Register Register

Author Topic: ISaW Production  (Read 4996 times)

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
ISaW Production
« on: 09 February 2017, 13:16:01 »
This one might be for the members here who have been involved with the rules development.

As we have all but completed our transition to ACS/ISaW we have begun using the supply and production rules. For the first turn (Mar 3019) we simply used the values given on page 348 of IO. In my case my FWL production should be 1336 +/- the various frontier planets that have changed hands. However, when I run the totals from the charts and 'other' planets I get different numbers depending on how one reads "Regional" capital (worth 40 RP barring any sort of industry).

In the example on page 348 the rules use Robinson in the FS as an example of Regional capital (40 RP) but the map key defines Robinson as a District capital which have no intrinsic RP base. In the case of the FWL only Stewart and Tamarind have the Regional capital symbol while Marik, Regulus, Orient and Andurien have the District capital symbol.

If I use the District capitals as regional capitals (w/ 40 RP) then the FWL income shoots up to over 1500 RP. If I only use Tamarind and Stewart as Regional Capital I still have too much cash.

So the question is, should Regional capitals and District capitals be treated the same with 40 RPs or just the actual Regional capitals. This has implication for other major Houses as well as I am sure that if all the Regional and District capitals are tallied up as possessing 40 RPs the income stated on  page 348 does not match.

Attached is a spreadsheet with two calculations.

The first has the Regional and District capitals each worth 40 RPs and a total of 1518 RP

The second column treats District capitals as "other" if they have no factories (Oriente and Regulus), which would be very strange, but the total is still above the page 348 totals.

Cheers.

[Edit] - ok,... so this Surface Pro I am using won't let me post any sort of attachment, quote or even bold, underline, etc.  <<sigh>>

Since I can't add the excel spread sheet, the totals in the columns mentioned above are 1518 and 1362 respectively (Oriente and Regulus worth 40 RP each in the first case and only 2 RP in the second).

« Last Edit: 09 February 2017, 13:36:20 by The Purist »
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • Battletech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4549
  • O-R-E-O
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #1 on: 09 February 2017, 14:21:35 »
The FWL is special due to the provincial nature of its internal political setup.  Regional capitals should be as follows:

Davion:  Robinson, New Syrtis
Liao:  Tikonov, Capella, Sarna, St. Ives
Steiner:  Donegal, Skye, Tamar
Kurita:  Dieron, Pesht, Galedon V, Benjamin, Rasalhague
Marik:  Regulus, Oriente, Andurien

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #2 on: 09 February 2017, 14:47:07 »
Now that makes perfect sense for all the major Houses. I take it Marik is left out because Atreus is the national capital.
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • Battletech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4549
  • O-R-E-O
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #3 on: 09 February 2017, 15:49:17 »
Basically, yes.  Regulus, Andurien, and Oriente are the major power players in FWL politics that aren't the Captain-General.

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7620
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #4 on: 10 February 2017, 03:46:54 »
Except that Marik (The planet/system) has the District Capital icon on the map provided for 3025 games, which every other planet on your list has, and only those planets

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #5 on: 10 February 2017, 09:46:36 »
That is true but if one goes by the letter of the rules District Capitals should not have the 40 RPs at all, only Regional capitals. This looks like a case where the rule as written was not clear enough (in the case of the Robinson example it is actually contradictory) and the map symbols and key do not match the text. Perhaps a future errata fr rules and map may deal with the issues but for now I am happy to replace "Regional capital" on the table with "District capital". The omission of the Marik system can grudgingly be explained away by having Atreus fill the political role for the Marik "province" with the symbol on the map being ignored for production purposes. You could write in the rules, "... exception - the Marik system is not considered a Regional capital for production calculations purposes", or something along those lines.

When you look deeper the confusion over regional capital and district capital actually has greater implication in the Draconis Combine. The map actually has 25 systems that are regional capitals (5 in each of the five Districts) that would generate a total of 1000 RP and completely throw off the production values. The FS and LC also have the same issue. The correction/clarification makes sense of the rule as written.

