Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish)

 
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 >> RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 1/30/2014 2:22:16 AM   
Grfin Zeppelin


Posts: 1515
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

, but I'm still repairing Tojo factories for later use when I may need to produce a lot in short order.

Thats a rather wasteful approach regarding supplies. Especially because the Tojo is a dead end.

_____________________________



(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 31
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 1/30/2014 3:22:20 AM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
Geoflambert,

Are you still looking for insight regarding your competence? It's been a little while and I just wanted to know what your needs were for excoriation.

Best,

Chickenboy.

_____________________________


(in reply to Grfin Zeppelin)
Post #: 32
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 1/30/2014 11:30:32 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I am listening. I've nearly completely shut down A6nM production and greatly reduced Tojo mfg., but I'm still repairing Tojo factories for later use when I may need to produce a lot in short order. I'm converting Zero sqds. to Claudes where convenient and for training in order to increase the replacement pool for A6M2s. Frank is a long way off, though, and at the rate I'm losing here I may never see that day. I'm hoping to leave most of the base protection to Jack and George and believe I will have sufficiently trained crews in reserve for that. That leaves the Tojos to do all the fighting and I have an inexhaustible pool of trained pilots for them (I think).

Well, yes, you do need to adapt any strategy to the reality of the game. As you say, no point prepping for '46 when you are up to your keister in Kirk's today.

If you think you will need Tojo's, then I would build them now as opposed to spending the supply to repair Tojo factories that you may not need. ie, halt (at least some if not all) of the Tojo factory repair and turn back on your Tojo production. Not sure how much Tojo production you have now, but if you have 100 repaired, you are ok. If you have 200 repaired, I would stop with that. Balance your Tojo production with your Oscar production. Most players build at least some Oscar for escort duty and/or LR sweeps.

A6M - keep production going to maintain pool (50 -100 planes is fine depending upon how you plan to use the KB). A5M should be used for training units. George/Jack are still a ways off ... you don't want to let your IJN groups go short on planes.

A2A losses:
Yardstick for 42 is that your A2A should be 1:1 ... many players do better (some have maintained 3:1 through most of '42, not me though), but you should point to that as a realistic goal. In '43, your A2A is going to drop off to hopefully not worse than 1:2. I try never to let it get worse than 1:3, although in '44 that can be tough to achieve.

FOW isn't the same on both sides, at least in my experience. IJ over reports allied losses by about 30%. So, if you see 90 allied P40's in the report shot down, yeah, take that as closer to 60. 30 of those were damaged, but survived to fight another day (armor is a big deal along with DUR, both of which are much higher in allied planes overall). And of course allied pilot losses are less than 50% of what the IJ will take, particularly in '42 when the IJ is on the offensive. So of those 60 planes the allies lost, expect they only lost 30 pilots ... IJ would have lost +55 pilots ...

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 33
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 1/30/2014 7:12:56 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Geoflambert,

Are you still looking for insight regarding your competence? It's been a little while and I just wanted to know what your needs were for excoriation.

Best,

Chickenboy.


Yes indeed. You can post your comments to that circular file on your desktop. That way I'll receive them immediately.

Yes, I'm subletting from Oscar the Grouch.

< Message edited by geofflambert -- 1/30/2014 8:16:52 PM >

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 34
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 1/30/2014 7:13:43 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

, but I'm still repairing Tojo factories for later use when I may need to produce a lot in short order.

Thats a rather wasteful approach regarding supplies. Especially because the Tojo is a dead end.


This war is a dead end, so it's only fitting.

(in reply to Grfin Zeppelin)
Post #: 35
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 1/30/2014 7:30:15 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I am listening. I've nearly completely shut down A6nM production and greatly reduced Tojo mfg., but I'm still repairing Tojo factories for later use when I may need to produce a lot in short order. I'm converting Zero sqds. to Claudes where convenient and for training in order to increase the replacement pool for A6M2s. Frank is a long way off, though, and at the rate I'm losing here I may never see that day. I'm hoping to leave most of the base protection to Jack and George and believe I will have sufficiently trained crews in reserve for that. That leaves the Tojos to do all the fighting and I have an inexhaustible pool of trained pilots for them (I think).

Well, yes, you do need to adapt any strategy to the reality of the game. As you say, no point prepping for '46 when you are up to your keister in Kirk's today.

If you think you will need Tojo's, then I would build them now as opposed to spending the supply to repair Tojo factories that you may not need. ie, halt (at least some if not all) of the Tojo factory repair and turn back on your Tojo production. Not sure how much Tojo production you have now, but if you have 100 repaired, you are ok. If you have 200 repaired, I would stop with that. Balance your Tojo production with your Oscar production. Most players build at least some Oscar for escort duty and/or LR sweeps.

