WanderingHead
Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Protagonist
It would seem as if you would either have to kill a great deal of transports or very very key transports to interdict this process.
The way to "attack" resources is to make it impossible or expensive for the WA to maintain the transport link to its resources. So you sort of hit the nail on the head when you said "a great deal of transports, or very very key transports".
But even without severing, you can make it expensive for the WA to maintain the link. Consider that _every_ turn, the WA would have to throw a transport out there, and if that means that every turn you can get another transport then you have made it expensive and difficult for him, even if you don't sever the link.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Protagonist
Do the NMRC resources follow the rule that they must be connected by transport to a factory?
No, these resources are taken from territories at the beginning of the season regardless of whether they have a link to anywhere or not.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Protagonist
Is there a rule for which resources are taken first?
Hmm, perusing the manual it doesn't seem to be specified, or not that I can find. The way it works is that it is that in NON-FROZEN regions with a factory, the production capability of that region (undamaged factories times production muliplier) worth of resources are safeguarded against NMRC annihilation, but any other WA resources in any region are fair game.
This resource safeguarding is implemented so that you don't get the ridiculous situation that an isolated England loses all her resources to NMRC while hoarding resources in other places around the world. A region with a factory that is "at war" won't lose its resources to NMRC.
Beyond that, I have observed in the game that the NMRC resources always come from the same territories. I imagine the code just goes through the regions in some arbitrary but invariant way.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Protagonist
What is the benefit to the Axis player (or the penalty to the WA) for not being able to fulfill NMRC?
It's not that NMRC isn't "fulfilled". The NMRC resources are annihilated regardless.
The benefit is a long term benefit. It means that resources tend to get consumed by NMRC rather than accumulating.
Since the factory multiples start small in the game, the WA production starts small. But the number of resource centers does not change. The number of resources supports USA production at FM=5 (factory multiple). So near the beginning of the game, the WA has a HUGE resource surplus. The NMRC reduces the surplus by annihilating the NMRC resources.
The implications are that the WA really have to try to keep their links, they cannot as easily accumulate buffers of stored resource pools. Such accumulated buffers could either allow the WA to link to fewer resources without a production loss, or if accumulated over many turns can provide the stored resources needed to fuel the quick burn at USA FM=5, which requires a huge number of resources. By that time, with the DEI and Europe lost the WA usually doesn't have enough resource centers to fuel FM=5 continuously, but with a buffer the USA can fuel FM=5 for several turns.
The NMRC makes it more work (connecting just about every turn) to maximize that buffer.
|
Printable Version
Non-Military Resource Consumption (no bug) - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread