Attempting to Fulfill the Plan: GDI Edition

[HousePet]

I think that Ground Forces Zone Armor is a late plan goal. We have many other priorities to address first.
(Orca refits, Point Defence Refits, more accurate Shells, more consumables, Steel Talons, Orbital Commitments, Wartime Factory Refits, more more consumables...)

 

[marids]

Do we really want to do the Ground Forces Zone Armor before we do Wartime Factory Refits? We only have so many Capital Goods to go around at any one time, and the wartime factories will hardly be up to the job for when the 4th war hits. And we'll have no choice but to rely upon those 8+ year old factories if we keep spreading out our Capital Goods among a dozen other projects.

Click to shrink...

Regardless of the age of the factories, so long as they're still functional, and not producing any of the new technology, then does it really matter all that much for how slightly more inefficient the older factories are at making older tech that aren't nearly as in demand?

Given how they Military is clamoring for more new things such as more Shells, Ablat, Zone Armor, and everything else that was developed and built with new technology and produced with newer modern factories, and not any of the older stuff that's being produced by the older factories, I can't help but feel that the War Factories Refit is more suited to be done later than sooner, especially since income is still not yet high enough to activate the dice(s) that the project is meant to generate.

Basically it seems that the Military values the deployment of new tech such as Zone Armor more compared to doing the refit for more older stuff, which is probably why it's not as high in priority consideration.

 

[staplesdex2]

You'd think that Wartime Factory Refits would mean they would get retooled to be the ones where we'd get the Shells and Ablatives from.

 

[marids]

You'd think that Wartime Factory Refits would mean they would get retooled to be the ones where we'd get the Shells and Ablatives from.

Click to shrink...

My understanding for that subject comes from this quote:

2. The military actually has "enough" of most extant hardware from that era. Would they say no to more battlebases? Would they say no to more Predators, or Firehawks, or grenades, rifles, and any of the other paraphenalia of war? Absolutely not. But at the same time they don't "need" more of any of it particularly desperately.

Click to shrink...

Which to me meant the older factories aren't built in a way to make the new tech, and even refitting them wouldn't be able to change them enough to produce what they were simply never designed to make in the first place. Thus, they'll make the older stuff in higher quantities and quality, but only the older stuff.

Although you do have a point on the shells. Because while the Ablat is definitely new tech, I can't imagine GDI not having even as Shell production factories before the start of the quest. Unless, they were either mostly or totally destroyed during the war, and thus the Military's need for Shells before the newer factories were built was mostly or entirely dependent on the leftover reserves the whole time?! If the answer is somehow yes, I wouldn't even be all that surprised... But yeah, in that case there wouldn't even BE much older Shell factories left to even do refits with.

 

[Simon_Jester]

I think the same of you for this topic actually.

Click to shrink...

In isolation, that's just a "no you."

Like, seriously. Do you really think that the popular sentiments leading to the demand for more arcologies are just a utopian lust for gleaming towers? Do you really think the extreme conditions of crowding and number of people being forced to live in undesirable homes under bombardment or in commieblocks doesn't have a lot to do with it?

While my plan does not set up railroads, in exchange it does three things:
-Set up Nod research for the next turn
-Set up Scrin research for the turn after next
-Pre-emptively deal with the labour shortage with YZ qualifications initiative

The railways and other logistical concerns can be resolved next turn, with the increased RpT and free dice.

Click to shrink...

The logistical concerns can be resolved by-and-by if we don't worry about the potential consequences of scraping the bottom of the barrel in Logistics over the present turn, and if we accept that we're on a choke-chain because of it.

I want a plan that pushes us close enough to a good Logistics position that we can treat the matter as being under control, rather than having to frantically bounce back and forth between crash spending on different projects to put out fires every turn.

I really think research needs to be done early for the potential of game changing technologies like the Tib Stabilizer was and not left until later where the potential gains are less rewarding.

Click to shrink...

The labor shortage doesn't need to be pre-empted; there is plenty of time to resolve it before it becomes relevant, insofar as the Yellow Zone qualifications initiative can resolve it at all.

As for the research, we still haven't acted on a lot of the research options we have. It's important, but just paying to activate those dice is a shaky proposition when we're still poorly positioned to deploy anything complex. Especially Scrin tech, which depends on transuranics that we really do need to make more tiberium refineries to process.

