Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

carrier shinano - a quick question

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> carrier shinano - a quick question Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/19/2007 11:48:07 PM   
temagic


Posts: 169
Joined: 7/26/2006
From: The land of trolls
Status: offline 		hi there.

I've read in numerous posts that jap players tend to halt the construction of the shinano (in order to accelerate other ships), using arguments such as the shinano being a "big hulk of scrap" or "floating deadweight"... Now these arguments lead to me question; what is wrong with the shinano (apart from the high cost in naval yard points)? To me, it seems like a big, robust carrier, operating large airgroups, that will make a fine addition to the KB (if it can survive long enough for the shinano to be completed)

Feedback on the subject is of course greatly appreciated.
Post #: 1
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/19/2007 11:54:50 PM   
marky


Posts: 5780
Joined: 3/8/2004
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline 		well she woulda been a good solid carrier, but she wouldnt have carried that many planes

i guess its a question of having Shinano, or a couple other good carriers


_____________________________


(in reply to temagic)
Post #: 2
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 12:26:09 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		In the real world, the Shinano was built as an auxillary carrier. She was intended to carry spare aircraft to support operations by the main fleet. Her capacity was decent, but she was not outfitted with the equipment to operate a large air wing in combat (though most mods give her that ability).

Most players halt production on the Shinano because she is a resource suck at a time when resources are dwindling. by the time the Shinano can be completed, Japan is on the full defensive and her carriers are targets, not assets. At that point in the war, it's better to be pouring resources into land based air and building up defenses on all bases.

In a 1944 or 45 carrier battle, the best Japan can hope for is trading most of her carriers for a couple of damaged Essexes. Maybe one sunk on a good day. The USN out numbers the IJN in so many areas at that point that it would only be an inconvenience to the Allied player.

Bill

(in reply to temagic)
Post #: 3
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 12:57:05 AM   
temagic


Posts: 169
Joined: 7/26/2006
From: The land of trolls
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

In the real world, the Shinano was built as an auxillary carrier. She was intended to carry spare aircraft to support operations by the main fleet. Her capacity was decent, but she was not outfitted with the equipment to operate a large air wing in combat (though most mods give her that ability).

Most players halt production on the Shinano because she is a resource suck at a time when resources are dwindling. by the time the Shinano can be completed, Japan is on the full defensive and her carriers are targets, not assets. At that point in the war, it's better to be pouring resources into land based air and building up defenses on all bases.

In a 1944 or 45 carrier battle, the best Japan can hope for is trading most of her carriers for a couple of damaged Essexes. Maybe one sunk on a good day. The USN out numbers the IJN in so many areas at that point that it would only be an inconvenience to the Allied player.

Bill




good to know; In my game we're still at the stage when I'm (japanese) the superior one, and he's trying his best to defend. Playing RHS EOS though, so I'll get the shinano in 1943:) - So maybe a Shinano/Akagi/Kaga/Hiryu/Soryu/Shokaku/Zuikaku/Hiyu/Jynuy KB can take on the allied CVs in mid to late 1943... I sure hope so... If successful, I hope it will delay allied counter attack to 1944, something which (hopefully) will give me enough time to prepare both the outer and inner defensive perimeters.

RHS EOS is pretty interesting, although I do not like the "Industrial forts" that have been added, as they seem to halt my advance far too much (had to send 7! divisions to Malaya in order to capture the peninsula and Singapore, delaying my conquest of the DEI by almost two months!, though he might have planned the defence very good, and I'm not an experienced player)

We're not closing on summer of 1942, I've secured DEI, most of Burma, stalemate in China, New Guinea and Rabaul and Solomons in my hands. Only minor ship losses to both sides (I've lost only two old CLs and one decent CL and two DDs, one SS and quite a few APs and AKs) He's lost heaps of SSs, a few CAs/CLs and a handfull of DDs, plus three BB/BCs (most of his losses were from the early days, raiding Soerabaja, Singapore, Manilla and the PH attack)

So both sides have the CV forces intact, waiting for an opportunity, though his force is getting stronger, mine isn't:( I do however count on LBA support for our first CV action, so no Midway operation... Well, anyway, looking forward to getting the Shinano, as I hope it will contribute to victory!

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 4
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 1:11:08 AM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline 		Halting Shinano would have given you enough extra shipbuilding points to accelerate the first three Unryus to completion by 6/43. In my calculus, 3xUnryu > 1xShinano.

