Economy & internal policy Events

The Flag?!

General Baker wrote:The Flag?!

Not only, but yes.

I created British India to simulate the difference in their overall industrialisation. At the moment it´s only India itself, but they´ll also get Pakistan, Burma, Bangladesh...
That is why I am still thinking about wether Manufacturing is good or wether I should change it to agriculture (especially as India has some 20 IC more than I originally planned, but I was too lazy to remove it for the moment)

Apart from that, I am thinking about putting a modifier on them ("Crown Colony" or the like) which denies them any significant military budget until the mothercountry demands mobilization from its colonies.

And by the way...
You don´t have to ADD 800 IC, but to REACH 800.

So, only add the difference, which is 800-284 = 516 ^^

I knew THAT part

I'm making an IC spreadsheet, so I don't mess up horribly ^^

Hmm, I really need to be a bit more generous with the IC give-out

EDIT: added 1s and 2s to the regions on these lists:

http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0027/tab16.txt
http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0027/tab17.txt

Alot of them didnt have anything O.o

[img][/img]

China is dooone.
Now I´m off watching the great game Argentina vs. Germany

On 750 or so... need to just boost it up a tiny bit then done \o/

http://www.mediafire.com/?mxmaizwnjzw <-- USA files

Excellent work, you have proven yourself worthwile, Padawan

You are applying for Russia, I assume?
Amazing what pace this has gathered with some motivation and another helping hand at work!

I can do Russia if you need it done I'm free now that holidays are on - just the occasional part-time gardening job Just have no ideas about what numbers I'm aiming for :? ...

General Baker wrote:I can do Russia if you need it done I'm free now that holidays are on - just the occasional part-time gardening job Just have no ideas about what numbers I'm aiming for :? ...

360

I just wanted to make sure you really wanted to do it ;-)

you can take a look here:
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/commonwealth/ussr_elec_1974.jpg

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/commonwealth/soviet_pet_refin_82.jpg

to get an idea of the distribution.


http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2007/01/sachs.png

To bad that is found this last one very lately, despite it being based on more recent data, it is very cool.

*puts on helmet* YESSAH

I'll have Russia finished by tomoz morning

Black Guardian wrote:
Karelian, you can do more useful stuff by researching and speculating a bit. Though I am doing this for the 1936 setup with historical data, the same will be due sooner or later with the 1946-scenario, this time with Magrathea for our mod. Right now the economy-stuff is a separate mod but as we will integrate it sooner or later (apart from the vanilla-release that I might consider), we need some GDP-estimations for the 1946 start. It is 10 years later, but with massive destruction due to the war in some areas. So, if you could do a similar list as I send you once (Country Industrialisation - the one with base IC and industrial status) with updated Data for 1946.

Will do, I´ll see what I can find about the unemployment statistics as well. And a separate release for economy part sounds like a good idea and an ideal way to playtest and refine it further.

http://www.mediafire.com/?mmzzmdw0qvf <--- Russia folder





And some useful maps I used (thanks for some, BG )

http://map.primorye.ru/raster/maps/commonwealth/soviet_pet_refin_82.jpg
http://map.primorye.ru/raster/maps/commonwealth/ussr_machine_1974.jpg
http://map.primorye.ru/raster/maps/commonwealth/ussr_metal_1974.jpg
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/commonwealth/ussr_elec_1974.jpg
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/commonwealth/ussr_pop_1974.jpg

Good. Thats it with the world IC-setup then. Now the only thing that has to be changed on the setup are
a) colonial holdings (such as British India)

which will be boring and stupid work again, as there are no existing cores for revolters that can be used to speed up the work as it was possible with India (at least I know no other way yet than doing it by hand)

and

b) ressources

that have to be assigned on the right places to keep all the additional IC running. Right now, some regions are severely misrepresented anyway in my opinion. Keep in mind that this is about starting ressources. Those required for the constant growth shall be added by event if it works as I have in mind

c) infra & railways (optional)

so that for Example India has not 80% Infra all over the place, and military advanced will be forced to proceed along railway lines... a major strategic aspect that Paradox has in my opinion failed to properly design to fit the supply model.


