Accelerating Japanese air frames

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Accelerating Japanese air frames

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Accelerating Japanese air frames

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Accelerating Japanese air frames - 5/28/2011 8:26:23 PM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

For each factory/location, one to 3 R&D points are added to the aircraft development per turn. This is how it has always been.

What this means it that it is not a simple case of how many R&D devices are out there.
For example, if I have 4 cities with each having 2 factories (of 10 active devices) researching a plane, the number of R&D points that turn would range from 8 (4x2x1) to 24 (4x2x3). Even though I have 80 (4x2x10) actives devices, which would be what is reported on most of the industry related screens.

Thus the advance by a month could happen in 13 to 5 days respectively.

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

In simple terms
(a) A factory will produce a random R&D between 0 and the number of devices in the factory ie 1 device = 0, 2 devices = 0,1, 3 devices =0,1,2, 4 devices = 0,1,2,3, 10 devices = 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 etc.
(b) The random R&D is then divided by 10. Any random R&D of less than 10 will be '0', otherwise it will be the ten's component of the random R&D.
(c) If there are no damaged devices in factory (this is a given as there must be NO damaged ones present), add '1' to the number from (b).
(d) If the number from (c) exceeds 3, it is capped at '3'.

The number from (d) is added to the a/c development counter - this will be a number from 1 to 3 inclusive.
Once the counter exceeds 100, it moves the available date sooner by a month and resets the development counter.

The above explains how R&D really works in the game.

So the majority of what I said below is unfortunately wrong, wrong, wrong.

The R&D factory repair rate and the switching of factories to the next plane in sequence without damage is still vaild though.

Ignore everything below this text that discusses R&D acceleration
After spending much time reading these forums (thanks everyone) and doing detailed tracking of Japanese production, I thought the following might be useful.

First off it is important to know that all Japanese airframe R&D factories start off damaged (execpt Helens, why them, I have no clue) at the beginning of every game. Engine factories are NOT damaged at the start of the game. Why the difference, I do not know. So the first thing before playing as Japan, is go in the editor and change all the R&D factories to Building versus Repair. Regardless of what some Allied players might tell you, this will NOT have a major impact on the game as you will see below.

To recap from the manual, a R&D factory will need to accumulate 100 build points before an engine or airframe can be advanced. As you might have guessed, this is not as easy as it may sound due to the following:

- If an R&D factore has ANY damaged factories ZERO points will be added to the 100 needed for advancement. Based on my testing this is true.
---- Example: A R&D factory that is a 5(0) will apply 5 points every month towards the 100 needed. A R&D factory that is 5(1) will supply 0 points until the 1 damaged factory is repaired.

- Damaged R&D factories are NOT automaticly repaired at the 1/day that production factories are. R&D repair is based on the difference between the availability date of the plane/engine and the current turn , the number of factories that need repaired, and the (imfamous) random number roll. Because of this, R&D factories for planes/engines that are available in '45 will have a much more difficult chance of repair in '42 versus ones that will be available in '42. So no jets in late '42

- As soon as the 100 points is reached, the plane/engine will advance one month. It is not randomly determined sometime after you have the 100 points (although it may seem like it lol).

- Regardless of what you do, you will ALWAYS get aircraft on the historical availability date. This is true even if you have ZERO R&D factories researching that plane (not historical to say the least). Therotically, you could switch every R&D factory to research A7M3-J Sams (availability 1/46) and you would still get all the planes the Japanese had historically on the historical dates. Using this method maybe you could get jets in 42/43

.

Example:
The Aichi Ha-60 starts off with 125 R&D factories fully repaired with an initial availablity date of 10/42. It was accelerated five times by 3/3/42. The turns it was accelerated and the new dates are shown below (thanks to Tracker).

- 18 to 9/42
- 34 to 8/42
- 51 to 7/42
- 69 to 6/42
- 87 to 5/42

You will notice that it advanced every 16-18 turns. The differences are due to rounding errors with the daily production numbers being applied to the 100 points needed.

As most of the Japanese plane R&D factories start at less than 5 (and damaged to boot), you will not get any large acceleration with airframes like you do with the engines. Even if fully repaired per my suggestion above, a R&D plane factory producing 5 points/month would take 20 months to accelerate just one month. Impressive huh lol?

The best method that I have found (and if anyone has a better one, feel free to share it) is to use at least two factories to research a plane. When BOTH factories are fully repaired, add 1 factory to one of them. This will stop that factory from contributing to the 100 points needed, but the other factory will continue to do so. Once that factory has been repaired add 1 factory to one of the two. Continue this until you get the number of factories you want. This will allow at least one factory to always working toward the 100 points.

Example: Accelerate Ki-45 KAIb Nick (not an inspired choice but just an example

)

- The Nick starts off with 2 R&D factories (assume fully repaired)
- Switch another factory to R&D this plane (say another 2 factory like the Ki-93-Ia)
- Wait until both are fully repaired (so both are showing 2(0))
- Now you have 4 points/month toward acceleration (25 months for a 1 month advance)
- Expamd one of the factories by 1. So now it is a 2(1)
- Wait until it is repaired (now a 3(0))
- Repeat as desired

For the planes I really want to advance, I want to get to the 25-50/month range as that will give me an acceleration of one month per every 2-4 months which is pretty good. I had one up to almost 70/month but realized it really was not gaining me that much as compared to the 50/month mark.