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to temagic)
Post #: 5
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 2:20:22 AM   
marky


Posts: 5780
Joined: 3/8/2004
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

Halting Shinano would have given you enough extra shipbuilding points to accelerate the first three Unryus to completion by 6/43. In my calculus, 3xUnryu > 1xShinano.


indeed

some of the IJNs later carriers were designed for the "outranging tactic"

planes would take off from their home carriers, refuel and reload on other carriers closer to the enemy, and then fly off to attack


part of the problem was that they didnt have the pilots for this and they werent experienced enough to do it

_____________________________


(in reply to tsimmonds)
Post #: 6
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 2:21:52 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Playing as Japan is all about choosing between competing demands on your resources and choosing to build that which will most effectively slow the American advance.

Shinano costs 185 naval ship points per day ( each ship point costs 3 HI to generate). In addition it takes roughly 3 years to build her so multiply the daily HI cost x 3 years. So, you can either have Shinano in 3 years OR whatever you could purchase with the 607,725 HI you've just sunk into the Shinano. To put it into perspective, if you don't build the Shinano but, instead, divert all of those resources into Bettys and Peggys and other twin-engined torpedo bombers you, as Japan, could build 11,254 Bettys.

So, what would you rather have? 11,000+ Bettys or 1 Shinano?

To put it another way, with a Betty costing 54 HI ( 18 per engine and 18 for the airframe ) and the Shinano costing 555 HI PER DAY you can build 10 Bettys PER DAY from day 1 by cancelling its production. Think you could find a use for 300 extra Bettys PER MONTH through the whole of 1942? I sure could.

(in reply to tsimmonds)
Post #: 7
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 2:23:49 AM   
marky


Posts: 5780
Joined: 3/8/2004
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline 		hehe

simple cost vs benefit


_____________________________


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 8
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 2:43:01 AM   
Honda


Posts: 953
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Karlovac, Croatia
Status: offline 		Bull! I lost 2 CVs to Raver near Noumea and immediatly restarted work on Shinano. I was a bit intoxicated, a bit more angry (it was my own Midwayish mistake with all Kates stood down) and so unloced the Shinano. I was aware of the impulsivness of my move but I stayed honest to myself and let if go like that. So now, I'm a proud owner of a Shinano in construcion due somewhere in the 70s
Seriously, when I'm finished with Musashi and most Unryus, I think I'll be able to accelerate Shinano. What, at a cost of a few RO subs maybe? I owe it to myself and JFBs to complete it and send into victorious action!

_____________________________


AAR of my game vs Raver on my clan forum in croatian language (despite the language differences, no Ravers allowed)

(in reply to marky)
Post #: 9
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 11:51:53 AM   
temagic


Posts: 169
Joined: 7/26/2006
From: The land of trolls
Status: offline 		That's the spirit, ey..?

After I've completed the two Unyo-class CVs, I plan on accelerating the Taiho, so I can get the Taiho and Shinano roughly (haven't calculated it though, maybe just wishfull thinking,) at the same time. They will then for CarrierDivision 1, after the reorganization of 1st and 2nd AirFleets. After completion of the Musashi, I might accelerate the Shinano too, as I fear the Essex class CVs might be cruising the Pacific very soon (when does the first Essex make its appearance?)

This game is so cool, but it takes up far too many hours of my day:) My social life really hurts as I plan to invade Guadalcanal. Recent news: I invaded Port Moresby very soon (right after taking Rabaul, in first phase operations, and now the pesky Australians have kicked me out with a division, defeating my 56th "Division" Brigade. Man, oh man, this game is getting tougher by the minute.

(in reply to Honda)
Post #: 10
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 12:38:30 PM   
Sardonic

 

Posts: 215
Joined: 12/1/2005
Status: offline 		I would argue that it is possible to have BOTH.

If you have the surplus resources. Because unless you expand the aircraft plants, their production is FIXXED.

The Shinano will have no impact whatever upon them.

(in reply to temagic)
Post #: 11
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 12:45:19 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline 		Building Shinano prevents IJ from accelerating many other more useful ships. In fact unless some other warships construction is halted or naval shipyards are expanded considerably at the very start, building Shinano will cause Yamato, Musashi, and eventually, Shinano herself to be delayed by several months.

For details, check out this thread.

< Message edited by irrelevant -- 2/20/2007 3:58:59 PM >

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to Sardonic)
Post #: 12
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 4:43:42 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
Shinano costs 185 naval ship points per day ( each ship point costs 3 HI to generate). In addition it takes roughly 3 years to build her so multiply the daily HI cost x 3 years. So, you can either have Shinano in 3 years OR whatever you could purchase with the 607,725 HI you've just sunk into the Shinano. To put it into perspective, if you don't build the Shinano but, instead, divert all of those resources into Bettys and Peggys and other twin-engined torpedo bombers you, as Japan, could build 11,254 Bettys.