Then I have to complete the first setup of events (namely the "from recession/depression back to growth"-branch) and you can start testing

\o/

I'm always here to help if you need resources/infra being done

Yeah, while looking for the ressources that are already in in vanilla (there was some summary-table I remember) I found out that it is not possible to add new ressources via event, despite an existing event-command. ="§/$(!)!!!!!


In disbelief, I just tested it myself and found out that the folks who had observed this were right.
I don´t know if this has been fixed in SF, but I doubt it. So, we are stuck again to technology or province-modifiers of some kind to mod it more complicated than necessary

If someone of you having SF could try wether it works - and if not, post his complaint in the beta-patch thread - we could really make things alot easier.

/me has SF

create a new txt-file within your hoi3/events folder, call it whatever you like ("test" would be sufficient)

and add the following into the new file:

Code:


country_event = {

   id = 15020

   trigger = {  owns = 2208
   }

   mean_time_to_happen =  {
      days = 10
   }

   title = "The oil fields of Dresden!"
   desc = "Surprisingly our geologists have found an unprecedented Oil field -  the biggest in germany yet - in the Province of Dresden while digging for coal."
   picture = ""

   option = {
      name = "You must be kidding!"
                2208 = { crude_oil = 30 }
      }
}



Save, and start up as Germany, wait until the event pops up and check if there is 30 crude oil in Dresden (you might have to wait 1 day after the event happened)

ooh ok, will do

No, doesnt work

But the popup works fine - a suggestion:

Make the event trigger a hidden tech, which ups the oil production in a region or across the country?

General Baker wrote:No, doesnt work

But the popup works fine - a suggestion:

Make the event trigger a hidden tech, which ups the oil production in a region or across the country?

Tech effects do only work for the entire country. Province modifiers are the only option to replace it, though then any province needs to have at least a base value which to modify positively.

Check the latest beta patch to see whether the aforementioned problem still exists?

Karelian wrote:Check the latest beta patch to see whether the aforementioned problem still exists?

At least it is not mentioned in the changelog, which is no good sign. I guess you mentioned it too shortly before the thread was closed by the mod because of the new Version... so you might want to remember them

Black Guardian wrote:

Karelian wrote:Check the latest beta patch to see whether the aforementioned problem still exists?

At least it is not mentioned in the changelog, which is no good sign. I guess you mentioned it too shortly before the thread was closed by the mod because of the new Version... so you might want to remember them

Thought so as well, just making sure to avoid unnecessarily repeating myself.

Soo, finally, after some annoyances with Deutsche Bahn (our railway operator), back from my small holiday-weekend away from home.

Has anyone tried any of the other commands with SF?
Energy does not work either if I remember, but maybe the poster is right and the command is not "energy" but rather "coal" despite what the scripting guide is telling us.

I´m currently thinking a bit more about the economic mobilisation we mentioned earlier, as the recession/depression -> growth will be fairly easy to script - at least in my mind - with the most extensive work being balancing. It is basically only 2 events and the decisions for stimulus packages.

And then I´ll do economic mobilisation as this is the most important part for the war-part of the game. I will base this upon Karelians approach of decision-chains that allow you to mobilise your economy step by step for purpose of war, setting in motion things like shortages, rationing, material collections (metals especially), civil conscriptions (women in factories) and the rearrangement of ressources to the war effort apart from only military spending in relation to GDP which probably will be additional, as it is subject to another method of measuring.
Influences on how fast it can be mobilised once you click the decision are most importantly the economic system (with central planning having a huge advantage here and completely free-market economies behaving worst because of the amount of change needed), national unity (as an indicator how cooperative people & government are in fighting commonly against a thread), and the level of planning made in advance (historical example is the UK which already had plans prepared before the war and could thus enact them quickly with the outbreak. This one will be modelled as a technology marking the level of detail/preparedness - could fit into the theory tech, couldn´t it?).