I'll plug in the changes to the spreadsheet and see if the total now comes out at 1336 RP for the FWL.


« Last Edit: 12 February 2017, 11:00:14 by The Purist »
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7620
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #6 on: 10 February 2017, 16:43:07 »
@The Purist that's what the map calls them, yes it's probably wrong, but it's what the map calls them

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #7 on: 12 February 2017, 11:38:57 »
I am afraid the numbers still do not jive - 25 industrial/capital worlds plus 308 other worlds total 333 planets with 1400 RP (pardon the misalignment of text below).

World-----Hex-----Type-------RP-----Factories
Andurien--3223---m/D. Cap--64------2
Asuncion--2524---m-----------24------1
Atreus-----2717---m/N. Cap--104-----1
Bernardo--2523---m-----------24------1
Calloway---2922---m----------24------1
Clipperton-2914---m-----------24   -----1
Dalton-----2919---m-----------24-----1
Emris IV---2720---m-----------24-----1
Gibson-----2914---m-----------24   -----2
Irian-------2422---M-----------40------3
Kalidasa---2320---m-----------24-----1
Kendall----2910---m-----------24-----1
Keystone--2519---M-----------40-----3
Loyalty----2615---m-----------24-----2
Marik   ------2717---m-----------24-----1
Oliver------2223---m----------24-----1
Oriente-----2921---D.Cap-----40-----0
Regulus----2818---D.Cap-----40-----0
Savannah--2321---m----------24-----1
Shiro III----3123---m---------24-----1
Stewart----2319---m----------24-----1
Tematagi---3114---m---------24-----1
Thermop---2416---m----------24-----1
Wallis-------2816---m---------24-----1
Westover---2912---m---------24-----1

                                Total 784RP
                                               
308 planets x 2 RP             616RP  30 factories
            
                Total RP   1400   

I suppose the question becomes whether the 1336 is actually a math error missed in the editing process and the total should now be 1400RP?
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • Battletech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4549
  • O-R-E-O
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #8 on: 12 February 2017, 18:05:13 »
That does look like a math error somewhere.  1,400 looks correct.

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #9 on: 12 February 2017, 22:40:15 »
If I were to hazard a guess I might suggest Andurien was overlooked. The 64 RP difference is exactly that which is produced by the Andurien capital.

While we are talking about the production issues, is there a list somewhere noting where the canon training centers are located? The old house books mention many training academies but what about training centers?

For now we plan on placing one on each capital and IO mentions one Combine center on Benjamin. Placing the balance of the three starting centers on district capitals seems to make sense but we would prefer to use canon locations.

Cheers.

Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • Battletech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4549
  • O-R-E-O
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #10 on: 13 February 2017, 03:37:15 »
The Field Manuals would be your best bet for locating training facilities, to be honest.

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #11 on: 20 July 2017, 11:24:39 »
Pardon the resurrection of a older thread but the topic remains the same.

We've completed our transition to ISaW/ACS and are ready to start a full campaign turn as of Apr 3019 but the economics are still causing grief. The check of the Liao and Kurita numbers were spot on and the Davion numbers were only off by 6 RP. We have fixed this by simply adding three "other" planets to the Davion total.

On the other hand, the Lyran numbers are way, way off. There is a definite conflict between the example provided on page 348 of IO and the chart totals. Instead of 1738 RP as a base the Lyran numbers only come to 1518, which places them quite a way behind the Davion and only slightly ahead of the Kurita RPs.

I am assuming that the author of the example was going from a list containing the information but the person who prepared the chart on page 349 did not cross check the details with their colleague (old/obsolete information). Mistakes happen but we now need to correct this.

Considering the LC is supposed to have the largest economy and the economics would effect play balance there is probably a need here for a complete review and correction. As IO should be a canon source it needs to be in line with the universe (namely, a powerful Lyran economy) and not contradict itself between two pages.

