Author Topic: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)  (Read 24785 times)

Revanche

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 567
  • Fanah’s Fangs (formerly of the Talitha Division)
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #30 on: 20 June 2012, 07:02:04 »
Big changes made, primarily due to Orcmaul taking over layout responsibilities (file provided in first post):

  • DropShips with less than 3/5 thrust require orbital construction (change from mass-based requirement)
  • new layout brings color tables, improved formatting, official BattleTech fonts, quick reference tables at the back, additional stylistic additions/changes
  • PDF Bookmarks added
  • Quick-links included in the Table of Contents for quick jump to major sections
As you'll quickly see, Orcmaul made huge improvements to the ruleset's readability. Please enjoy and comment on suggestions.


- Rev

BritMech

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 375
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #31 on: 20 June 2012, 09:00:38 »
c-bill should be C-bill for consistency with the other books.

Looks good, the examples really help understand how the process works.

Revanche

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 567
  • Fanah’s Fangs (formerly of the Talitha Division)
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #32 on: 20 June 2012, 09:13:54 »
I'm really glad to hear the examples help. I made them -at first- to check the process, but had to mostly re-compute them every time a figure changed earlier in the process. I even named the players based on their product (D for diesel, Dieter), to help me keep things straight.

C-bill noted and I'll make the changes.  Thanks.

BritMech

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 375
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #33 on: 20 June 2012, 14:42:54 »
I even named the players based on their product (D for diesel, Dieter), to help me keep things straight.

Most people seem to use a similar system. Alice and Bob for A and B, Eve for the Eavesdropper.

BritMech

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 375
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #34 on: 20 June 2012, 15:07:16 »
Errata: p. 9

Quote
Gale intends to produce as many Gauss rifles as she can possible churn out.

Should be:

Quote
Gale intends to produce as many Gauss rifles as she can possibly churn out.

Errata: p. 10

Quote
Products in the Other Items production class require a minimum of only 1 level (refineries have a minimum of 3, 4 or 5 levels, depending on the amount of the CF). Aerospace and conventional fighters, small craft, combat vehicles, ProtoMechs, satellites, Battle Armor, support vehicles and components require a
minimum of two levels. BattleMechs, IndustrialMechs and aerodyne type DropShips require 3. Spheroid type DropShips require 7.

Should be

Quote
Products in the Other Items production class require a minimum of only 1 level (refineries have a minimum of 3, 4 or 5 levels, depending on the amount of the CF). Aerospace and conventional fighters, small craft, combat vehicles, ProtoMechs, satellites, Battle Armor, support vehicles and components require a
minimum of 2 levels. BattleMechs, IndustrialMechs and aerodyne type DropShips require 3. Spheroid type DropShips require 7.
« Last Edit: 20 June 2012, 15:16:28 by BritMech »

BritMech

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 375
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #35 on: 20 June 2012, 15:40:09 »
For the Block Tonnage and Personnel Table, the semi-automated and fully-automated entries should really be 0, rather than -. The - designator is used to show that this selection is not possible, both in general but also in the other table on the same page.

One of the big things missing is the formulae for certain parts of the system. They are in there, but get kind of buried in the text. A simple formulae summary in one of the boxes would help things a lot. PCV, PCQ and Final Facility Costs are the main ones, but really all of them should be laid out.
« Last Edit: 20 June 2012, 15:46:35 by BritMech »

BritMech

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 375
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #36 on: 20 June 2012, 16:03:38 »
Errata:

p. 26

Quote
the gamemaster conducts a review check, with a failing roll.

I think that should be with a skill roll.

Also, the table on p. 26 has headings of Merit of Failure and Merit of Success, but no title as to what the table actually is. Given that the lefthand columns of the two tables are labelled with MoF and MoS, the headings are kind of redundant. They could be replaced with a heading saying that this is the Maintenance Check Table.

Revanche

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 567
  • Fanah’s Fangs (formerly of the Talitha Division)
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #37 on: 20 June 2012, 22:40:41 »
Thanks, BritMech. All great catches. Really appreciate the extra pair of eyes.
« Last Edit: 21 June 2012, 06:49:43 by Revanche »

Gryphon

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 325
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #38 on: 22 June 2012, 02:23:53 »
The Space shuttle's own integral thrusters are woefully underpowered for pushing it into orbit. That's why its gets two of those massive boosters attached.

Couldn't you do the same to a dropship? Big one shot JATO style rockets intended to loft it into orbit where its own engines can take over from there. This wouldn't be economical for repeat performances, but for building such a craft on the surface and setting it "afloat", it would work just fine.

As a side note, wouldn't an orbital infrastructure capable of building a dropship from raw materials have secondary side aspects such as massively increased efficiency for the creation of raw materials? After all, when you make it, you drop it into the gravity well where you want it, and let it parachute to the ground for pick up. If there was a concern for safety, drop it away from that concern, and build your industry "out there". Fusion power is comparatively cheap, so too must maglev technology or even electrical motor driven trains, right?

Basically, orbital infrastructure would have a significant impact, and restricted spacecraft building based on 1G gravity wells is seems unrealistic.

Edit: Fixed some typos, and changed wording slightly to something less...resolute.
« Last Edit: 22 June 2012, 11:43:37 by Gryphon »

Revanche

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 567
  • Fanah’s Fangs (formerly of the Talitha Division)
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #39 on: 22 June 2012, 06:10:02 »
Hey, Gryphon.

My intention has always been to make these rules as close to something I'd expect to see from CGL as possible and not create new technologies if I could help it. Blocks skirt that issue, because they are abstract representations of canon technology (production machinery). What you're proposing (orbital boosters) may be feasible within the BT-verse, but I can't say it has been used as a plot device in any canon works.

Orbital facilities do exist within the canon, so I worked to bring a rules structure to this set that would both allow their development and still have balance.