Once the decision is enacted it will take some time according to the factors mentioned above (and if anyone has other good ideas, please go ahead and throw them in) and then add a modifier which, depending on the level, increases several things like IC-to-supply-efficiency, IC-to-oil, maybe lower unit costs as well as an indicator for efficiency increase in producing them? It could also be handled by further IC-efficiency-increase, but I dislike the fact that it then changes the "industrial level" as a whole... but we´ll have to decide on that later.

So far I´m waiting for your input

Black Guardian wrote:And then I´ll do economic mobilisation as this is the most important part for the war-part of the game. I will base this upon Karelians approach of decision-chains that allow you to mobilise your economy step by step for purpose of war, setting in motion things like shortages, rationing, material collections (metals especially), civil conscriptions (women in factories) and the rearrangement of resources to the war effort apart from only military spending in relation to GDP which probably will be additional, as it is subject to another method of measuring.

Influences on how fast it can be mobilised once you click the decision are most importantly the economic system (with central planning having a huge advantage here and completely free-market economies behaving worst because of the amount of change needed), national unity (as an indicator how cooperative people & government are in fighting commonly against a thread), and the level of planning made in advance (historical example is the UK which already had plans prepared before the war and could thus enact them quickly with the outbreak. This one will be modelled as a technology marking the level of detail/preparedness - could fit into the theory tech, couldn´t it?).

Once the decision is enacted it will take some time according to the factors mentioned above (and if anyone has other good ideas, please go ahead and throw them in) and then add a modifier which, depending on the level, increases several things like IC-to-supply-efficiency, IC-to-oil, maybe lower unit costs as well as an indicator for efficiency increase in producing them? It could also be handled by further IC-efficiency-increase, but I dislike the fact that it then changes the "industrial level" as a whole... but we´ll have to decide on that later.

So far I´m waiting for your input

First of all the theory tech solution for prewar planning is good, and I support it.

As for the effects of different economic mobilization decisions, I prefer the latter approach of various smaller effects instead of simple IC-efficiency-increases.

For example, if we can create an event system that automatically destroys too large peacetime supply stockpiles, and gives some cash in return to simulate the fact that nobody hoarded vanilla-game style raw material stockpiles before the war but they were instead sold off? If so, we can have a system where the beginning of economic mobilization marks the beginning of resource stockpiling: the events are replaced by other set ("Resource stockpiling during national emergency") where the upper limit for resource stockpiles becomes considerable higher. Once again centralized economies are able to stockpile more goods, but not significantly more.

Historically problems related to different aspects of economic mobilization in WWII era were caused by political fragmentation and administrative difficulties. The miserable mess and infighting of German wartime economy is a classic example, while the relatively low pace of French economic mobilization had much to do with the politically bitterly didived home front of France. Generally speaking economic mobilization was both administratively complex and politically extremely sensitive task, and attainment of full war potential required social cohesion and skilled, centralized administration. France lacked the first, and as surprising as it may sound all the major axis powers lacked the latter. Therefore in the historical comparison only the USSR, US and Britain were able to fully mobilize their economies to support the war effort.

Here are some interesting statistics of the subject:


United States and Soviet Union are able to mobilize their economies very well, while Germany is worse than Britain despite being the most mobilized of the Axis powers.


Interesting correlation between change in real GDP and relative GDP per head from the situation of 1938

Another correlation of GDP per head and percentage of population mobilized - Soviet Union is roughly equal with Bulgaria in this regard.

Interesting statistics - though we´ll have to look what they can provide us except nice background information.

Historically problems related to different aspects of economic mobilization in WWII era were caused by political fragmentation and administrative difficulties. The miserable mess and infighting of German wartime economy is a classic example, while the relatively low pace of French economic mobilization had much to do with the politically bitterly didived home front of France.