Hopefully you found this useful. Any suggestions or correction of errors, please let me know.

Based on the fact that R&D factories can be switched WITHOUT damage in very specifc cases, I thought it might be good to know what those cases were

. Below is what factories can be switched to what types in order to maximize the ability of the Japanese to get more advanced airframes earlier.

You will note that there are some very odd paths for some plane types. Specificly the Zero and Tony line. I have no ideas as to why, but this is what the database has. I want to stress this is NOT the upgrade path for squadrons, just factories.

The bottom line of all of this is that if you want to play the 'Japanese Production game' is that trying to accelerate any plane not on this list is a waste of very limited resources. Also most of the planes on this list are not worth accelerating anyway due to the aircraft not being very good and/or it only has a single upgrade past the initial version. This obviously limits the choices in which airframes should be accelerated or not. IMHO, any airframe that has 2 or less upgrade 'hops' should be skipped, your decisions may vary

.

What to do about all the plane R&D factories of planes not on this list? Switch all of them to an airframe that is on this list. Remember, all aircraft arrive on their historical dates even if zero R&D factories have been used. So you will still get the planes so why waste valuable R&D factories on them when you do not have to? Obviously not very historical

As I do not feel that is very realistic, I play with a self imposed house rule where if I have not had at least one R&D factory researching a plane up to it's availability date, then I cannot build it in the game. This at least forces me to have to chose between which planes I really want and which ones I don't.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Numdydar -- 10/9/2017 6:10:54 AM >

Post #: 1

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 5/29/2011 8:56:56 PM

jhowell

Posts: 27
Joined: 10/16/2008
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Hi Numdydar

This is a really useful post and helped me understand how R&D works for the Japanese. I hadn't realised that it was this involved.

Do you think that 3 x 10(0) R&D factories are better than 1 x 30(0) in terms of the amount of research that is produced. This is one of the claims discussed in a previous thread on the subject

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2253970

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 2

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 5/29/2011 9:44:45 PM

Sharps9

Posts: 12
Joined: 11/15/2010
Status: offline

My experience echoes what Numdydar is saying.

KiwVik, that link no longer applies since the forumla has been tweaked with subsequent updates. 3x10(0) factories is exactly the same as 1x30(0). The only difference is that in previous versions, it took longer to repair the large factory.

Since the mystery production formula applies to all factories regardless of their size, there really isn't much of an advantage to having lots of factory locations. The only advantage is in having lots of completed factories. Which are ridiculously hard to obtain. (Esp. jets, even though the Nazis had the Me 262 by April 1944).

Therefore, I don't agree its possible to have jets by '42 or even late '43 with the current formula.

Japanese airframe acceleration is dismal at best. The best you can do is accelerate them by maybe a year, usually much less. Remember, that costs tens to hundreds of thousands of supplies. I have starved Japan of resources in the process.

< Message edited by Sharps9 -- 5/29/2011 9:48:46 PM >

(in reply to jhowell)

Post #: 3

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 5/30/2011 4:51:26 PM

n01487477

Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sharps9

My experience echoes what Numdydar is saying.

KiwVik, that link no longer applies since the forumla has been tweaked with subsequent updates. 3x10(0) factories is exactly the same as 1x30(0).

No it's not, having done some testing over the years and under M6 I did 3 rounds of tests using the following set up.

1x 30(0) will take 100 days to advance.

3x10(0) will take from 112 - 120 days (so I was wrong here citing the other thread where I claimed different-although I did say under witp NOT AE)

1x60(0) will take 100 days

1x120(0) will take 100 days

quote:

The only difference is that in previous versions, it took longer to repair the large factory.

Actually once you settle on the idea that 30(0) is the best size it doesn't really matter but the fact is that larger factories repair faster in rate but as they are bigger then it takes longer overall to repair. This is how it has always worked and it hasn't changed iirc.

quote:

Since the mystery production formula applies to all factories regardless of their size, there really isn't much of an advantage to having lots of factory locations.

Well there is an advantage to having multiple 30(0) factories no matter what you think and even if it did apply to all factories < size 30 (which it doesn't) - multiple factories are always going to be better.

quote:

The only advantage is in having lots of completed factories. Which are ridiculously hard to obtain. (Esp. jets, even though the Nazis had the Me 262 by April 1944).

Actually your right in your first part but as the R&D in AE is better than real life (if you follow the multi 30(0) rule) it is in fact possible to do and I'll prove it once I've run 1200 turns

quote:

Therefore, I don't agree its possible to have jets by '42 or even late '43 with the current formula.

Japanese airframe acceleration is dismal at best. The best you can do is accelerate them by maybe a year, usually much less. Remember, that costs tens to hundreds of thousands of supplies. I have starved Japan of resources in the process.

