-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Thanks guys, I've smoothed out the population in the USA a bit based largely on your comments for my modded Province.csv.
While it's nice to get some of these details a bit more accurate, the population distribution of the USA is relatively unimportant to gameplay (invasions of the USA are likely to be rare and even then the shift of a bit of manpower growth isn't going to impact the game much).
But keep the comments coming.
- Mithel
While it's nice to get some of these details a bit more accurate, the population distribution of the USA is relatively unimportant to gameplay (invasions of the USA are likely to be rare and even then the shift of a bit of manpower growth isn't going to impact the game much).
But keep the comments coming.
- Mithel
Actually, what caused me to notice it was writing an event that involved removing portions of the population from the west coast of the US to farther inland. I noticed it was difficult to remove population from San Francisco. Not necessarily important for game play, but very important for feel. MDow
MateDow, I agree completely. While it's obviously most important to get the critical aspects correct, all the little details help improve the "feel" and that's something I really like about HoI - we can refine it to get little details like minor countries to be more "realistic".
- Mithel
- Mithel
Handy download links to Mithel's tool and work:
At Mithel's site:
http://www.mnstarfire.com/download/hoi/ProvinceEditor.html
At RTW:
HoI Province Editor 1.00
Mithel's Province.csv with Historical Economic modifictations (except: Central and South America which uses 1.05b values).
Awesome, Mithel
This will help a lot of people having difficulties modding this csv file with MS Excel due to the list separation issues and MS Excel's corrupted file saves.
About your work in the province.csv, i will take a look at it now. The assumptions are quite interesting. Just one question: if Rubber is a valuable good or the country's agricultural values, does this mean that countries such as USA, Argentina, Uruguay should have a lot of rubber? And what about coffee? Should Brazil and Colombia have some devcent amount of rubber then? I think that this assumption will change the gameplay quite much, and i hope that for the good. Let's just give it a try!
The issue for CORE would be to translate the csv into the inc file... Unless the forget about the inc file for the moment and go back to the csv. Any suggestions?
Later.
At Mithel's site:
http://www.mnstarfire.com/download/hoi/ProvinceEditor.html
At RTW:
HoI Province Editor 1.00
Mithel's Province.csv with Historical Economic modifictations (except: Central and South America which uses 1.05b values).
Awesome, Mithel
This will help a lot of people having difficulties modding this csv file with MS Excel due to the list separation issues and MS Excel's corrupted file saves.
About your work in the province.csv, i will take a look at it now. The assumptions are quite interesting. Just one question: if Rubber is a valuable good or the country's agricultural values, does this mean that countries such as USA, Argentina, Uruguay should have a lot of rubber? And what about coffee? Should Brazil and Colombia have some devcent amount of rubber then? I think that this assumption will change the gameplay quite much, and i hope that for the good. Let's just give it a try!
The issue for CORE would be to translate the csv into the inc file... Unless the forget about the inc file for the moment and go back to the csv. Any suggestions?
Later.
Procer, for the most part I don't want to tweak rubber in the major nations because of it's overall impact due to conversion technologies. I do think they should be given some but I haven't had time to completely think it through and I didn't want to completely mess up the economy with half baked tweaks.
To give a country that has 20 ICs, ten rubber doesn't totally screw up the world economy but it does wonders for avoiding raw material "meltdowns" for those little countries without the AI (or human player) needing to worry about trading on the world market. In most cases I've left each nation slightly short (usually one point) of rubber and a small stockpile of rubber (you need to edit the .inc files for the countries) to burn for the first three years. This for the most part assures that another country conquering them won't gain a huge bonus of rubber.
I know very little about the economies of Argentina and Uruguay so it would be difficult/impossible for me to pass judgement as to how much of their raw materials should be rubber vs Coal/Steel.
While I've tried to be conservative in my changes it might be better if we completely ignored rubber being "rubber" and fixed up all countries to have healthy amounts of "rubber" to reflect internal wealth (whether that's coffee, gold, wheat or some other product).
CORE is a fantastic piece of work and I spent many hours thinking about how to assure that my work is compatible with CORE. In the end I decided to make my own mod. However I will do everything I can to make my changes easily adapted to CORE (like I'm avoiding event ID conflicts) but for me it's a lot easier to modify the Province.csv than to make a province.inc. I know we have an issue if Paradox releases a new Province.csv in v1.06, but I think we have to just bite the bullet and deal with that when and if it happens.