While the second case is already represented by the National Unity, the Axis case is harder to grasp. My initial idea was to use the corruption-indicator we already planned for the political system for this, but I don´t know wether this fits historical reality. Administrative difficulties are not necessarily tied to corruption, as far as I remember in Germany it was a deliberately created situation to confuse people aiming to strengthen their identification with the symbolic figure of the Führer. At least this is what we learned in our history-lessons
Another approach could be to simply make the Axis economic system (heavily state-regulated private corporations, ranging up to central planning with private equity) worse in these matters despite being centrally planned.

And as a sidequestion: Do you have any idea which economic system law fits best for Japan? Also the typically axis privately-owned but state-directed command economy?

Black Guardian wrote:While the second case is already represented by the National Unity, the Axis case is harder to grasp. My initial idea was to use the corruption-indicator we already planned for the political system for this, but I don´t know wether this fits historical reality. Administrative difficulties are not necessarily tied to corruption, as far as I remember in Germany it was a deliberately created situation to confuse people aiming to strengthen their identification with the symbolic figure of the Führer. At least this is what we learned in our history-lessons. Another approach could be to simply make the Axis economic system (heavily state-regulated private corporations, ranging up to central planning with private equity) worse in these matters despite being centrally planned.

Your history lessons were similar to mine, then. The key question of Italian Fascism and German National Socialism was the relation between the Party and the State: and Germany and Italy did indeed pursue virtually opposite directions in their domestic policy. Since Mussolini never really held a firm grip over his unruly party, membership soon became little more than a meal ticket for advancement and the price of entry for office, as Mussolini instead consolidated all power in the state apparatus.

Meanwhile in Germany Hitler´s political and ideological leadership of the NSDAP was unquestioned and absolute, and thus the Party remained indispensable to him while the civil service and Interior Ministry and their skilled, conservative bureaucrats were always viewed with suspicion. As a result he preferred his old Party comrades as Gauleiters and gave these individuals sweeping powers and little responsibility to report to anyone else than himself. In effect "it was easy to see, that our allegedly highly centralized Führer state had already begun to break up into dozens of satrapies and scores of tiny duchies", quoted a bitter Interior Ministry bureaucrat already in 1939. So while this system unavoidably created inefficiency and corruption, that wasn´t the actual goal - the aim, as you said, was to create a system where everyone worked "towards the will of the Führer." Yet in effect the system of Sonderverwaltung created a mess where paraller organizations competed and fought one another within the Nazi state, and different ministers where in vain wasting time trying to work out who was responsible for what. Hitler was never in Berlin, there were no cabinet meetings and the Reich Defence Council, Reichsverteidigungsrat, that in theory could have acted as a wartime government was a dead letter due Göring´s laziness of promoting it and Hitler´s overall lack of support: After December 1939 it scarcely ever met, and efforts to revive it later failed.

All in all I support the idea of making endemic corruption a key hindrance of Axis wartime economies, especially in the case of Germany. Thus they´d be in their historical position as a "third way" between free market democracies and planned economy of the Soviet Union.

Black Guardian wrote:And as a sidequestion: Do you have any idea which economic system law fits best for Japan? Also the typically axis privately-owned but state-directed command economy?

In short: Yes. The ruling clique was never able to bring the major zaibatsus under their control because these business groups were strong and influential enough to defend their own interests much like the major business groups in Germany were able to wield significant influence in wartime economy of the Reich.

Oh well, sorry to bore you to death: it clearly shows that I´ve been recently reading books about the subject while trying to device stats for 1946-scenario.

That has nothing to do with boring me, indeed, I am very interested in such historical detail. I´m also reading a lot of history books myself, as I think it is easiest to understand our world with a look back to the past. Right now I´m reading a history about the oil economy. Would have better studied history instead of economics - maybe focused on economic history... but its too late now.