As for the technical limitations of mining on or above 1G planets, I'll leave that to Cray or others to discuss.

BritMech

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 375
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #40 on: 22 June 2012, 09:57:14 »
The biggest issue is with the mechanics of gravity itself. 1g = 2ST. To escape 1g you need 3ST (1.5g). But when the multiples start going on, it gets weird.

Planet / Thrust / Required
1.0g = 1.5g (3ST) = 0.5g surplus needed
1.1g = 1.5g (3ST) = 0.4g surplus needed
1.2g = 2.0g (4ST) = 0.8g surplus needed
1.3g = 2.0g (4ST) = 0.7g surplus needed
1.4g = 2.0g (4ST) = 0.6g surplus needed
1.5g = 2.0g (4ST) = 0.5g surplus needed
1.6g = 2.5g (5ST) = 0.9g surplus needed
1.7g = 2.5g (5ST) = 0.8g surplus needed
1.8g = 2.5g (5ST) = 0.7g surplus needed
1.9g = 2.5g (5ST) = 0.6g surplus needed
2.0g = 3.0g (6ST) = 1.0g surplus needed

Now in reality, any surplus g will allow you to break atmosphere. So 0.1g should be enough. But 1.6g gravity requires 0.9g of thrust rather than the 0.4g it would have if 4ST were allowed. And 2.0g gravity requires 1.0g surplus rather than the 0.5g if 5ST were allowed.

This is to say nothing of the ease with which take-off could be accomplished if it had an empty cargo hold and this was taken into account. For example, a 3/5 100k ton DS that lands on a 1.2g planet should be stuck there. But if it landed with a full hold and dropped off 50k of cargo, the thrust is effectively doubled to 6. Plenty to get off the planet.

All this is way off topic, but it shows just one of the ways that the rules are only a rough approximation of reality.

Revanche

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 567
  • Fanah’s Fangs (formerly of the Talitha Division)
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #41 on: 25 June 2012, 06:09:42 »
Errata:

p. 26

I think that should be with a skill roll.

BritMech,

After review of the section, I find that I did (and do) mean a failing roll, in that a quirk does occur when the 'pre-installation review' roll is made and the modified TN fails (quirks are not something sought). I'll put a page number (p. 19). in that statement, to help make that clear.

- Rev
« Last Edit: 25 June 2012, 06:11:59 by Revanche »

BritMech

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 375
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #42 on: 25 June 2012, 12:06:15 »
BritMech,

After review of the section, I find that I did (and do) mean a failing roll, in that a quirk does occur when the 'pre-installation review' roll is made and the modified TN fails (quirks are not something sought). I'll put a page number (p. 19). in that statement, to help make that clear.

- Rev

Let me quote a little more and show you what I mean.

Quote
Quirks are most likely to occur when a production line has not had a pre-installation review check done (see the Production Line Design section) and, upon installation, the gamemaster conducts a review check, with a failing roll. Review checks are also rolled following damage repairs or any major changes to the line (such as retooling, expansion or upgrading). When a review check is failed, a result roll of 1d6 is made. A positive quirk is introduced when the result is 1, no quirks for 2-4 and a negative quirk rears its head on 5 or 6.

The first sentence says that a review check is made when the production line is installed, and has not had a pre-installation review. At that point, the roll has not passed, failed or taken place. It is simply at the point where it needs to be made. The second sentence states other times when the check needs to be made.

The third sentence is where it says what to do if the roll passes or fails. So here it deals with the failing roll. But in the first sentence, it should be "with a skill roll". The skill is being tested, but has not yet passed or failed.

Revanche

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 567
  • Fanah’s Fangs (formerly of the Talitha Division)
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #43 on: 29 June 2012, 08:05:02 »
The third sentence is where it says what to do if the roll passes or fails. So here it deals with the failing roll. But in the first sentence, it should be "with a skill roll". The skill is being tested, but has not yet passed or failed.

I had to read it 15 times at three different times and it just clicked with me. Thanks, BritMech.

Revanche

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 567
  • Fanah’s Fangs (formerly of the Talitha Division)
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #44 on: 15 July 2012, 07:30:13 »
Orcmaul & I have just released version 1207.14.

Changes included are: acknowledgements added, identified errors corrected, rewording of Quirk generation, requested formula breakouts in the text and legal statement added.  The link in the first post will take you to it.

Phase 2

We know there are a number of eyes on these rules and input to date has been very helpful. What we'd like to add to that mix now is a discussion of values. Keeping in mind military and aerospace facilities are supposed to be expensive, what values strike you as off? While logically  some civilian facilities should also be expensive, are they 'priced' right? As you run through the creation rules, what doesn't seem to fit in just perfectly?

We want to hear from you!



Minerva

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 212
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #45 on: 15 July 2012, 10:59:09 »
Orcmaul & I have just released version 1207.14.
We know there are a number of eyes on these rules and input to date has been very helpful. What we'd like to add to that mix now is a discussion of values. Keeping in mind military and aerospace facilities are supposed to be expensive, what values strike you as off? While logically  some civilian facilities should also be expensive, are they 'priced' right? As you run through the creation rules, what doesn't seem to fit in just perfectly?

"Facility cost" is essentially a combination of two factors. Facility cost and facility equipment.

Facility costs are almost identical. For example almost all factory types have same building types and cost between well ventilated electronics construction room and dirty steel mill actually within 25% of cost of a housing block. Most expensive military facility per square meter was (if I remember it right) satellite communications facility (because it needs a ton of wiring and air conditioning you do not have in office block and I faintly remember it was no more than twice the cost of housing block.

Facilty cost is mostly factor of its toughness (making it a bunker) or building to a difficult place (swamps are impossible and cliffs are very expensive).
For places: I remember from civilian building that border costs for places are something like 20% for soft terrain and hill sides. Add x10 factor if you build it underground (always difficult) or into a mountain.
For toughness: The bunker costs are difficult in sense that they depend directly on amount of protection sought. Rough approximate for cost should be amount of concrete you use compared to "ordinary building". So cost is three times the normal building if you have three times the protection.