I'm willing to consider rejiggering the plan a bit for Research dice (it's not impossible), but the core issue remains Infrastructure spending.

I'll point out that if you want logistics quickly, Automated Civilian Shipyards gives +9 Logistics for median cost 80R.

Click to shrink...

I don't know if you read my actual plan draft, but it contains Automated Civilian Shipyards.

Just at a low enough expenditure to count as a slow-walk: three dice this turn and then one more per turn until it finishes. Because I want the project, but I don't want to waste dice on it at 20 R/die.

Eh, it's not as economical as it looks compared to Glaciers.

Vein Mines, for 120R, are an 80% to complete at 40-60 income, and take Capital Goods. Whereas glaciers for the same cost are +99% and take Logistics instead.

The main benefit for Vein Mines is we don't further strain ZOCOM and it synergies better with a Capital Goods full press.

Click to shrink...

Also, it doesn't burn Infrastructure dice. Not counting phases made cheaper from Medina-Mecca-Jeddah, glacier mines at -5 Logistics per phase require us to spend Infrastructure and Tib dice in a roughly 1:1 ratio just to keep the Logistics up. By contrast, vein mines require us to spend Heavy Industry and Tib dice in a roughly 1:4 ratio.

The vein mines use a lot more Tib dice (though not a lot more total resources) for the same +RpT payoff... but they don't compete with all our other projects for Infrastructure dice.

Do we really want to do the Ground Forces Zone Armor before we do Wartime Factory Refits? We only have so many Capital Goods to go around at any one time, and the wartime factories will hardly be up to the job for when the 4th war hits. And we'll have no choice but to rely upon those 8+ year old factories if we keep spreading out our Capital Goods among a dozen other projects.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, you're right. You really are right.

Regardless of the age of the factories, so long as they're still functional, and not producing any of the new technology, then does it really matter all that much for how slightly more inefficient the older factories are at making older tech that aren't nearly as in demand?

Click to shrink...

HELL YES.

Greater output of military equipment from those factories frees up all sorts of assets to produce more of the things we need, and to make the front lines stronger by making it easier for them to obtain things. This can be as big as "we can fortify the front more densely because we have more MCVs and Rigs" or as subtle as "Firehawk fighters can fly more sorties because we're manufacturing more spare parts."

The military isn't clamoring for more production from those factories because it takes those factories for granted- they're not new wonderweapons and the military normally bugs us for wonderweapons. That doesn't mean they're not important, because, y'know, war mobilization and war production efficiency matter.

 

[uju32]

I think that it has been stipulated that the vast majority of yellow zoners would vastly prefer to live in the blue zone rather than the yellow zone.

Click to shrink...

I would appreciate a citation for this.
Because there's a difference between saying they'd like to live in a BZ and saying they'd like to move to a BZ.

Do remember that you are asking a whole bunch of people to relocate to strange cities, among strangers, that they've been hearing Nod propaganda about for decades, and who they share very little with. A lot, possibly the majority, of people would stay where they were with only a moderate improvement in living standards as long as they got to do so among familiar people.

And from GDI's perspective, there are political imperatives to investing in the Yellow Zones they capture.
And to be seen to invest in the Yellow Zones.

I vote 'defensive'. NOD still has a substantial naval presence, and their super-transport subs is what turns India from 'another warlord state' to a real threat to our ambitions by acting as a rear area and supply center for every other NOD-aligned warlord.

Having the ability to land troops at war's start is nice, but I don't think it's worth having to fight NOD as a unified block instead of as, essentially, co-belligerents. To say nothing of what would happen if our naval logistics got slashed.

Click to shrink...

1)Point of correction:
If you read the update again, you'll notice that Offensive and Defensive are used as categories, but its not stated they're mutually exclusive. You can choose to build Shark frigates(Defensive), then add Victory LCS ships(Offensive). Or build Assault ships(Offensive) before Escort carriers(Defensive). Or the other way around.

Mix and match in any order that the threat environment dictates.

2) Offensives are how you take the war to Nod.

How you find the shipyards building their ships and wreck them. How you cut the supply lines between Nod regions, forcing them to fight you as individual warlords instead of a unit. How you find and wreck their production infrastructure.
How you force them to spend resources on defenses instead of being on that attack.

You dont win a war on land by defending. You wont win a war on the seas by defending.
You will need both offensive and defensive fleet elements.

