B6N1 : To Be or not to Be ?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

B6N1 : To Be or not to Be ?

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 >> The War Room >> B6N1 : To Be or not to Be ?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

B6N1 : To Be or not to Be ? - 5/20/2017 2:18:30 AM

ElvisDaKing

Posts: 130
Joined: 9/7/2004
From: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Status: offline

I am wondering if B6N1 Worth to be produced...

B6N1 is available in May 1943, using engine Ha-44 and has a Service Rating 2
Engine Ha-44 is on R&D from begining of campaign and available May 1943
Engine Ha-44 is only used by B6N1

B6N2 is available in October 1943, using engine Ha-32 and has a Service Rating 1
Engine Ha-32 is existing from begining of campaign...

I have currently 5 R&D factories for B6N1 and 2 R&D for Ha-44
But I am thinking of skipping the production of B6N1 and transform Ha-44 R&D to more needed engine like Ha-43..
With my 6 x R&D factories, and planned pool of Ha-32 > 500 units, I may expect B6N2 to be available only 2 months after B6N1...

So il will add 2 new engines R&D to my existing engine R&D programm, will not consume supply for producing engine which are only required by B6N1, and will not consume supply to produce B6N1 for squadrons that would be upgraded to B6N2 fez weeks/months later...
But in other hand, i will have to stay with the Kates for additional couple of months..

Any thoughts, comments ?

< Message edited by ElvisDaKing -- 5/20/2017 5:15:53 AM >

_____________________________

'To my point, in war, there s just one attractive thing : the victory Parade... What sucks, it s all the things before.... We should get the enlist payroll and do the parade right away, before that it get totally screwed up'
Un Taxi pour Tobrouk

Post #: 1

RE: B6N1 : To Be or not to Be ? - 5/20/2017 2:40:27 AM

Ldeathbow

Posts: 28
Joined: 2/15/2010
Status: offline

I'm with you - don't waste the time or resources to produce the B6N1, go straight for the N2.

You'll have to R&D an engine and frame, only to toss it some months later.
While the aircraft plant should "auto update", not sure about the engine.
Spend that R&D points on the later model (a post I read earlier said you need 100 points to
MAYBE get it a month sooner). So, in fact, you'll need 100 points per month to expedite the
N1 and then another 100/mo. on the N2. Why waste the effort in the N1 (that R&D plant can be
told to design a plane that uses the common engine)

(in reply to ElvisDaKing)

Post #: 2

RE: B6N1 : To Be or not to Be ? - 5/20/2017 2:49:07 AM

belfry

Posts: 18
Joined: 6/19/2010
Status: offline

If you're at the start of the game N2. If you've already committed to N1 and have spent time and resources on repairs then let it roll and turn the factories into an N2 when it comes live in the month before N1 production is available (when its blue). The upgrade will keep your factories undamaged and your research % will continue upwards.Then simply don't produce N1s

What I would say though i that if you were to have a go at Ki-94-II then you'll want 44s in the late war....

< Message edited by munichman -- 5/20/2017 2:52:15 AM >

(in reply to ElvisDaKing)

Post #: 3

RE: B6N1 : To Be or not to Be ? - 5/20/2017 5:15:32 AM

ElvisDaKing

Posts: 130
Joined: 9/7/2004
From: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Status: offline

Thanks for your thoughts

So the B6N1 will not be produced, but still researched - I am March 42 and have already 5 R&D ongoing for the B6N1...
I will upgrade them to B6N2 after B6N1 R&D over.

My plan is to transform 2 existing B5N1/2 Kate production lanes(still producing B5N1 with remaining old Hikari engines in pool) to B6N2 when available and will transform 1 R&D to production factory as well with a 100 x B6N2 monthly production..

4 remaining R&D will be upgraded to B6N2a for the N6 Radar...
I don t forecast to still have a strong KB to fight allied Deathstar by end of 44, so plan is to use Land Based night naval attack as anti shipping strategy.
I hope that N6 radar will improve night attack efficiency...

I will not go for Ki-94 II as obviously I will not produce Ha-44 engines.
I am not convinced about Ki-94 II armement which lack accuracy..
My fast late war IJA fighter will be Ki-83 despite being an expensive twin-engine...