So, you agree with my idea to use corruption as an influental value to wartime economy?
Hard to believe that Germany was ever corrupt from todays point of view, where everyone is so proud of the incorruptible bureaucracy here... though in reality they are all prone to business interest today, at least they give us the feeling (today our jurisdiction sentenced a bank manager to 10 years probation / suspended sentence and some lump sum of 100.000 euro - does anyone think THIS will decrease the incentive to turn your bank into a speculation-group after he earned millions of euros with it?)


I don´t know wether you can find better statistics on the military spending levels of countries than I have - if they show similar results (which I highly suspect, because mobilisation increases military output, replaces back civil production and concentrates ressources on military actions, which leads to increase of the total military spending in comparison to GDP) we can also tie the military spending levels above "medium" (10-20%) on the amount of military mobilisation, so that only economically mobilised countries can reach spending levels above 20%.


Now, I shall bore you to death with some advise on scenario planning that I learned this semester. The important steps you have to take are to carve out the key factors that are influental on the variables you look for in the end. In case of GDP-levels this is probably population (people killed cannot produce anything), economic growth during the wartime (increase of GDP / productivity increase / reconstruction of destroyed production capacities), destruction during the wartime (decrease of GDP) and captured economic capacity.
Then you take a look on these factors, their actual influence for your scenario-relevant output-variable (GDP 1946). Finally, when varying them, you can then estimate how things could look like - of course this always depends on your assumptions about their influence and their projected change.

Black Guardian wrote:That has nothing to do with boring me, indeed, I am very interested in such historical detail. I´m also reading a lot of history books myself, as I think it is easiest to understand our world with a look back to the past. Right now I´m reading a history about the oil economy. Would have better studied history instead of economics - maybe focused on economic history... but its too late now.

I´d say it is netter to find a job with an economics degree and read history as a hobby

Black Guardian wrote:I don´t know wether you can find better statistics on the military spending levels of countries than I have - if they show similar results (which I highly suspect, because mobilisation increases military output, replaces back civil production and concentrates ressources on military actions, which leads to increase of the total military spending in comparison to GDP) we can also tie the military spending levels above "medium" (10-20%) on the amount of military mobilisation, so that only economically mobilised countries can reach spending levels above 20%.

Black Guardian wrote:The important steps you have to take are to carve out the key factors that are influental on the variables you look for in the end. In case of GDP-levels this is probably population (people killed cannot produce anything), economic growth during the wartime (increase of GDP / productivity increase / reconstruction of destroyed production capacities), destruction during the wartime (decrease of GDP) and captured economic capacity. Then you take a look on these factors, their actual influence for your scenario-relevant output-variable (GDP 1946). Finally, when varying them, you can then estimate how things could look like - of course this always depends on your assumptions about their influence and their projected change.

Sounds like a plan. I´ll have to cross-check my sources, but so far it seems that during WWII the nazi-occupied Europe national income grew only in Germany, and their "occupation economics" wreaked widespread havoc. In the worst cases and areas, rampart inflation led to the collapse of state authority and a temporal abandonment of a monetary economy. By the end of the war, tax revenues in Greece, for example, covered less than 6% of government spending! In July 1942 Finance Minister von Krosigk noted that "In Greece...a legal market no longer exists, nor a price mechanism which could act as a basis of stabilization and reorganization...If the war drags on, it will be necessary to prevent the countries whose potential we are exploiting, from premature economic ruin. A few months later, when the German commissar at the Belgian central bank wrote of dangerous inflationary pressures because of the difficulty of controlling the black market, he highlighted the risk of making ""A monetary Greece" out of Belgium." Interesting stuff when one compares it to the current situation of world economy.

This is indeed very interesting, and I didn´t know it was THAT bad. Seems like this can/must be considered also with some kind of event, not only the real destruction by war due to advancing troops.

Right now, I made the first larger playtest with Depression-setup, as I assigned the depression-modifier to the US in 1936. Until January 1938, within 2 years, the US-IC had reduced to 734 (starting with 794) or by 8%, meaning roughly 4 % decrease per year. It took until May 1938 until the depression ceased, after I triggered a massive stimulus-package in Dec 37. By then, IC was down to 723. It could have taken even longer, had I not put the stimulus pack into action. - Again, this is random. In my first start the depression ended in April 36, which was a bit too early for me, but the second test has been more satifying.