Well I agree somewhat, but I've seen players (including myself) do >1 year, but it does take dedication to one or two models.

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 5/30/2011 5:25:27 PM >

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to Sharps9)

Post #: 4

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 5/30/2011 10:11:16 PM

kmitahj

Posts: 100
Joined: 4/25/2011
Status: offline

In classic WitP (and things apparently did not change in AE in that area) I preferred 1x30(0) config over 3x10(0) (or 2x15(0) or others) for two reasons. One was predictability. You are sure to achieve 1 month of advance in exactly 100 days of work with 1x30(0) setup (or 50 days with 2x30(0), or 34 days using 3x30(0) etc.). With 3x10(0) random rolls will give you anywhere between 0 and 3 points a day. Net result over time may be very close to 1x30(0) but you won't be able to predict exact day of advance.
Second more importatnt reason is efficiency. Number of available R&D facilities is limited so if 1x30(0) factory provides more or less the same results as 3x10(0) facilities why not stick to only 1 and use other two on other models. Or other way around why not expand at the start these 3x10(0) to 3x30(0) and get the month advance every 34 days instead of every 100 days.

As for painful repair process of R&D facilities I think the only thing japan player can do is to be patient and to keep always enough supply in bases containing these facilities (otherwise they will miss a chance for repair check made every day). My very rough rule of thumb in classic WitP was that when starting with fully damaged R&D facility it will take about 2/3 of time on repairing and only 1/3 on generating R&D points. It is rough estimation and may be slightly on the conservative side but when planning your war effort it is always better to keep some margins for safety.

(in reply to jhowell)

Post #: 5

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 5/31/2011 4:05:14 AM

n01487477

Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kmitahj

In classic WitP (and things apparently did not change in AE in that area) I preferred 1x30(0) config over 3x10(0) (or 2x15(0) or others) for two reasons. One was predictability. You are sure to achieve 1 month of advance in exactly 100 days of work with 1x30(0) setup (or 50 days with 2x30(0), or 34 days using 3x30(0) etc.). With 3x10(0) random rolls will give you anywhere between 0 and 3 points a day. Net result over time may be very close to 1x30(0) but you won't be able to predict exact day of advance.
Second more importatnt reason is efficiency. Number of available R&D facilities is limited so if 1x30(0) factory provides more or less the same results as 3x10(0) facilities why not stick to only 1 and use other two on other models. Or other way around why not expand at the start these 3x10(0) to 3x30(0) and get the month advance every 34 days instead of every 100 days.

As for painful repair process of R&D facilities I think the only thing japan player can do is to be patient and to keep always enough supply in bases containing these facilities (otherwise they will miss a chance for repair check made every day). My very rough rule of thumb in classic WitP was that when starting with fully damaged R&D facility it will take about 2/3 of time on repairing and only 1/3 on generating R&D points. It is rough estimation and may be slightly on the conservative side but when planning your war effort it is always better to keep some margins for safety.

Yep you are right - I guess my posting was misleading about the 3x10(0); my intent was basically to say multiple factories are better in AE and witp with the proviso that size 30 is always the sweet spot. Anything less than or more than 30 is not as efficient as a 30(0). So I'll say it this way a 1x60() is worse than 2x30(0).

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to kmitahj)

Post #: 6

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 5/31/2011 3:58:27 PM

viberpol

Posts: 838
Joined: 10/20/2005
From: Gizycko, Poland, EU
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477

No it's not, having done some testing over the years and under M6 I did 3 rounds of tests using the following set up.

1x 30(0) will take 100 days to advance.

3x10(0) will take from 112 - 120 days (so I was wrong here citing the other thread where I claimed different-although I did say under witp NOT AE)

1x60(0) will take 100 days

1x120(0) will take 100 days

Damian, you're suggesting that factories bigger than 30 R&D points get you no better advance than a 30 point one, right?
Well, my experience is somehow different.
In my Pbem somewhere near turn 640 I managed to get 200 N1K2 R&D points up and ready.
This means that witj 200 R7D points I'm receiving an advance more or less once a month.
See the below placed printscreen.

What should be emphasized is that the sooner the arrival date of the new frame, the bigger chances of repairing a damaged R&D point. So, if one version is first of the line, and is available only at '45 (jets) it's very difficult to get them much sooner.

A clever player should focus on frames with several upgrades in line, repair as much as possible before their availability, and then, before arrival switch free to the next available, better version, accelerating its arrival.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by viberpol -- 5/31/2011 4:03:08 PM >

_____________________________

Przy lackim orle, przy koniu Kiejstuta Archanioł Rusi na proporcach błysł

(in reply to n01487477)

Post #: 7

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 5/31/2011 6:36:17 PM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

The above also mirroes my experience.

I mistakenly tried to advance the 2nd version of a airframe (skipping the first version) while on another one I did the opposite (concentrated on the first version). Tryng to accelerate the first version worked much better following the same logic as viberpol's. Of course I had already done the deed so to speak on accelerating the 2nd version and did not want to go through the slow process of repair again.