_____________________________

(in reply to belfry)

Post #: 4

RE: B6N1 : To Be or not to Be ? - 5/20/2017 7:54:55 AM

belfry

Posts: 18
Joined: 6/19/2010
Status: offline

Just keep your R and D factories to no bigger than 30 and don't forget they don't start accumulating Research % until they are repaired...and it takes a long time to repair them once you start fiddling around with them. I would also not change any from research to production until I got the 2a...as you say for the radar capabilities

It might not be worth producing any N2 unless you're desperate to get rid of the Kates.

Another thing to consider about Kate and Val production is your strategy with KB. If you intend to throw them at the Allies you're going to lose quite a few so keeping a pool is worth it...however if by the summer/autumn of 42 you've just about reached your strategic expansion limits then you might need fewer, especially as some of those carriers will be considering upgrades which will take them out of service for around a month and you can replace losses over that period at a slower rate.

Keep your carriers intact well into 43 or you'll have little to put your 6N2s on...

My thoughts are the Ki-94-II has some firepower and speed, but as you say lacks accuracy. However as a CAP plane versus bombers you may need less accuracy and the firepower to damage them more significantly...notice I don't say shoot them down ;-) The 57mm on the 93 has a really decent punch but I think its even less accurate, however it will damage bombers significantly if it can get a hit.

< Message edited by munichman -- 5/20/2017 8:05:35 AM >

(in reply to ElvisDaKing)

Post #: 5

RE: B6N1 : To Be or not to Be ? - 5/22/2017 11:14:32 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

OK, things to consider. First off you are wrong about the Ha-44 only being used in the Jill. Its also used in the Ki-94-II. This puppy is the Japanese P-47, or close. Granted a 'fantasy' plane for Japan, as its due date is Feb. '46 I believe, but its a 'late' model A/C I'm attempting to produce. Right now just one site which is to 4(26) as of June'42, but I plan to add others later. Figure I could get it spring '45.

At any rate there are other advantages to getting the 'early' Jill models as well. For me in my last two games I've not produced the Kate-2 at all. Only the Kate-1, as there are quite a few engines for this plane and you should be able to keep early war losses low enough to pull this off. The Kate-1 is also a SR2 A/C, but this isn't too much of a problem as carrier battles then to be short and violent. One or two combats and they're back to port for resupply. The Jill is also quite a bit faster than either Kate and should result in better survivability.

Also keep in mind that strike coordination is affected by speed delta. Since I like to get my Judy dive bomber ASAP as well (for its 500kg bomb) the speed delta between it and the Kate is much greater than that of the early Jill. Both of these A/C can be brought into play at roughly the same time. Just some food for thought.

Of course the above is just my type of game and YMMV.

Edit: I get your concern with the accuracy of said weaponry, but these are heavy (30mm cannon) we're talking about here and the 20MM accuracy isn't bad for wing mounted. If I get there I'll let you know.

< Message edited by rustysi -- 5/22/2017 11:19:57 PM >

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to belfry)

Post #: 6

RE: B6N1 : To Be or not to Be ? - 5/23/2017 8:36:44 AM

ElvisDaKing

Posts: 130
Joined: 9/7/2004
From: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Status: offline

yes, I agree with potential issue of strike coordination if speed difference too high like between Judy and Kate..
So Jill should replace the Kate asap.
But I consider delaying the production of Jill with B6N2 variant, instead of B6N1 and save production of Ha-44 for other engine R&D and production is a good trade off.

Ha-44 being only used by B6N1 and very late war Ki-94 II fighter...

On a separate note, my decision not to produce Ki-94 II is not in regards of its performances but only because of production and R&D rationalisation...

Even if its a more than good plane, it will come too late to have 1 dedicated engine production running from 1943 for a plane only showing in mid/late 45 in best case..
not even considering potential destruction of your engine Ha-44 production lane and Ki-94II R&D lanes by allied Heavy Bombers in 1944...

You may also stop the production of Ha-44 after reaching 500 engines in the pool, providing not producing any more B6N1, and then get the R&D bonus, but it will take long time and also supply and HI points to reach the 500 magic number for, again, no certitude to see any day the Ki-94 II flying...

_____________________________

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 7

RE: B6N1 : To Be or not to Be ? - 5/23/2017 10:06:54 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

Got it and agree with all you say. Just showing a bit of the other side with my inputs.

_____________________________

(in reply to ElvisDaKing)

Post #: 8