I'd welcome more discussion with the active developers of CORE. Ideally I would write the code to read CORE's province.inc and include those changes in the economic report, but for the moment I'm sticking with my position that editing the province.csv is the better route to go long term (because of the fact that province values revert to what is in the Province.csv when they are captured).
- Mithel
To give a country that has 20 ICs, ten rubber doesn't totally screw up the world economy but it does wonders for avoiding raw material "meltdowns" for those little countries without the AI (or human player) needing to worry about trading on the world market. In most cases I've left each nation slightly short (usually one point) of rubber and a small stockpile of rubber (you need to edit the .inc files for the countries) to burn for the first three years. This for the most part assures that another country conquering them won't gain a huge bonus of rubber.
I know very little about the economies of Argentina and Uruguay so it would be difficult/impossible for me to pass judgement as to how much of their raw materials should be rubber vs Coal/Steel.
While I've tried to be conservative in my changes it might be better if we completely ignored rubber being "rubber" and fixed up all countries to have healthy amounts of "rubber" to reflect internal wealth (whether that's coffee, gold, wheat or some other product).
CORE is a fantastic piece of work and I spent many hours thinking about how to assure that my work is compatible with CORE. In the end I decided to make my own mod. However I will do everything I can to make my changes easily adapted to CORE (like I'm avoiding event ID conflicts) but for me it's a lot easier to modify the Province.csv than to make a province.inc. I know we have an issue if Paradox releases a new Province.csv in v1.06, but I think we have to just bite the bullet and deal with that when and if it happens.
I'd welcome more discussion with the active developers of CORE. Ideally I would write the code to read CORE's province.inc and include those changes in the economic report, but for the moment I'm sticking with my position that editing the province.csv is the better route to go long term (because of the fact that province values revert to what is in the Province.csv when they are captured).
- Mithel
I'm wondering about the cuts for the minors, what was the reason for it? Also, will they be able to put up they historical forces in the field?
Madner, the reason for the cuts for minor countries was comparison of actual historical GDP figures. I feel most minors are just as well off (but more historic) than v1.05b due to the fact they can sustain their economy and not "meltdown". Some are much better off (like Switzerland).
I did tweak Romania up a bit just because of it's critical position in the war and the relatively large army they have to supply to start with (in my mod I also reduced the supply need for Cavalry as I interpret them slightly differently than Paradox).
- Mithel
I did tweak Romania up a bit just because of it's critical position in the war and the relatively large army they have to supply to start with (in my mod I also reduced the supply need for Cavalry as I interpret them slightly differently than Paradox).
- Mithel
Yes, but the GDP isn't the same as IC. Poor countries can put a large armies and wealthy one may not be able to transform the wealth into the military machine. (see Iraq and Kuwait).
Also, with the very expesnive research the minors will be even more (and even more then historicly) backward comapred to the majors.
Maybe it would have been better to give the majors more IC.
Also, with the very expesnive research the minors will be even more (and even more then historicly) backward comapred to the majors.
Maybe it would have been better to give the majors more IC.
Paradox's values (for the major countries) track the historic GDP figures *extremely* closely so it's very likely that's what they were working with till they started taking wild guesses for the minors. I suspect Paradox took the minors high in the thought that would make them more playable.
My changes actually increase most of the majors a little too.
My mod also reworks the tech tree so that minors can do more research with less IC.
I can't think of anything better (than GDP) to base the IC of HoI on. In my opinion the changes I've made make the minors MORE viable as they don't suffer from "meltdown". Try playing Czechoslovakia or Hungary in Paradox's v1.05b (or earlier). As a human given the resource constraints you end up doing absurd things.
There are modifications we need to account for some historic aspects (like the neutral nature of the USA) but with Grendel's suggestion I think I'll do this with events and techs that adjust the industrial efficiency.
I imagine a poor country might be able to raise a large army (limited by manpower) armed with pitchforks, etc but that's not appropriate in the context of HoI.
- Mithel
My changes actually increase most of the majors a little too.
My mod also reworks the tech tree so that minors can do more research with less IC.
I can't think of anything better (than GDP) to base the IC of HoI on. In my opinion the changes I've made make the minors MORE viable as they don't suffer from "meltdown". Try playing Czechoslovakia or Hungary in Paradox's v1.05b (or earlier). As a human given the resource constraints you end up doing absurd things.
There are modifications we need to account for some historic aspects (like the neutral nature of the USA) but with Grendel's suggestion I think I'll do this with events and techs that adjust the industrial efficiency.