So when an airframe is within a month I switch it's R&D factories to the next version (unless I really want all those factories to actually build planes).

It is VERY important to do this at the one month mark PRIOR to the plane's current availability. So if a plane that is accelerating is available on 2/43 and it is now 1/43, make the decision to keep the factories as R&D or to allow them to become production ones. If you wait, the plane may accelerate in the middile of the month and all those R&D factories IMMEDIATELY switch to production and can no longer be used for R&D.

Obviously I know this because it happened to me lol.

(in reply to viberpol)

Post #: 8

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 5/31/2011 7:06:34 PM

viberpol

Posts: 838
Joined: 10/20/2005
From: Gizycko, Poland, EU
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

The above also mirroes my experience.

I mistakenly tried to advance the 2nd version of a airframe (skipping the first version) while on another one I did the opposite (concentrated on the first version). Tryng to accelerate the first version worked much better following the same logic as viberpol's. Of course I had already done the deed so to speak on�accelerating the 2nd version and did not want to go through�the slow process of repair again.

So when an airframe is within a month I switch it's R&D factories�to the next version (unless I really want all those factories to actually build planes).

It is VERY important to do this at the one month mark PRIOR to the plane's current availability. So if a plane that is accelerating is available on 2/43 and it is now 1/43, make the decision to keep the factories as R&D or to allow them to become production ones. If you wait, the plane may accelerate in the middile of the month and all those R&D factories IMMEDIATELY switch to production and can no longer be used�for R&D.

Obviously I know this because it happened to me lol.��

Yup, some caution is needed...

But I also tried more hardcore version.

If it's 1/43 and the airplane will be available at 2/43 and given the fact that only fully repaired factories produce research points -- you can actually quite safely expand the factory by 28-29 points and change the researched airplane type one day before its arrival. If the availability date is close, the damaged points are repaired quite fast -- even 1 per day. Of course you need to closely monitor the repaired factories.

_____________________________

Przy lackim orle, przy koniu Kiejstuta Archanioł Rusi na proporcach błysł

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 9

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 5/31/2011 9:30:12 PM

jhowell

Posts: 27
Joined: 10/16/2008
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol
A clever player should focus on frames with several upgrades in line, repair as much as possible before their availability, and then, before arrival switch free to the next available, better version, accelerating its arrival.

Viberpool, so if you switch the R&D factory to the next plane on the research path do the factories not get damaged?

(in reply to viberpol)

Post #: 10

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 5/31/2011 10:12:36 PM

viberpol

Posts: 838
Joined: 10/20/2005
From: Gizycko, Poland, EU
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KiwVik

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol
A clever player should focus on frames with several upgrades in line, repair as much as possible before their availability, and then, before arrival switch free to the next available, better version, accelerating its arrival.

Viberpool, so if you switch the R&D factory to the next plane on the research path do the factories not get damaged?

Yup, that's what I am saying, they're fully operational and not damaged.
But before any switch, check the natural upgrade path... (for example Ki61b autoupgrades to "d" variant, not "c"...).

_____________________________

Przy lackim orle, przy koniu Kiejstuta Archanioł Rusi na proporcach błysł

(in reply to jhowell)

Post #: 11

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 5/31/2011 10:59:01 PM

FatR

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KiwVik
Viberpool, so if you switch the R&D factory to the next plane on the research path do the factories not get damaged?

Yes. Unfortunately, none of the Japanese planes that can benefit from this trick most have particularly great late-war models.

(in reply to jhowell)

Post #: 12

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/1/2011 1:27:24 AM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

If you have PDU off then acceleration really does not have a great impact as with it On as you will not be able to use the accelerated planes execpt in those squardons that upgraded to them historically. So acceleration only really comes into it's on when PDU is on. Of course it will be On for both sides, so choise wisely

.

Against a human Allied player, I would suggest to make the game more 'even' (not that it really can be lol) would be to play with PDU Off. While you will be able to produce better aircraft faster with PDU On, the Allies can create some very good squadrons with better planes too. I've played it both ways and both have their advantages and disadvantages so it is really up to the player(s) involved.

(in reply to FatR)

Post #: 13

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/1/2011 1:55:39 AM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477

quote:

ORIGINAL: kmitahj

In classic WitP (and things apparently did not change in AE in that area) I preferred 1x30(0) config over 3x10(0) (or 2x15(0) or others) for two reasons. One was predictability. You are sure to achieve 1 month of advance in exactly 100 days of work with 1x30(0) setup (or 50 days with 2x30(0), or 34 days using 3x30(0) etc.). With 3x10(0) random rolls will give you anywhere between 0 and 3 points a day. Net result over time may be very close to 1x30(0) but you won't be able to predict exact day of advance.
Second more importatnt reason is efficiency. Number of available R&D facilities is limited so if 1x30(0) factory provides more or less the same results as 3x10(0) facilities why not stick to only 1 and use other two on other models. Or other way around why not expand at the start these 3x10(0) to 3x30(0) and get the month advance every 34 days instead of every 100 days.

