Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown
But, notice that the load cost goes down. If I remember right, the IJA reduced the number of men in a squad, so firepower AND load cost went down

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Just something I've noticed on the boards here that I wished to address for reasons of clarification.

I've noticed some here mention the '43 IJA infantry as a 'downgrade', which is false, but I believe I see the reasons for the confusion and wished to bring it to light in case others missed it.

Until now I've not paid any real attention to the matter. Having 'beaten' the AI in '43 I never advanced beyond that point. To me it was always a matter of, OK, now I'll try again and do this, this time.

Well reading quite a few posts telling us that you need to get deeper into the game to see if your economy will 'survive' the end game I decided to continue with my current game. That being said I've seen for the first time the Japanese '43 infantry squads that I recall reading were a 'downgrade'.

They're not of course, but the confusion comes from within the game itself. You can see this if you look around. Going into the Aircraft, Troop, and Vehicle database (3rd tile top of screen) you'll find two listings under troops for IJA infantry. One has no upgrade path. It lists the A/Arm=5 and A/Soft=20. The second does list an upgrade path to the '43 IJA infantry. The strengths for these are listed as A/Arm=5 and A/Soft=22 for the IJA infantry, and A/Arm=5 and A/Soft=20 for the '43 IJA infantry.

Thus the confusion as it looks as if the 'upgrade' is a 'downgrade'. The numbers in the database are reversed. The IJA infantry should have been listed as A/Soft=20 and the '43 IJA infantry should have the 'upgrade' of A/Soft=22. Now the reason there are two listings, again for those who may be less familiar, are due to the fact that not all Japanese ID's will 'upgrade'. Most will stay with the original devices. Only a select group will 'upgrade' to the '43 IJA infantry.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Just something I've noticed on the boards here that I wished to address for reasons of clarification.

I've noticed some here mention the '43 IJA infantry as a 'downgrade', which is false, but I believe I see the reasons for the confusion and wished to bring it to light in case others missed it.

Until now I've not paid any real attention to the matter. Having 'beaten' the AI in '43 I never advanced beyond that point. To me it was always a matter of, OK, now I'll try again and do this, this time.

Well reading quite a few posts telling us that you need to get deeper into the game to see if your economy will 'survive' the end game I decided to continue with my current game. That being said I've seen for the first time the Japanese '43 infantry squads that I recall reading were a 'downgrade'.

They're not of course, but the confusion comes from within the game itself. You can see this if you look around. Going into the Aircraft, Troop, and Vehicle database (3rd tile top of screen) you'll find two listings under troops for IJA infantry. One has no upgrade path. It lists the A/Arm=5 and A/Soft=20. The second does list an upgrade path to the '43 IJA infantry. The strengths for these are listed as A/Arm=5 and A/Soft=22 for the IJA infantry, and A/Arm=5 and A/Soft=20 for the '43 IJA infantry.

Thus the confusion as it looks as if the 'upgrade' is a 'downgrade'. The numbers in the database are reversed. The IJA infantry should have been listed as A/Soft=20 and the '43 IJA infantry should have the 'upgrade' of A/Soft=22. Now the reason there are two listings, again for those who may be less familiar, are due to the fact that not all Japanese ID's will 'upgrade'. Most will stay with the original devices. Only a select group will 'upgrade' to the '43 IJA infantry.

While I had read reference to the above I have no idea if this had been discussed before and while I have read a ton of threads it could have been brought up before I got around to the site. At any rate I just wanted to put this out there for those who may have been mislead by it.

Hope this clears something up for at least one of you. Ciao

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

So it is is a downgrade but should not have been?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

But, notice that the load cost goes down. If I remember right, the IJA reduced the number of men in a squad, so firepower AND load cost went down

quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Just something I've noticed on the boards here that I wished to address for reasons of clarification.

I've noticed some here mention the '43 IJA infantry as a 'downgrade', which is false, but I believe I see the reasons for the confusion and wished to bring it to light in case others missed it.

Until now I've not paid any real attention to the matter. Having 'beaten' the AI in '43 I never advanced beyond that point. To me it was always a matter of, OK, now I'll try again and do this, this time.

Well reading quite a few posts telling us that you need to get deeper into the game to see if your economy will 'survive' the end game I decided to continue with my current game. That being said I've seen for the first time the Japanese '43 infantry squads that I recall reading were a 'downgrade'.