I imagine a poor country might be able to raise a large army (limited by manpower) armed with pitchforks, etc but that's not appropriate in the context of HoI.
- Mithel
I didn't mean hordes of peasents, but most Balkan minors had quite large armies, despite they very low GDP. Compare the peace time armies of say Yugoslavia, France and Germany, and they starting IC, and you will notice the difference. Yugoslavia had a peacetime army of some 200 000 men, Germany in '38 800 000, France '39 900 000. So the factor is 4-5, and I won't argue that both France and Germany were better equiped, but the IC gap is factor 10 and 20x.
I've recently made some calculations on how, for example, economy of Yugoslavia works in HoI (I am referring to HoI 1.05b + CORE 0.532 ).
It starts off with 55 IC, and enough coal and steel to sustain that IC for about 3 years (it spends just a few more then it gets, and slowly gets rid of its initial stockpile). Rubber, however, is another tale entirely. Its needs are about 16 rubber per day, and that burns through the initial rubber stockpile in about 3 months. It then takes another 3 months to burn through its initial oil stockpile, and by mid 1936 its economy collapses. Every time.
After collapse, it oscillates between 20 and 30 IC average. Even a clever human player, constantly trading to their best advantage, can do no more then postpone the collapse with sometime in 1938 under best of circumstances. God forbid that you get some random events that raise your IC, or that you should try and raise it yourself. That'd kill you even faster.
As for army sizes and comparisons, Germany starts with some 400 IC, compared to 55 for Yugoslavia. France I think starts with 250 IC or so. German units start off about 50% better then Yugoslav ones, and get twice as good by 1939 (mostly through Spanish Civil War free tech gain). French units are a little worse off, but still become significantly better then Yugoslav ones by 1939.
Basically, the fact that Yugoslavia starts off with about 25 divisions and can probably build up to 40 by 1941 is fairly irrelevant, as it gets crushed by superior Axis troops in an eyeblink anyway. Its economy invariably collapses under AI in about 6 months, so basically its real IC capacity is about 20. Which makes it about as playable as Bhutan... Its minimal IC capacity is mostly taken by need to maintain a large army, and what is left is hardly enough to research 5 IC techs, much less some fancy high-cost doctrines...
What I am saying here is that I see no problem in giving minors small sources of rubber to keep their economies from collapsing. Having Germany take over a source of 16 rubber in the Balkans is not going to mean much to a country that by that point needs about 250 rubber per day to keep going. And most minors where this "hack" is appropriate are not in Europe anyway.
On the matter of editing province.csv vs. provinces.inc I am definitely in favor of editing province.csv. It just makes for a more permanent solution. Hopefully, Paradox will make .inc file changes stick in next version of HoI, but until then, I say we edit the main file and worry about future later.
Zerli
It starts off with 55 IC, and enough coal and steel to sustain that IC for about 3 years (it spends just a few more then it gets, and slowly gets rid of its initial stockpile). Rubber, however, is another tale entirely. Its needs are about 16 rubber per day, and that burns through the initial rubber stockpile in about 3 months. It then takes another 3 months to burn through its initial oil stockpile, and by mid 1936 its economy collapses. Every time.
After collapse, it oscillates between 20 and 30 IC average. Even a clever human player, constantly trading to their best advantage, can do no more then postpone the collapse with sometime in 1938 under best of circumstances. God forbid that you get some random events that raise your IC, or that you should try and raise it yourself. That'd kill you even faster.
As for army sizes and comparisons, Germany starts with some 400 IC, compared to 55 for Yugoslavia. France I think starts with 250 IC or so. German units start off about 50% better then Yugoslav ones, and get twice as good by 1939 (mostly through Spanish Civil War free tech gain). French units are a little worse off, but still become significantly better then Yugoslav ones by 1939.
Basically, the fact that Yugoslavia starts off with about 25 divisions and can probably build up to 40 by 1941 is fairly irrelevant, as it gets crushed by superior Axis troops in an eyeblink anyway. Its economy invariably collapses under AI in about 6 months, so basically its real IC capacity is about 20. Which makes it about as playable as Bhutan... Its minimal IC capacity is mostly taken by need to maintain a large army, and what is left is hardly enough to research 5 IC techs, much less some fancy high-cost doctrines...
What I am saying here is that I see no problem in giving minors small sources of rubber to keep their economies from collapsing. Having Germany take over a source of 16 rubber in the Balkans is not going to mean much to a country that by that point needs about 250 rubber per day to keep going. And most minors where this "hack" is appropriate are not in Europe anyway.