See attached spreadsheet (above the red bar) for the details of disconnect between the example and chart information.

The list of errors is as follows:

1 - from example on pg 348: ...200 for Donegal, Skye and Tamar (Regional Capitals; Donegal and Skye are also Major Industrial Worlds)...

In fact Donegal is only a minor planet so the point total is off by 16 RP. This can be corrected by changing Donegal to a major planet (3 factories).

2 - from example on pg 348: ...360 for nine additional Major Industrial worlds, 144 for six Minor Industrial Worlds...

There are only 3 major planets listed outside capitals already factored in (Alarion, Coventry, Hesperus II) and 11 minor planets. The example gives a total of 15 industrial planets (9 major+6 minor) but the factory list notes 13 after the three mentioned above are removed

Which six planets should be increased to major Industrial to equal the required 9?
Which six planets should become, or remain, minor industrial worlds?

This is an important point as any planned invasions by the FWL or DC will be effected by such information. To be fair, the LC knows where the FWL and DC starting major and minor worlds are.

3 - from example on pg 348: ...and 914 for the 457 other worlds...

Using the chart information there are only 427 other worlds for a total 854 RP.

Total deficit is a whopping 220 RP.

While we will use the 1738 RP total, the disconnect between the charts list of major and minor planets and the numbers provided in the example is important for game play (strategy, etc.).

<<I play the FWL but I still want the LC to have the economy it should.  :)  >>


« Last Edit: 20 July 2017, 18:53:20 by The Purist »
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

worktroll

  • Ombudsman
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 20769
  • 504th "Gateway" Division
    • There are Monsters in my Sky!
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #12 on: 20 July 2017, 18:47:56 »
Please note - this is a discussion, and should not be taken as any sort of official ruling, ok?

I've inherited the role of custodian for the ISW system after the release of IO. A lot of work had to be done to fit an extremely extensive ISW ruleset into the word & page limits available for the published IO, and cuts had to be made to make it fit. Things like Intelligence, Research, etc all got cut, and there were further cuts to the base rules.

In the process, there are a number of rough edges. You just hit one. The whole duplication of effort between "number of factories" and "major/minor" is one of them - two completely separate systems that don't align neatly, or in some cases don't align. Donegal would be one case - one cerebral hemisphere considering it a "Major" world, but only 2 listed factories. (In fact, beyond Lockheed-CBM, I can't find any other major military manufacturer on-planet. Nashan Pharmaceuticals not being counted ;) )

Another is period - I'm not the one who counts the worlds, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the world numbers may be for 3030, not 3025 - and not 3019, although a 3025 figure should be 'good enough' for you.  Again, this is not an official adjudication.

I do know that for the 1SW & 2SW figures I did do Excel calculations based on # of worlds, and # of major/minor/capitals etc, to get the eventual outputs (applying IndustryTech modifiers for local tech levels). Side note - as much of the loss of production over the Succession Wars comes from loss of knowledge & efficiency, as loss of factory worlds.

I'm going to be very interested in the other observations your group come up with as your game progresses. Are you likely to use the additional rules in 2SW now that they're published? I can't promise a major revision to IO, but want to keep improving the baselines we work off where possible.

Cheers,

W.
* No, FASA wasn't big on errata - ColBosch
* The Housebook series is from the 80's and is the foundation of Btech, the 80's heart wrapped in heavy metal that beats to this day - Sigma
* To sum it up: FASAnomics: By Cthulhu, for Cthulhu - Moonsword
* Because Battletech is a conspiracy by Habsburg & Bourbon pretenders - MadCapellan
* The Hellbringer is cool, either way. It's not cool because it's bad, it's cool because it's bad with balls - Nightsky
* It was a glorious time for people who felt that we didn't have enough Marauder variants - HABeas2, re "Empires Aflame"

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #13 on: 20 July 2017, 19:06:21 »
Please note - this is a discussion, and should not be taken as any sort of official ruling, ok?...