I'm not sure if I'm a fan of expanding nukes. I kind of preferred not expanding traditional nukes and just working on energy weapons.

Click to shrink...

As demonstrated during the Scrin invasion, GDI cannot always count on orbital superiority.
The thinking of the military would be along the lines of a backup being nice to have in the event the Scrin should show up.
Again.

Plus, nukes are not just weapons of war.

Demolitions for example, and other civil engineering projects on Earth or on the Moon, Mars and other extra terrestrial bodies might find a use for explosives. Its certainly going to be easier to transport a 40kg clean nuke among your supplies to blow a hole in the Martian crust than to carry 20 tons of TNT.

 

[uju32]

Regardless of the age of the factories, so long as they're still functional, and not producing any of the new technology, then does it really matter all that much for how slightly more inefficient the older factories are at making older tech that aren't nearly as in demand?

Click to shrink...

Yes.
Its the difference between having 70% of your equipment available and with spare parts for prolonged operations
And having 95% available and with spare parts for prolonged operations.

Those vehicles, the RIGs and MCVs and Firehawks, remain the backbone of large chunks of our forces.
Mission availability rates for your gear matters.
Its one of the more effective upgrades we could do for our forces; we just couldnt afford the Cap Goods before.

I think that Ground Forces Zone Armor is a late plan goal. We have many other priorities to address first.
(Orca refits, Point Defence Refits, more accurate Shells, more consumables, Steel Talons, Orbital Commitments, Wartime Factory Refits, more more consumables...)

Click to shrink...

If ZOCOM is making noises about it on behalf of the army, we better pencil down at least 1-2 factories sometime in the next four turns. Unless you dont like money and the things money can buy.

 

[TheFourthman]

s demonstrated during the Scrin invasion, GDI cannot always count on orbital superiority.
The thinking of the military would be along the lines of a backup being nice to have in the event the Scrin should show up.
Again.

Click to shrink...

There was talk of putting them in orbit too. Which I also have reservations about.

Plus, nukes are not just weapons of war.

Click to shrink...

I don't think the Soviet program or Project Plowshare were that successful.

 

[HousePet]

If ZOCOM is making noises about it on behalf of the army, we better pencil down at least 1-2 factories sometime in the next four turns. Unless you dont like money and the things money can buy.

Click to shrink...

ZOCOM suggesting that the Ground Forces need something does not override everything else that the Ground Forces have been asking for for years.

 

[aceraptor]

Regardless of the age of the factories, so long as they're still functional, and not producing any of the new technology, then does it really matter all that much for how slightly more inefficient the older factories are at making older tech that aren't nearly as in demand?

Given how they Military is clamoring for more new things such as more Shells, Ablat, Zone Armor, and everything else that was developed and built with new technology and produced with newer modern factories, and not any of the older stuff that's being produced by the older factories, I can't help but feel that the War Factories Refit is more suited to be done later than sooner, especially since income is still not yet high enough to activate the dice(s) that the project is meant to generate.

Basically it seems that the Military values the deployment of new tech such as Zone Armor more compared to doing the refit for more older stuff, which is probably why it's not as high in priority consideration.

Click to shrink...

Yes.
Its the difference between having 70% of your equipment available and with spare parts for prolonged operations
And having 95% available and with spare parts for prolonged operations.

Those vehicles, the RIGs and MCVs and Firehawks, remain the backbone of large chunks of our forces.
Mission availability rates for your gear matters.
Its one of the more effective upgrades we could do for our forces; we just couldnt afford the Cap Goods before.


If ZOCOM is making noises about it on behalf of the army, we better pencil down at least 1-2 factories sometime in the next four turns. Unless you dont like money and the things money can buy.

Click to shrink...

Keep in mind that IIRC the GM has outright stated that completing War Factory Refits will place GDI in a position of outright superiority for two years (or was it one?) over NOD as those wartime factories that have been refit flood the armories of GDI forces with much more war material. Enough to allow even GDI militia to get outfit with Predator tanks for example.

That's two years that Nod will be forced to hunker down and struggle against the immense material superiority being brought against them on all fronts.

 

[uju32]

There was talk of putting them in orbit too. Which I also have reservations about.



I don't think the Soviet program or Project Plowshare were that successful.

Click to shrink...