As for painful repair process of R&D facilities I think the only thing japan player can do is to be patient and to keep always enough supply in bases containing these facilities (otherwise they will miss a chance for repair check made every day). My very rough rule of thumb in classic WitP was that when starting with fully damaged R&D facility it will take about 2/3 of time on repairing and only 1/3 on generating R&D points. It is rough estimation and may be slightly on the conservative side but when planning your war effort it is always better to keep some margins for safety.

Yep you are right - I guess my posting was misleading about the 3x10(0); my intent was basically to say multiple factories are better in AE and witp with the proviso that size 30 is always the sweet spot. Anything less than or more than 30 is not as efficient as a 30(0). So I'll say it this way a 1x60() is worse than 2x30(0).

Mutiple factories are much better. 2x15(0) are better than 1x30(0) and here is why.

Once the set of 2 factories and the set of 1 factory have been fully repaired, there is NO difference between their production rate. However, with two factories, using my OP suggestion, the two factories working in tandom (one providing points towards the 100 and the other reparing) allows approximately an additional 50% of the final total of both go towards acceleration.

Continuing my OP example starting with 2x2(0) R&D factories that are fully repaired and using a 1 day repair time to keep things simple.

Turn Factory 1 Factory 2 Total towards acceleration
1 2(0) 2(1) 2
2 2(1) 3(0) 5 (3 plus the 2 above)
3 3(0) 3(1) 8
4 3(1) 4(0) 12
5 4(0) 4(0) 20 (done)

So in 5 turns we have increased our number of R&D factories of this airframe from 4 to 8 and produced 20 points towards acceleration.

Using a single factory (again assuming a 1/day repair rate) we would need 6 days to go from a 2(0) to an 8(0). During which time, ZERO points would go towards acceleration. So we would lose 20 points in order to save an R&D factory for another airframe type. Given that the Japanese have a lot of airframes that really should not even been produced, why would you want to lose any fraction of points towards airframes that you really need to get early?

Also remember that you will get ALL airframe types regardless of whether they are reseached or not. So saving R&D factories makes even less sense knowing that. Would you really want to get the Oscar II early and not have the A6M5 not as fast as you could have had it? You could easily get an extra month acceleration for the A6M5 by using two factories versus one. Even more if three or even more were used.

As many have pointed out here, Japanese production is not for the feint of heart

. So hopefully this thread will help everyone to better undersatnd it's complexities.

Edit: Well the table looked good in the original typing of this lol.

< Message edited by Numdydar -- 6/1/2011 1:58:42 AM >

(in reply to n01487477)

Post #: 14

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/1/2011 5:25:56 PM

kmitahj

Posts: 100
Joined: 4/25/2011
Status: offline

Hi Numdydar,

interesting approach you propose. Minor issue I have with it is that facility of size 2(0) is supposed to produce two r/d points per month not per day (unless something changed very drastically?!). The real problem I see here is repair time you assumed. If it would be anywhere near 1/per day you assume it would be definitely worth thinking of. However if it is still as it was in Classic WitP where chance of repair single unit of facility each day was in proportion to size of factory and in reverse proportion to airframe model arrival time (in days) then things may not look so rosy.

Lets assume we have a airframe with arrival time of 1000 days. Most likely you will need first to get two factories from your example repaired from 2x0(2) to 2x2(0). If the above assumption still holds true for each factory the probability of repair of single unit is about 1/500 at the beginning, and you need two successful checks to get it ready. Of course the probability of single success will be slowly growing each day as the number of days till arrival is getting smaller. How much time is needed on average to get such factories fully repaired? That is kind of question for which statistics is supposed to get the precise answer (well actually statistics would tell how much time you would have to wait to get factories ready at set certainty level like 90%, 99% or 99.9% ). Without statistics it is about anybody guess but i think assuming 500 days isn't pessymistic at all. So now you voluntairly damage one factory by adding single element. Probability of repair of such element is now about 3/500 (size of factory versus number of days left) or 1/166 (and growing very slowly). So again many (on average, there is always a chance of luck smiling to you) days waiting when factory does not deliver r&d points. And so on it will go...

Now compare it with situation where you start with one (or better two if you can afford) factories of size 30. They too have to be repaired first but nice thing is that because chance of repair success is in proportion to factory size then for all practical purposes time needed for full repair of facility does not depend on factory size (well, it is just first approximation, again precise answer would be only given by statistics methods way beyond my reach

). Anyway it would be time comparable to 500 days assumed above. To be on the safe side I would assume more like 600-650 days but anyway after that time these factories would be ready to work full tilt delivering each maximum practical number of 30 r/d pts a month comparing to the above 2-3-4-5 a month in your approach.

Well, at the end it all seem to lead to the question how is process of repairing r/d facilities working in WPAE. Is it the same as classic witp or not?

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 15

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/3/2011 4:39:20 AM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

The repair rate is based on the items I listed in the OP.

