US IC Increase

[goobermaster]

As germany, I constantly find myself having either the same amount or slightly more IC then the US after Sealion.

I for one do not like this - the US's industrial output during WW2 was simply gargantuan, ouptroducing Germany, Japan and the UK combined by a sizeable factor.

So I am trying to come up with an event to add some IC to the US when they go to war, to correctly leave me outproduced and add some challenge - given that the AI is as dumb as a post, I hope this will add a small challenge.

So, based on the US's base IC of 281 in the 1936 GC, how much do you think I should add (along with about half the materials needed for them as the US already has insane amounts of raw materials)?

50? 100? 150? How much IC should I give the US?

 

[wright1331]

As germany, I constantly find myself having either the same amount or slightly more IC then the US after Sealion.

I for one do not like this - the US's industrial output during WW2 was simply gargantuan, ouptroducing Germany, Japan and the UK combined by a sizeable factor.

So I am trying to come up with an event to add some IC to the US when they go to war, to correctly leave me outproduced and add some challenge - given that the AI is as dumb as a post, I hope this will add a small challenge.

So, based on the US's base IC of 281 in the 1936 GC, how much do you think I should add (along with about half the materials needed for them as the US already has insane amounts of raw materials)?

50? 100? 150? How much IC should I give the US?

what difficulty level r u playing on?

 

[talin]

I for one do not like this - the US's industrial output during WW2 was simply gargantuan, ouptroducing Germany, Japan and the UK combined by a sizeable factor.

50? 100? 150? How much IC should I give the US?

If we are to believe the numbers that the TRP team crunched to make the IC in their mod more accurate. Then you should try about 500 IC

 

[Alexander Seil]

Not sure how the TRP computed that, but remember that what HoI2 IC should not be derived directly from GDP estimates or anything of that nature, because it, implicitly, does not encompass the entire range of economic activities in a country, and even in 1940s the share of services in US output was much higher than it was in Germany. Even the durable output is not a good measure, because what you allocate to civilian spending in the game mostly represents output that could be diverted to military uses. If you derive IC strictly from GDP or durable output, you'll get a grossly unbalanced game (the US and USSR are already massively powerful).

 

[AlanC9]

Umm... so what is a good measure of production?

It's important to remember that Lend-Lease production is simulated by directly creating IC in the target countries. 6 IC for Britain the first time, 5 every time afterwards. 3 IC for the Soviets every time, 6 IC for China every time. Since these events fire a lot, that's where the missing US production is.

Unfortunately, it would take a total rework of the events to let the US keep these ICs for itself, either because the target has fallen or the US player just doesn't want to give it away.

 

[goobermaster]

500 IC... hmm then I guess I will have to have an event to give the US..

300 IC!

Then mabye I can have a challenge - the AI itself is no challenge, and with such a massive IC, the US will be able to put up a serious fight. With ministers, machine tools, they could have 650+ IC!!!!

And Seil... Well thats how the war was won, really...massive industrial production by the allies or soviets that was a great deal above that of Germany, Italy and Japan. I mean, the USSR was outproducing Germany on the eve of Barbarossa!

 

[Alexander Seil]

You're comparing apples to oranges - real life Germany and a Germany that controls the British Isles and capable of mobilizing the massive industries there for its own needs. And we didn't even start on the measures of production yet...

EDIT: And for the particularly gifted and witty among us - a good measure of production is one that captures output that was used for military purposes directly, or productive capacities that could be easily diverted to military uses (output of heavy machinery, etc.). The value of tourism industry in your country, however, should play very little role in determining IC, no matter how huge it makes your GDP...

Now, there sure are more refined ways of going about it (you could consider the possibility of a low-industry, high-GDP nation buying weapons abroad and such), but that is too much detail.

 

[wright1331]

Since these events fire a lot, that's where the missing US production is.

Unfortunately, it would take a total rework of the events to let the US keep these ICs for itself, either because the target has fallen or the US player just doesn't want to give it away.

Does the USA actually lose IC when they accept these events?? I just thought they lost supplies... hmm


on a note;
Since your talking about writing your own events in the case that you take over the UK mainland. Maybe you could just make an event specifically for that.

Maybe, have the USA gain a 10-20% IC boost by event if germany holds london (possibly add and Paris to this)... Something like "The fate of the free world is now on the shoulders of the United States, urgent wartime production is the Main Priority" or something to that effect

 

[unmerged(35036)]

If we are to believe the numbers that the TRP team crunched to make the IC in their mod more accurate. Then you should try about 500 IC

TRP was great except for IC numbers, a little example is that Chile had more IC than Brazil and Argentina together, LOL...