1)For storage, to put them out of the hands of the minor and medium warlords, who can only make nukes with significant effort and would much rather steal outs. Which has probably happened before.
Major warlords are entirely capable of making their own easily.

2) The Soviets snuffed a gas well with a nuke IIRC.
Political reasons and the potential for radioactive byproducts scuppered the further exploration of that.
Tiberium Earth has none of those issues.

ZOCOM suggesting that the Ground Forces need something does not override everything else that the Ground Forces have been asking for for years.

Click to shrink...

Yes it does.

ZOCOM's readiness determines the Treasury's ability to expand our Red Zone mining operations, which is a major chunk of the funds that everybody else relies on, including the Ground Forces. That makes them the most important branch of the military to the Treasury, followed by the Navy that protects our ocean shipping lanes.

So when they say they need the Army equipped in power armor to reduce the weight of responsibility for non-Red Zone operations from them? So they can handle more Red Zone mining operations?
It carries the equivalent of a Very High Priority with the threat of PS loss at the Treasury's highest levels.

 

[marids]

Yes.
Its the difference between having 70% of your equipment available and with spare parts for prolonged operations
And having 95% available and with spare parts for prolonged operations.

Those vehicles, the RIGs and MCVs and Firehawks, remain the backbone of large chunks of our forces.
Mission availability rates for your gear matters.
Its one of the more effective upgrades we could do for our forces; we just couldnt afford the Cap Goods before.

Click to shrink...

My main reasoning is that those 'backbone' units are not nearly as in demand or as useful as the newer generation of developed and deployed technology, as in while the Military would certainly like more of them as a reserve, they'd prefer to get the new stuff instead to prepare for the new impending war over getting simply more surplus of what they already had.

For example, rather than simply getting more of the old regular infantry gear, they'd prefer the entire army to be upgraded to the newer Zone Armor, or rather than simply getting more tanks, they'd prefer to cover up their existing stock of tanks with more Ablat, or even just getting more Shells to fire their new artillery with.

Basically I see them wanting the new stuff far more than getting more of the older stuff, which they already have sufficient supplies of, and are not up to the quality and usefulness that they'd rather get instead with newer tech. It's why I question is it really as important, because while both are important, one has to be MORE important. Priorities exists for a reason after all.

 

[DecaffeinatedOwl]

1)Point of correction:
If you read the update again, you'll notice that Offensive and Defensive are used as categories, but its not stated they're mutually exclusive. You can choose to build Shark frigates(Defensive), then add Victory LCS ships(Offensive). Or build Assault ships(Offensive) before Escort carriers(Defensive). Or the other way around.

Mix and match in any order that the threat environment dictates.

2) Offensives are how you take the war to Nod.

How you find the shipyards building their ships and wreck them. How you cut the supply lines between Nod regions, forcing them to fight you as individual warlords instead of a unit. How you find and wreck their production infrastructure.
How you force them to spend resources on defenses instead of being on that attack.

You dont win a war on land by defending. You wont win a war on the seas by defending.
You will need both offensive and defensive fleet elements.

Click to shrink...

I am well aware that this projects represent individual classes of ships, and that we can mix and match...if we can get ships in the water.

Which we can't. Not for all the fleet elements we want, not by Q2 2059. It'll be a damn miracle if we can get two of our four proposed classes deployed, with everything else on our plate. Personally I expect to fully deploy one class and maybe get started on another.

The question then is 'which is more valuable at war's start', which is to say 'what is the best Navy we can have at war's start.'

To wit. The threat environment at sea consists of:
1.NOD piracy towards our convoys at sea.
2.WW2-style submarines, also attacking our convoys at sea
2.Super transport submarines, and presumably a number of super attack submarines because NOD likes their wunderwaffe.

Note: No High Seas fleet of capital ships that can be bombed at dock or hunted down at sea. Just an omnipresence or fleet-in-being of submarines and stealthy small craft, operating out of anchorages we can't find.

At war's start, we will be facing a Battle of the Atlantic on a global scale. Sea trade is our backbone, the web that ties us into a cohesive state instead of a bloc of co-belligerents. If that gets slashed, we're done, game over.

And note the lesson from history: The Battle of the Atlantic wasn't won because the U-boat pens were taken or bombed out from the air, though this happened for all of them eventually. It ended, or more subsided, because the Wallie's ASW got so good that no U-boat could shoot at a convoy and live.

