WWW Production Observations

[Devout]

Best estimate of how production works based on the WWW videos.

Production Factors
Factory production: 5 IC per factory per day
Max Gearing Bonus: Starts at 50% and goes to 100%
Min Gearing Bonus: Appears to be 10%
Production Bonus: Starts at 5% with Germany and goes to 95% in WWW10
Resource Availability: Value of 1.0 if all material is available

Example 1
The year is 1940 and Germany has 1936 fighter technology, an 80% max gearing bonus, and a 65% production bonus. Germany has 15 factories producing the BF109 which has an IC cost of 22. All resources are available for the 15 factories (15 oil, 15 rubber, 30 aluminum). The factories have been running for some time and have reached max efficiency

Planes Built =( 15 factories x 5 IC per factory x 0.80 gearing x 1.65 bonus x 1.0 resource) / (22 IC per plane) = 4.5 planes per day

Example 2
The player wants to double production of planes so he changes his 15 factory tank line over to BF109. Germany has all necessary resources for the production line (15 oil, 15 rubber, 30 aluminum). The new production line produces far less:

Planes Built =(15 factories x 5 IC per factory x 0.10 gearing x 1.65 bonus x 1.0 resource) / (22 IC per plane) = 0.56 planes per day

Additional Notes
1. Naval production: Dockyards do not have gearing bonus. Dockyards are showing 2.5 IC per factory production
2. Resource Impact: This value appears to change as they are balancing the game. As of WWW10, production is at 55% for one missing resource (1 of 2, or 2 of 3) and 35% for 2 missing resources (1 of 3). Penalty for having no resources is unknown.
3. Cost increase over time: It appears that newer technology results in increased costs. It was pretty evident with ships (SS1 to SS2 went from 1000 to 11000, and BB1 to BB2 went from 14k to 15.4k). Artillery level 2 also increased to 5 (over 4 in 1939, and 2 in 1936)
4. Cost decrease over time: It appears that some older technology gets cheaper over time. Infantry weapons 1 costs 0.75 in 1936. When infantry weapons 2 is researched, it costs 0.75, but level 1 decreased to 0.5.
5. Gearing Rate: The tool tip showed a 1.7% increase (per week). That translates to a 41 week time period to go from 10% to 80%. The dev diary indicates an S curve, so it may not be that bad if that number represents the flat part of the curve.
6. Variant Cost: It appears that variants and versions (AA, Artillery, etc.) use the same cost as the base unit (i.e. Medium tank costs 12 so the Medium Tank Destroyer costs 12). But it should be noted that the resource cost goes up significantly.
7. Gearing loss: Appears to be a 50% penalty from switching production lines to a newer version
8. Reliability/Loss: Not enough information to project reliability needs on production. But a quick approximation shows that Germany went from +3k infantry weapons to -7k infantry weapons after losing 500k men. A 100% infantry to equipment ratio would show a 50k equipment need instead of 10k. So it looks like it is a 20% weapon loss ratio.




Cost Reference
1. Infantry Weapons: 1936 INF1 costs 0.75IC + 2 steel. INF2 costs 0.75IC + 4 steel. INF1 cost reduced to 0.5IC + 2 steel when INF2 researched.
2. Support: 1936 Support is 2IC + 2 Steel + 1 aluminum. By 1938 the cost increased to 4IC.
3. Artillery: 1936 Artillery costs 2IC + 2 steel + 1 Tung. By 1938 the cost increased to 4IC. ART2 cost increased to 5IC.
4. Light Tanks: 1934 Light tank tech shown as 11IC + 2 Steel + 1 oil. In 1940, the light tank cost is shown to be 9IC.
5. Medium Tanks: 1940 medium tanks shown as 12IC + 2 steel + 1 oil + 2 Tun
6. Heavy Tanks: 1937 heavy tanks shown as 50IC + 3 Steel + 1 oil + 3 Tun. Cost decreased to 25IC in 1940.
7. 1936 Planes: Fighter 22, CAS 22, NAV 26, TAC 35, Carrier -F 26.4, Carrier -NAV 31.2. All require 2 aluminum + 1 oil + 1 rubber
8. 1936 4 engine: STR 60IC, TRAN 180IC. Both require 3 aluminum + 1 oil + 2 rubber
9. Motorized: 2.5IC + 1 rubber + 1 oil
10. Mechanized: 10 IC + 2Steel + 1 oil + 1 rubber
11. Navy 1: Convoy 70 +1S+1O, SS 1000+1S+1O, DD 1300+2S+1O, LC4200+2S+1O, HC 5600+3S+1O+1CH, BC 10k+3S+1O, CA 11k+3S+1O+1CH, BB 14.4k+3S+1O+1CH
12. AA: 1936 costs 2IC+ 2steel. In 1938 increased to 4IC
13. Tank Destroyer: 1940 Med TD cost of 12IC w/ unknown resources
14. SP Artillery: 1940 Light Artillery 11IC w/ unknown resources, 1940 med Artillery 15 IC w/ 1R+ 1Oil + 1Steel