A6M - keep production going to maintain pool (50 -100 planes is fine depending upon how you plan to use the KB). A5M should be used for training units. George/Jack are still a ways off ... you don't want to let your IJN groups go short on planes.

A2A losses:
Yardstick for 42 is that your A2A should be 1:1 ... many players do better (some have maintained 3:1 through most of '42, not me though), but you should point to that as a realistic goal. In '43, your A2A is going to drop off to hopefully not worse than 1:2. I try never to let it get worse than 1:3, although in '44 that can be tough to achieve.

FOW isn't the same on both sides, at least in my experience. IJ over reports allied losses by about 30%. So, if you see 90 allied P40's in the report shot down, yeah, take that as closer to 60. 30 of those were damaged, but survived to fight another day (armor is a big deal along with DUR, both of which are much higher in allied planes overall). And of course allied pilot losses are less than 50% of what the IJ will take, particularly in '42 when the IJ is on the offensive. So of those 60 planes the allies lost, expect they only lost 30 pilots ... IJ would have lost +55 pilots ...


How does 240 and counting on the Tojos grab you? I've noticed that planes shot down over friendly territory and especially with armored cockpits greatly improves survivability on the pilots. Here's the graphic showing my A2A, so you think he's actually at about 1,100? I guess it's good if you're a gorn.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 36
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 1/31/2014 1:50:26 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
240 is far more than I produce, but every player has their own strategy. That's close to my total fighter production of all fighter models for both IJN/IJA in '42.

As to his losses ... you're showing 1858 ... so knock off about 30% ... say around 1300 or so ... so you are just above 1:1 on your A2A losses overall. Not bad at all. 10 months into the war ... so you are losing 400 planes/month overall - this is a high tempo but not unusual. So if your TOTAL AC production was say 600 AC/month, that would mean you are replacing the 400 lost PLUS you are upgrading 200 more each month. which means at this point you have 2000 more AC in the map and in pools than when you started the game.

200 AC / month means you are upgrading about 7 air groups each month ... a fairly quick pace. Far faster than what was done historically.

Your operational losses are what is killing you ... they are as high as your A2A. You need to review your group settings and make better use of the "rest" command. I try hard to keep my operational losses to 10% of my A2A losses. Not always successful of course, but I do try ... If your operational losses were at that 10% target, you would have over 1000 more planes and +500 more experienced pilots ... that's a big deal to me ....

< Message edited by PaxMondo -- 1/31/2014 2:58:46 AM >


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 37
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 1/31/2014 1:42:21 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I am listening. I've nearly completely shut down A6nM production and greatly reduced Tojo mfg., but I'm still repairing Tojo factories for later use when I may need to produce a lot in short order. I'm converting Zero sqds. to Claudes where convenient and for training in order to increase the replacement pool for A6M2s. Frank is a long way off, though, and at the rate I'm losing here I may never see that day. I'm hoping to leave most of the base protection to Jack and George and believe I will have sufficiently trained crews in reserve for that. That leaves the Tojos to do all the fighting and I have an inexhaustible pool of trained pilots for them (I think).

Well, yes, you do need to adapt any strategy to the reality of the game. As you say, no point prepping for '46 when you are up to your keister in Kirk's today.

If you think you will need Tojo's, then I would build them now as opposed to spending the supply to repair Tojo factories that you may not need. ie, halt (at least some if not all) of the Tojo factory repair and turn back on your Tojo production. Not sure how much Tojo production you have now, but if you have 100 repaired, you are ok. If you have 200 repaired, I would stop with that. Balance your Tojo production with your Oscar production. Most players build at least some Oscar for escort duty and/or LR sweeps.

A6M - keep production going to maintain pool (50 -100 planes is fine depending upon how you plan to use the KB). A5M should be used for training units. George/Jack are still a ways off ... you don't want to let your IJN groups go short on planes.

A2A losses:
Yardstick for 42 is that your A2A should be 1:1 ... many players do better (some have maintained 3:1 through most of '42, not me though), but you should point to that as a realistic goal. In '43, your A2A is going to drop off to hopefully not worse than 1:2. I try never to let it get worse than 1:3, although in '44 that can be tough to achieve.