Don't get me wrong, I am not looking to have anyone hung from barrel of a conveniently located AC10, just some clarity on how to proceed. I have no doubt that the task for finalizing IO was daunting and filled with deadlines, oversights and shortcuts. Considering the staff levels and number of projects underway I am not surprised.

That aside, we are assuming the lists are for 3025 based on the 3025 map borders. It makes sense. In the case of the errors in the FWL economics the fixes were easy to identify and implement, increasing the FWL total to 1400 RP. That being said, to short the LC by 220 RP is asking the Archon to swallow a very large and bitter pill considering she is supposed to have the strongest economy in the inner sphere.

Rather than a major overhaul to IO (or even just ISaW) how about we focus on fixing this particular glitch. Once the LC econ base is sorted the entire section is resolved and ready for a future errata or even post.

I'll volunteer to help where I can.

Question - Is it time to create a new forum for CO/IO/ISaW?

After all, the issues are different from SO and are bound to expand as players get into the larger campaigns.

2nd SW Rules published? I'm on my way to purchase the download now :)
« Last Edit: 20 July 2017, 19:09:50 by The Purist »
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

worktroll

  • Ombudsman
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 20769
  • 504th "Gateway" Division
    • There are Monsters in my Sky!
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #14 on: 20 July 2017, 19:16:37 »
Sorry about the legalese start - you'd be suprised (or possibly not) at how a few posters take things a beemer posts, and hang universes on a word taken out of context. But I'm delighted to have people to talk to about ISW.

Speaking for the forum management, we're not seeing enough traffic on ISW to justify a separate sub-forum yet. If things change, it'll be worth re-considering.

For comparison purposes, and based on 3025 map borders,
- how many worlds do you count for the major factions having for 3025?
- Do you have an independant estimate on which worlds you'd consider major/minor in 3025?

Seriously. Not faulting the people who collected all the work published in IO, but looking for back-bearings on where the discrepancies slid in.

W.
* No, FASA wasn't big on errata - ColBosch
* The Housebook series is from the 80's and is the foundation of Btech, the 80's heart wrapped in heavy metal that beats to this day - Sigma
* To sum it up: FASAnomics: By Cthulhu, for Cthulhu - Moonsword
* Because Battletech is a conspiracy by Habsburg & Bourbon pretenders - MadCapellan
* The Hellbringer is cool, either way. It's not cool because it's bad, it's cool because it's bad with balls - Nightsky
* It was a glorious time for people who felt that we didn't have enough Marauder variants - HABeas2, re "Empires Aflame"

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #15 on: 20 July 2017, 21:05:07 »
Eeeeech!!! I'll admit I have not counted the LC planets as the RP totals for the other four major houses came out pretty close to perfect. Only the LC has a major flaw somewhere.

I suppose I could build a spreadsheet and 'plot' the 3025 map by hex number, # of planets and planet type. As for what should be major minor and other I am afraid I am not well enough educated in the BT Universe lore to truly add to that. However, before I undertake that task, please tell no such spread sheet exists.  ;D

The first question we need to answer is whether the LC has 1738 RP. In my view, based on the RP totals of the other houses that would be a yes. We then start filling in the blanks to reach that total.

One suggestion is to de-link the source book totals of actual factories from what is in the strategic game. These totals should definitely be in the equation but perhaps, like "other" planets, other factories (or factors)might support the main factories adding to their value (count).

It may not need to be a "hard count" of factories at all. In ISaW when a player lays out 576 RP to convert an 'other' world to a 'minor' industrial world, does it now possess one or two factories? Does a world upgraded from minor to major have three or seven factories? Currently the RP total gained for Hesperus II is no different than Alarion. Perhaps a world with six or seven factories (Hesperus) in the 3rd and 4th SW eras might count as a two major industrial worlds and produce 40+40 RPs much as a planet in the 1st SW with 16 factories would count as two hyper industrial worlds.