About the idea of this post, well i think US IC is OK, maybe it should be raised a little more, but not that much, think how would the German Industry had become if they had archieved sealion?, i think if you are comparing germany after a successfull sealion, then you can't ask for historical changes of this kind.

 

[Thistletooth]

500 IC... hmm then I guess I will have to have an event to give the US..

300 IC!

Better give them some extra resources while you're at it. You're looking at a minimum of 600 energy, 300 metal, and 150 rare.

TRP was great except for IC numbers, a little example is that Chile had more IC than Brazil and Argentina together, LOL...

Oh, now I HAVE to know why they'd do something like that.

*notices your avatar*

Bitter any?

 

[unmerged(35036)]

Oh, now I HAVE to know why they'd do something like that.

*notices your avatar*

Bitter any?

TRP = Total Realism Project

I live in Argentina, and im sure i know what im talking about.

There is no chance that IC number could be reflected, i complained a lot in TRP forums about things like this, and they affected many small countries, not only Argentina, for an instance also Brazil have less IC than Chile wich is something impossible as well.

Tough TRP is great in a lot of things, IC number is something very strange in that mod.

Some countries IC were wipped out, some were raised out, and its really nonsense.

 

[unmerged(13991)]

" for one do not like this - the US's industrial output during WW2 was simply gargantuan, ouptroducing Germany, Japan and the UK combined by a sizeable factor.
"

Pardon? Who say that, write that, any sources? Please show me, actually I am moody and it will for sure give me a good laught.

I am sure, certain, without any doubt, the US's industrial was not garguatuan (can I say it's a Rabelaisian joke to say so), nor outproducing Germany + japan + UK ..... let say in february 1940 (the scholars affirm the WWII started in septembre 1939, so february 1940 is during the WWII).

On the other hand , I am ready to agree your affirmation is true let say in 1946 or 1945 ... Well Japan was almost destroy, Germany was almost destroy also, UK was so hurt economically they had to give away the empire.

So there is no historical justification to give more IC to USA in let say 1936, not 1939 ( or if you really want it, let say 2 IC in more in Wyoming because I do like Cody ... ). MAss production of war materials started in 1940, and influenced the war in late 1940, not before.

I will not argue about numbers, btw us I do nat have any, but if you are doing events, you should make those events follow the history, mean boost US IC starting in 1941, one time year, but not before that date in my opinion (because before that date the various gearing to war events do it quite well).

But think about game balance. I know the trend is to do a WC, but what can be the fun if I do a WC with Luxembourg to whom I had give 250 IC as base IC (if you get my point). If you give too much IC (Even if accurate) the game will be too easy (not balancing). And there is no country in DD or HOI II that is accuratly represented, so what oyu will give to USA yo uhave to do the same for the other countries

 

[Gormadoc]

" for one do not like this - the US's industrial output during WW2 was simply gargantuan, ouptroducing Germany, Japan and the UK combined by a sizeable factor.
"

Pardon? Who say that, write that, any sources? Please show me, actually I am moody and it will for sure give me a good laught.

I am sure, certain, without any doubt, the US's industrial was not garguatuan (can I say it's a Rabelaisian joke to say so), nor outproducing Germany + japan + UK ..... let say in february 1940 (the scholars affirm the WWII started in septembre 1939, so february 1940 is during the WWII).

On the other hand , I am ready to agree your affirmation is true let say in 1946 or 1945 ... Well Japan was almost destroy, Germany was almost destroy also, UK was so hurt economically they had to give away the empire.

So there is no historical justification to give more IC to USA in let say 1936, not 1939 ( or if you really want it, let say 2 IC in more in Wyoming because I do like Cody ... ). MAss production of war materials started in 1940, and influenced the war in late 1940, not before.

I will not argue about numbers, btw us I do nat have any, but if you are doing events, you should make those events follow the history, mean boost US IC starting in 1941, one time year, but not before that date in my opinion (because before that date the various gearing to war events do it quite well).

But think about game balance. I know the trend is to do a WC, but what can be the fun if I do a WC with Luxembourg to whom I had give 250 IC as base IC (if you get my point). If you give too much IC (Even if accurate) the game will be too easy (not balancing). And there is no country in DD or HOI II that is accuratly represented, so what oyu will give to USA yo uhave to do the same for the other countries

Think you miss the point, he is playing Germany and want a bigger challenge by giving US more ic. Dont think he cares of overall gamebalance and which specific year United states started to outproduce the rest of the world.