I am currently on a holiday so I do not have exact cost calculation modifiers  but those things shuold give you an idea what you should be looking for.

Finally, the main cost of facilities is the equipment housed there. This depends entirely on purpose of the place. There is no real rule of thumb for it as they depend on what you just did buy to be there (probably with the rules you have made).

Revanche

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 567
  • Fanah’s Fangs (formerly of the Talitha Division)
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #46 on: 16 July 2012, 18:32:26 »
"Facility cost" is essentially a combination of two factors. Facility cost and facility equipment.

You nailed it on the head with that statement. For the most part, the building rules included in this ruleset are canon and from Mercenaries Supplemental Update. The exception is refineries, which are of my own creation to fill a void.

What I'm looking for is feedback on the facility equipment, Blocks. That is where the expense lies, of course, and as you also stated, that cost "depends entirely on purpose of the place."

Minerva, feel free to get into the guts of the rules (at your leisure) and see if they make sense. If they don't please explain why. The strongest arguments against my values will be based upon canon (both rules and fiction), which will be sparse due to my data-mining available rules for guidance, and then, second, real world economies of production.

Thanks,
Rev
« Last Edit: 28 May 2017, 09:30:06 by Revanche »

gomiville

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 352
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #47 on: 17 July 2012, 21:56:08 »
I've been away from BT for a little while (I think TO was brand spankin' new when I was last paying real attention), but I love this rule set.

Today, I was playing around with building a factory to produce a custom jumpship design, and I ran into an issue with personnel.

We know how many laborers are needed (or not needed) per block.  I'm assuming that the number of machinists needed is really based on maintenance needs?  And how many line engineers are needed for a functioning factory (not producing new lines)? 

Lastly, we know the total admin personnel needed (based on laborers, machinists and engineers), but some guidelines for breaking that down into executives, department heads, secretaries, etc would be helpful.  Although, in a larger context, when spacecraft have just officers and ranks, without further specification, just leaving it as "Admin" works fine, I guess.

Also, you kind of have to dig around to find how many machinists are needed in the maintenance rules, well after the construction rules.  Since putting an orbital factory in a space station requires quarters, it would be helpful to put something near the building rules section, at the end of construction.  Even if just a pointer to the maintenance rules to calculate machinists, etc.

Should the rules address multiple shifts too?  You have increased maintenance rules, if running 1, 2 or 3 shifts a day, but does increasing shifts also increase production per block?  I don't think that's mentioned or denied in the text.  I especially think that would be a useful rule for an economy ramping up for wartime production.  For example, during peacetime, Abe's ammunition factory only runs from 9-to-5 (plus a little time after hours for maintenance every week).  But, during wartime, under government contract, Abe's able to triple his output by hiring hundreds of Rosie the Riveters, without changing his blocks, his equipment.  Sure, the extra work load increases the maintenance issue, and might cause a problem if he doesn't keep his machinists hopping, but the troops need their bullets.  But he doesn't need to buy more blocks to do it.

Cowdragon

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2921
  • PM me for Ft. Collins CO battletech games
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #48 on: 19 July 2012, 05:16:47 »
nice book! Thanks!

On wings of steel, Come I, Pillars of flame
Mark me, Fury bright as suns, Foes fear
The star back road, I hunt, Blood geld payment
Shan't be, The ravens throne, Blod Orn
- vidar (thank you vidar!!!)
Pie or Spehs and Tanks also BA

Marwynn

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3984
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #49 on: 20 July 2012, 11:55:49 »
This is awesome! Why did it take me so long to discover this?

Orcmaul

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #50 on: 21 July 2012, 02:40:57 »
So here is my analysis of a Warhammer 6R factory sited on Emris IV and the supporting factories producing the necessary components to supply the primary factory.  It uses the latest version of the Industrial Rules (v1207.14). 

Warhammer Industrial Analysis v3 (google docs)

Main Facility:
StarCorps Industries Warhammer assembly plant on Emris IV.
Products: Warhammer WHM-6R (100 per year), VOX 280 Standard Fusion Engine, Cockpit, Life Support, Standard Musculature, Actuators, Gyro and Heatsinks.

Secondary Facility:
StarCorp Industries Warhammer assembly plant on Terra.
Products: StarCorp 100 Chassis, Leviathan Plus Standard Armor, O/P 3000 COMSET Communication System, and O/P 1500 ARB Targeting and Tracking System.

Vendors:
Pandora 'Mech Works on Terra supplies the Donal PPCs.
Blankenburg Technologies on Terra supplies the Holly SRM-6.
Rebel Industrial Technologies on Mars supplies the Sperry Browning MGs.
Corean Enterprises on Stewart supplies the Martell Medium Laser and the Magna Small Laser.

Here's the breakdown.  The mech assembly line consists of 7.58 blocks and runs two shifts (2 cycles).  The line costs 6,657,592,829 C-bills to build and employs 665 production line, maintenance, and administrative personnel at an annual salary cost of 2,937,600 C-bills. 

The 20 component factories (including vendors) consist of a combined 7.06 blocks and run one or two shifts (as appropriate).  The lines have a combined cost of 1,064,095,805 C-bills to build and employ 553 personnel at an annual salary cost of 2,805,360 C-bills.

Interstellar transportation costs to deliver components to the main facility on Emris IV are an estimated 663,400 C-bills per year.

Sources: TRO 3039, Sarna.net, Objective Raids 3067, and FM Mercenaries revised.



Notes
In the process here are the questions and clarifications I ran into as well as some thoughts I had.

