Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panjack

Just to confirm: repairing one point of HI requires 1,000 supply points (and a minimum stock of 10,000 points is required in the city to do repairs). In turn, each point of HI generates 2 supply points. So it would take 500 days to break even if you repair HI.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Actually things will repair without the 10K in stock It is just their repair will just be slowed down if you do not have enough in the pool.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
You might search for threads where this is discussed in terms of opportunity cots. What you say is true as far as it goes, but the total system costs and benefits is not a simple decision. In particular, look at the costs of not repairing the HI in terms of what other costs are incurred to make up for it. Transport fuel, ship damage, risk of attack to additional transports, etc. Not to mention not having enough HI at the end of the game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panjack

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
You might search for threads where this is discussed in terms of opportunity cots. What you say is true as far as it goes, but the total system costs and benefits is not a simple decision. In particular, look at the costs of not repairing the HI in terms of what other costs are incurred to make up for it. Transport fuel, ship damage, risk of attack to additional transports, etc. Not to mention not having enough HI at the end of the game.

You must be referring to
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=2855499

And others Alfred has participated in, with much better words.

I imagine that the costs/benefits of repairing HI differ dramatically between the Japanese and the Allies.

Sure.

For instance, the Allies don't need any more HI than they already start the game with in LA, SF, and Seattle (these cities give far more than needed to produce any on-map aircraft throughout the whole war).

Repairing HI is, to me, for the Allies, completely a supply generation issue.

Second...I think this is true...a single xAKL's worth of supply (say, 1750) is 875-day's worth of HI factory supply production. So if you don't repair the factory and send a single xAKL's worth of supply, this would be equal to repairing the factory and producing for 1,375 days!

Let me know when that ship arrives at Chungking, OK?

(And, frankly, I treat xAKLs as disposable units and don't bat an eyelash when one of my unescorted xAKL get sunk). Plus, instead of getting 2 supply points dripping out each day which might not make a difference, if you didn't repair the factory you'd have 1,000 supply points to use from day one (and then the 1,750 you'd get when the xAKL arrived). That might be helpful.

You are being too geographically lazy.

Of course, the issue of repairing factories in China (when cut off from ports) is somewhat different.

To say the least. The decision to repair/not repair in China can significantly affect 1943 there. If the Allied player intends to abandon China, or pull far, far back then the decision is different again. I just tire of these threads where people say "Always . . ." In AE there is no always, except it always depends.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panjack

Mr. Moose,

I think we can agree that China is a special case. But I'm not sure that just because we can't drive an xAKL to Chungking that we should repair HI in, say, Calcutta.

And we can agree that general rules ("always do this") are not always valid. Yet, I think it reasonable to say that IF you can supply LCUs by sea (directly or indirectly over land) then it might not be a good idea to repair a damaged HI complex that could also supply the LCUs.

I agree opportunity costs shouldn't be forgotten. But it might be noted that repairing HI today has an opportunity cost: you can't use 1000 supply today to supply units/upgrade units/etc today. There's no such thing as a free K ration!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
BUT, I think the issue is far more fraught for the Japanese. Places like Java, with long over-water LOCs, have different costs/risks than more interior-line HI depots when opportunity costs are averaged in. It might not be xAKLs at risk. It might be fat, modern xAKs with the range to make Java. (I also don't think of any ship as expendable for no gain, but I play for VPs.) Holding Java after fuel is dear might depend a lot on local supply sources that allow forts to be rebuilt in a siege. Many Japanese players have never gotten past mid-game, so they might not see a three-year pay-back as reasonable, given how dear supply is in the rapid expansion and construction phases they have played over and over. And it's a hard wall to climb given the initial cost, no question. But it's still an area that shouldn't be tossed off without thinking it through.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panjack

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
BUT, I think the issue is far more fraught for the Japanese. Places like Java, with long over-water LOCs, have different costs/risks than more interior-line HI depots when opportunity costs are averaged in. It might not be xAKLs at risk. It might be fat, modern xAKs with the range to make Java. (I also don't think of any ship as expendable for no gain, but I play for VPs.) Holding Java after fuel is dear might depend a lot on local supply sources that allow forts to be rebuilt in a siege. Many Japanese players have never gotten past mid-game, so they might not see a three-year pay-back as reasonable, given how dear supply is in the rapid expansion and construction phases they have played over and over. And it's a hard wall to climb given the initial cost, no question. But it's still an area that shouldn't be tossed off without thinking it through.

I have zero, zip, nada insight into the Japanese supply situation...I'm struggling to figure out the much simpler Allied situation! But now that I'm 300+ days into the war I'm finally trying to learn some of the stuff you can't just learn by trial-and-error and casual perusal of the manual and the forums.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar


As the allies ther is no reason to ever turn of industry? Why on earth would you want to. anyway? The Allies have piles of everytrhing so there is no shoratage like there is as Japan. Plus the Allies do not 'build' anything. All their planes are based on a fixed schedule/month. The Allies never have to mess with any production as it is totally unlike Japan's. The two systems are totally different.

As the Allies, you cannot expand AC factories, shipyards etc. What you have is what you get is just one example as to how the two sides are totally different.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar


As the allies ther is no reason to ever turn of industry? Why on earth would you want to. anyway? The Allies have piles of everytrhing so there is no shoratage like there is as Japan. Plus the Allies do not 'build' anything. All their planes are based on a fixed schedule/month. The Allies never have to mess with any production as it is totally unlike Japan's. The two systems are totally different.

As the Allies, you cannot expand AC factories, shipyards etc. What you have is what you get is just one example as to how the two sides are totally different.

IIRC ElCid has created a supply production issue for the allies in his RHS mod. Alot of starting allied factories are 50% damaged at start also.