Apart from this, I will probably rebuild the growth->recession approach. Right now, it is modelled by 4 different events that all represent different scenarios (stock market crash, banking sector crash, currency crisis, speculative bubble) - the problem that arises is that those have 4 different MTTHs and thus increase random triggering by the factor 4. I seek to prevent this by reducing it to one or 2 events (as banking sector crash has some different options that give different results for the player according to the choice) and putting up several flavor-explanation AFTER this one event has triggered.

So, you´ll get the gameplay-event removing growth & setting recession and some days after you´ll get notice of what happened. Hopefully I will find a way to write the event-text in a way that provides some sence to it. Somewhat like: "Today the stock market plunged deeply, alarming news are arising from the major corporations. Meanwhile, our economists still can only guess what happened and try to investigate further to find out what really happened."
Some days after, the news arrived. "It has become clear that the recent turbulences on the market are caused by a huge bubble within our economy. People are now in panic and try to sell their asset to save their money. Unfortunately this pushes us deeper into the crisis. Companys are becoming undercapitalised, people save their money in fear of unemployment and the banks are unwilling to give credit to business due to the worsening conditions".

Apart from that, I noticed that ressources are not as much of an issue as I thought they´d be. Surprisingly, the USA could still supply themselves with everything necessary. They have some problems with metal and rares if their IC gets too high, but I never experienced real shortcomings in the 4 years of my test.
Other countries have more problems, but nothing that cannot be resolved by improved trading-AI and some minor ressource-adding.

Third - and very important - is the fact that at least with the USA, money is of no worth at all. You get enough at your own, don´t have to spend it for ressources because you have everything you need, and license-building is useless as you can build anything on your own high tech level.
So, we definitely need to increase the worth of money... at least in this case. We have to look at other countries as well to find out how much of an issue it is for them.

Next status report: Economic mobilisation implemented, the first minor bugs have been eradicated in the first test, now it works as supposed to.
Time until the event triggers is still subject to randomness, lacks some modifiers (the pre-planning tech is not implemented yet for example) and needs further tweaking.

In my test, I started the war on the 5th of July 1939, immediately mobilising my economy.



I didn´t yet test wether the tech-command for increasing IC-to-supplies works, but I am pessimistic from earlier expierences. Seems like only event-commands work for modifiers, so no Ic-to-supply-efficiency here. But unit recruiting time is a nice replacement.

Due to my high National unity (above 90%) and the fact that I didn´t make the modifier for Axis economic system too high, and maybe a bit of luck, I already got this on August 21, which means my mobilisation took some 47 days... a bit too fast maybe, but this is randomness I cannot change without taking the risk of making the time possible too long



Of course I immediately went on to trigger the full mobilisation after I got basic mobilisation.
Again, my impression was that it happened quite quickly, probably the NU-modifier is too high in relation to the MTTH. Further testing must show.
This time it took 59 days to prepare everything.


Further issues noted: Units are too expensive in relation to the IC available. I could hardly build up a decent force with medium spending as Germany, though historically it did. Similar issues are with Britains small spending which is not able to finance the ships that were in construction...

Black Guardian wrote:
Further issues noted: Units are too expensive in relation to the IC available. I could hardly build up a decent force with medium spending as Germany, though historically it did. Similar issues are with Britains small spending which is not able to finance the ships that were in construction...

Looking good so far, I just got back from local rock festival.
I think we´ll need to adjust and tweak the unit costs a little bit until we start to get historical production rates.

*Bump*
Anything new in this regard?

Karelian wrote:*Bump*
Anything new in this regard?

No, its examination-time and I host a guest as well at the moment, no time or motivation. I will take a break anyway and won´t be doing much in the next 2-3 weeks.

Hey mals
Add ali raşit

Iraq fuhrer: Rashıd Alı Gaylanı