Damaged R&D factories are NOT automaticly repaired at the 1/day that production factories are. R&D repair is based on the difference between the availability date of the plane/engine and the current turn , the number of factories that need repaired, and the (imfamous) random number roll. Because of this, R&D factories for planes/engines that are available in '45 will have a much more difficult chance of repair in '42 versus ones that will be available in '42.
�
I indicated in my example that I chose 1/day just to keep the example simple. It would not work that way in the game. Not until the arrival date was pretty close to the turn date.

Unfortunately there are no R&D factories that start out as large as 30 for airframes, engines yes. And as I stated 99% of all R&D factories start the game damaged. So while a 30 point R&D factory would repair faster than a smaller one (all other factors being equal), using two factories would at least get you points accumulating faster rather than waiting for the entire 30 points to be repaired first. Of course, the question is would waiting for all 30 to be repaired versus having smaller factories switching off is something that would need to be analyized in more detail.

My impression from observing the game is that it would not. This is due (imho) that by the time all 30 were repaired, the arrival date of the plane would be too close to have acceleration really have an impact.

As an example J2M5 Jack is available in 1/45. It starts off the game with 0(2) R&D factories. I expanded it at the begining (before I really understood how all of this worked hence the reason to start this post

) by 9 more. So on the first turn the factory was 0(11). In 400 turns I have repaired exactly 2 factoies (now 2(11)) and have had zero points applied to acceleration. Assume another 2-3 repaired in another 400 turns and you wil see that in almost half the game is over and still no points towards acceleration. If this was a size 30, then I still would have only had 2 repaired (maybe 3 due to the number of factories).

With the two factory approch, after 400 turns both factories would most likely been repaired so I would have been getting 4 points/month towards acceleration so in 25 months (2 years or 726 turns about) I would have gotten a 1 month acceleration if�I did no further expansion. Using a 200 turn repair cycle, if I expanded again to a 2(1) for one factory I would be getting 5 points/month at the 600 turn mark (about halfway to the availability date). Repairs may be getting faster now as the actual date is now closer to the availability date.

Taking the other 2(0) and expanding it to a 2(1) on a 150 turn repair cycle would now have me getting 6 points/month plus what I had already accumulated by turn 750. If this epansion was kept up I feel it is possible to get a 2-3 month acceleration. As of now, I have to wait untill all 11 are fully repaired which should be sometime in late 43/early 44 which means that I will be lucky to get one month of acceleration as it will still take 10 months to accumulate 100 points.

So unless someone has better data then I have to disagree about using a single factory versus two or more.

To answer you last question, afaik, the repair rates are the same in AE as WitP. Of course I did not understand it in WitP either lol.

< Message edited by Numdydar -- 6/3/2011 4:42:13 AM >

(in reply to kmitahj)

Post #: 16

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/3/2011 4:55:21 PM

kmitahj

Posts: 100
Joined: 4/25/2011
Status: offline

Hi,
first I would put aside engine factories. The more I look on it myself and read others relations the more I think that r/d process for engines is implemented differently then for airfarmes.

The point I tried to put forward is that the time needed to repair two fully damaged r/d ac-facilities in all practical cases does not depend on factory size.
In classic witp (and I believe in AE too) at the heart of airframe r/d factory repair check is the test looking like that: RANDOM(0..NumberOfDaysTillAvail) <= FactorySize. Based on this one can estimate both absolute probability of single repair success at any given day as well as relative probabilities of success for facilities of different sizes. In particular it is clear that for factory of size 30 such base probability is 15 times higher then for factory of size 2. Think of it as calculating time of arrival for two cars travelling two different roads. One has a distance which is 15 times longer (size: 30 versus 2) but it travels with average speed 15 higher then the other (probability of single success is 15 times higher). Net result is (on average) the same travel time because the FactorySize factor is both in nominator and deominator so it reduces itself.
Of course it's not the proof, just an intuition. To proof (or to falsify) it you would have to use one of smart books on statistics and look for the formula which is applicable to our case (if probability was constant over time one of formulas we [should] know from high school would be enough), make necessary calculations and draw your own final conclusions.
Or having like me some prejudice toward smart books you could write a script (in visual basic or any other scripting language) simulating r/d repair process for different factory sizes and DatesOfAvail. Repeat it many times, take averages and again draw your conclusions. Not perfect certainly but I think better then trying to test it directly in game (especially that you rather can not count on automatic AI-vs-AI game runs as AI apparently has its own easier repair code path).

Bottom line however is that it is just a game so it is supposed to be fun for the player and part of having fun is doing it in a way you see fit. So have fun and Banzai!

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 17

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/3/2011 11:50:22 PM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

All my examples and analysis are based on airframes not engines because engines are handled differently.

I still think the number of factories matters. Lucky for everyone I just happened to have another airframe that also becaomes available at 1/45 (Ki-109-I Peggy) that I also increased at the start of the game from 0(2) to 0(4). God knows why lol, but I did. This factory at the same point in time as the one above has only repaired 1 factory so now it is 1(3) versus the 2(9) that the factory listed above shows.

While certainly not definate proof that the number of factories matter, it indicates that it is a good hypothsis until further analysis proves otherwise.

