Remove ads

Attempting to Fulfill the Plan MNKh Edition

Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Reader mode
Dice average: 54.921052631578945


Passenger Rail Network(Western SU) 1359+(1*27)+97=1483/2250
Construction of the Paved Road Network(Stage 5) 607+(2*27)+51+10=722/800(19.53%/30.03%)
Telecommunications Infrastructure(Stage 3) 74+(3*27)+98+64+74=391/300(55.24%/66.15%)

Dneprodzerzhinsk Metallurgical Combine Expansion 0+(1*32)+75=107/200
Taganrog Metallurgical Plant Expansion 116+(1*32)+64=212/150(99.00%/100.00%)
Coal Power Plants 63+(2*32)+84+58=269/200(74.44%/84.04%)
Test Reactor Complex Construction 116+(1*32)+5=153/180(69.00%/84.00%)
Development of the ZIL Automotive Plant 142+(1*32)+7=181/200(75.00%/90.00%)
Bus Plants(Riga) 0+(1*32)+67=99/225

RLA Expansion (1*0)+85=85
Development of the Stalingrad Plant(Stage 2) 26+(2*27)+66+10=156/150(76.54%/85.69%)

Pre-Caspian Petroleum Basin Exploitation(Stage 1) 37+(2*27)+59+46=196/100(99.72%/100.00%)
Oil Cracking Plants 342+(1*27)+92=461/400(70.00%/85.00%)
Plastic Production(Stage 4) 203+(1*27)+37=267/310(21.00%/36.00%)
Pesticide Production Plants(Stage 4/5) 74+(3*37)+10+15+28=238/475(0.03%/0.33%)
Medical Sector Modernization 0+(3*37)+77+2+100=290/300 (Nat 100) (omake?)(23.94%/33.85%)

Expansion of the Park Systems 0+(2*27)+49+60=163/150(55.35%/68.40%)
Agricultural Infrastructural Development 230+(1*27)+60=317/250(100.00%/100.00%)
Agricultural Institutes 0+(1*27)+63=90/100 (omake?)(28.00%/43.00%)
Housing Expansions 141+(1*27)+67=235/285

Film Studio Formation (Stage 3) 27+(1*27)+78=132/150(5.00%/20.00%)
Professional Service Development 0+(1*27)+49=76/100(28.00%/43.00%)
Pilot Rapid Food Systems 0+(1*27)+63=90/100 (omake?)(28.00%/43.00%)
State Retail Renovation 98+(1*27)+1=126/500 (Nat 1)

Restructure Enterprise Tax Structures (1*5)+37=42
Streamline Financial Organs (1*5)+95=100
Ministry Reorganizations (1*5)+84=89
 
State Retail Rennovation is not a horrible place to roll a nat 1, at least. Probably. We can survive the project itself blowing up, but worst case scenario is we get a backlash over becoming too capitalist.

Well we sure rolled well on telecomms, practically inviting us to start on the next stage. Shame we probably won't have the dice for a bit. But the reactor stings, that wont be good for the pocket book.

At least our work on expanding the overbuilt RLA rolled well, perhaps we'll salvage this thing in time for a moonshot afterall. And a Nat 100 on medicine is pretty poggers, Soviet medial industry continues winning!

We finished Agricultural Infrastructural development, but not Housing Expansion. Wasn't the worry that if we finish the former but not the latter that all the new famers will just crowd up existing cities? I hope a 1-turn separation will not cause too much damage.

Anyways assuming everything gets omake'd, our net electricity change this turn is +23 (-87 stuff completing, -24 civvies, -7 military, +65 coal, +76 autopower), so we'll have a pretty potent reserve of 112 next turn. Let's try not to use it all at once.

EDIT: Also, a nat 1 in the interior. I wonder what sucker exploded this time.
 
Last edited:
General_Urist said:
We finished Agricultural Infrastructural development, but not Housing Expansion. Wasn't the worry that if we finish the former but not the latter that all the new famers will just crowd up existing cities? I hope a 1-turn separation will not cause too much damage.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No, the big worry there was doing Secondary Agricultural stuff without the Housing Expansion + Infra. So we should be fine on that end.
 
