Let's Talk About Tech, Baby!

[Detuite]

iperious leader I hear where your coming from about advanced artillery not being a tech , I don’t consider my tech tree to acually be just techs, but also traing and politics. In any war certain amounts of scrap metal will be bought by the government smoldered down and use for machines of war, so if scrap prices drop technicly so does the price of what ever it is being used to build. And advanced artillery and paratroopers is more of a traing program to make your troops better at what they do , practice makes perfect. And warbonds were there and did suplement a good amount of government money. That’s why I use the system I use because take Airborne Rangers for example you don’t hand a grunt a parachute and expect him to know how to use it which is my reson for not using OOB tech, the more times you jump the better you get. I’m not sure if you were even talking about my system but I just want to say there not just techs but techs, training, political advances and production of machinery by the lowest bidder.
                                                                                thank you for the feed back and were playing a game europe40 now, were at turn four and a total of 35 tech,s have been learnedbetween the 6 nations.

[Imperious Leader]

Paratroopers , War Bonds, etc can be standard rules and not techs.

Paratroopers can be just infantry where you pay 1 IPC and for that turn its converted, sort of a pay to play use permit. The Paratrooper can attack at +1 or not.

War bonds can be activated any time say USA enters the war, by that time all players are considered mobilized for the war effort, so just say on turn 4 everyone gets this.

Improved magic “poof” your naval cost -2 for no reason technology… well just scrap that dumb rule. Many of these OOB techs are like filler ideas and not at all developed or thought out. I imagine these were created while watching cartoons with no thought at all made to any relevance to reality.

It the technology tree contains these types of ideas, just leave out that word technology and use the words… “player upgrades and assorted ideas thought on a whim”

[axis_roll]

@Imperious:

Improved magic “poof” your naval cost -2 for no reason technology… well just scrap that dumb rule. Many of these OOB techs are like filler ideas and not at all developed or thought out. I imagine these were created while watching cartoons with no thought at all made to any relevance to reality.

I can not agree that improved ship yards has no basis in reality.
Ever hear of ‘economies of scale’?

[Imperious Leader]

Yes that would be modeled by USA growing in income as per OOB and her wartime mobilization efforts. Its not a thing where you pay a scientist to ‘research’ how to be magicians like David Copperfield and transform a nations economy into a 20% cost reductions.

If Germany had the income like USA in the war, it too could have built more naval among other things. The more raw materials you got the more you can buy, the cost of a bomber is X, and if you got alot more income it can be Y, but this is only a function of having more resources…. not technology. At this stage assembly line production was invented long ago, their are no shortcuts for a cheaper made tank or bomber, unless you substitute cheaper materials. Quality goes down if you take shortcuts.

The only way it could get cheaper due largely to technology would be if you had an army of robots making ships… they were not in use in 1940. It was still Rosie the riveter and other women and even slave labor toiling in factories. If anything factory costs may have increased because the pool of talent working on large warships was used to fight the war leaving lesser qualified types with novice skill to finish working in naval shipyards. The best talent always is used in more effective positions especially in wartime.

Also, the economics are already modeled in the game, albeit not very well. Income is raw materials expended for building wartime materials. The higher value you have the larger “economy of scale” you got.

So its already covered.

[axis_roll]

This entire game is an abstraction.  I don’t quite understand what makes the IL cut and what does not.
I guess I am more concerned how you diminish other’s idea’s concepts as wrong or of lesser quality than your thoughts.

---

just because USA has more capacity, doesn’t mean it can produce units cheaper.

Reduction in cost per unit resulting from increased production, realized through operational efficiencies.

THAT is what ‘economies of scale’ mean.  Operational efficiencies can be view in terms of {technological} improvements in manufacturing procedures.  Procedures do not necessarily require robots.  Better Rivets (materials) or better training (labor) or better materials delivery systems (just in time) are all realized without robots.

---

I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.

[Detuite]

Ok I see were your coming from ill change the name because your right this tree really doesn’t have much to do with technology, but i really couldn’t think of a new tital that people seeing the forum would understand. ( A breakdown of a euro game going on right now 5 turns in.

Germany- Lv1 paratroopers, Lv1-2and3 Advanced Artillery training, Lv1 Recruit, Lv1 Cargo Craft, Lv1and2 Divebombers, Lv1and2 Adv Submarines, Lv1 False Intellegence, And Lv1and2 Warbonds.

Soviet Union- Lv1and2 Advanced Artillery Training, Lv1 Recruit, Lv1 Fighter Training, Lv1 DiveBombers, Lv1 Increased Factory Production, Lv1-2and3 Warbonds.

United Kingdom- Lv1 Paratroopers, Lv1 Advanced Artillery Training, Lv1 Cargo Craft, Lv1 Shipyards, Lv1 Radar, Lv1 Warbonds.

Italy- Lv1 Marines, Lv1 Recruit, Lv1and2 Advanced Transports, Lv12and3 warbonds

USA- Lv1 Paratroopers, Lv1 Recruit, Lv1 Cargo Craft, Lv1 Divebombers, Lv1 Advanced Bombers, Lv1 Battle Cruisers, Lv1 Adv Transports, Lv1 Increased Factory Production, Lv1 Warbonds, Lv1 Diplomacy

Im thinking of removing the + 1 movement from air and naval bases and just having them for scramble and ship repair.

Thanks again for the input im going to think on this some more and change a few titles.

[Imperious Leader]

just because USA has more capacity, doesn’t mean it can produce units cheaper.
Quote
Reduction in cost per unit resulting from increased production, realized through operational efficiencies.

THAT is what ‘economies of scale’ mean.  Operational efficiencies can be view in terms of {technological} improvements in manufacturing procedures.  Procedures do not necessarily require robots.  Better Rivets (materials) or better training (labor) or better materials delivery systems (just in time) are all realized without robots.

These efficiencies come at a higher economic cost. They are not born out of low income economies. Just look at how many small economies can produce battleships at a lower cost than a larger economy. They don’t exist if you compare quality. If you can show me an example thats fine. The largest economies can do this mush more effectively than a smaller economy, so “economies of scale” also has the meaning that the greater investment of money will necessarily lead to a greater efficiency of effort.

“refers to the cost advantages that a business obtains due to expansion. There are factors that cause a producer’s average cost per unit to fall as the scale of output is increased.”

I look at this as the more income you got for investment, the greater the potential for economies of scale. So to me these are built in factories assumed by the larger, burgeoning economies in the game.

“…since some economies of scale may require a larger market than is possible within a particular country — for example, it would not be efficient for Liechtenstein to have its own car maker, if they would only sell to their local market.”

Another indication. Italy in the game would be less capable of this compared to USA or Germany.

Perhaps rather than a tech for every 20 IPC lead the combined axis or allies have over the other side receives a -1 cost benefit for naval. that would model “economies of scale” a bit better IMO rather than paying some dude in a white lab coat 5 IPC to “invent” a cash poor nations way of getting cheaper battleships, when another nation much larger is somehow paying a 20% markup for the same battleship but has 3 times to economy to do it.

We have to agree to disagree.