Likewise here. We cannot expect to be able to attack the pens at war's start even if we have the ships for it, and if we cannot maintain the web of sea trade we will not be able to attack at all later. By necessity, our Navy's stance will have to be to some degree 'defensive'.

In short, our priorities will be: Maintain the viability of seaborne logistics, then, if we can, support our ground forces with shore bombardment and naval aviation, then, if we can, press the attack with naval landings.

With that in mind, here's what our fleet looks like now:

Hydrofoils: Fast Attack Boat. Anti piracy patrol in the littorals.

Governors:ASW, air defense, and shore bombardment. Very generalist. At present, convoy protection and submarine hunting.

Battleships: Naval interdiction and the shore bombardment mission, potentially. Convoy protection at present, being freed up for other missions as Governors hit the water.

Fleet Carrier: A lot of everything, potentially. Convoy protection and ASW at present, being freed up for other missions as Governors hit the water.

You may note a theme here, of ships that would be better off doing anything else playing convoy protection to protect our delicate jugular. This is symptomatic of both a 'top heavy' Navy and our reliance on sea trade.

Here's what our proposed fleet elements look like:

Escort Carrier: Anything you can carry out with a Super Orca, so a little bit of everything. Probably convoy protection with ASW-loaded Orcas.

Frigate: Dual purpose ASW/AAA. Half a Governor, basically, minus the shore bombardment mission. Convoy protection and submarine hunters.

Assault Ship: The Landing Mission. (Maybe an ersatz escort carrier too.)

Monitor: Supporting the Landing Mission. Shore bombardment, ASW, and mine sweeping...in the littorals.

The 'defensive' classes proposed perform the same missions that our larger ships are forced to do, freeing them up for the missions they are actually good at. Like supporting the Landing Mission with shore bombardment and naval aviation.

Of the two offensive classes, the Assault Ship is dedicated solely to the Landing Mission--in everything else it's a poor heli carrier. The Monitor, likewise, is specialized for supporting the Landing Mission--that doesn't mean it's completely helpless against the odd pirate, but in hostile waters you will lose it.

In any case, the Landing Mission cannot be performed if local naval superiority cannot be assured, which requires capital ships and other dedicated naval combatants, which must somehow be freed up from the convoy protection mission. Hence the chicken and egg comment earlier--you cannot expect to be able to ensure naval superiority solely by overrunning the docks, especially if the only way to access the docks in question is by sea.

Hence, we must focus on ensuring victory at sea by suppressing the NOD presence at sea, before we can destroy the docks that enable that presence. Hence, the 'defensive' stance, by focusing on Escort Carriers and Frigates first, and then, and only then, moving on to Assault Ships and Monitors.

 

[AntiSanity]

In isolation, that's just a "no you."

Like, seriously. Do you really think that the popular sentiments leading to the demand for more arcologies are just a utopian lust for gleaming towers? Do you really think the extreme conditions of crowding and number of people being forced to live in undesirable homes under bombardment or in commieblocks doesn't have a lot to do with it?

Click to shrink...

In isolation, it does seem that way. But I just disagree with you on this while agreeing with you on other matters. Look, I don't disagree that apartments are needed. I just don't think it should be done this turn when a better option is available to satisfy and explicitly stated need plus not "bouncing from option to option" of half done projects. The people saw a slow walking of arcologies for a long time and this will satiate them by actually finishing one.

The logistical concerns can be resolved by-and-by if we don't worry about the potential consequences of scraping the bottom of the barrel in Logistics over the present turn, and if we accept that we're on a choke-chain because of it.

I want a plan that pushes us close enough to a good Logistics position that we can treat the matter as being under control, rather than having to frantically bounce back and forth between crash spending on different projects to put out fires every turn.

Click to shrink...

We won't be bottom of the barrel logistics for my plan. Tiberium Glacier harvesting is projected to reach out from the completed Mecca, leading to only a -2 logistics. No other options in that plan will have a logistics cost. 3 die into Expanding Communications Network will have 92% chance of getting +2 logistics to counter that drain. My plan will end the turn with a net neutral change of logistics. With the existing +6, there is more than enough time to do more logistics the next turn to avoid the choke-chain possibility.

The labor shortage doesn't need to be pre-empted; there is plenty of time to resolve it before it becomes relevant, insofar as the Yellow Zone qualifications initiative can resolve it at all.

