Idea - Industrial Policy Affects Production Costs

[Edwin P.]

Blashy - Liam is right, uboats in SC are WAY too expansive, they should be 150mpps or 175 at the MOST.

Blashy, I agree that U Boats are too expensive.

But perhaps the high cost reflects a decision not to focus German industrial on U boat production and the diversion of materials and labor to other production priorities.

Likewise the cost for US Bombers is too high as the US devoted more resources to bomber production than other nations.

Although it will not be included in SC2 I would like to see the ability for each nation to purchase a single industrial policy that would affect the production costs for the least produced units (Carriers, Bombers, Subs, Rockets, and Surface Warships).

Example;

Industrial Policy Options (Cost 200MPP):

Strategic Bombing - Reduces cost of Bombers by 25%

Submarine Warfare - Reduces cost of Submarines by 25%

Rocketry - Reduces cost of Rockets by 25%

Carrier Warfare - Reduces cost of Carriers by 15%

Surface Warfare - Reduces cost of Battleships and Cruisers by 15%

Thus a nation that selected a Strategic Bombing Policy for a cost of 200MPP would see the cost of producing bombers drop by 25%.

Naturally a notion could only follow one industrial policy at a time and changing to a new one would cost 200MPP.

Thinking about it some more - an industrial policy would 1) reduce the cost of producing a specific type of unit and 2) reduce the build time for the selected unit.

Then Germany might decide to focus its industrial might on submarine production and see production costs for this type of unit decline.

The US might focus its production policy on Carrier and see the cost of producing these units dramatically decline.

The question then arises is should other nations know of the industrial policy you have chosen to follow? I think so, as such a major focus of industrial resources could not be kept hidden for long. Or it could become general knowledge after 10 turns, or to enemies that have Intel Tech 1 or higher.

Just another idea to consider for SC3.

[pzgndr]

Although it will not be included in SC2 I would like to see the ability for each nation to purchase a single industrial policy that would affect the production costs for the least produced units

A single policy? Would you REALLY want that, either for yourself or for the AI to randomly lock itself into??

As it is SC2 has THREE ways of affecting production and costs. Industrial Technology will increase your overall MPP collection based on new country specific industrial modifiers. Production Technology will generally decrease unit costs, primarily to offset the cost increases of your technology advances. And finally there is Infrastructure research to reduce the costs of op moves and transports.

These three things should provide some interesting game play, depending on what players decide to invest in and what actually happens. As for production costs for the least produced units, some of these costs are changing. Subs are down to 275 in our latest playtest. Ideally, players should have enough incentive to produce a variety of units and reducing some of the "prohibitive" costs may help.

[Blashy]

Indeed, you should have the option to buy ALL those policies, in your example you would have to spend 1000mpps. It's a command decision.

But I think the 3 part system pzgndr gives is a very good way to start. Elaborate yet no micro managing necessarry.

[Edwin P.]

My thinking was that nations usually prioritize the production of one type of unit.

If you give priority to the building of submarines they get the best welders, the first pick of construction workers, the best engineers and a guaranteed supply of raw materials. The production of other types of units - battleships, aircraft, etc suffer.

This means that this type of unit, can be produced faster and cheaper that other types of units.

I thought that allowing players (and the AI) to adopt such a policy would make for a more competitive game as it would instantly reduce the cost of these units; faster and substantially more than if he had researched industrial technology, if the player wanted to focus his resources in this area.

Of course its risky and its costs MPPs to make on area a priority for your economy, and you can only give priority to the production of one type of unit. Furthermore, to make it pay off you have to plan on producing at least 5 units of that type; if the cost savings is 25%.

If you plan on launching a massive build program of submarines its a worthwhile investment, but if your plans change you have thrown away the 200MPPs you spent too tool your factories and allocate your resources to support this industrial policy.

[ September 26, 2005, 09:33 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Edwin P.]

As for production costs for the least produced units, some of these costs are changing. Subs are down to 275 in our latest playtest. Ideally, players should have enough incentive to produce a variety of units and reducing some of the "prohibitive" costs may help.

A most welcome change. With the relative cost of subs going down I will assume that the price of those little used bomber and rocket units also dropped in price.

[Blashy]

Rockets and Bombers were rarely used not because of price but because of use. They had very little impact on SC.

In SC2, rockets and bombers are supposed to have more bang, if they do, then they'll have more use.