On the matter of editing province.csv vs. provinces.inc I am definitely in favor of editing province.csv. It just makes for a more permanent solution. Hopefully, Paradox will make .inc file changes stick in next version of HoI, but until then, I say we edit the main file and worry about future later.
Zerli
Romania has a much larger army than Yugoslavia (in HoI v1.05b) and can maintain it fairly easily with only 30 ICs I believe. I should do some further investigating of these two as they are in critical locations of Europe and it's rather important we get them as accurate as we can.
All nations maintained both a standing army and reserves. This can be very difficult to model in HoI. If we tweak France to have only a historic standing army to match their historic standing army then there is almost no way for them to build / raise the amount of troops they had at the time of the German invasion.
I'm not sure exactly how we want to handle countries like Romania and Yugoslavia. If their GDP doesn't warrant enough ICs to actually maintain their current army then perhaps it's best if we fiddle with the supply costs?
It might be most historically accurate to allow them to have slightly smaller initial armies. None of us have accurate miltary manpower figures for 1936 do we?
- Mithel
All nations maintained both a standing army and reserves. This can be very difficult to model in HoI. If we tweak France to have only a historic standing army to match their historic standing army then there is almost no way for them to build / raise the amount of troops they had at the time of the German invasion.
I'm not sure exactly how we want to handle countries like Romania and Yugoslavia. If their GDP doesn't warrant enough ICs to actually maintain their current army then perhaps it's best if we fiddle with the supply costs?
It might be most historically accurate to allow them to have slightly smaller initial armies. None of us have accurate miltary manpower figures for 1936 do we?
- Mithel
Ok, a quick look at the Balkans in HoI reveals:
v1.05b Starting Armies (1936):
Yugoslavia - 18 divisions
Romania - 31 divisions
Greece - 16 divisions
Bulgaria - 10 divisions
Now as a rough estimate, I use each division as having 15,000 men (I'm more detailed but this figure will work for general discussion like this).
Historically at their entry into war they had:
Yugoslavia - 150,000 men (1941) or 10 HoI divisions - thus HoI has them with far too large of a 1936 starting army.
Romania - 686,000 men (1941) or almost 46 HoI divisions - thus they have to grow quite a bit to reach historic figures.
Greece - 430,000 men (Oct 1940) or almost 29 HoI divisions - again they need to grow quite a bit to reach historic figures.
Bulgaria - 160,000 men or almost 11 HoI divisions - thus just about exactly their strength at the start of the war.
With my revised Province.csv Yugoslavia has 21 ICs (& crappy ministers) which easily support the starting army.
This raises the question of how large should the armies actually be in 1936 and what rate of growth should be expected of them. Considering that we aren't likely to get good historic figures for 1936 this is going to be at best educated guesses.
If I take Yugoslavia as an example with my modified Province.csv values the AI will allocate 3 ICs to production (and 3 ICs to R&D). Thus producing 1080 ICs per year or roughly two and a half divisions per year. So with four years roughly to grow that'll mean about 10 additional divisions (less actually because of the supply demand reducing production).
- Mithel
v1.05b Starting Armies (1936):
Yugoslavia - 18 divisions
Romania - 31 divisions
Greece - 16 divisions
Bulgaria - 10 divisions
Now as a rough estimate, I use each division as having 15,000 men (I'm more detailed but this figure will work for general discussion like this).
Historically at their entry into war they had:
Yugoslavia - 150,000 men (1941) or 10 HoI divisions - thus HoI has them with far too large of a 1936 starting army.
Romania - 686,000 men (1941) or almost 46 HoI divisions - thus they have to grow quite a bit to reach historic figures.
Greece - 430,000 men (Oct 1940) or almost 29 HoI divisions - again they need to grow quite a bit to reach historic figures.
Bulgaria - 160,000 men or almost 11 HoI divisions - thus just about exactly their strength at the start of the war.
With my revised Province.csv Yugoslavia has 21 ICs (& crappy ministers) which easily support the starting army.
This raises the question of how large should the armies actually be in 1936 and what rate of growth should be expected of them. Considering that we aren't likely to get good historic figures for 1936 this is going to be at best educated guesses.
If I take Yugoslavia as an example with my modified Province.csv values the AI will allocate 3 ICs to production (and 3 ICs to R&D). Thus producing 1080 ICs per year or roughly two and a half divisions per year. So with four years roughly to grow that'll mean about 10 additional divisions (less actually because of the supply demand reducing production).