1. With multiple limited blocks (multiple small lines) at the same site can one On-Cycle Machinist and/or On-Cycle Engineer cover multiple limited blocks up to a combined total of 1 block?  Some of the blocks needed to produce components for 100 warhammers per year are very small and if this was allowed the 11 secondary lines on Emris IV would only need 5 On-Cycle Machinists and 5 On-Cycle Engineers.

2. Cycles are described as 8 hour shifts and carry with them a weekly maintenance requirement in hours.  You can operate a production line at up to 3 cycles per day (continuous 24 hour operation) but then you have to have a special off-cycle at some point to perform maintenance to the line.  I'm not clear if these Cycles are 5 days a week or 7 days a week. 

If they are 5 days a week then I have 48 hours of off-cycle time even if I run my factory 3 cycles continuously.  If they are 7 days a week then I have 0 hours of off-cycle time per week if I run 3 cycles continuously and at some point I will have to run a special off-cycle to perform maintenance. 

3. Unless you can run a factory continuously at a fixed number of cycles for an entire year it seems you'd get a difficult to calculate annual output.  This way lies madness.  Sure I can build out a 52 week spreadsheet tracking the number of on- and off- cycles each week and handle the variable maintenance but to parallelize this for multiple factories...  I don't want to. 

A quick check with my brother (aspiring engineer) says this is called Capacity Utilization Rate (Wikipedia) and should be represented with a percentage of maximum output the factory is using.  So the factory output values and personnel requirements should probably be calculated with this value in mind.  This should work so that the factory still receives full maintenance while producing at 100%.  Operating in excess of 100% (if possible) should increase difficulty of maintenance (time pressure and increased wear).  Operating at less than 100% will leave additional time for maintenance and cause less wear to the equipment (easier maintenance checks).  Under this concept having fewer or more maintenance personnel than required would also modify the maintenance checks.  Also this eliminates the concepts of on- and off- cycles and lets you phrase your personnel requirements in terms of 100% utilization and thus your staffing level can also be a percentage during operation and maintenance related checks. 

4. Administrative Personnel.  It looks like you kind of pulled this number from FM Mercs.   FM Mercs specifies 1 man-hour of admin work per 30 non-admin personnel so a regular admin (30 man-hours per week) can support 900 non-admin personnel.  If we assume the same 30 man-hours of productivity you're assuming 1 hour of admin work per non-admin personnel per week.  Eh.  What you've got works.  Call it good enough.  Also FM Mercs specifies 320 C-bills monthly salary instead of your 640 C-bills/month.  I'm sure they appreciate the raise.  :)

5. Support Infrastructure.  This whole bit is kind of confused.  First the facility is blocks = hexes then after a bit of reading it becomes blocks x 1.5 = hexes.  The description of what it contains and that it can be integrated or separate is also kind of confusing.  It seems like this is to allocate space for non-production activities.  This sort of space allocation makes sense for administrative and support activities.  The way the "Establish the Facility Dimensions" section is organized could be improved and improving the way support infrastructure is explained should be part of this.  My thinking is that this support building should be explained as a separate structure but can be integrated as a cost or space savings.  Also, this should come up in some fashion when discussing orbital factories. 

6. Storage/Warehousing.  The amount of space provided by the support infrastructure allocation seems inadequate to handle storage of the factory's input materials and output product.  Storing dropships or other huge objects in a building seems obviously inappropriate and so there should be some discretion here and different factories will use different levels of backstock.  I guess what I'm looking for here is a rough way to chart my storage needs for input materials and output products roughly in terms of a percentage of my annual output.  This also feeds into underground facility design and orbital factory design.

7. Tool & Die Shop should come up in Factory Design since it looks like this is not only an operation topic but also a type of factory you might design.  I might want to design a traveling factory built into a dropship and this seems to be the way to do it.
Victory through Spreadsheets!

Revanche

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 567
  • Fanah’s Fangs (formerly of the Talitha Division)
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #51 on: 22 July 2012, 08:31:44 »
To all, I'm on travel and do not do well typing elaborate responses into my smartphone. My apologies.
 
To gomiville, cowdragon and Marwynn: I'm really glad you guys like these rules. I'm hoping they prove useful. I'm also honored I'm gomiville's first post.
 
To gomiville and orcmaul: I owe both of you responses. Both have given me pause and I can see another updated release based on your comments. I'm re-reading both posts throughout each day, as I consider your comments while driving.
 
Marwynn: you're not late to the party. They've only been out for 2 months and have definitely been improved by Orcmaul's joining the team. I'd say you can credit yourself with having been one of the first to discover them (I'm not great on self-advertising).
 
Responses in a few days, guys. Again, thanks for the comments.

gomiville

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 352
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #52 on: 22 July 2012, 09:56:02 »
To gomiville, cowdragon and Marwynn: I'm really glad you guys like these rules. I'm hoping they prove useful. I'm also honored I'm gomiville's first post.
First post on this version of the forum, at least.  I posted pretty extensively a few iterations back, and didn't realize this was the same forum, actually, until I saw all the names I recognized among the posters.  But, having come back to the game, and the forum, at this time, your rules were one of the first cool new fan made projects I saw.  I'm a big fan of creation rules to flesh out the canon or my own AU (that acronym is new to me, but the idea is something I'm very familiar with).

Orcmaul's analysis of Warhammer production, using these rules, is a perfect example.  It deepens the universe, providing background and campaign hooks. 
 
Quote
To gomiville and orcmaul: I owe both of you responses. Both have given me pause and I can see another updated release based on your comments. I'm re-reading both posts throughout each day, as I consider your comments while driving.
 
As I've gone through the rules more, I've found a lot of the information I was asking about in that post.  Maybe pulling that information together into a "Personnel" section, after the block creation section, but right before the building creation section.  That way, when you start thinking about putting together the factory building, or designing a space station for an orbital facility, you know both the equipment and the people it needs to accommodate.