(in reply to kmitahj)

Post #: 18

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/4/2011 2:52:30 PM

jhowell

Posts: 27
Joined: 10/16/2008
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol

quote:

ORIGINAL: KiwVik

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol
A clever player should focus on frames with several upgrades in line, repair as much as possible before their availability, and then, before arrival switch free to the next available, better version, accelerating its arrival.

Viberpool, so if you switch the R&D factory to the next plane on the research path do the factories not get damaged?

Yup, that's what I am saying, they're fully operational and not damaged.
But before any switch, check the natural upgrade path... (for example Ki61b autoupgrades to "d" variant, not "c"...).

Hey, I tried this and you're right! I had tried it before but I didn't look up the upgrade path and choose an incorrect upgrade.

Does this mean that it is possible to reach critical mass with your aircraft R&D for long research paths like for the Zero or Oscar? I.e. get 3 or 4 research factories up to 30(0) and then just before they finish researching one model, switch them over to the next in the path. Then repeat over and over.

(in reply to viberpol)

Post #: 19

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/4/2011 3:23:32 PM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

Yes. However there are not that many airframes that will meet that criteria. Plus getting the 1st one is still challenging

.

So if you get P1Y1 Frances accelerated, you can awitch these R&D factories to the next version without damage to the P1Y2. It is important to note that you have to be very carefuly doing this. This is because you cannot just go by name.

For example there are three versions of the Ki-102 Randy, a, b, and c. These all look like that one model upgrades into another, but that is NOT the case. None of these have any upgrade paths, so switching the 102a to a 102b version would cause all of your R&D factories to become damaged.

The Oscar and Zero line have the biggest 'bang for the buck' so to speak (Oscar IIa-IV - 4 steps; Zero A6M3 [non-CV model] -A6M8 - 6 steps). To be even more specific about the Zero line:

A6M2 - A6M3 - A6M3a - A6M5 - A6M5b - A6M5c - A6M8

Switching to ANYTHING outside this path will lead to damaged factories. You will notice that the A6M7 is not in that list because it is a FB not a F. So to paraphrase from an old carpentry saying, "Check twice, switch once"

(in reply to jhowell)

Post #: 20

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/4/2011 7:19:28 PM

jhowell

Posts: 27
Joined: 10/16/2008
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Sure, they're hard to repair if you're aiming for something 1� years out, but they repair quick if the goal is only a couple of months away. So there is an incentive to keep adding research factories towards the end of the research cycle so that they repair and can be used on the next project - which might have a historical arrival date far in the future.

This thread has helped me understand the Japanese R&D a lot better. Now I just wish I understood why the aircraft R&D starts disabled while the engine R&D factories start the game fully repaired.

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 21

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/5/2011 3:29:06 AM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

I too would LOVE someone to answer that one lol.

I will point out that the Hellen 1a's (availability 4/42) and the Toka (availability 12/45) start out fully repaired. Why them versus all the rest is yet another mystery to be solved

This is why I suggested in my OP that the editor should be used in any GC (whether against the AI or a player) to change all the R&D factories to be fully repaired from the start of the game.

Even if a factory is producing 5/month (and most are not) it will still take 20 months to get a one month advance. I'm sure this will stop the Allies in their tracks not.

(in reply to jhowell)

Post #: 22

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/6/2011 3:04:53 PM

SuluSea

Posts: 2358
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline

I made an image of the starting Air R & D facilities . I counted 77 of them but ran out of fingers and toes so... It's actually many more than I thought when I see it laid out like that instead of viewing in game. Thanks Damian for you answers you provided to my R & D questions as you really helped clear the fog and this thread does as well.
I love this tip as it will help streamline-

quote:

Viberpool said

"A clever player should focus on frames with several upgrades in line, repair as much as possible before their availability, and then, before arrival switch free to the next available, better version, accelerating its arrival. "

Here's an image if anyone wants to copy it for scratch note purposes. I have good eyes and am able to write small if anyone needs me to break it up in two or three sections just ask.

< Message edited by SuluSea -- 6/6/2011 3:08:12 PM >

_____________________________

"There�s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.� ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 23

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/6/2011 6:58:40 PM

jhowell

Posts: 27
Joined: 10/16/2008
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Look at all those little factories... The thing I take away from this thread is that there is little point in trying to accelerate planes that are years out (e.g. Ki-201 Karyu aka the Japanese ME626). Although counter intuative because you would think that the highest gains would be made on something that is still years away - this is the way that ship acceleration works for example - it is in fact a waste of time and a waste if an R&D factory slot.

Choose something with several upgrades in a line and devote a stack load of R&D factories to it. Carefully build up and repair the factories. Repairing gets easier as you get closer to the historical due date. Don't go over a factory size of 30 at each location. It is going to take a long time and you won't make huge gains because your R&D locations will spend most of their time with at least 1 disabled factory. Then just before the first plane of the chain is 'invented' make sure everything is fully repaired and then WHAM switch all of them over to the 2nd in line. Now you can make huge gains because everything is fully repaired and ready to go and there is a long lead time to cut down.