As for the research, we still haven't acted on a lot of the research options we have. It's important, but just paying to activate those dice is a shaky proposition when we're still poorly positioned to deploy anything complex. Especially Scrin tech, which depends on transuranics that we really do need to make more tiberium refineries to process.

I'm willing to consider rejiggering the plan a bit for Research dice (it's not impossible), but the core issue remains Infrastructure spending.

Click to shrink...

It's definitely in our interest to pre-empt labour shortages. With research consuming a good amount of resources, the remaining free dice can go towards qualifications. It's better to clear out the resource-free option while we are constrained by resources and have dice left.

The existing research that hasn't been acted upon isn't as game-changing as the projects that we did act upon. Something like Tiberium Stabilizers was only possible through research. Projects like that have a compounding gain the earlier they are available. Do remember there is a time lag between research completion and project availability. We do it now while we are still in our income building phase and the research will be ready when our income base is steady.

The transuranics argument is a non-sequitur for two reasons.
-The new processes for transuranics are already in play with Chicago and Mecca and we are in no shortage of processing.
-The first tech to complete is Nod tech. Not Scrin. Scrin technology also takes longer to appear after research completion. By the time Scrin tech projects come we will be on good footing for processing.

 

[sunrise]

Wartime Factory Refits has one major benefit to us that the military does not care about 1d2 military dice we want those at the turn we can afford to use them so we can use less free dice on the military and more elsewhere.

 

[Crazycryodude]

The factory refits aren't for the military, that's why the military hasn't asked for them. They're for the Treasury, because we're currently running a bunch of extra overhead and workarounds and emergency wartime kludges that are causing serious inefficiencies in military production. The end consumers (i.e. the military) don't actually care because the point of all those kludges is to get them their requested production levels at the cost of giving the Treasury a migrane, which was a good trade during World War 5 when we needed more tanks right this second and fuck anything else. But we can't keep soldiering through decades of peacetime with a migrane. That's where the extra Military dice come from, reducing administrative overhead on the Treasury side, not giving the military more guns.

 

[Simon_Jester]

We've been directly told that it'll increase production of some things, and logically when you throw THAT much Capital Goods into a set of factories, either you're increasing production or you're reducing the labor/resource input required to operate them.

 

[Oshha]

The factory refits aren't for the military, that's why the military hasn't asked for them. They're for the Treasury, because we're currently running a bunch of extra overhead and workarounds and emergency wartime kludges that are causing serious inefficiencies in military production. The end consumers (i.e. the military) don't actually care because the point of all those kludges is to get them their requested production levels at the cost of giving the Treasury a migrane, which was a good trade during World War 5 when we needed more tanks right this second and fuck anything else. But we can't keep soldiering through decades of peacetime with a migrane. That's where the extra Military dice come from, reducing administrative overhead on the Treasury side, not giving the military more guns.

Click to shrink...

But doesn't the description for the action say that it will give more vehicles and spare parts to the military? That seems like something that benefits the military and is more than just sorting out unnecessary administrative overhead for the treasury.

major improvements in the availability of spare parts and actual fully functional vehicles can be made.

Click to shrink...

 

[Void Stalker]

Do we really want to do the Ground Forces Zone Armor before we do Wartime Factory Refits? We only have so many Capital Goods to go around at any one time, and the wartime factories will hardly be up to the job for when the 4th war hits. And we'll have no choice but to rely upon those 8+ year old factories if we keep spreading out our Capital Goods among a dozen other projects.

Click to shrink...

Before we do any of the refits? No, we probably want to do the 1st and maybe 2nd phase before doing ground armor but i think we will want to do 1 or 2 ground armor before finishing all 4 phases. Also part of the reason to keep pushing cap good production.


Also hmm might do the automated shipyard in HI this turn so we can push a lot of glaciers. Do we know how many more phases we have at the -2/-3 logistics from Medina for glaciers?

 

[Crazycryodude]

We've been directly told that it'll increase production of some things, and logically when you throw THAT much Capital Goods into a set of factories, either you're increasing production or you're reducing the labor/resource input required to operate them.

Click to shrink...

But doesn't the description for the action say that it will give more vehicles and spare parts to the military? That seems like something that benefits the military and is more than just sorting out unnecessary administrative overhead for the treasury.

Click to shrink...