I second Orcmaul's point about warehousing.  We can pretty well figure out the storage needs of the output, because we know how much tonnage a 'mech or even assault rifle take up.  Need to store 100 30-ton mechs?  Then you need 3,000 tons of warehouse.  But how much is needed for the raw materials.

I think this is particularly important for orbital facilities.  You can have daily deliveries for a ground factory, but deliveries to a space station are likely to be less frequent and larger, as a result.  Does an object require 150% of mass in raw materials?  125%? 200%?  That number is likely to be pretty variable, depending on product.  Maybe make it dependent on tier and product class?  Maybe ranges for each tier/class combination?  Like Tier I, Other class items require between 125% and 150% raw materials, but a Tier III , Battlemech class requires from 110% and 120% (because there's less waste when you're basically bolting together previously built components).

idea weenie

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4855
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #53 on: 22 July 2012, 12:03:23 »
For deliveries to/from a space station, I'm assuming the planet has sufficient industry to handle a Dropship lifting off every week at the minimum, and probably every day (since the space station was maintained in the meantime).  So maybe figure a tonnage of supplies needed per week, add sufficient cargo capacity to the station to reflect that, and as the materials are used up, the products are stored in their place.  When the supply Dropship pops up, it spends time loading through one cargo bay, and unloading through another to the station.

That would provide a small revenue stream for a merc unit on-planet.  Essentially figure a cost per ton that the factory needs, and pay the merc unit for each delivery it makes to/from orbit.  Since it is in orbit, you can even get by with ships that haven't had as much maintenance (life support is only good for a 3 day trip, the space station is only 1 hr away, no problem).

It'd be a nice way to earn money to help offset the Dropship crew's paycheck.


2017-10-03 - attached spreadsheet
« Last Edit: 03 October 2017, 02:50:05 by idea weenie »

Orcmaul

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #54 on: 27 July 2012, 23:44:26 »
So I thought about an alternative to the cycles system and this is what I came up with.  I didn't change any other numbers to compensate so keep in mind that you can tweak the outcome by bending numbers elsewhere.  Fiction first, then a vague explanation of the rules concepts, then maybe some notes.  This is probably too long.  Sorry, I do go on a bit.  If you get through it all tell me what you think.

Warhammer Industrial Analysis v5

The way this all came to me is imagining this sort of post-raid report of the site's condition.  I wrote this in the middle of the night so apologies if it is bad or all the commas are missing/in the wrong places.  I just wasn't going to get to sleep until it came out.  :P  They're basically meeting at the home of the VP in charge of Operations on Emris IV to go over the raid on their factory. 

Quote from: Fiction
July, Emergency department head meeting for the StarCorps Industries Warhammer assembly plant on Emris IV.

Hello, is everyone here?  Well, I'm sure you are all wondering why we're having this meeting in my dining room instead of the office.  You all know Carol, head of security for our site.  Go ahead Carol.

Thank you, Chris.  Three days ago elements of McCarron's Armored Cavalry used an intermediate pirate point to enter the Emris system and launch a series of raids all over the planet.  Instead of the usual week or so we only had two days to prepare.  Planetary Militia was occupied with defending population centers and government installations and spread pretty thin but they did provide an infantry platoon for local security and all four of our test pilots had volunteered to drive units that recently finished QA in case we were attacked.  That platoon really came through and they were able to provide us with some MG and SRM loads so we didn't have to go out there with empty ammo bins.  Last night our Warhammer factory site came under attack by a short company of Battlemechs.  We think the raiders were after our warehouses hoping to score parts and maybe some of the factory if we'd let them.  The test pilots did a hell of a job.  Two kills and an assist on the kill the militia made with no losses.  Bill from marketing actually captured holovid footage of one test pilot connecting with both PPCs on one of their mediums mid-jump.  He even managed to frame the Warhammer and our main sign with the corporate logo in the shot.  Unfortunately, the flaming wreckage happened to land directly on our main office building and the resulting fire made it a total loss.  We've got off-site backups so it's mostly the capital loss.  Incidentally, Bill's psychiatric leave for that stunt is expected to be ongoing so please keep Bill and his family in your thoughts.  The engineers report that the main factory took some fire and is about 85% functional.  EOD and hazmat have finished all of the cleanup work and we can get started with repairs but the building is going to need serious work.  Of course with widespread damage like this getting builders in to do the repairs is difficult.  Our test pilots were reactivated from retirement and were reassigned to the militia along with the Warhammers they were piloting.  The militia's main mech repair depot was also hit and they lost a number of good techs.  As part of our response we sent about a quarter of our line and maintenance personnel to fill in the losses.  We didn't have much of a choice, most of them were reserve and would have been activated unless we fought it, but that and the lance of Warhammers bought us the goodwill to get us first shot on reconstruction.  We should have things patched up in a week or so and with our current staffing engineers are saying we should be able to manage 63.75% output.  We'll try to use the downtime to make further repairs to the line; try and bring that output back up, and I heard from corporate that The League is extending some serious incentives if we upgrade our site to a hardened facility and install fortifications and defensive emplacements.  In the meantime the platoon that participated in the defense of our site along with the rest of their company have been assigned to secure our site on a semi-permanent basis.  You'll all want to be sure and introduce yourselves to Captain Anderson and his soldiers.  We owe those men and women our gratitude for defending our homes and most importantly our business.  I've forwarded this presentation and the engineering assessments to everyone present.  Questions or comments? 

Rules Concepts

Instead of building a factory at a normal output of about 40M C-bills per cycle per year and having tricky cycle calculations and rules for on and off cycle I just said that a factory at maximum capacity puts out its rated production capacity of C-bills per year and receives full maintenance with no downtime. 

After this pretty much everything is phrased in percentages.  Percentages aren't always easy to work with in your head and maybe blur connection to the reality a little bit but they are super easy to work with in a spreadsheet.