Well, the good news is that we have achieved the target for Gas Projects needed for our autogas to keep running smoothly. Next up is getting stage for gas pipelines by 1962, which I am guessing we'll get the option to start on next turn. Those were 50 RpD historically, gives us a ballpark at least. If we can afford it we might want to get it before '62, both for insurance and since it will reduce coal usage. LCI is going to be pretty oil/gas focused for the next few turns I bet.
 
Ashheap said:
History of Soviet Oil Industry OTL Part 1, Part 2
How much should we worry about this guys?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's definitely not as bad - the economy and in particular exports are a lot more diverse and just bigger, and it seems like we're doing pretty well at dealing with declining profitability as it comes up. Transitioning to gas sooner too AFAIK. But there'll still be an energy crisis sooner or later that'll cause some kind of effects.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, were also trying to see if we can get nuclear power up and with an auto dice action for next plan, which will also help. Either way with a large, friendly trade bloc with other industrialized countries in it and a far healthier economy were at little risk of petrorubles becoming more than a meme unless we go out of our way to do so.
 
Oh guys did you know gandhi is hated in India because of his controversial pacifist ideas (they believe it killed more Indians then them fighting the British ) and his sexist behavior also they think of him as a British supporter so no wonder he was killed
 
Whenyouseeyou said:
Oh guys did you know gandhi is hated in India because of his controversial pacifist ideas (they believe it killed more Indians then them fighting the British ) and his sexist behavior also they think of him as a British supporter so no wonder he was killed
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Hated by whom? The general populace? Or more likely the Hindutva extremists who disliked how he accepted the loss of Pakistan and Bangladesh without fuss?

Yes, the man was a racist and sexist asshole, but his ideals put Britain on the spot and forced them to admit that no, they're not the good guys here, and their colonies want them out. Either they accept it, or turn into worse than the Nazis trying to hold it, especially in the face of a collapsing economy and an exhausted British public who just want food, social welfare, and an end to war. Full-on resistance wouldn't have been any easier; in fact, a full-on insurgency would have meant the British government would have carte blanche to suppress the rebels, painting them as Communist, radicalize both sides, and embitter the Indian populace, messing them up even more.

Ask the Viet Cong how armed resistance worked for them. Ask the Algerians. Yes, it was worth it, but it was incredibly bloody and costly. India had the advantage that the British were just plain exhausted and just needed to be worn down, and Gandhi and his allies knew it. Better to lose some people in passive resistance than set the country ablaze in a war. The French fought tooth and nail to keep their colonies because they were too prideful. The British were (mostly) more pragmatic about the whole thing, and didn't have the whole 'damaged ego' bit since they never got conquered by the Nazis.

And for context, the Malay emergency ended with the British also leaving, but on British terms rather than local ones. They wiped out the communists by utilizing local forces and prejudices, and then left at their own leisure.
 
Saint_007 said:
And for context, the Malay emergency ended with the British also leaving, but on British terms rather than local ones. They wiped out the communists by utilizing local forces and prejudices, and then left at their own leisure.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's not quite what happened in Malaysia. Rather, Britain lost the war to stay, changed the narrative after losing said war, then withdrew having proclaimed victory.

Pragmatic, yes, but not the victory Britain had gone into the emergency looking for. (Also, the emergency was an exceedingly long and nasty war, so it wasn't cheap either.)

Whenyouseeyou said:
Oh guys did you know gandhi is hated in India because of his controversial pacifist ideas (they believe it killed more Indians then them fighting the British ) and his sexist behavior also they think of him as a British supporter so no wonder he was killed
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I am not surprised in the least that Gandhi hate is at least somewhat popular in modern India.

Now what does this have to do with state planning in the Soviet Union? Would you like us to commission a series of movies to educate the Soviet populace about how awful pacifism is?

fasquardon
 
Ashheap said:
History of Soviet Oil Industry OTL Part 1, Part 2
How much should we worry about this guys?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Those are good videos! Though the second video skips over the catastrophic resource crunch in the steel industry that was going on at the same time and had a far more serious impact on the Soviet economy.

