• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Kriegsspieler

Field Marshal
68 Badges
Feb 27, 2003
10.454
1.252
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Surviving Mars
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
Well, the short answer is -- it beats me! Read on and find out why . . . .

But seriously, I have long admired those contributors to the Paradox forums who set themselves down and experiment with various things to establish, for example, what the most effective combat mix might be and so forth. So last night I began experimenting with things to try to decipher how overall industrial rating (IR) is calculated. Here are the first set of results -- very basic stuff, as you will see -- but with more to follow:

I began with France in the Grand Campaign, difficulty rating set on the second highest. France's IR begins the game at 50. Now, if you now simply empty all the factories of their workers and do nothing else, the IR decreases to 30. If you then shut down the RGO's that produce raw materials so the stockpiles of coal and sulfur and the like go down to zero and then put workers back in the factories, your IR goes back up to 42 or 43. Those workers aren't making anything at this point, they're simply there. Now if you restore the raw materials the IR returns to approximately 50.

I use the terms "approximately" here because, as you all probably know, one enormous influence on your IR is what your net assets are. If you want to watch your IR rating plunge, fight a war over 6 months or so and run up 10000-20000 pounds' worth of loans. Conversely, if you want to make your IR skyrocket, sell off some tech to the Chinese. The effect of the "money term" in the overall complex equation of IR should be fairly easy to reckon (assuming it's linear and not some bizzaro logarithmic function!), but I haven't had a chance to do it yet. With respect to my experiments with the factories described above, I found it quite difficult and time consuming to hold the amount of money reasonably level while playing with everything else.

There are three other factors I want to examine next: building new factories, expanding existing factories and upgrading rail.

More to come.
 
Last edited:

unmerged(24160)

Sergeant
Dec 30, 2003
86
0
One thing you should take into consideration when testing is POP merging. POPs at the beginning of the game are often unstable (meaning that there are several POPs of the same characteristic each under the limit of 50 000), and thus if you make changes to RGO operations they might merge. Merging will reduce output due to non-linear POP productivity.

I usually avoid doing any changes in the beginning of a campaign, and if I have to do something (e.g. get more soldiers) I'll do all POP education stuff at once for the affected province. Personally I think Victoria's POP system as silly micromanagement, but what can you do... 1.03 should fix some of the POP merging problems, but I do not see any need for non-linear efficiency (unless it is meant to represent waste or some such stuff...).
 

Kriegsspieler

Field Marshal
68 Badges
Feb 27, 2003
10.454
1.252
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Surviving Mars
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
prantasa said:
One thing you should take into consideration when testing is POP merging. POPs at the beginning of the game are often unstable (meaning that there are several POPs of the same characteristic each under the limit of 50 000), and thus if you make changes to RGO operations they might merge. Merging will reduce output due to non-linear POP productivity.
Yes, good point. I am trying to study the IR consequences over very short time frames, on the order of: "what are the immediate effects of finishing the upgrading of 3 factories?" That sort of thing. That should reduce the complexities of POP mergers.
But let's face it. There a so many things that go into the sausage grinder that spits out the IR that we'll never get entirely to the bottom of it. We'll only be able to say: "yes, that's a factor," and so on.
 

Kriegsspieler

Field Marshal
68 Badges
Feb 27, 2003
10.454
1.252
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Surviving Mars
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
Ok, I have done a further test and gotten some very surprising results:

Playing France in 1840, I had an IR of 73. I then tried upgrading the infrastructure of different states to the level 1 (experimental railroad). After each experiment, I relaoded the game back to the same starting point. I might add that during none of these tests did anything odd happen to my factories, nor did I get a gift railroad through an event.

Here's what I got after the upgrades were finished:

In 3 states (11 provinces) with 0 factories: final IR of 77
In 3 states (11 provinces) with 1 factory: final IR of 78
In 3 states (11 provinces) with 2 factories: final IR of 78.

In other words, this seems to run against the conventional wisdom that upgrading rail in states with factories will have a big payoff. Of course it does have a payoff elsewhere -- in profits from more efficient factories -- but it seems to have little impact on the IR.