It may have been better to pay fewer RPs for actual factories and slowly build up a planets infrastructure (and potential targets for attack) rather than simply labelling upgrades "minor" and "major". That is probably another discussion.   :o

In the end,the result of the audit should be to identify the shortages. The recalibrating of which planets become other, minor or major producers of RPs can be sorted out afterwards by incorporating universe lore, ie: Donegal gets its third (or fourth) factory.
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • Battletech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4549
  • O-R-E-O
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #16 on: 20 July 2017, 21:10:56 »
Well first off, going by the numbers and not the example, the LC should have a base of 1,516 RP, which is a 222 point deficit.  However, they also have the Merchant King faction ability, giving a pre-trade total of 2,274 RP.

Still looking, and Inarcs can be a minor factory (level 1), for Hi-Scout production in the 3020s.

EDIT:

Also, the text example is wrong anyway because there are only 443 worlds in the Lyran Commonwealth in 3025
« Last Edit: 20 July 2017, 21:30:34 by Alexander Knight »

worktroll

  • Ombudsman
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 20769
  • 504th "Gateway" Division
    • There are Monsters in my Sky!
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #17 on: 20 July 2017, 21:32:37 »
Okay, hands up - who else forgot about "Merchant King" altogether?  :-[

W.
* No, FASA wasn't big on errata - ColBosch
* The Housebook series is from the 80's and is the foundation of Btech, the 80's heart wrapped in heavy metal that beats to this day - Sigma
* To sum it up: FASAnomics: By Cthulhu, for Cthulhu - Moonsword
* Because Battletech is a conspiracy by Habsburg & Bourbon pretenders - MadCapellan
* The Hellbringer is cool, either way. It's not cool because it's bad, it's cool because it's bad with balls - Nightsky
* It was a glorious time for people who felt that we didn't have enough Marauder variants - HABeas2, re "Empires Aflame"

Onion2112

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #18 on: 20 July 2017, 21:53:58 »
Hello this is my first post on this board, but I've been a lurker for quite a while (and a very long term Battletech player) - just a bit of background -  I'm slowly putting together a ISaW campaign loosely titled "Twilight of the Suns" set from 3145 - using teh forces & maps FM:3145 - basically its about either saving/destroying the FS - lots of fun research. I'm gradually putting together some thoughts/question that I hope to post at the later date.

Anyway off topic

I thought since LC RPs is being discussed here (and this is relevant to the LC) I wondered what the thoughts were around the generated RPs on Clusters (such as Enders Cluster in the LC - near New India on the Periphery Border) - this has a bracketed 10 after the name - is this 10 habitable worlds? or just stars in the cluster. My thought is just 1 per circle.

Other examples Pleiades Cluster in FS/TC has 100 - with 3 listed worlds - Brocchi's Cluster in DC has a 40, Pirates Haven 50 and then theres flannagan's Nebulea in TC

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • Battletech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4549
  • O-R-E-O
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #19 on: 20 July 2017, 21:57:58 »
Welcome to the boards, Onion.

For the clusters, they generally only "count" as 1 world per circle on the map.  So the Pleiades Cluster has 3 worlds.

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #20 on: 20 July 2017, 22:42:59 »
Guys,... we should be looking at the base incomes - before factional modifications.

I put together this spread sheet (attached) and now I have no idea where the totals come from.

The hex map has a total of 446 planets. I worked the chart as presented and the numbers come up shy by 216 RP. I then worked the numbers from the example and, while the pain is lessened, the LC is still out 60 RP.

As I mentioned, the LC should have the strongest base economy by a significant degree and not come in just over the FS and DC.

In my opinion the industrial planets for the LC need a serious review for all reasons already discussed (balance, strategy, known at start assets, etc.). The other four houses were either spot on or the flaw was easily spotted and corrected. This situation is different.