I'm not sure that's entirely accurate. It costs 3 HI to increase a shipyard by one (plus the associated supply cost to expand the yard). Once produced, I believe it then produces one shipyard point per day for free. I believe the way you want to look at it is how many shipyard points are produced each day.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 13
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 5:25:35 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline 		No, I believe Nemo is absolutely correct. Each shipbuilding point costs 3 HI. Increasing a shipyard costs the same as increasing any other factory (don't have the rules in front of me, but it is something like 100 supply + 1 manpower for each new center, then as you say, 1000 supply to repair). Once a shipyard is build and repaired, each shipyard costs 3 HI per day to run, and produces 1 shipbuilding point per day.

THe only thing IJ ever gets for free is repair yard points. Everything else costs HI.

< Message edited by irrelevant -- 2/20/2007 5:40:41 PM >

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 14
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 6:49:36 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Yup, you're right.  It's repair yards that are free. 

I guess getting sleep at night is a good thing.  Gotta try it someday.

(in reply to tsimmonds)
Post #: 15
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/20/2007 9:18:15 PM   
SireChaos

 

Posts: 710
Joined: 8/14/2006
From: Frankfurt, Germany
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Playing as Japan is all about choosing between competing demands on your resources and choosing to build that which will most effectively slow the American advance.

Shinano costs 185 naval ship points per day ( each ship point costs 3 HI to generate). In addition it takes roughly 3 years to build her so multiply the daily HI cost x 3 years. So, you can either have Shinano in 3 years OR whatever you could purchase with the 607,725 HI you've just sunk into the Shinano. To put it into perspective, if you don't build the Shinano but, instead, divert all of those resources into Bettys and Peggys and other twin-engined torpedo bombers you, as Japan, could build 11,254 Bettys.

So, what would you rather have? 11,000+ Bettys or 1 Shinano?

To put it another way, with a Betty costing 54 HI ( 18 per engine and 18 for the airframe ) and the Shinano costing 555 HI PER DAY you can build 10 Bettys PER DAY from day 1 by cancelling its production. Think you could find a use for 300 extra Bettys PER MONTH through the whole of 1942? I sure could.


It´s not quite that easy. Sure, you can have 10 Bettys per day, but only with 35exp pilots, which basically means 10 additional VP to the Allies per day for three years, while Shinano gives them only about 300 VP (including its airgroup) once.

Personally, I halt Yamato, Musashi, Taiho and Shinano, and accelerate the Unryus, Ruyho and Ibuki; as soon as Zuiho, Junyo and Hiyo are completed, I restart Taiho. That way I should get three Unryus around mid-43, before the Allied carrier fleet is invincible.


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 16
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/21/2007 12:08:32 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Sure, you can have 10 Bettys per day, but only with 35exp pilots, which basically means 10 additional VP to the Allies per day for three years


Not really. If you just assume that for every 10 Bettys you engage in a 3 month training programme to raise their experience and you stick to that you will simply receive NO additional Bettys for the first three months and then receive your 70 Exp Bettys ( 10 minus whatever your training losses were) every day from that point in time onwards.

Obviously my example is over-simplified and doesn't deal with all the possible permutations of production which one can have instead of the Shinano ( eg. One could opt for several accelerated Unryus and a smaller number of additional fighters or Bettys per day etc etc ) but it does illustrate the point that Japan is all about opportunity cost and the opportunity cost of the Shinano is huge. Obviously though whether x Bettys or X Unryus would be better depends very much on your planned strategy in 1944. My planned strategy is to rely as little as possible on naval air and as much as possible on land-based air hence numbers ( for kamikaze attacks) work VERY much in my favour. Even if only 1 hit per 30 planes despatched is scored that would mean that by giving up the Shinano I could get 120 kami hits by torpedo carriers throughout 1944 above and beyond what would otherwise be possible... something I would argue is wortwhile.

Others draw the line in a different place and that's fine too. There's room in the game for all sorts of different approaches.

(in reply to SireChaos)
Post #: 17
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/21/2007 1:45:57 AM   
PzB74


Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline 		In 45 I'm accelerating RO subs....and destroyers. Nothing else. Shinano stays on the slip!
No use for her at all, if you got a KB in 45 it should be kept faar away from US carriers




_____________________________



"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 18
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/21/2007 4:05:24 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		ATTACK.....REPEAT......ATTACK



_____________________________


(in reply to PzB74)
Post #: 19
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/21/2007 4:16:53 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		In SpamMod, I've removed her entirely.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 20
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/21/2007 4:53:53 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		I made her a battle carrier.



_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 21
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/21/2007 5:28:33 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		SpaceBattleship Shinano?

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 22
RE: carrier shinano - a quick question - 2/21/2007 5:46:58 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		Commanded by Deslock!

_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 23
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> carrier shinano - a quick question Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.328