So the first number I'll introduce is the CU% (Capacity Utilization Percentage).  CU% is the percentage of the maximum output the factory is operating at.  I usually phrase it in terms of desired and actual CU%. 

I also track Laborers, Machinists and Engineers as percentages.  I don't have to do it exactly this way but for the spreadsheet I didn't feel like the extra lines would add much.  You could track your employees by headcount and convert it to percentage to do the calculation.  Laborers determine the maximum CU% your factory can operate at.  In the spreadsheet I experience a 25% reduction in available laborers and thus even though I want to operate at 100 CU% I can only achieve a maximum of 75 CU%.

I also phrased damage as a percentage.  I guess we'll call it Intact%  On the Battletech board you'll have individual hexes of buildings with CR but totaling up the CR for your factory building and comparing it to the original CR gives you the Percentage of your line that is undamaged.  This is the Intact%.  You can only operate the undamaged portion of your factory and thus this number is a reduction of your actual CU%.  My factory took 168 points of CR damage from stray shots out of a combined 1120 so I'm 15% damaged and 85% intact and can only achieve 85% of my actual CU%. 

Also due to the fighting and the week of repairs I had 25% downtime that month.  Which means my factory was only in operation for 75% of the month.  We'll call it Operational%  This is another direct modifier to the actual CU%.

So the way you get actual CU is as follows. Compare Desired CU% and Laborers% and use the lower value.  Multiply that value first by the Intact% then multiplying that result by the Operational%

Actual CU% = (lower of Desired CU% and Laborer%) x Intact% x Operational%

Notes

1. Note to self: check if there has been anything said about what the time period the strategic turn in IO will be.  Maintenance checks and other factory time periods should maybe be on this scale so your factory production matches up with other strategic elements.  Answer: According to the Rulebook Primer the time frame IO is expected to use will be months.  Doing Maintenance checks and record keeping on a monthly schedule is entirely possible and does not require me to sacrifice my sanity to the tentacled horror that is the elder god of spreadsheets.
2. Using Lima Tank Plant as an example, I note they have a test track but no firing range and I’m thinking my Warhammer plant is similar.  Therefore, they have no access to ammunition and probably go to a planetary militia range to do weapon testing during QA.  The weapons were tested by their manufacturer before being shipped out for installation so it’s just down to confirming everything works and doing the initial zeroing with the targeting systems.  This is why they did not have ready access to ammunition to load into the mechs their test pilots drove.
3. A lance of their product and a platoon of infantry.  According to Objectives I nailed it dead on in terms of defenses that would be on-site.  The infantry I listed were militia instead of corporate security but I imagine that will change if they get around to hardening the site and mercenaries will definitely be a topic during budget discussions for next year. 
4. One raid reduced a sizable Warhammer factory to 63.75% output almost on accident.  Rebuilding to full capacity is going to be a substantial investment even if the FWL does cover the cost under a Combat Damage Compensation law that incentivizes rebuilding factories in the FWL.  The replacement parts for the factory line are also going to take a long time to build.  Existing tool and die shops will be busy as it is and this is a sizable job.  It probably took the combined output of T&D shops from a number of nearby worlds to build the line in the first place. 
5.Recruiting.  With the line in such bad shape they’ll likely try to tread water with their existing staff at least until repairs to the main building are complete.  After that they’ll be trying to recruit laborers who they can probably train themselves provided they have the necessary basic understanding of the tech level to do their job (read HS diploma or appropriate trade school).  They’ll also want machinists who will be difficult to find if there look to be shortages.  And finally they’ll need some new test pilots.  Trained mech drivers are hard to get when there is conflict in the region.  Basically the company will be looking for retiring mechwarriors with an honorable or medical discharge that are still able to operate a mech (full combat capacity may not be needed, just enough to test function and confirm quality).  If desperate you might be able to use industrial mech operators as a stand in but they likely won’t have experience with the sorts of communications and sensors used in combat mechs much less weapon systems and targeting. 
5. I didn't get into maintenance but my rough estimate is as long as your machinist% matches your desired CU% (after accounting for the Laborers%) you should get full maintenance with no penalty.
6. Calculating staffing requirements should get a section in the construction rules like it does for vehicles and ships.
Victory through Spreadsheets!

gomiville

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 352
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #55 on: 28 July 2012, 21:11:10 »
I'm wondering what people think about designs with only one or two "high tech" components?  Say a D-tech tank with a single E-tech weapon. Or an ICE engine and otherwise C-tech Workmech with D-tech myomers and gyro.

Could it work with a factory at the lower tech level dependent in a component supplier for the high tech stuff? Like that Workmech getting myomers and gyro from a Battlemech supplier but otherwise being akin to a C-tech tractor factory. Treating the D-tech items as black boxes , attach tab A to port B.

Obviously it could be house-ruled, but do people think it makes sense for wider adoption?

Orcmaul

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #56 on: 28 July 2012, 23:22:35 »
Could it work with a factory at the lower tech level dependent in a component supplier for the high tech stuff?  Obviously it could be house-ruled, but do people think it makes sense for wider adoption?

Hmm...

Official Rules-Wise the bit about overall unit Tech Rating being determined by the highest tech item installed on the unit really only comes up with Support Vehicles.  For the other unit types the books basically say it really doesn't matter.  So from an official perspective I'd say grey area for anything other than support vehicles.  For all those units they are covered by the rule on page 6 of ITH which says unit tech level is determined by highest tech item.

OK.  Got that out of the way.  If official rules were your primary concern you wouldn't be in a thread for a fan project for making factories.

Installing higher tech equipment after factory production is simple and already covered by customization rules.  So that's a straightforward way to pull off something similar to what you propose. 

You have a tech C factory with a tech C product and you decide to upgrade the design of the product to incorporate tech D equipment.  Let's say you've replaced a large laser on a tank with a PPC.  You want to produce the upgraded design in your tech C factory without upgrading to handle the higher tech level of the upgraded product.  The theory is that you make the PPC bolt in so it doesn't require any additional expertise to install in the otherwise tech C tank. 