Cheers.

[Edit: corrected a typo on the spreadsheet that may have led to confusion]
« Last Edit: 21 July 2017, 01:34:54 by The Purist »
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #21 on: 21 July 2017, 00:02:17 »
Ready for another reality check.   ;D

A number of the economic faction traits do not make sense. At least the history of economics in our own era shows the faction abilities for State Run and Decentralized State are backwards.

The Capellans and Combine are "state run" economies and get a 25% bump with no means of countering the effect along with the claim these economies are more efficient. That's doesn't seem to connect with Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, Fascist Italy, Soviet Russia or Communist China (pre-capitalist reforms). While it is true that Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia and Communist China could mass produce basic products, and in some cases small quantities of advanced products, these were limited in scope (technologically) and inefficiencies in production were rife. In the case of the Soviet Union it could produce large numbers of limited products but shortages elsewhere where often crippling and if not provided by other sources (ie lend-lease) could not have been provide except at the cost to other production. Then there is the corruption, cronyism and inefficiencies that were inherent in all five economies and still exist today in modern versions of closed states.

The Lyrans are Merchant Kings and get a 20% bump in their economy and I suppose that makes sense but, again, there is no counter to the bonus (profiteering?).

On the other hand the Federated Suns are penalised 20% for being a decentralized economy. This is precisely what the modern western economies were that fought both world wars, the cold war and are still the most vibrant economies today. To date, the decentralized "open" economies have proven to be the most efficient at both mass production and technological advancement. Yet Davion loses 20% of its economy.

In game terms what this means is that House Liao has an economy that just about equals Davion's. This is very strange. With the Liao 25% bonus it produces 1208 RPs per turn compared to Davion's adjusted 1243 RP. Is Davion really expected to maintain its extremely large army of 3025 as well as support it large mercenary forces with an economy little larger than Liao's?

I would ask if the +25% bonus for the CC and DC, the +20% for the Lyrans and the -20% for the FS, cannot be effected by events or other flaws or bonuses,...why not simply set the economic base levels at the adjusted levels and simplify the rules?

I am wondering if this was play tested, or even considered before these rules were adopted.

Turning to (my) FWL next   8) .

The FWL is hit by Decentralized State (-20%) but is then propped up by Merchant Kings (+20%), again with no means of effecting either trait. If they cancel out, why include them at all?

Parliamentary chaos makes sense as it can give and take away. This is not something that the Merchant Kings, Decentralized States or State Run traits have built into their traits.

The other non-economic traits have some nice touches and add some flavour but short of Parliamentary Chaos the economic traits don't seem to work. Take for example the 4th SW based on the 3025 map and economic bases.

CC: 966 x 1.25 = 1208 RP
DC: 1480 x 1.25 = 1850 RP
FS: 1554 x .8 = 1243 RP
FWL: 1400 x 1.1 (or .9) = 1540 RP (or 1260 RP) a +/- 10 percent average
LC: 1516 (under discussion) x 1.2 = 1819 RP

This means the FedCom alliance (supposedly the two largest economies in the inner sphere) can only raise 3062 RP per turn to fight the 4th SW against Kapteyn Concord's 4598 RPs (on a bad turn for the FWL perhaps 4318 RPs).

Hopefully I am not the only one who sees a problem with this situation.  ;)

I doubt we will use the three traits mentioned above but will likely keep Parliamentary Chaos. I am not sure why there are other economic traits but none are assigned to a faction (ie: booming economy). What am I missing?

Cheers.
« Last Edit: 21 July 2017, 09:24:07 by The Purist »
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

Onion2112

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #22 on: 21 July 2017, 00:20:44 »
Excellent spreadsheet, and I'm sorry to be nit picky but Tamar is actually just a regional capital in 3025, it doesnt have any factories - so the spreadsheet figure is 40 too high. So 1522 is the number - way too low.