From the end of the 1960s, the iron and coal mines in the western Soviet Union (most significantly the Donbas) had grown so deep that the expense of extracting more coal and iron ore got increasingly expensive, to the point that more and more mines became uneconomical over the 70s and 80s. Steel of course is a vital material for industrial civilization, but for a heavy-industry biased and coal-powered economy like the Soviet Union costs soaring were especially bad. Iron ore and coal costs soaring basically ate up more and more of the growth of the Soviet Economy, so that by the early 80s, it was overall stagnant.

And while high oil prices in the 70s did indeed allow the Soviets to put off this problem, the video also skips over the fact that spending also soared in the late 1980s, almost entirely because Gorbachev was buying off interest groups (most significantly Gromyko and the collective farm managers with out of control agriculture subsidy spending that went on excessive pesticide and fertilizer production that actually hurt farm outputs). These soaring costs were the results of bad choices, and that the Soviet oil industry couldn't save the country from those bad choices is not really a failure of the Soviet oil industry.

Dessard said:
It's definitely not as bad - the economy and in particular exports are a lot more diverse and just bigger, and it seems like we're doing pretty well at dealing with declining profitability as it comes up. Transitioning to gas sooner too AFAIK. But there'll still be an energy crisis sooner or later that'll cause some kind of effects.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Eh. We haven't really been tested by real declines in resource extraction though. We've just been facing off against declines in the rate of increase of resource extraction, which is MUCH less of a problem.

Also, oil still makes up a major part of our exports and less Stalinist mismanagement means less setbacks to resource extraction (for example, in WW2 the Germans didn't get near Baku, probably meaning Caucasus oil production has remained far more intense). We may be in a slightly better position due to MAYBE having an economy that can handle lowering the carbon intensity of production successfully, however, there are also reasons why we may be in a slightly worse situation than the OTL Soviet Union.

And depending on the choices we make, when oil production does stagnate, we may be in an even worse position if we make bad choices.

fasquardon
 
fasquardon said:
Also, oil still makes up a major part of our exports and less Stalinist mismanagement means less setbacks to resource extraction (for example, in WW2 the Germans didn't get near Baku, probably meaning Caucasus oil production has remained far more intense). We may be in a slightly better position due to MAYBE having an economy that can handle lowering the carbon intensity of production successfully, however, there are also reasons why we may be in a slightly worse situation than the OTL Soviet Union.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, when oil shock becomes a thing, we will be in an akward position because of that. Our lighter oil reserves will be much more exhausted than OTL. I think it has been said that we could achive French level carbon emissions if we continue going with hydro and nuclear which is nice
 
Mr. Sandman said:
Yeah, when oil shock becomes a thing, we will be in an akward position because of that. Our lighter oil reserves will be much more exhausted than OTL. I think it has been said that we could achive French level carbon emissions if we continue going with hydro and nuclear which is nice
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yup, nuclear power is pretty vital. Developing our economic allies is also important. One of the reasons why the rising costs of the US and West European steel industries didn't cause a crisis on par with that suffered by the Soviet Union in the 70s and 80s is because they could import coal and ore or raw steel from places like Indonesia, Australia, Morocco, Japan and China.

fasquardon
 
What does this mean for our near-future actions? We were planning on doing the Stage 2 of our current oil options for more Petrorubles for the budget + Gas for completing gas heating.

Do we just do the 2nd stage options but don't go further? Or something else?

Naturally we're gonna want to push nuke and hydro power hard, but the question for me is what do we do with our other actions.
 
Nothing we weren't already going to do, this is all a problem for 15-20 years in the future. We're already investing in hydro and nukes, we're already investing in natural gas power and infrastructure, we're already investing in the modern cracking technology to keep up refined outputs in the face of heavier and heavier raw oil. We need to do the stage 2 oil fields for the natural gas so we can phase out coal heating for air quality reasons, the oil is honestly just a side benefit as far as we're concerned in this moment. Then we probably won't be drilling a whole lot after finishing off stage 2 of what's available, until next FYP calls for more natgas for more power again at least.
 
Last edited:
Wonder if we will get involved with the kola well or it's just going to be a background thing or butterfly into something bigger/something else?
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top