Regards Gormadoc

 

[goobermaster]

Thanks for all your responses.

I think I will write the events to give the US free ic after paris, london and/or moscow are occupied - representing a gear up for a war with Germany (as was historical)

And Gormadoc is correct - I want a huge challenge - the AI is laughable to defeat, if one knows what to do , and imagine trying to invade N. America when its protected by the US Navy with 600 IC behind it

I'm salivating already

Thanks again.

 

[AlanC9]

Does the USA actually lose IC when they accept these events?? I just thought they lost supplies... hmm

No, they don't lose IC. But they should be gaining the ICs if they don't shift that production overseas.

The way to do this right (within the existing framework) would be to rework the Lend-Lease events as timed events (persistent events have problems with loading saved games anyway). At the appropriate dates check to see if aid can be sent to China, Russia, or the UK (they exist, they're at war, the US has passed the Lend-Lease Act, Russia is not cut off from convoys). If not, the US automatically gets the IC. If the US can send the aid, the US chooses between giving the IC or keeping it. This should get around the problem sting01 mentions, since the IC would come into the game gradually rather than existing from the beginning.

Anyone have any idea how often these events should fire? UK event says "offset = 270 # Check for trigger conditions every 120 days", USSR event says "offset = 270 # Check for trigger conditions every 30 days," and the China event just says "offset = 300" I'm guessing the USSR is a typo.

How about twice per year - July 1 and January 1? This would mean 1 rise in 1940, and 2 per year afterward. Then it's a question of how many ICs we want to give the Allies on those dates. How about 15 total? That'd be 120 more ICs total by January 1944. I don't think we'd want to go much higher than that.

We also need dated events to return ICs to the US if the target provinces for the IC builds are conquered.

I also get the impression that the Chinese get too many ICs from the existing events, and Russia too few. And if the British Isles are conquered the US should probably stop sending any aid to China.

Anyone like this plan?

 

[unmerged(35036)]

And Gormadoc is correct - I want a huge challenge - the AI is laughable to defeat, if one knows what to do , and imagine trying to invade N. America when its protected by the US Navy with 600 IC behind it

To my taste the US have a decent IC ATM, but if you want challenge, i don't think giving US more IC would be enough.

To my taste more big nations AI are not very realistic, US dont behave as it should, also UK have a lot of problems, and dont forget about retarded Japanese AI dont leaving 1 gar in Japan main provinces and not atacking dutch indies unless you serve it to em on a plate!

To make this things more Challenging, i think you should aim for AI changes, instead of IC changes, but is up to you .

 

[unmerged(45079)]

As germany, I constantly find myself having either the same amount or slightly more IC then the US after Sealion.

I for one do not like this - the US's industrial output during WW2 was simply gargantuan, ouptroducing Germany, Japan and the UK combined by a sizeable factor.

So I am trying to come up with an event to add some IC to the US when they go to war, to correctly leave me outproduced and add some challenge - given that the AI is as dumb as a post, I hope this will add a small challenge.

So, based on the US's base IC of 281 in the 1936 GC, how much do you think I should add (along with about half the materials needed for them as the US already has insane amounts of raw materials)?

50? 100? 150? How much IC should I give the US?

For those who want to have figures. Here they are:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_aircraft_production
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II

 

[Faeelin]

In 1941, Germany produced 11,776 aircraft; the UK produced 20,094, Japan produced 5,088, and the USA (which was still at peace, though rearming, 12,804).

The germans produced 5,200 tanks; the UK only 4,841, and the US a measly 4,052, while Japan produced 1,024.

But what happens in 42? Russia, with its industrial heartland occupied by the Germans, produces 24,446 tanks, while Germany, with the resources of Europe, produces, umm, 9,200. The US produces 24,997.

Let's fast foward to 1944, as Speer takes command of the German economy, and the US begins producing less military equipment, as it's clear they're winning.

The US produces 96,318 aircraft, while Germany produces 39,807, and Japan produces 28,180.

So IMO, even if you look at military production, America's IC should be 2 or 3 times Germany.

Edit: Information is from Why the Allies Won

 

[unmerged(44893)]

Yep, it's all an issue of economy in the end.

 

[Gen.Schuermann]

you also have to keep in mind that the US still had to produce consumer goods on a grand scale, whereas Germany was already on a total war doctrine (Totaler Krieg), where the maximum output was in 1944.