My view is that the tech D PPC isn't completely self contained design-wise.  It probably requires a number of supporting elements of matching tech level to support it.  Sensors and targeting systems, power supplies, .  Maybe you could tie it into less advanced supporting elements without taking a mass penalty somewhere else but I find it suspect.  However, let's say you can do enough engineering to pull it off.  I think you'd take an automatic quality hit (see Quality Assurance section) that can't be fixed without upgrading the factory.  I think it'd be worse the more advanced tech you incorporate.  So yeah, that is how I'd house-rule it. 

My feeling is that this is very edge case for the rule set.  This is the sort of thing done out of desperation because you won't be able to upgrade the factory before you lose the war.  In order to allow players to pull this off I'd want to see a lot of roleplaying, fanfic, and/or other analysis to prove their work before I let them proceed.  Otherwise, I'd want them to upgrade a portion of the factory.  Those rules are on page 31. 

For my Warhammer factory which I'm using as a test bed for a lot of the rules I was wondering about how I'd offer some capability for offering bespoke configurations or customization.  The Line Changes rules are pretty flexible about letting you break off blocks of your factory into a separate line and retooling or upgrading just that piece to build your new design.

Could you assemble computers in a barn with 19th century labor?  Sure.  The parts don't require a lot of background technical knowledge to assemble but you'd need to train them to a certain level to be able to install the parts correctly.  A barn is not really a good place to put the computers together and you'd take at least a quality hit doing your production this way maybe a productivity hit as well.  Your QA would need to be automated otherwise you are depending on those same laborers to test your computers. 

So my 2 cents says keep it a house rule but I could see something like this in the main ruleset with more clarification.  Still, there's a number of concepts like this that should be checked out for inclusion.  So keep the ideas coming. 
Victory through Spreadsheets!

Orcmaul

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #57 on: 11 August 2012, 03:40:23 »
So my 2 cents says keep it a house rule but I could see something like this in the main ruleset with more clarification. 

 :-\  Heh.  Retrotech is going to make me eat my words.  Primitive engines and armor combined with LB autocannons and ER lasers.  I don't have Jihad Secrets so I don't have all the details but XTRO RetroTech suggests that the factories for producing retrotech mechs are available to factions who could not otherwise manage to build a mech factory.  I would need someone to confirm this guess but if the primitive equipment is tech level C then if you were to average out the tech level of all of the equipment these retrotech units sport you'd come in around a C.5-D tech rating.  Hmm... maybe there's something there worth giving a closer look.

In further news I've turned up some new ideas that merit their own consideration.

Real world factories can make multiple products and usually do.  The tooling for different products can be changed out (this is called Changeover and can usually be done within a couple hours) and this way they can explore the exciting world of Economic Lot Sizes. 

Being able to make multiple products on the same line would simplify factory setups for making multiple products simultaneously. (such as doing the design and analysis of a factory making the Hunchback and it's related variants).  My basic thinking is total up annual or monthly output and you can produce total products equal to that C-bill amount minus overhead for each additional product after the first (changeover penalty). 

For those of you interested in exploring the world of warehousing there are terms like Carrying Cost and Safety Stock. 
Victory through Spreadsheets!

Revanche

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 567
  • Fanah’s Fangs (formerly of the Talitha Division)
Re: The Industrial Tycoons Handbook (Industrial Rules)
« Reply #58 on: 03 October 2017, 15:43:44 »
The following is a message thread for which idea weenie has given me permission to post:

Quote from: idea weenie
Looking on page 17-18, I see mention of Machinists and Engineers, but I'm missing mentions of how many Machinists and Engineers should be present.  Where in the document is that number listed?  Page 18 has a listing where there is a total of 745 people for the Administrator to handle (Laborers, Machinists, and Engineers), but no mention of how that number was calculated.

A reference to page 24 to determine how many hours are needed per block would be useful.

Another idea would be to mention that at certain tech levels (and above) you need 1 Line Engineer per Block, and they often have 6 Machinists to help them perform maintenance/repairs on a block.

I'm trying to make a spreadsheet for the factory, and noticed that I couldn't fill in the numbers yet for Machinists and Line Engineers.  For Administrators, I'll just total the other numbers, and divide that by 29 (Administrators can handle up to 30 people including themselves, so that is 29 besides themselves).

Very nice sheet, thank you for putting it all together.

Quote from: Revanche
Machinists (p. 24): the table there indicates how much maintenance each Block requires. if a Block runs only 8 hours daily, then there is less maintenance requirement than if it runs 2 or all 3 daily cycles. The maintenance requirement determines how many machinists are necessary. It is feasible one machinist can spread his work-day between multiple Blocks. Im other words, the amount of maintenance completed is dependent upon the number of available machinists. To determine the ideal number of machinists, you have to have an idea how how much your facility will be run (8, 16, 24 hours/day). From that, you know how much maintenance is necessary. Multiply that by the number of Blocks on the line and then divide by 8 (hours) to figure out how many machinists are ideally needed. The facility can run with less, by foregoing all maintenance or overworking the machinist(s).

Edit note: first para (p. 24) does require one machinist per active block (fully-automated Blocks excepted). The same machinist can perform post-cycle maintenance (at an overtime cost) or another machinist can be hired to work on that post-cycle maintenance period. For example, if the facility has a 4-Block (Type A) line, 8 hours of maintenance are needed weekly. The line will need 4 machinists when on-cycle and they can each work an additional 2 hours post-cycle weekly to do the post-cycle maintenance or a 5th machinist can be hired to do the 8 hours. It's flexible, according to the availability of machinists or the owner's whims.