Yeah but the military doesn't particularly care about those things. Of course the military factories make things for the military and making more stuff for the military will help them, but the Joint Chiefs aren't going out of their way to ask for it because they have like a dozen higher priority things and getting more Pitbulls is pretty low on the list. I should have phrased it as being primarily a project to help the Treasury, obviously it also helps the military. It's just not something the military really wants us to go out of our way to get, they'd prefer other things.

And to be clear I'm pointing this out because I support doing them and unfucking the Treasury's problems, not "oh the military hasn't asked for it so we should ignore it." We're the Treasury, I thought it was pretty evident that a thing helping the Treasury is a point in its favor.

 

[RCNAnon]

Ithilid said two or three at least for Medina. So three/four total minimum.

 

[Derpmind]

I would appreciate a citation for this.
Because there's a difference between saying they'd like to live in a BZ and saying they'd like to move to a BZ.

Do remember that you are asking a whole bunch of people to relocate to strange cities, among strangers, that they've been hearing Nod propaganda about for decades, and who they share very little with. A lot, possibly the majority, of people would stay where they were with only a moderate improvement in living standards as long as they got to do so among familiar people.

And from GDI's perspective, there are political imperatives to investing in the Yellow Zones they capture.
And to be seen to invest in the Yellow Zones.

Click to shrink...

I mean. I'd do a lot to not have to live among giant green death crystals. Though that said, technically the best investment we could do for the YZ population is turning all our "GZ" into more BZ territory.

Yeah but the military doesn't particularly care about those things. Of course the military factories make things for the military and making more stuff for the military will help them, but the Joint Chiefs aren't going out of their way to ask for it because they have like a dozen higher priority things and getting more Pitbulls is pretty low on the list. I should have phrased it as being primarily a project to help the Treasury, obviously it also helps the military. It's just not something the military really wants us to go out of our way to get, they'd prefer other things.

And to be clear I'm pointing this out because I support doing them and unfucking the Treasury's problems, not "oh the military hasn't asked for it so we should ignore it." We're the Treasury, I thought it was pretty evident that a thing helping the Treasury is a point in its favor.

Click to shrink...

I'm starting to seriously regret not doing the meme-plan to get Wartime Factories.

 

[Crazycryodude]

I mean. I'd do a lot to not have to live among giant green death crystals. Though that said, technically the best investment we could do for the YZ population is turning all our "GZ" into more BZ territory.

Click to shrink...

Luckily unless something terrible happens we should convert all our currently held Green to Blue within 2-3 years. Later waves of BZ apartments are probably going to end up being urban reconstruction projects for former Yellow Zone population centers, every turn that the BZ's grow from now on is pushing past where we started the game and into former YZ's. The Terminus cities will probably be getting cleaned up over the next year and some of our Blue Zone housing construction will probably shift to them, and repeat the pattern as we push farther out.

Although it should be noted that the only Green Zone we hold that wasn't GDI territory in 2047 is the farthest out ~1% or so, the inner Green Zones are former Blue that got devastated during the war. So we're still not pushing deep into Yellow Yellow, most of the locals in the Green Zones were GDI citizens in Blue Zones 10 years ago. Which probably also explains why they're so damn eager to move to a Blue Zone, that's what they're used to and living in a Blue Zone under the GDI is how they grew up. I think deeper Yellow populations will be a little more reluctant to leave their lifelong homes to move halfway around the planet.

 

[TheFourthman]

For example, rather than simply getting more of the old regular infantry gear, they'd prefer the entire army to be upgraded to the newer Zone Armor, or rather than simply getting more tanks, they'd prefer to cover up their existing stock of tanks with more Ablat, or even just getting more Shells to fire their new artillery with

Click to shrink...

The issue is that it isn't just infantry gear.

It's everything. More of all the old stuff can get made. Which is more possible units and equipment during a war. While everyone will prefer newer stuff the old stuff will still be pressed into service. The next war baring some crash initiatives? Is going to see a use of old and new tech. With a slant towards older tech probably.

 

[Rakuhn]

I think that the wartime refits haven't been critical yet due to the low level nature of the conflict. So our current level of production is enough to both equip our offensive troops, as well as provide for our defenses' first line equipment attrition.

As the conflict is heating up, it's going to be more important to equip our backlines and reserves, and our equipment attrition rate is going to go up substantially.