Comments? Suggestions?
 

Memnon

Czar of Texas
4 Badges
Jan 2, 2004
3.385
200
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
Perhaps your job would be made easier playing as a more managable country. Maybe you could give experimental railroad to Uruguay, open them up, and then redo the test. That should help you weed out all the other variables that you get playing as France, as well as monitoring POP merging better.

Just a suggestion. :) I'm really interested to see your findings.
 

Kriegsspieler

Field Marshal
68 Badges
Feb 27, 2003
10.454
1.252
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Surviving Mars
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
One other point about the effects of money on IR. I ran some additional tests by first allowing my balance to grow a lot and then sink into a deep hole while holding everything else equal. It turns out that positive amounts of money have no observable effect on your IR, at least up to about 10000. But having loans does affect it, to the tune of a loss of about 1 IR for every 500 debt you accumulate, at least as far as I've taken it, which was -20000.
 
Last edited:

Kriegsspieler

Field Marshal
68 Badges
Feb 27, 2003
10.454
1.252
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Surviving Mars
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
Memnon said:
Perhaps your job would be made easier playing as a more managable country. Maybe you could give experimental railroad to Uruguay, open them up, and then redo the test. That should help you weed out all the other variables that you get playing as France, as well as monitoring POP merging better.

Just a suggestion. :) I'm really interested to see your findings.
Hah! I began doing this as Russia. Talk about unmanageable!!
I like working with France because they start out with an insane number of mech points and their indigenous supply of raw materials is nicely varied.
You may be right about playing around with a smaller country like Uruguay, though. I may try that next.
 
Last edited:

Kriegsspieler

Field Marshal
68 Badges
Feb 27, 2003
10.454
1.252
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Surviving Mars
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
That's interesting, and if true it might be a bug. I haven't noticed it myself, but in doing these tests I have mostly worked with France, which had the exp. RR at the start. So there was no chance to see what you report.
 

Sam Gamgee

First Lieutenant
5 Badges
Aug 20, 2003
219
0
Visit site
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
Kriegspieler said:
That's interesting, and if true it might be a bug. I haven't noticed it myself, but in doing these tests I have mostly worked with France, which had the exp. RR at the start. So there was no chance to see what you report.

Might be a bug, but it might be WaD to encourage you to continue to upgrade infra... interesting thread...
 

Kriegsspieler

Field Marshal
68 Badges
Feb 27, 2003
10.454
1.252
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Surviving Mars
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
For those of you interested in the IR issues discussed in this thread, I just wanted to let you know that I'll be away this weekend and back on the job on Sunday. Feel free to insert comments, objections, etc. in the meantime. I'll post something on Sunday that summarizes what I've determined up to now.
 
Dec 19, 2001
698
0
Visit site
One of the problems in this test is the time-frame and the settings.
To do a vialable test you need compareable settings, especially the same WM which is not easy to simulate.

In such a test I would advise you to edit the save-file instead of waiting months.
Set the construction-date to start+2 days. 1 day to give the WM time to settle after loading and next day your RR is ready. Compare the situation on day 1 and day 2. Day 0 (= start) is bad since the WM has to restart.

Still not easy to compare.
France is a rather big country where the impact of a few RR should be very little (like noticed by you). Either build a RR everywhere in France or test it with a smaller country where the change in %age of provinces with RR would be bigger.
 

Kriegsspieler

Field Marshal
68 Badges
Feb 27, 2003
10.454
1.252
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Surviving Mars
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
Nebukadnezar said:
One of the problems in this test is the time-frame and the settings.
To do a vialable test you need compareable settings, especially the same WM which is not easy to simulate.

In such a test I would advise you to edit the save-file instead of waiting months.
Set the construction-date to start+2 days. 1 day to give the WM time to settle after loading and next day your RR is ready. Compare the situation on day 1 and day 2. Day 0 (= start) is bad since the WM has to restart.
Nebukadnezer, I do not see why the gyrations of the WM should affect the outcome of RR expansion with respect to a country's IR. Can you explain?

