Discussion of guidelines for estimation of infrastructure (revising vanilla values)

[Mattias]

I have found it useful to have some kind of guidelines when i revise the sometimes not so realistic infra-values in AoD (and HoI 2). If anyone' s interested i would like comments - and possible corrections /Mattias

My current guidelines:

0% =
Uninhabited desert or ice-covered areas.
Not even trails, impassable with bigger groups.

10% = [Parts of Sahara and northernmost Siberia]
Desert with few oases, tundra or other very harsh climate, hardly any permanent settlements.
Not even farms
No roads, only trails totally unsuitable for vehicles and with limited water supply, natives use pack-animals.
No road-or water connection to neighbours

20% = [Parts of Sahara, some inland parts of Asia and Northern Canada]
Semi-desert or taiga with a few small settlements.
No factories or workshops, only small-scale farming, no railways or places were ships can land
No good road-or water connection to neighbours
Few tracks/bad roads suitable for vehicles

30% = [Inland china, westernmost Aleutians - NO harbour in game, linked to islands with harbour for supply, Msus, Mechilli]
Undeveloped rural area with some settlements, very poor infrastructure.
No factories or workshops, no railways/anchorages with piers, i.e. only a place to anchor and unladen a small ship.
Good road-connection to at least one neighbour OR harbour capable of receiving small costal freighters
No main-roads in province

40% = [Most small islands with prepared harbours]
Rural area.
No factories, a few small workshops, possibly a very small rail yard/dock-area
Good road-connections to at least two neighbouring provinces OR one rail/waterway-connection (incl. harbours capable of receiving small sea-going vessels).
Only one good main-road in province

50% = [Villhelmina, Gällivare, Kiruna]
Developed rural area with at least one small city.
No industrialized areas, a few industries/mines, at least one small rail yard/dock-area
Good road-connections to at least two neighbouring provinces, at least one good rail/waterway-connection (incl. harbours capable of receiving sea-going vessels)
Few good main-roads in province

60% = [Östersund, Åmål, Tobruk, most regional naval main-bases should have this size]
Well developed rural area with some small cities.
Few industrialized areas, small rail yards/dock-areas
Good road connections to at least half of the neighbours, good rail/waterway connections to at least two neighbours (incl. harbours with some sea-going traffic).
Good main-roads in province

70% = [Luleå, Ludvika, Tripoli]
Semi-industrialized area
Some industrialized areas, rail yards/dock-areas
Good road and rail/waterway-connections to a majority of the neighbours (including harbours with regular sea-going traffic).
Good road-network in province.

80% = [Stockholm, Alexandria]
Semi urbanized area
Industrialized areas, quite big rail yards/dock-areas
Good road and rail/waterway-connections to most neighbours (including harbours with regular ocean-going traffic).
Well-developed road-network in province

90% = [all areas not fully urbanized, Stalingrad, Warsaw]
Urbanized area i.e. terrain-type urbanized
Heavily industrialized areas, big rail yards/dock-areas
Several good road and rail/waterway-connections to most neighbours (including harbours with regular trans-ocean traffic).
Extensive road-network in province, many paved roads.

100% = [London, Moscow, Singapore, Ruhrgebiet]
Fully urbanized area i.e. terrain-type urbanized
Extensively industrialized areas, very big rail yards/dock-areas
Several road and rail/waterway-connections to all neighbours (including harbours with regular trans-ocean traffic).
Extensive paved road-network in province.

 

[Amallric]

Yes, very interesting. I just think you're not harsh enough for the first 3 steps. For me, no road means 0% infra. I don't believe that places with sparse native(uncivilized population) are much more helpful for an army than a completely unhabited one.

Also how to take in account the railroads that pass through an otherwise completely undeveloped and void area such as the Transsiberian. Historically it was but a single-track railroad, but enough to supply the whole Far East area. Especially with the AoD system where the ESE is linked not to your current province infrastructure but to the infra of all provinces between you and the capital, this need to be modelled somehow.

 

[HistoryMan]

And (since you are talking about AoD), remember that Infra goes up to 200% now. Tim

 

[Mattias]

@ Amallric: In theory you’re right but I’m not sure it would be right in-game (I’m not sure my model is correct in game either – it’s partly based on HoI 2 - without the units ability to carry supplies with them).

I have compared the infra-guidelines to the wars fought in northern Africa and also the 1944 Soviet autumn/winter offensive in northernmost Finland/Norway. IRL I think it was possible for even armoured units to fight and be (slowly) re supplied in provinces like Msus and Forte Maddalena in north Africa, provinces with 10-20% infra according to the maps I have seen (IRL). Even if the soldiers had to carry almost everything with them it was still possible to exist there for quite some time.

I think the guidelines should reflect if it's possible to transport supplies through the province or not. Then the only areas with 0% would then be deserts (warm or polar) exposed to sand/snow storms without access to water, with very few landmarks – making it impossible to find ones way without generations of expertise and were vehicle-traffic is literally impossible (even for motorcycles and light tracked vehicles) due to difficult terrain and to few landmarks making it impossible to find ones way.

If a few settlements (10%) exist it will be possible to find some identifiable landmarks and at least some tracks will exist making it possible to travel by foot or with very light vehicles (like along a modern hiking-path in mountains or deep forest) even if the area is to difficult for trucks, making it almost impossible to supply bigger units.

If the area has small-scale farming (20%) it will be quite easy to find landmarks and possibly to use light vehicles along some kind of tiny roads. It will be possibly to use light vehicles like horse-drawn carriages and jeeps and thus supply at least some non motorized units.

About railways:

Even single tracked railways have different kind of capacity. The Trans-Siberian (like the iron-ore railway between Kiruna and Narvik in Sweden/Norway and many such railways in northern America) has high axle load, quite low gradients and enough meeting-stations and rail-yards. In vanilla AoD (and HoI) they are provinces with 60% infra, Imho 50% would be a better value if the province has few good roads, and perhaps 40% if it’s only one single railway almost without rail yards or cities (even if this isn’t common in AoD due to the big provinces – who actually are a compromise between different kind of terrains).

When I’m not sure about what infra-value a province should have I give it what I think works best in game – like making it possible to support large (Soviet) armies in the Far East.

/Mattias

 

[Mattias]

@HistoryMan:
I have heard about the new 200% max infra but I don't understand what's it's supposed to represent?!

It isn't represented at the map in-game. Even New York is (only) 100% infra so I don’t really understand how the developers thought when they implemented this? It seems pointless to just delude the current values to twice as much?!

/Mattias

 

[Balesir]

200% Infra represents very advanced infrastructure such as we see through later history - autobahns/motorways/dual carriageways, electrified and diesel railways and much denser road nets. One thing we should have done, but have not yet, is link the level of Infra attainable to technologies. When/if we do this it should be moddable, so there will be a tech command for "allow Infra up to level X".

Edit: first autobahnen were built in the 1930s/1940s, so the increase in Infra over 100% is actually apposite for WW2.