They're not of course, but the confusion comes from within the game itself. You can see this if you look around. Going into the Aircraft, Troop, and Vehicle database (3rd tile top of screen) you'll find two listings under troops for IJA infantry. One has no upgrade path. It lists the A/Arm=5 and A/Soft=20. The second does list an upgrade path to the '43 IJA infantry. The strengths for these are listed as A/Arm=5 and A/Soft=22 for the IJA infantry, and A/Arm=5 and A/Soft=20 for the '43 IJA infantry.

Thus the confusion as it looks as if the 'upgrade' is a 'downgrade'. The numbers in the database are reversed. The IJA infantry should have been listed as A/Soft=20 and the '43 IJA infantry should have the 'upgrade' of A/Soft=22. Now the reason there are two listings, again for those who may be less familiar, are due to the fact that not all Japanese ID's will 'upgrade'. Most will stay with the original devices. Only a select group will 'upgrade' to the '43 IJA infantry.

Ehm, are you sure you cleared things up there?

There are 3 types if IJA squad in stock all named "IJA Infantry Squad" in the ingame DB with (antiarmor/anitosoft/loadcost) as follows:
5/22/19 available from 41/12 and do not upgrade
5/20/17 available from 43/01
5/22/19 available from 41/12 and upgrade to the upper type.

3->2 is a downgrade because # of squads in ID does not change so you lose 10% AV. And who cares about load cost at that time anyway. Problem with the game is that 1) w/o editor you have no way of determining what kind of 5/22/19 you have, they all are named tha same, and 2) that you can check tha editor, forbid upgrades for the IDs with last-type squads and be golden, unlike Japan in reality
Edit: well, golden until those IDs are trashed and need replacements maybe. But I do not see if first-type squads are limited by the timeframe, and Japanese reinforcement process is different from Allies. Do replacements (directly from manpower and armaments pools) stop for the squads that have upgrade available? I doubt it.

• increasing the firepower of all artillery
  
• increasing the firepower of all American LCUs which contain infantry squads (definitely), probably the same for all Australian LCUs, definitely for all British units with Bren devices. In fact the 1941 Dutch and Filipinos are probably the only Allied LCUs which would not have to be revised upwards
  
• either reducing substantially the Japanese industrial base capacity or markedly increasing the cost to expand industry
  
• decreasing the number of new Japanese LCUs arriving on map post January 1943
  
• reduce the size of Japanese OOBs
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
It is not a downgrade.

There is no historical justification for a Japanese squad to have an anti-soft rating of 22. To attempt to do so in AE, in order to keep the relativities intact and consistent with the algorithms, would demand inter alia

• increasing the firepower of all artillery
  
• increasing the firepower of all American LCUs which contain infantry squads (definitely), probably the same for all Australian LCUs, definitely for all British units with Bren devices. In fact the 1941 Dutch and Filipinos are probably the only Allied LCUs which would not have to be revised upwards
  
• either reducing substantially the Japanese industrial base capacity or markedly increasing the cost to expand industry
  
• decreasing the number of new Japanese LCUs arriving on map post January 1943
  
• reduce the size of Japanese OOBs
  

Within the context of the game's abstractions, Japanese squads never increased their firepower. The few reinforced 1941 units decreased their firepower down to the level of the 1941 non reinforced units.

Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

So it is is a downgrade but should not have been?

There is nothing wrong with the AE treatment of the subject.

Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

But, notice that the load cost goes down. If I remember right, the IJA reduced the number of men in a squad, so firepower AND load cost went down

quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

... Alfred, I get what you are saying about the relative firepower balance and agree with the need.
I meant that ingame realization is not ideal. Japan has means to dodge this check, and it looks
like a downgrade from the isolated Japanese point of view.

Probably the better way was like you outlined - increasing allied firepower more with the upgrades. But I can't judge as I do not know what other constraints WITP designers faced at that time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

But, notice that the load cost goes down. If I remember right, the IJA reduced the number of men in a squad, so firepower AND load cost went down

It's this. It is a downgrade - one fewer guy in a squad, one less rifle and one less load cost.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Just something I've noticed on the boards here that I wished to address for reasons of clarification.

I've noticed some here mention the '43 IJA infantry as a 'downgrade', which is false, but I believe I see the reasons for the confusion and wished to bring it to light in case others missed it.

Until now I've not paid any real attention to the matter. Having 'beaten' the AI in '43 I never advanced beyond that point. To me it was always a matter of, OK, now I'll try again and do this, this time.

Well reading quite a few posts telling us that you need to get deeper into the game to see if your economy will 'survive' the end game I decided to continue with my current game. That being said I've seen for the first time the Japanese '43 infantry squads that I recall reading were a 'downgrade'.