Nebukadnezar said:
Still not easy to compare.
France is a rather big country where the impact of a few RR should be very little (like noticed by you). Either build a RR everywhere in France or test it with a smaller country where the change in %age of provinces with RR would be bigger.
Well, what I was really looking for was an appreciable increase between the different levels of industrial development in the provinces (1 industry, 2 industries, etc.). But you're right. I need to run this test on a smaller country.
 
Dec 19, 2001
698
0
Visit site
Idustrial rating can be based on
1. #of factories+# of RR+# of workers in factories
2. amount of produced materials (no matter the prize)
3. value of produced goods
4. well..something else :)

By building RR you would increase your industrial rating no matter how the industrial rating is measured.
IF 3. is the appropriate measurement then you need a stable WM to test the impact of RR.....hopefully with a WM without bottlenecks.
IF the price of the prudced items is absolutely irrellevant then of course there is no reason to think about the WM, but I doubt that this will be the case.
The #1-producer of lumber (let's say: 1000 units) should be lower rated then the #1-producer of steel (800 units) considering 'normal' prices on the WM but in the beginning of the GC the demand for lumber is very high (colonies, RR) while demand for steel is low (only RR). Testing in these early years with lots of fluctuations on the WM could produce strange results :)

That's what I wanted to say when I said that you need the same setting for analyzing the impact of something. Leave everything else absolutely identical (or come close to).

(sorry for the bad english :) )
 

unmerged(24517)

Second Lieutenant
Jan 10, 2004
126
0
I'm pretty sure industrial ranking is based on total available production. If assuming you had 10 steel factories, you would get industrial points based on how much steel they could produce if they had full raw materials. I notice that even factories that aren't actually producing, factories that have craftsmen but dont have the raw materials to produce, still give industrial points. Also, capitalists increase your total possible production by a lot, and I consistently notice a massive jump in industrial points when I create a large number of capitalists. If I open a new factory, I get a small gain. If I make capitalists I get a large gain. (Note: If you are planning on testing, be aware that the benefit from capitalists is recalculated every month, like population is. Make the capitalists, wait till the turn of the month, then check production levels. They should be significantly higher than before, as your industrial score will be.)

To sum up, industrial ranking is primarily based on total possible production, not based on actual production. This is supported by the the fact that
1) When railroads are built total possible production goes up. There is a corresponding increase in industrial points.

2) When factories do not have enough raw materials to produce goods, the industrial points do not change. Thus, its highly unlikely that the industrial points are based on actual production.

3) Capitalists produce gigantic increases in both production and industrial
points, when built in industrialized provinces.

4) If those capitalists are not in an industrialized province, they do not increase industrial points. Also unemployed craftsmen/clerks do not contribute industrial points. These two facts make it highly unlikely that industrial ranking is based on number of workers.

5) Empty factories do not add industrial points. Thus the number of factories in and of themselves probably do not directly affect industrial points.

6) The most compelling argument is common sense. It is much easier and makes much more sense to base industrial points on actual production than on number of factories or number of workers.

Based on this, the only real question left is whether or not industrial production is based on number of goods or value of goods produced. I think that its based on value of goods produced because once again, that makes more sense than anything else. Also, it seems like automobile factories give significantly more industrial points than cement factories.

Industrial points are based on total possible production. Total possible production means possible total value of goods produced. Actual production does not matter. Possible production if you had full raw materials gives industrial ranking.
 

unmerged(11486)

The Ancient Mariner
Oct 31, 2002
2.689
0
Visit site
Thiks would ideally be tested in Switzerland, I think. Small, 1 state, moderatly wealthy, comparatively industrial...

I happen to agree with Duke Ringo's assessment.

Steele
 

Kriegsspieler

Field Marshal
68 Badges
Feb 27, 2003
10.454
1.252
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Surviving Mars
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
I also agree with Duke Ringo, and he has summarized things better than I have done so far. But to his list you also need to add a factor for: 1) your debt and 2) "something else," as Nebukadnezer put it. This latter factor can be seen by playing a country like Peru, which starts out with an IR of something like 20, without a factory in sight.

Steele's suggestion that I give it a try with Switzerland is a good one. I'll see what I can do.