- Mithel
I dunno where you take the figueres from, but they are most defintly wrong. There are several orbats for 6. April, and while the army was still mobilizing there were at least 40 divisions.
The Germans took 350 000 POW, so considering the fact that most croatian and slovenian formations were realesed on spot it means the army was larger.
oob '41
However, if we only count the divisions we might make a BIG mistake, for example the austrian divisions were very small (TO&E 8057 men) austrian infantry division '38 while other nations (usually those with abudant manpower reserves) had much larger formations Yugoslavian '39 TO&E
My source for those manpower figures is "World War II - A Statistical Survey" by John Ellis (1995 corrected edition) (ISBN 0-8160-2971-7). Pages 227 & 228 give a listing of "Manpower Raised by each of the belligerent Nations". It lists: On Entry into War; End of War; Peak number and Total Mobilized (many numbers missing).
Another location in that book gives the Yugoslav army as 16 divisions plus one Royal Guards division. And states, "According to General Simovic, the Prime Minister, only five infantry divisions and some cavalry regiments managed to engage the enemy."
Counting divisions on the one reference site you gave I come up with 30. Counting from the other site you give (kumbayaaa) I get 17 Infantry divisions;
11 "reserve" divisions; and 3 cavalry divisions - for a total of 31 divisions.
Hence it would appear that "10" divisions is low. However without knowing the exact number of men per division it's difficult to compare them in terms of generic divisions. That "Kumbayaaa" website lists their divisions as 27,000 men (darn near double what I'm using for a generic HoI division)
From "Germany's Lightning War" by Adrian Gilbert (2000), page 189 he states, "Its small peacetime army of 150,000 men could be mobilised to approximately 1.4 million troops..." And he describes the Germans as meeting almost no resistance. He lists about 343,000 men as captured and 300,000 as slipping away (nucleus for the resistance). German casualties were 392 wounded, 15 missing and 151 KIA - obviously not a hard fought battle!
So while I can see the potential for Yugoslavia to field perhaps 600,000 men ( 40 of my generic HoI divisions), it would be unreasonable to start them with that figure. And it's questionable how well they could maintain an army of that size or larger. Yugoslavia was a country in turmoil and it would be inaccurate for us to portray them in HoI as being able to put up any serious resistance to Germany.
With every country (Poland, France, etc) we come across typically two very different figures in "standing army" vs "reserves". What do we do about Denmark which had 6,000 soldiers yet an economy that obviously could have supported far more?
I completely agree, we must be extremely careful when "counting divisions". That's why I used "manpower" figures and translated to HoI division equivalents (15,000 men).
This is one of the most frustrating aspects of modeling WWII - wildly different figures.
Probably our best approach is to look at "relative" figures from the same source and try to double check them with at least one other source. And I highly advise we avoid "counting divisions".
- Mithel
Another location in that book gives the Yugoslav army as 16 divisions plus one Royal Guards division. And states, "According to General Simovic, the Prime Minister, only five infantry divisions and some cavalry regiments managed to engage the enemy."
Counting divisions on the one reference site you gave I come up with 30. Counting from the other site you give (kumbayaaa) I get 17 Infantry divisions;
11 "reserve" divisions; and 3 cavalry divisions - for a total of 31 divisions.
Hence it would appear that "10" divisions is low. However without knowing the exact number of men per division it's difficult to compare them in terms of generic divisions. That "Kumbayaaa" website lists their divisions as 27,000 men (darn near double what I'm using for a generic HoI division)
From "Germany's Lightning War" by Adrian Gilbert (2000), page 189 he states, "Its small peacetime army of 150,000 men could be mobilised to approximately 1.4 million troops..." And he describes the Germans as meeting almost no resistance. He lists about 343,000 men as captured and 300,000 as slipping away (nucleus for the resistance). German casualties were 392 wounded, 15 missing and 151 KIA - obviously not a hard fought battle!
So while I can see the potential for Yugoslavia to field perhaps 600,000 men ( 40 of my generic HoI divisions), it would be unreasonable to start them with that figure. And it's questionable how well they could maintain an army of that size or larger. Yugoslavia was a country in turmoil and it would be inaccurate for us to portray them in HoI as being able to put up any serious resistance to Germany.
With every country (Poland, France, etc) we come across typically two very different figures in "standing army" vs "reserves". What do we do about Denmark which had 6,000 soldiers yet an economy that obviously could have supported far more?
I completely agree, we must be extremely careful when "counting divisions". That's why I used "manpower" figures and translated to HoI division equivalents (15,000 men).