FOW isn't the same on both sides, at least in my experience. IJ over reports allied losses by about 30%. So, if you see 90 allied P40's in the report shot down, yeah, take that as closer to 60. 30 of those were damaged, but survived to fight another day (armor is a big deal along with DUR, both of which are much higher in allied planes overall). And of course allied pilot losses are less than 50% of what the IJ will take, particularly in '42 when the IJ is on the offensive. So of those 60 planes the allies lost, expect they only lost 30 pilots ... IJ would have lost +55 pilots ...


How does 240 and counting on the Tojos grab you? I've noticed that planes shot down over friendly territory and especially with armored cockpits greatly improves survivability on the pilots. Here's the graphic showing my A2A, so you think he's actually at about 1,100? I guess it's good if you're a gorn.







not sure what you are actually doing with your bombers but your flak losses just look horrible. Actually a more realistic number but for a "game" number it is looking really horrible to me for the date.

Total numbers lost, well, also looking realistic but in game terms quite heavy to me. 60% of your losses would be the max to accept for me at this stage of the game.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 1/31/2014 2:44:00 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 38
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 1/31/2014 4:43:03 PM   
offenseman


Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline
CT- DBB has more robust AAA. That might help cause those losses. Last turn (Lenny, read on with caution) I sent 73 Sally against Singers and on day one of the turn, 20 were damaged by flak and little damage was caused. Base had no CAP to interfere either. In stock that result would not have happened in early 1/42 against Singers.

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 39
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 1/31/2014 6:11:51 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: offenseman

CT- DBB has more robust AAA. That might help cause those losses. Last turn (Lenny, read on with caution) I sent 73 Sally against Singers and on day one of the turn, 20 were damaged by flak and little damage was caused. Base had no CAP to interfere either. In stock that result would not have happened in early 1/42 against Singers.



I know Babes flak, have been playing against/with that flak for a couple of years and above's flak losses are still shocking to me. My stated losses were based on Babes flak.

_____________________________


(in reply to offenseman)
Post #: 40
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 1/31/2014 10:29:46 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy



not sure what you are actually doing with your bombers but your flak losses just look horrible. Actually a more realistic number but for a "game" number it is looking really horrible to me for the date.

Total numbers lost, well, also looking realistic but in game terms quite heavy to me. 60% of your losses would be the max to accept for me at this stage of the game.



Most of that's from Singapore. He put a lot of flak there before I started bombing, then I got desperate because he also added engineers there and was fixing damage faster than I was delivering it, so I started running the bombers in at 5k instead of 10k. I stopped bombing there altogether some time back, with the exception of naval attack.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 41
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 2/1/2014 2:23:55 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy



not sure what you are actually doing with your bombers but your flak losses just look horrible. Actually a more realistic number but for a "game" number it is looking really horrible to me for the date.

Total numbers lost, well, also looking realistic but in game terms quite heavy to me. 60% of your losses would be the max to accept for me at this stage of the game.



Most of that's from Singapore. He put a lot of flak there before I started bombing, then I got desperate because he also added engineers there and was fixing damage faster than I was delivering it, so I started running the bombers in at 5k instead of 10k. I stopped bombing there altogether some time back, with the exception of naval attack.



You got to be quite stubborn or careless if you lose a usual year's bomber production to flak of one base.

_____________________________


(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 42
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 2/1/2014 7:31:11 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy



not sure what you are actually doing with your bombers but your flak losses just look horrible. Actually a more realistic number but for a "game" number it is looking really horrible to me for the date.

Total numbers lost, well, also looking realistic but in game terms quite heavy to me. 60% of your losses would be the max to accept for me at this stage of the game.



Most of that's from Singapore. He put a lot of flak there before I started bombing, then I got desperate because he also added engineers there and was fixing damage faster than I was delivering it, so I started running the bombers in at 5k instead of 10k. I stopped bombing there altogether some time back, with the exception of naval attack.



You got to be quite stubborn or careless if you lose a usual year's bomber production to flak of one base.


To be fair, it may be the most tactically important base for Japan to take in initial expansion.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 43
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 2/1/2014 8:09:37 PM   
wyrmmy


Posts: 214
Joined: 7/19/2004
Status: offline
Which he has yet to take, rerouting a lot of troops to Thailand to stop the incursion by SEA command. There was a window in Feb - March he could have taken it easily, now he lacks the troops to do so.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 44
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 2/2/2014 2:45:19 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy



not sure what you are actually doing with your bombers but your flak losses just look horrible. Actually a more realistic number but for a "game" number it is looking really horrible to me for the date.

Total numbers lost, well, also looking realistic but in game terms quite heavy to me. 60% of your losses would be the max to accept for me at this stage of the game.