Quote from: idea weenie
So for Machinists on page 17, you might add:
Each Non-automated and semi-automated Block requires 1 Line Machinist for on-duty checking to make sure the Block is working correctly for the Laborers.  Additional Machinist hours needed are in the "Block Maintenance Table" found on page ##.  Additional hours can be provided by having the Machinist working overtime, or by hiring more Machinists.  Remember that Fully automated Blocks do not require a Machinist for maintenance.

For Laborers on page 17, would it be good to add which sub-skill under the Career skill would apply?  You have the Machinist sub-skill for Machinists, and the Mechanical Engineer sub-skill for Line Engineers.  If not a specific skill, then a variety of examples might work.

p18:
Base pay for a Laborer is 5 C-Bills per hour (p17).  However the monthly paycheck for a Laborer on p18 is 320 C-Bills per month.  Mathematically that means the Laborer is working 64 hours per month, or only 16 hrs per week.  Should this be changed to 640 C-Bills per month, so a Laborer works 28 hrs per month, or 32 hrs per week (with extra 4 weeks per year being used for down-time and overhauls).  But then you'd have to change the paychecks for Machinist and Line Engineer as a result.

Quote from: Revanche
Line engineers have multiple responsibilities. However, in keeping with the 3025-mindset, they may be rare (in limited numbers) and the factories need to be able to run without them. Therefore, the rules have an engineer lead a Technical Team (p. 3) of 6 machinists to conduct repairs (not maintenance). If you have one TT, you can affect repairs. Additional engineers (and TTs) provides more repair capability.

So, to not answer your question directly  ;) , one engineer can be assigned to one Block (and have a LOT of time on his hands) or one engineer can be assigned to multiple lines of Blocks, with them all dependent upon his TT, in order to be fully functional (if any are damaged). It really is up to the owner/player.

Looking through the comment you reference on p. 18 ("For example, if a production line requires 745 people (Laborers, Machinists and Engineers) for all of its Blocks, then the administrative burden would be an additional 25."), I now realize that was a poor choice of words on my part. Yes, a facility needs line engineers ideally, but there is no minimum number required for the facility to run, just to repair. However, if line engineers are a part of the work force, then they have an admin tail required (as part of the production side of the house). That 745 was an example of a random industrial facility's production staff, to help illustrate the means to determine admin staff.

As the line engineers are only necessary for repairs, you only need them during production downtimes, enabling you to use them at other facilities/lines for their downtimes.

Quote from: idea weenie
It could be phrased as:
Line Engineers are heavily in demand, and if you have a production line that produces anything that is not "Other", you will likely want to hire a Line Engineer with a 6 Machinist tech team.  However, they are pricey, plus finding a Line Engineer will require lots of RP skills to get permission from the House Representative to do so (why let the Line Engineer get hired out to you when other facilities need them even more).

If you want to rent a Line Engineer instead of hiring one full-time, the price per month for them will double (contractors have to save up money for when they are not being employed).  Roll a d6 to determine how long before they are available for your factory.  A good guideline is if you have more than 5 blocks, hire the Line Engineer full-time.

Quote from: Revanche
I may have misunderstood this statement; this table indicates just how much maintenance a Block needs, depending both on type and run cycles run.

Do you mean an example should be provided, such as:
"Jeremy's one Type A Block runs for only 8 hours daily, requiring to be shut down for 2 hours each week for maintenance.  Emily's five Type D Blocks run for 16-hours (2 cycles) daily, and must shut down for maintenance lasting 7 hours (apiece) each week."

But maybe you mean I could add a sentence to the 3rd para of column 2. "This is the minimum maintenance time required for each Block."

Just in case I didn't make it clear above, but also because you've found a good way to re-state the issue, semi- and non-automated Blocks need machinists for weekly maintenance, but only need Engineers if they sustain damage. If maintenance is maintained, then repairs are unlikely (outside of battle damage).

Quote from: idea weenie
p20
An example of a Tool & Die shop creation would be good.  For example:
During the early 3010's Michael's Marauders are often on deep raids then return to their Cadre contracts on a Periphery World, and decide they need a Tool & Die shop to help them produce various specialized items that they need, and don't have time to dig through an old battle site to find.  As such they are wanting a TL D Tier II Component Shop (surprisingly high-tech local industry provides the materials they need to make the items, while the Mech Bays serve to assemble items onto the Mechs).  They tell their Administrator to price out a Tool & Die shop that would fit their needs.

This is initially priced as a TL D Block producing TL D items, which means it would normally produce $40M worth of product each year, but since Tool & Die shops are only 1/3 as effective it will only produce ~$13M per year, or just over $1M per month.  Since there is no bonus efficiency for reduced tech items, this will not change based on the items being needed (so it can produce ~$1M per month of TL A vacuum tubes, or ~$1M per month of modern Mech circuitry).  From the "Block Tonnage & Personnel" table, the Tool & Die shop will mass 144 tons and need 40 Laborers.  It requires an equal number of Machinists, for another 40 Machinists.

Dimensions: as a Tool & Die shop means it is a level 2 Shop, to handle tall stuff that will later be installed on a Mech.  As a single 'Block' it will take up 1 hex.  The extra warehousing takes up another hex (1/2 the hexes of the Tool & Die shop, rounding fractions up).

The final cost estimate is:
250,000,000 C-Bills (generic price of a Block) * TL D (*1.0) * Tier II (*1.25) * Component (*.5) No Automation (*1.0) * Periphery World (*1.15) * Tool & Die Shop (*3) = 539,062,500 C-Bills.

The Administrator sighs as she hands over the pricing list, and Michael's Marauders decide to keep digging over old battlefields (since it would take over 40 years to pay for itself).  A generic civilian Tool & Die shop would be half the price, but still take over 20 years to pay for itself (Other Item multiplier is .25, vs Component at .5).

}:) Also note, idea weenie has attached the requested spreadsheet to his last post above.

 

Register