This is one of the most frustrating aspects of modeling WWII - wildly different figures.
Probably our best approach is to look at "relative" figures from the same source and try to double check them with at least one other source. And I highly advise we avoid "counting divisions".
- Mithel
Yes, those figueres are much closer to what I have.
The peace strength of the Yugoslav army today is 150,000 soldiers, 8,200 officers and 9,400 non-commissioned officers. Its armament comprises 2,000 light machine-guns, 800 heavy machine-guns, 250 batteries of artilery, five tank companies, and 45 air squadrons. A general field mobilisation would place at the dsiposition of its commanndant (active and reserve), 1,200,000 first line combatants thoroughly trained and admirably organised, and about 400,000 territorials, more than half of whom are war veterans. Such an army is terribly expensive.
Out of a total of 1,040 million Swiss francs, the Yugoslav budget for 1932 allotted 277 million, or about 27 per cent, to the Ministry of War.
Now, an peacetime army of 170 000 men is by no means small, but rather a very big army. I will fetch the numbers of other Balkan peace time armies (I have to look trough a militarty encilopedia
) but from my memory, only Turkey had a larger army then Yugoslavia.Also, when Greece could field 460 000 men with a population of 7 milions it isn't unreasonable to belive Yugoslavia could field twice that, with a population of 15 milions (and one of the fastest growing population in Europe).
Historicly, there was no war between Germany and Yugoslavia, basicly the serbian Generalstaff was convinced they had no chance and acted the same way. Also, the army was mobilizing, while Germany was prepared for the attack on SU, this two things combined were the prime reasons for the fast conquest of Yugoslavia. (In game terms, the yugoslavian player reinforced all his divisions to full strenght, and suffered org close to 0 for it, the German player used that to full extent
)
From more study yesterday it appears Paradox basically retained Rumania's war time army for their 1936 starting OOB and that in comparison makes Yugoslavia's army "too small".
In my opinion to create a "historic" mod we should have the 1936 starting OOBs as essentially the "peacetime" figures and evaluate how well the country can reach historic mobilization within the appropriate time frame (1939/40/41) in the HoI game system. (i.e. we might need to tweak the starting OOB or economy a bit to result in closer to historic figures).
But we certainly don't give a country it's theoretical mobilized force.
- Mithel
In my opinion to create a "historic" mod we should have the 1936 starting OOBs as essentially the "peacetime" figures and evaluate how well the country can reach historic mobilization within the appropriate time frame (1939/40/41) in the HoI game system. (i.e. we might need to tweak the starting OOB or economy a bit to result in closer to historic figures).
But we certainly don't give a country it's theoretical mobilized force.
- Mithel
Yes, there I agree, if the economic model doesn't allow the historical developments then it is basicly flawed.
Rumenia is by no means an exception, but rather the rule, Poland is another example of a overpowered '36 oob.
Also, could you post the GDP figueres, as they would be most interesting, imho another importment factor for agricultural nations was population, so maybe the IC should be a combination of those two factors.
Rumenia is by no means an exception, but rather the rule, Poland is another example of a overpowered '36 oob.
Also, could you post the GDP figueres, as they would be most interesting, imho another importment factor for agricultural nations was population, so maybe the IC should be a combination of those two factors.
Sure, I've got the GDP figures on my website at:
http://www.mnstarfire.com/ww2/history/economic/GDP1938.html
As I understand it the way Maddison calculated GDP (specifically for nations for which there are no good numbers) was to figure out a per capita productivity value and then multiply by population. So in a way the GDP figures are a reflection of population.
As I understand it GDP very much includes agriculture. But the HoI economic system doesn't really account for agricultural production and trade (everything revolves around four key resources and a "world market" which in my opinion is virtually worthless).
I plan to review the initial OOB now that I've discovered that inaccuracies seem to be rampant. (I had expected the OOB would be one of the more accurate parts of HoI)
- Mithel
http://www.mnstarfire.com/ww2/history/economic/GDP1938.html
As I understand it the way Maddison calculated GDP (specifically for nations for which there are no good numbers) was to figure out a per capita productivity value and then multiply by population. So in a way the GDP figures are a reflection of population.
As I understand it GDP very much includes agriculture. But the HoI economic system doesn't really account for agricultural production and trade (everything revolves around four key resources and a "world market" which in my opinion is virtually worthless).
I plan to review the initial OOB now that I've discovered that inaccuracies seem to be rampant. (I had expected the OOB would be one of the more accurate parts of HoI)
- Mithel