I wonder if the numbers attached to Enders Cluster (10) and C.M.O. 26 (I know just one world) (or maybe others) upset the world counting when the 457 other worlds figure was achieved in teh example?

I'm thinking maybe Hesperus could possibly be a Hyper Industrial and a few others like Donegal, Twycross and Sudeten changed to major.

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #23 on: 21 July 2017, 00:26:48 »
Excellent spreadsheet, and I'm sorry to be nit picky but Tamar is actually just a regional capital in 3025, it doesnt have any factories - so the spreadsheet figure is 40 too high. So 1522 is the number - way too low.

Actually it is 24 RP too high. Being a Regional Capital generates 40 RP. Nevertheless, the deficit is now a full 216 RPs

I wonder if the numbers attached to Enders Cluster (10) and C.M.O. 26 (I know just one world) (or maybe others) upset the world counting when the 457 other worlds figure was achieved in teh example?

I ran the numbers using 10 for Enders Cluster and the balance was still 42 RP short (with 455 planets). That is the closest I have come. I am wondering if a similar audit of the DC and FS (both have large clusters) might show a similar discrepancy and perhaps solve the problem. Are clusters counted by the bracketed values??? Hmmmm.

[Edit:Gahhhhh. it's too late in the night now to crunch any more numbers. Last correction to the spread sheet is being posted now]

I'm thinking maybe Hesperus could possibly be a Hyper Industrial and a few others like Donegal, Twycross and Sudeten changed to major.

Well, a hyper ind planet requires 8 factories and are not allowed in 3rd (and I would suppose the 4th) Succession Wars.
« Last Edit: 21 July 2017, 01:36:29 by The Purist »
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • Battletech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4549
  • O-R-E-O
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #24 on: 21 July 2017, 00:36:34 »
Hesperus was a Hyper-Industrial world in the 2nd Succession War.  Blame Kurita and Marik for the downgrade.  #P

Onion2112

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #25 on: 21 July 2017, 00:48:25 »
Hesperus was a Hyper-Industrial world in the 2nd Succession War.  Blame Kurita and Marik for the downgrade.  #P
Very true, but in the original sources its alway regarded as the place where the most and biggest mechs are made, I just thought this could be a way to reflect this in the 3/4SW era

Iracundus

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 494
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #26 on: 21 July 2017, 01:59:14 »
I presume the unassigned traits we see are for the future or other hypothetical scenarios.  The FWL might be argued to have a booming economy when it was busy being the arms seller for the Inner Sphere. 

The state-run trait encompasses control over the populace as well as the economy.  So it can also be envisioned to encompass how the societies of the Combine and the Confederation are willing to (or forced to) accept greater civilian privation in order to free up resources for the state.  The decentralized trait means also the government is more regional, which describes the unruly March Lords of the FedSuns, so resources may be spent on appeasing local interests rather than being made available to the central government.     

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #27 on: 21 July 2017, 12:43:10 »
I presume the unassigned traits we see are for the future or other hypothetical scenarios.  The FWL might be argued to have a booming economy when it was busy being the arms seller for the Inner Sphere.

That is perfectly reasonable but please see below.

The state-run trait encompasses control over the populace as well as the economy.  So it can also be envisioned to encompass how the societies of the Combine and the Confederation are willing to (or forced to) accept greater civilian privation in order to free up resources for the state.  The decentralized trait means also the government is more regional, which describes the unruly March Lords of the FedSuns, so resources may be spent on appeasing local interests rather than being made available to the central government.     

I'm not sure that such an 'intangible' works in this situation.

The net effect of these particular traits is that it simply bankrupts the Federated Suns right out of the starting gate.

The AFFS has 77 house commands, 38 mercenary commands, 5 capital forts, 7 standard forts. The basic non-combat supply costs (including the x 2 cost for mercenary commands) comes out to 1281 RPs. Unfortunately, with the -20% penalty the FS only brings in 1242 RPs. A deficit of 39 RPs. The FS is the only Inner Sphere House so effected.

