Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
3 
Report this post
Not sure what / how I could make that, same for transferring units, it's not a possibility problem, it's more of a logic problem
What checks I should perform to have the AI do that intelligently.
I don't know yet what conditions should apply for it to happen not systematically but at the right time etc
Still thinking
I feel like getting the tank from another country for the same price this country is paying it is a bit not normal. Might add a +10% to the base price to reflect the delivery etc
What do you think ?
LOL well reading up on it, it seems very complicated :) ..
Costs depended on the type of deal and how costs were applied varied country to country and year by year. For example, after the war, the US discounted the UK's lease lend debt by 90%! and spread it over a number of years, at first charging 2% interest then zero interest.
I think the US eventually forgot about the debts of lease lend to Russia altogether and agreed landing rights around the world instead. When payments were made they were usually in gold, platinum, diamonds, oil etc and sometimes 'reverse lease lend' deals such as for science & tech, industrial equipment, resources, destroyers, etc. Much of the payment was 'tacit' such that political and socio-economic favours were exchanged for supplies and hardware.
Fortunately, (a master stroke in my view) HoS uses a single abstract concept of 'money' to represent all this wealth of cash+gold, production efficiency, raw materials, technology, and so on, so I guess inter-ally equipment exchange costs could be simply modelled based on historical reality - if one wanted to get pretty obsessive about it :)
It seems that the primary economic powers of Germany and the U.S. offered equipment to Allies strategically, rather than economically (which I appreciate sounds naive, but seems to be broadly true, except the U.S. public required to see some value added to the country at the time to support the deal - which was never really eventually realized).
So a suggestion is that it could be set up that the US heavily discounts but limits availability of equipment to UK and Russia and the same for Germany to Italy and Japan.
In other words, you get it cheap but you can't get a lot. The US lease lend deal was 17% of its production capacity, I would guess that German supply to allies with all of its oil. steel and foods shortages was much less, but both wanted to assist allies if they could as iyt helped with their longer term goals.
Won't go hyper detailed about what country for what price
So, if you have lots of excess money and no great need for more units, as sometimes you often do, you could buy loads of equipment from an ally, which you don't really have to deploy, and the ally will receive cost +15% and so make loads of money they may not otherwise have available with which they can then buy units and improve their forces to win their aspect of the war?
In a sense this would be directly funding an allies war effort would it not? Should there not be a hard limit of how much an ally can buy otherwise you could transfer huge sums of money to an ally. Historical speaking as well, production capacity is limited to available manpower and materiel, especially for minors.
Incidentally, when you buy units from an ally are you in effect paying for them to be produced? I ask as prior to you looking to buy from them the ally may not have the money to produce any or have any 'in stock' so to speak.
Well, there's no exploit or anything here. I am playing romania on the europe map currently, I get 500 income per turn. With this 500, I can do the followings : Buy 1 tank to germany, or resuppply all my units.
it's always the same thing. Yes, sure you can buy tanks to germany, but if you do that you will use all of your income. Thus, leaving your troops at the front without any reinforcements.
So, as a minor, you can't afford much, really. It's always dilemmas. You have a very limited amount of resources that are available to you to spend in any way you'd like.
Wanna buy a U-Boot to Germany ? Cool ! Do it ! But this doesn't guarantee a victory at all. It is expensive to repair subs.
Yes you are paying them to produce it and ship it to you :)
You're right, this should maybe be taken into account, or maybe not. Since you are paying first and receiving then, you are covering all expenses. Thing here is Romania doesn't have the plans of the Panzer III, but they can afford buying a unit, so they send money to Germany, enough to cover all the expenses + a little something so Germany gets a profit out of this deal, and they then ship your tank.