Unit Requirement Reference
1. Infantry = 100 inf weapons
2. Motorized = 50 mot + 100 inf
3. Light Tank = 60 tanks
4. Mountaineers = 140 inf
5. Recon = 40 inf + 10 support
6. Engineer = 10 inf + 30 support
7. Artillery = 24 artillery
8. Hospital = 20 mot + 30 support
9. Heavy tank = 40 tanks
10. Signal company = 10 mot + 50 support
11. Tank destroyer = 20 TD
12. AA = 16 AA
13. SP Artillery = 20 Light Artillery

 

[bkuepers]

Thanks Devout. Time to start making some spreadsheets for my Army plans.

Edit: removed. List updated.

 

[Daelyn75]

I don't quite understand why PDS is still making transport planes hideously expensive! Three times the cost of a heavy bomber? Come on. These aren't super jumbo jets with luxurious seating, along with champagne and steak and lobster served to the airborne forces going along for the ride! Even then, they would be cheaper than three times a heavy bomber! I think if anything, transports would be cheaper than a medium bomber since few were armed or armored, and they didn't carry bombs unless transporting them to an airbase.

I understand that they were previously abstracted to mean that there were several hundred in a unit of Air Transport, so that one unit could load up an entire airborne unit, but now we are counting them individually in HOI IV. The only thing I can think of, is if they abstract each transport plane the same way they do with infantry weapons. Which is 1000 = enough for a division. So each transport plane would equal many more than they represent.

 

[Devout]

They didn't show TD costs. Thats the problem with flipping back and forth between UK and Germany, as they skip some of those steps.

A couple of other notes I forgot to mention:
1. Not enough information to project reliability needs on production. But a quick approximation shows that Germany went from +3k infantry weapons to -7k infantry weapons after losing 500k men. A 100% infantry to equipment ratio would show a 50k equipment need instead of 10k. So it looks like it is a 20% weapon loss ratio.
2. Transitioning is really going to be a question of projecting surplus and demands. Germany's infantry weapon shortage is a great example. He just started inf weapons 2 at the same time he took the losses. My numbers project he would produce about 3k units from 15 factories in 40 weeks as they ramped up. If he had his inf weapon 1 factories still going, he could have produced 8k weapons (266%) in the same time period.
3. Also forgot to mention that there is a tool tip saying that gearing rate does not increase without resources. So starting a 1936 fighter line at game start without rubber doesn't accomplish much. You not only produce little, you don't increase over time. So the challenge early game is figuring out how to use your civilian factories. Keep them producing factories or trade them for resources?

 

[skillor7]

I don't quite understand why PDS is still making transport planes hideously expensive! Three times the cost of a heavy bomber? Come on. These aren't super jumbo jets with luxurious seating, along with champagne and steak and lobster served to the airborne forces going along for the ride! Even then, they would be cheaper than three times a heavy bomber! I think if anything, transports would be cheaper than a medium bomber since few were armed or armored, and they didn't carry bombs unless transporting them to an airbase.

I understand that they were previously abstracted to mean that there were several hundred in a unit of Air Transport, so that one unit could load up an entire airborne unit, but now we are counting them individually in HOI IV. The only thing I can think of, is if they abstract each transport plane the same way they do with infantry weapons. Which is 1000 = enough for a division. So each transport plane would equal many more than they represent.

I guess they´re doing this for gameplay reasons, to prevent paratrooper spam

 

[bkuepers]

I apologize if this has been asked before and answered, but does efficiency go up faster if you assign more factories to the line?

Wouldn't It would make sense if it did?

 

[Devout]

I apologize if this has been asked before and answered, but does efficiency go up faster if you assign more factories to the line?

Wouldn't It would make sense if it did?

I don't believe it does. It depends on how you view the gearing ratio. You could argue that 15 factories would share information with each other and gear up faster. Or you can view gearing ratio to be the factors that can not be avoided and each factory has to go through (Training employees. Adapting a unique factory layout to one optimized to production. Working with local vendors to provide resources in an efficient manner, etc)

 

[chemonaut]

Devout this is AWESOME!

 

[bkuepers]

I don't believe it does. It depends on how you view the gearing ratio. You could argue that 15 factories would share information with each other and gear up faster. Or you can view gearing ratio to be the factors that can not be avoided and each factory has to go through (Training employees. Adapting a unique factory layout to one optimized to production. Working with local vendors to provide resources in an efficient manner, etc)

Interesting. So I could just assign 1 factory to a line until it is max efficiency and then add 14 more factories to it and it wouldn't loose any efficiency? I guess I'll need some house rules so as not to game the system.

 

[bkuepers]

They didn't show TD costs.