The LCAF costs = 1336 with an income of 2086; 750 RP surplus
The CCAF costs = 716 with an income of 1245; 530 RP surplus
The DCMS costs = 1069 with an income of 1850; 781 RP surplus
The FWLM costs = 914 with an income of 1540 (or 1260); 626 RP surplus (or 346 RP surplus)

While trade will increase the FS income by a certain amount it also increases the other house incomes so the disparity is not reduced.

These trait modifications do not appear to be well thought out or were not 'play tested' to check their impact.

What we have here is the Federated Suns, arguably the most powerful House of the era, effectively crippled and not even remotely possible of fighting a war as per the canon sources (4th SW or otherwise)

At the same time, the Capellan Confederation, the one House that could not meet its expenses and was finding it difficult to maintain the forces it had, receives a healthy surplus each month. With the economics and supply rules as noted in ISaW the CC is actually capable of attacking the FS rather than vice versa.

Discard the economic traits (possible exception for Parl. Chaos) and the numbers look like this (note trade values assume no trade with immediate neighbours or Periphery):

AFFS costs = 1281 w/ income of 1554; 273 RP surplus + trade (~155)
LCAF costs = 1336 w/ income of 1738; 402 RP surplus + trade (~174)
CCAF costs = 716 w/ income of 966; 250 RP surplus + trade (~97)
DCMS costs = 1069 w/ income of 1480; 411 RP surplus + trade (~148)
FWLM costs = 914 w/ income of 1400; 486 RP surplus + trade (~140)

AFFS+LCAF surpluses = 1004 RP
CCAF+DCMS+FWLM surpluses = 1532 RP
« Last Edit: 21 July 2017, 12:50:23 by The Purist »
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #28 on: 21 July 2017, 12:54:50 »
After scrounging through some old source books (most of mine are old) and the web I was able to come up with these changes to get the LC economy closer to the 1738 RP mark. I wedged in a few factories based on their being supporting industries to full military facilities. I also treated Hesperus as two major factories.

Not exactly canon but it brings the numbers much closer to where they should be.

With the Hesperus fudge the total comes out to 1742 (+4 RPs). Without the Hesperus fudge the total is 1702 (-36 RPs).

The reason I feel it is so necessary to fix this issue is that the LC/FS alliance needs to be strong enough to take on the DC/FWL/CC coalition. The reduced RPs, either by the base LC economy or the FS 'trait', actually place the alliance in a near untenable position for being able to fight the late 3rd SW/4th SW era campaigns. The base numbers alone are trouble enough for the alliance without the other handicaps.

LC + FS base economy = 1738+1554 = 3292 RP
DC + FWL + CC base economy = 1480+1400+966 = 3846 RP

The two coalitions are only 554 RPs per turn apart and considering operating costs as well as replacements Operation Rat in 3028 would be a challenge.  :)

Cheers.

[EDIT: ensuring the RPs are correct even more important now that the 2nd SW book has introduced tech levels and research, special ops and Comstar Interdiction rules (all of which cost RPs, sometimes quite a few).   :D
« Last Edit: 22 July 2017, 14:54:49 by The Purist »
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 405
Re: ISaW Production
« Reply #29 on: 27 July 2017, 08:49:31 »
This one might be for Worktroll or one of the other designers.

Further reviewing of the production rules it was noted that page 348 of IO states that a mech regiment cost is based on the standard 108 mechs, however, a Sword of Light regiment has four battalions totalling 144 mechs. With 33% more mechs than a standard regiment would be correct to increase the cost of such a regiment by the same 33% (ie: a medium SoL regiment would cost 32 RP compared to 24 for a 3 battalion regiment).

The answer may seem an obvious yes but the question was asked and the increase does make sense. Otherwise, in such a scenario, a Kurita player could simply declare all of his new regiments 'Sword of Light' and gain a free battalion.

Cheers.
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

 

Register