They're not of course, but the confusion comes from within the game itself. You can see this if you look around. Going into the Aircraft, Troop, and Vehicle database (3rd tile top of screen) you'll find two listings under troops for IJA infantry. One has no upgrade path. It lists the A/Arm=5 and A/Soft=20. The second does list an upgrade path to the '43 IJA infantry. The strengths for these are listed as A/Arm=5 and A/Soft=22 for the IJA infantry, and A/Arm=5 and A/Soft=20 for the '43 IJA infantry.

Thus the confusion as it looks as if the 'upgrade' is a 'downgrade'. The numbers in the database are reversed. The IJA infantry should have been listed as A/Soft=20 and the '43 IJA infantry should have the 'upgrade' of A/Soft=22. Now the reason there are two listings, again for those who may be less familiar, are due to the fact that not all Japanese ID's will 'upgrade'. Most will stay with the original devices. Only a select group will 'upgrade' to the '43 IJA infantry.

While I had read reference to the above I have no idea if this had been discussed before and while I have read a ton of threads it could have been brought up before I got around to the site. At any rate I just wanted to put this out there for those who may have been mislead by it.

Hope this clears something up for at least one of you. Ciao

You get an "A" for effort and attempt to explain the issue. But your conclusion is wrong.

There is a very substantive 2011 thread on the subject.

Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: inqistor



Technically, they lose 2/3rd Arisaka, and 1/6th of 20mm AT Rifle from Company Support (2x20mm AT Rifles, with 5 crews), plus 1/3rd Arisaka, and 1/3rd of "Knee Mortar", from Platoon Support (One "Knee Mortar", and ammo guy). Roughly 2 points of firepower, and 2-3 points of weight, but I think, there is no 20mm AT Rifle modelled, in original TOE.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2700375&mpage=1&key=IJA%2Cinfantry#

Alfred is this the thread?

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2700375&mpage=1&key=IJA%2Cinfantry#

Alfred is this the thread?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

I think that would be a bad idea since suddenly an unit just disappearing from front-line is not okay. It is also not likely that Japanese just changed their squads in one go, certainly units continued with them for while.
If the units loose squads in combat then Japanese player is forced to upgrade the TOE to have new squads. It seems the less worse option.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2700375&mpage=1&key=IJA%2Cinfantry#

Alfred is this the thread?

Yes.

That is by far the best single source thread on the subject available on the public forum. Digging up the reference made in post #54 leads to even more specific details but those are not generally available. What was posted publicly is more than adequate to explain the devs treatment of the subject as being correct.

Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

I think that would be a bad idea since suddenly an unit just disappearing from front-line is not okay. It is also not likely that Japanese just changed their squads in one go, certainly units continued with them for while.
If the units loose squads in combat then Japanese player is forced to upgrade the TOE to have new squads. It seems the less worse option.

Only a problem for ongoing games; an issue I flagged in my post. Otherwise not a problem as has been consistently demonstrated by Allied players who have many combat LCUs withdraw which do not even return unlike the suggested "fix" where the Japanese LCUs would return.

The actual fix adopted works but is inelegant. Its main benefit being the minimum amount of dev work involved. The fix creates other issues which whilst not game stoppers do lead to player misunderstandings. The greatest misunderstanding being that the 1943 upgrade = a downgrade. Notwithstanding what some say, it isn't.

What AE is doing is replicating the historical Japanese lightening of their reinforced units. Doing so via a change of TOE in AE was a possibility but it in turn leads to other problems, chief amongst them being shortage of suitable location spots for TOE upgrades and opportunities. There is a reason why Japanese TOE upgrades do not approach the frequency of Allied TOE upgrades.

The other main issue with doing it via TOE upgrade is that the historical lightening was not done, in AE terms, at the TOE level but at the squad AE abstraction level. There is significant AV reductions which would need to be done (plus actual worloak) if this route had been adoptedImplement the change via TOE and the devs would have been criticised by the internet knowledge dependent fanbois.

Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

OK, so I've read what I feel I need to read. Not every post of the 2011 thread as TBH there's far more minutia in there than I care to get into. I accept the Dev's decisions for what they have done and what they had to do, and why they made the decisions they made.

So I have my original question, which I haven't actually stated as yet. Are these 'upgraded' units in the Japanese OOB actually stronger, weaker, or the same? IOW what is their relative combat strength when compared to one another, before and after 'upgrade'?

quote:

In short, it's really best to just deal with the slight downgrade in the long run.