mdiehl
Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000 Status: offline
|
quote:
Now, if user allocates more then that, then economy is going great. Alternatively, user can draw on the ships from this pool but at the cost of the efficiency of the HI/etc factories. Possible enhancements could be to tie total required capacity to the size of the economy and/or introducing similar thing for TKs. The problem with that is that at no time during the war was Japan's economy going great. It started the war 2 Million GRT short of what it needed to maintain its civilian economy, and military operations of EVERY kind, including the mere maintenance of Status Quo Ante in China (along with military budget expenditures approaching 60% of Japanese GDP) prevented the Japanese civilian economy from expanding and more generally led to a slow decline in the health and wealth of ordinary Japanese citizens well prior to significant Allied bombing efforts. The proper way to simulate the effects of the shortage of AKs is to have Japan's ability to wage war modeled as a self-destructing artifice whose capability simply deteriorates much faster when Japan moves ships, men or aircraft ANYWHERE for ANY reason. I know that view won't be popular, but it would be the best simulation of the shortfall in Japanese merchant capacity. There was in reality no "middle ground" between sustained economic activity and military operations because both (irrespective of each other) overtaxed the extant Japanese merchant fleet. So, either radically increase the resource and fuel demands of Japanese domestic industry, or radically decrease the total number of AKs available to Japan. Just treat them as "tied up with domestic industry" and get on with it. Actually, do BOTH and you come nearer the mark.
_____________________________
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics. Didn't we have this conversation already?
|