They didn't show the Med.TD IC cost, but I thought it did show the number needed for a battalion when he was in the division designer.

 

[GsusNSV]

Interesting. So I could just assign 1 factory to a line until it is max efficiency and then add 14 more factories to it and it wouldn't loose any efficiency? I guess I'll need some house rules to as not to game the system.

No. The efficiency is tracked for every factory alone. In your example, the efficiency will drop near 0 as the 14 new factories have none.
Edit: The bar on top should be the average efficiency of the assigned factories.

 

[bkuepers]

No. The efficiency is tracked for every factory alone. In your example, the efficiency will drop near 0 as the 14 new factories have none.
Edit: The bar on top should be the average efficiency of the assigned factories.

Thank you for the reply. That is good news. Great strategy for the game as far as when to remove production from a line, etc. This will take some serious planning ahead. Well done Paradox.

 

[Daelyn75]

I guess they´re doing this for gameplay reasons, to prevent paratrooper spam

Quite possibly. But in reality, if they were so effective then why didn't they make a lot more than just three airborne units? The US had two, and Britain had one. If they aren't that effective in real life, then why are they effective in the game?

 

[skillor7]

Quite possibly. But in reality, if they were so effective then why didn't they make a lot more than just three airborne units? The US had two, and Britain had one. If they aren't that effective in real life, then why are they effective in the game?

good point

Yes, for accuracy they sould make them cheaper, but less effective.... altough it wouldn´t change that much actually

better they focus on more important issues

 

[Devout]

They didn't show the Med.TD IC cost, but I thought it did show the number needed for a battalion when he was in the division designer.

Yes. See first post. 20 TDs in a TD unit. I thought this was interesting as I expected 40-60 to match tanks units. I think that is to enable a cost effective way to give hard attack to alot of motorized units. I personally expect TDs to cost the same as the primary type (Medium Tank in WWW). Not seeing a strong reason to change the costs.

 

[Ibn_Solmyr]

I don't quite understand why PDS is still making transport planes hideously expensive! Three times the cost of a heavy bomber? Come on. These aren't super jumbo jets with luxurious seating, along with champagne and steak and lobster served to the airborne forces going along for the ride! Even then, they would be cheaper than three times a heavy bomber! I think if anything, transports would be cheaper than a medium bomber since few were armed or armored, and they didn't carry bombs unless transporting them to an airbase.

I understand that they were previously abstracted to mean that there were several hundred in a unit of Air Transport, so that one unit could load up an entire airborne unit, but now we are counting them individually in HOI IV. The only thing I can think of, is if they abstract each transport plane the same way they do with infantry weapons. Which is 1000 = enough for a division. So each transport plane would equal many more than they represent.

I agree and was asking myself also, since a long time. I came to same conclusion as you : in HoI3, a classic para division was made of 3 x 3000 soldiers = 9000. So let's say that it was requiring about 200 transport planes, which would give us 45 soldiers per each, or 250 planes, 36 per each. I was roughly thinking I was building 100 planes when building an air unit, so 2x/2.5x more. Still quite expensive for some rather simplistic planes... Then we might add other planes for redeploying the unit itself, for its logistics, etc...

Edit : D'Oh ! I'm just realising my numbers would be true only for a 1 squadron transporting a whole division, when we actually need 3 (?) in HoI3... So it's even more uncomprehensible to me.

This last point was same for all air units, by the way : we need transport planes everywhere ! (And reco/linking planes also)

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

In contrast to transport planes, convoys seem to be (again) very cheap, even if "convoy" is taken as representing single medium sized cargo ship, several which would be needed to move even infantry division around.

Merchantmen in this period seem to have gone for $1.5-2m or so. In comparison Sims class DD $5.5m, Fletcher $11m, Gato $2.85, Tacoma class frigate $2.25. And obviously merchantman would need more steel since it's larger though possibly no chromium (=high strength and armour steel).

 

[Devout]

I updated the 1st post
Clarified material costs (no real change, just clarification)
Added resource needs for materials
Added Germany resources
Added AA unit info

 

[panzerzombie]

In Video No.4 at 53:47 it is shown that a full battalion of 20 med.TD costs 240 IC so a single one costs 12 IC

or does this mean the training time ?

edit: wouldn´t make much sense if td cost the same as tanks, they were produced because they were cheaper ( at least the Stug-types ) and many were converted from existing chassis.

 

[Devout]

In Video No.4 at 53:47 it is shown that a full battalion of 20 med.TD costs 240 IC so a single one costs 12 IC

or does this mean the training time ?

edit: wouldn´t make much sense if td cost the same as tanks, they were produced because they were cheaper ( at least the Stug-types ) and many were converted from existing chassis.

Good spot. I updated the first post. Note that we do not know the resource needs for the tank destroyer. If the tank destroyer has 0 or 1 Tungston resource cost (compared to 2 Tungston for the Medium tank), it would make a big difference in production cost IMO.