Supply improvements offshore.

Discussion of the Economic Model in SR2010

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
Kriegsspieler
Captain
Posts: 134
Joined: May 24 2005
Location: Madison, WI

Supply improvements offshore.

Post by Kriegsspieler »

Playing as the Canadian Maritime provs, I find can't get sufficient supply to my off-shore oil derricks, and one of them currently has a supply level of 0%. How can I best solve this? Improve the general level of infrastructure funding? Build a road that goes as close as possible to the derrick? I've tried both, but neither seems to have any effect.
Shog-goth
Lieutenant
Posts: 67
Joined: Dec 18 2004
Location: Italy

Re: Supply improvements offshore.

Post by Shog-goth »

Kriegspieler wrote:Playing as the Canadian Maritime provs, I find can't get sufficient supply to my off-shore oil derricks, and one of them currently has a supply level of 0%. How can I best solve this? Improve the general level of infrastructure funding? Build a road that goes as close as possible to the derrick? I've tried both, but neither seems to have any effect.
I think you need at least one active port to supply them.

Hope this help. :-)
They are ill discoverers that think there is no land, when they can see nothing but sea...
Kriegsspieler
Captain
Posts: 134
Joined: May 24 2005
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Supply improvements offshore.

Post by Kriegsspieler »

Shog-goth wrote: I think you need at least one active port to supply them.

Hope this help. :-)
Not yet --
I do certainly have ports available, such as Halifax. Is there something particular about which port could be used for supplying an oil derrick?
Decimatus
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 734
Joined: May 18 2005
Location: The Empire

Post by Decimatus »

Go into terrain mode and put the supply filter on. You will be able to see how far your port supplies the ocean. You may just need to build a port closer. Or, if halifax is a pier, it may need an upgrade.
Kriegsspieler
Captain
Posts: 134
Joined: May 24 2005
Location: Madison, WI

Post by Kriegsspieler »

Excellent! Thanks.
One more question, though. It turns out that the off-shore oil platform in question starts out the game in supply and then loses it. That suggests that there is a cap on supply capacity that gets exceeded somehow when additional installations are built.

Does that sound familiar?
Cauldyth
Lieutenant
Posts: 62
Joined: May 11 2005

Post by Cauldyth »

Same thing happens to an oil field in the West Coast of Canada. It starts out supplied, but then loses it. I'm assuming it's because my minister sets infrastructure spending to a value lower than was used in designing the scenario. I don't know if infrastructure affects naval supply as well, but you could try turning up your spending in it.


-Cauldyth
Shog-goth
Lieutenant
Posts: 67
Joined: Dec 18 2004
Location: Italy

Post by Shog-goth »

Cauldyth wrote:Same thing happens to an oil field in the West Coast of Canada. It starts out supplied, but then loses it. I'm assuming it's because my minister sets infrastructure spending to a value lower than was used in designing the scenario. I don't know if infrastructure affects naval supply as well, but you could try turning up your spending in it.


-Cauldyth
Good suggestion! I ever try to mantain high levels of infrastructures as It's a sure boost to economy.
They are ill discoverers that think there is no land, when they can see nothing but sea...
lordrune
Lieutenant
Posts: 98
Joined: Dec 26 2004
Location: Australia

Post by lordrune »

In their enthusiasm to balance the budget, the ministers almost always drop infrastructure as a cost-cutting measure (bit like governments of the west today, hmmmm). I always raise infrastructure to recommended level, and lock it - the productivity benefits and military supply are too important to ignore.
Kriegsspieler
Captain
Posts: 134
Joined: May 24 2005
Location: Madison, WI

Post by Kriegsspieler »

lordrune wrote:In their enthusiasm to balance the budget, the ministers almost always drop infrastructure as a cost-cutting measure (bit like governments of the west today, hmmmm). I always raise infrastructure to recommended level, and lock it - the productivity benefits and military supply are too important to ignore.
I agree, I think! But investments in infra take a LOOONG time to pay off. I did exactly what you advocate: raising spending on infra to something like 90% and locking it, and more than a year later it was hard for me to see any payoff. But IIRC the Battlegoat guys have said more than once that you should invest in infra, so that's what I do!
Post Reply

Return to “Economics - Treasury Department”