Mwhu ha ha ha. I am really looking forward to using this. Shame I can't use it to get jets early though.

Hey SuluSea, do you know that you can export tracker information to csv files and load them into excel. This saves a lot of typing.

(in reply to SuluSea)

Post #: 24

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/6/2011 7:51:26 PM

SuluSea

Posts: 2358
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KiwVik

Hey SuluSea, do you know that you can export tracker information to csv files and load them into excel. This saves a lot of typing.

I tried to export a CSV file yesterday and couldn't figure out how to just get the airframe research facilities. So I started up my photo program and took pictures of my screen cropped & stitched them together and change colors- total time maybe 5 minutes.

Thanks!

_____________________________

"There�s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.� ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to jhowell)

Post #: 25

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/7/2011 1:15:33 AM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

Yes and notice ALL start damaged too lol (execpt the two I mentioned earlier, Helen 1a's and the Toka).

(in reply to SuluSea)

Post #: 26

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/14/2011 6:37:11 PM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

Bump due to update

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 27

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/14/2011 7:10:56 PM

d0mbo

Posts: 592
Joined: 8/21/2009
From: Holland
Status: offline

May I add a fair warning to consult with your PBEM opponent first how he thinks about advanced Japanese planes arriving much earlier ? This to prevent a Japanese player from investing many a turn in R&D only to find out his opponent might not be pleased and not accept the fact that Franks are rolling off your Tokyo assemblyline in late '42. (Exxagarted example, but you get my drift).

I think 1-3 months should be no problem, but more can give you an unfair advantage over the allies, who do not have the option to accelerate anything.

This message states �in reply to� but it�s meant as a general remark

< Message edited by d0mbo -- 6/14/2011 7:13:16 PM >

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 28

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/14/2011 8:17:14 PM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

Really

Japan can have an unfair advantage over the Allies? Wow! I had no idea that was even possible lol.

(in reply to d0mbo)

Post #: 29

RE: Accelerationg Japanese airframes - 6/18/2011 6:07:21 PM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

The above also mirroes my experience.

I mistakenly tried to advance the 2nd version of a airframe (skipping the first version) while on another one I did the opposite (concentrated on the first version). Tryng to accelerate the first version worked much better following the same logic as viberpol's. Of course I had already done the deed so to speak on�accelerating the 2nd version and did not want to go through�the slow process of repair again.

So when an airframe is within a month I switch it's R&D factories�to the next version (unless I really want all those factories to actually build planes).

It is VERY important to do this at the one month mark PRIOR to the plane's current availability. So if a plane that is accelerating is available on 2/43 and it is now 1/43, make the decision to keep the factories as R&D or to allow them to become production ones. If you wait, the plane may accelerate in the middile of the month and all those R&D factories IMMEDIATELY switch to production and can no longer be used�for R&D.

Obviously I know this because it happened to me lol.��

Yup, some caution is needed...
But I also tried more hardcore version.

If it's 1/43 and the airplane will be available at 2/43 and given the fact that only fully repaired factories produce research points -- you can actually quite safely expand the factory by 28-29 points and change the researched airplane type one day before its arrival. If the availability date is close, the damaged points are repaired quite fast -- even 1 per day. Of course you need to closely monitor the repaired factories.

I actually tested your theory

Sorry to say it did not quite work out the way you suggested

I had a new plane type becoming available in Aug (i.e. reseach would be completed on 8/1). On July 17, I took two R&D factories and switched them over to the airframe whose research would be completed on 8/1 to test your hypothsis. So only 14 turns left for the R&D fctories to perform research (7/18-7/31). Both the factories were expanded to be 0(12) on 7/17. Here are the results:

Turn Fac1 Fac2 Totals
7/18 0(12) 0(12) 0
7/19 1(11) 0(12) 1
7/20 2(10) 0(12) 2
7/21 2(10) 0(12) 2
7/22 2(10) 1(12) 3
7/23 2(10) 2(10) 4
7/24 2(10) 2(10) 4
7/25 2(10) 2(10) 4
7/26 3(09) 2(10) 5
7/27 4(08) 2(10) 6
7/28 4(08) 2(10) 6
7/29 4(08) 2(10) 6
7/30 4(08) 2(10) 6
7/31 5(07) 2(10) 7

So even if the availability date is very close, the R&D factories still repair differently than normal production ones. There must be a different repair routine involved.

What is suprising is that these factories were in two different cities both with adaquate supplies (both over 20K) yet one repaired at a significently better rate than the other. Factory 1 repaired 5 out of 12 versus 2 out of 12 for Factory 2, a 250% difference between them (5 divided by 2). So maybe the actual location of WHERE the R&D factory is located plays a part in the repair chance. Of course this is just a theory as with only a 14 day pronbability chance pool does not give enough data points to prove or disprove this. But interesting none the less.

Regardless, it appears that there is some form of a cap on the repair rate for R&D factories that prevents them from ever reaching the 1/day rate that production factories enjoy.

(in reply to viberpol)

Post #: 30