Most of that's from Singapore. He put a lot of flak there before I started bombing, then I got desperate because he also added engineers there and was fixing damage faster than I was delivering it, so I started running the bombers in at 5k instead of 10k. I stopped bombing there altogether some time back, with the exception of naval attack.



You got to be quite stubborn or careless if you lose a usual year's bomber production to flak of one base.


To be fair, it may be the most tactically important base for Japan to take in initial expansion.



and that makes losing several hundred bombers worth it? Serious? Different people, different oppinions. I found and still find losing nearly 1000 bombers in one year war horrible, let alone losing most of them
over Singapore. That's clearly an example when I say the commander did something seriously wrong. There's nothing justifying the loss of so many bombers early on, that's just crazy to me.

My ongoing PBEM sees KB attacking Manila, is near Malaya three days later, the IJ lands at Mersing, Malay is cut in two, Northern pocket with 25000 men falls on the first attack for literally no loss, shock attack
into Singapore takes the base on first attempt. Total losses: 1 ship, 2 dozen aircraft, 50 squads of inf and support and some guns, all done in the first week of January with not much the Allied can do about as
there is nothing to be made out of thin air and stuff doesn't magically teleport around other than the IJN's magic task forces of turn one. Now this may be an ideal example but the OP's example must be the worst
then because I have never heard about losing hundreds and hundreds of bombers to flak over Singapore which makes asking about the IJ economy the wrong question, first to ask would be to avoid losses like this,
because with losses like this no economy can correspond.

How can one keep attacking at the wrong altitude after losing a couple of dozen bombers to flak just to keep on attacking the same way again and again to probably lose more than 1000 bombers doing so because
if there are nearly 1000 flak losses, then there are hundreds more that resulted in ops losses. Can only repeat me, horrible.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 2/2/2014 3:48:22 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 45
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 2/2/2014 3:13:10 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

not sure what you are actually doing with your bombers but your flak losses just look horrible. Actually a more realistic number but for a "game" number it is looking really horrible to me for the date.

Total numbers lost, well, also looking realistic but in game terms quite heavy to me. 60% of your losses would be the max to accept for me at this stage of the game.



Most of that's from Singapore. He put a lot of flak there before I started bombing, then I got desperate because he also added engineers there and was fixing damage faster than I was delivering it, so I started running the bombers in at 5k instead of 10k. I stopped bombing there altogether some time back, with the exception of naval attack.



You got to be quite stubborn or careless if you lose a usual year's bomber production to flak of one base.


To be fair, it may be the most tactically important base for Japan to take in initial expansion.



and that makes losing several hundred bombers worth it? Serious? Different people, different oppinions. I found and still find losing nearly 1000 bombers in one year war horrible, let alone losing most of them
over Singapore. That's clearly an example when I say the commander did something seriously wrong. There's nothing justifying the loss of so many bombers early on, that's just crazy to me.

My ongoing PBEM sees KB attacking Manila, is near Malaya three days later, the IJ lands at Mersing, Malay is cut in two, Northern pocket with 25000 men falls on the first attack for literally no loss, shock attack
into Singapore takes the base on first attempt. Total losses: 1 ship, 2 dozen aircraft, 50 squads of inf and support and some guns, all done in the first week of January with not much the Allied can do about as
there is nothing to be made out of thin air and stuff doesn't magically teleport around other than the IJN's magic task forces of turn one. Now this may be an ideal example but the OP's example must be the worst
then because I have never heard about losing hundreds and hundreds of bombers to flak over Singapore which makes asking about the IJ economy the wrong question, first to ask would be to avoid losses like this,
because with losses like this no economy can correspond.

How can one keep attacking at the wrong altitude after losing a couple of dozen bombers to flak just to keep on attacking the same way again and again to probably lose more than 1000 bombers doing so because
if there are nearly 1000 flak losses, then there are hundreds more that resulted in ops losses. Can only repeat me, horrible.

He's a new guy - he wasn't saying it was a great series of maneuver, just explaining what happened. I think he understands more now!

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 46
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 2/2/2014 5:14:18 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
I think attacking Singers from lower than 15k is a mistake every newly-minted Japanese player has to make at least once.

Definitely not worth several hundred bombers (I'd have to look back at how much it cost me in this past game, but I'd say probably less than 50), I was just expressing that it's understandable why our Gorn would set his bombers more aggressively in an attempt to "break" Singers.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 47
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 2/2/2014 7:41:10 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Gorns are never wrong.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 48
RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) - 2/3/2014 1:32:34 PM   
offenseman


Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Gorns are never wrong.


You have a great attitude regarding the game in general.

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 49
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish) Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.703