacted Heavy Industry Emphasis. Level 5 of the two IC techs will be reached on October 3 '37.

 

[21oliver]

I never thought to use Heavy Industry during peacetime, i wouldnt have thought you would have gotten 200 Ic so fast with the penalties. Nice...

 

[Peter81]

Yes, i thought so too. I was a bit shocked when by CG need went from ~15 IC to 85 IC, but then i was counting how many factories were in production before and after the switch to HI (roughly the same). But the build time decreased so heavily...
Someone in this forum made the calculations that HI is better if you use a certain percentage of your IC for production, can't remember the numbers. For me it was something like 85 IC for CG and >105 IC for production.

 

[Charles Reeps]

Yes, i thought so too. I was a bit shocked when by CG need went from ~15 IC to 85 IC, but then i was counting how many factories were in production before and after the switch to HI (roughly the same). But the build time decreased so heavily...
Someone in this forum made the calculations that HI is better if you use a certain percentage of your IC for production, can't remember the numbers. For me it was something like 85 IC for CG and >105 IC for production.

Very good achievement and I never thought to do this as HI is supposed to be avoided unless you have over 200 effective IC. Thanks to this I will know better next time and check my numbers instead of casually ignoring a viable option.

BTW: why perform the Purge when you have already achieved all its benefits through spies? Unless there is some hidden benefit the Purge essentially costs you 15% LS and a bunch of dead officers for no viable gain.

 

[Peter81]

BTW: why perform the Purge when you have already achieved all its benefits through spies? Unless there is some hidden benefit the Purge essentially costs you 15% LS and a bunch of dead officers for no viable gain.

Roleplaying, doesn't feel right without the purge ;-)
With spies i only went to 60 NU and 70 Neutrality for earlier War Economy. This only gives me One-year draft, after the purge i can get Three-Year draft and as USSR i normally start investing a lot of LS in officers in 1937.

EDIT: Also, HI needs 70 NU

 

[21oliver]

BTW: why perform the Purge when you have already achieved all its benefits through spies? Unless there is some hidden benefit the Purge essentially costs you 15% LS and a bunch of dead officers for no viable gain.

And you gain 500 MP by firing the Purge. I too have looked into this Charles, once i saw how early i could fire War Economy i gave it a look see. I wasnt thinking about the HI but i really didnt want to give up 500 MP, and yes the Third year draft is big for the Soviet Union.

 

[Charles Reeps]

Roleplaying, doesn't feel right without the purge ;-)
With spies i only went to 60 NU and 70 Neutrality for earlier War Economy. This only gives me One-year draft, after the purge i can get Three-Year draft and as USSR i normally start investing a lot of LS in officers in 1937.

EDIT: Also, HI needs 70 NU

Okay...since I've never thought of using HI this makes sense, though I don't concentrate on officers until late 38. Also, since I am always building NU I get to 70% sometime around October, 1937. Hell, what's another year

I don't go to war until September, 1939, and at this point it's only against minors. Having an officer ratio of 110 is more than enough to fight minors (including Italy) and I just keep building officers up until I've reached 130; this is satisfactory for the big showdown with Germany. I just can't stand the thought of losing all that LS and those officers, especially since Russia doesn't have enough leaders, even without the Purge.

And you gain 500 MP by firing the Purge. I too have looked into this Charles, once i saw how early i could fire War Economy i gave it a look see. I wasnt thinking about the HI but i really didnt want to give up 500 MP, and yes the Third year draft is big for the Soviet Union.

Oliver: I never want for manpower with the SU; in fact they have more than enough without any buffs.

This all comes down to play style and objectives so no particular method is right or wrong. By the time I go against the Germans my airpower is almost double the Luftwaffe and I have more ARM and HARM than the Wehrmacht. Germany is lucky to get more than 3 provinces deep into Russia before I seize the initiative.

 

[21oliver]

I agree it all depends on how you play, lately ive been playing a more is better style. In my current game i didnt squeeze out every drop of IC (In 1937 i turn it from manual to production, so some supplies get built...) and i just hit 200 IC on Oct 31, so the HI really does help.

 

[21oliver]

HEADS UP....

After building your IC go back to Consumer Production from HI...

I waited a bit and then did so, with a 300 IC base I saved almost 140 IC (more in production)...

 

[Pro_Consul]

After building your IC go back to Consumer Production from HI...

I waited a bit and then did so, with a 300 IC base I saved almost 140 IC (more in production)...

That depends on what else you are doing and have been doing. If you have been raising your CG requirement by building regulars, that is a point in favor of going back to CP. If you are building or about to build a decent batch of big ticket items, then that is a point in favor of HI. Remember that in order to accurately measure the relative IC cost of CP vs HI, you need to factor in the time savings of the build efficiency HI gives you. The bottom line currency here is not IC; it is IC-days.

Edit: another factor that might favor HI over CP is practical cooking. You can cook practicals for big ticket items much more quickly under HI, due to the build effciency bonus. The tradeoff is that you have less IC for larger parallel runs of other stuff. Even then, though, the tradeoff might be negated. Remember that though you can run fewer builds in parellel under HI, your builds are completing quicker, so you can do more serial iterations.

 

[21oliver]

But in my case I was saving 140 IC daily it was already late (?) 1938, and i hadnt built any units whatsoever just IC (and early cooking practicals for IC) so it seemed the way to go. My builds will be diverse from this point on big and small items.

 

[Opanashc]

HEADS UP....

After building your IC go back to Consumer Production from HI...

I waited a bit and then did so, with a 300 IC base I saved almost 140 IC (more in production)...

To game the system, build with Consumer Production, then switch to HI for a day - and your industry will finish sooner.

 

[Peter81]

Will raising threat against Japan make the USA enter the war earlier? Or should i raise threat against NatChi or Finland to lower my neutrality? I'm currently thinking of making a big airforce build (mostly INT, later TAC) after the 300 base IC are done, do you think i should stay at HI?

 

[Charles Reeps]

Will raising threat against Japan make the USA enter the war earlier? Or should i raise threat against NatChi or Finland to lower my neutrality? I'm currently thinking of making a big airforce build (mostly INT, later TAC) after the 300 base IC are done, do you think i should stay at HI?

1. I made this mistake and raised Japan's threat to astronomical numbers and USA entered almost on day one of WWII. It was disenheartening to watch powerlessly as USA defeated Japan before I could get involved

2. You don't get enough of an effect when making NatChi or Finland your targets for raising threat. IMO using Germany is the way to go because eventually Japan's threat gets pretty much all of USA's attention. That being said, you still have to be careful as raising global threat can, and most likely will, result in USA's early entry against the Axis.

3. Stay at HI. It was long ago proven that any nation with over 200 IC has nothing but positive benefits when using HI;i.e., not using HI will actually hurt you in the long run. This clearly applies to building an airforce, especially TACs. HI gives you a 20% improvement in IC efficiency (you lose the -15% from CG and get +5% from HI). This makes all your units cheaper (in actual cost) and faster to complete, thus the latter means it takes less time to build those cheaper units (an additional savings). In a "snowball" effect those quicker build times raise practicals faster, resulting in far cheaper units that build even faster. This is a win-win when applied to aircraft, armor and naval units.