RE: 18 Feb 42 report

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: 18 Feb 42 report

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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/1/2019 7:46:09 PM

PaxMondo

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

SBD-5 is 9 hex with 1000lb, SBD-6 is 10 hex. AND their fighters have better range than the A7M � after 10/42 you are fighting with a range DISADVANTAGE, which mean they can hit you and you cannot retaliate. THat is the scenario you enjoy right now until 10/42.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 331

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/1/2019 7:49:51 PM

PaxMondo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

With 5x30 research on Rufe from the start I�ve just moved one to A6M5c. I will keep one to build Rufes.
One way I can have my cake and eat it is to change a few more research factories back to Rufe, to ultimately have 4 on A6M5 and 4 on A6M5c.
I�m actually thinking of moving a few of my non-fighter research factories back to Rufe, they should just have time to repair before changing to A6M5. Supply is starting to grow at Tokyo again, but. Is will cost about 4K supply / day to repair he new Rufe factories.
I think I have 4 on the Judy now so maybe 2 of them plus 2 others that I�ll find that I haven�t wasted much supply repairing yet.
The thought of A6M5 in about Jul/Aug 42 has been very appealing since Obvert first raised it, and this way I won�t have to delay the armour that I want.

I can�t access the game for about 14 hours so will ponder this some more today.

My main strategic thinking is that Japan needs to try and win the war on points by 1 Jan 44 at the latest, so one aspect of this is that I probably need to force a carrier battle in 1942/43 to get more victory points. The allies may not comply, but I feel I will need to try and force the issue. This is also what the IJN were trying to do historically, and in this game the USN is still intact so they will be a massive threat if I can�t reduce them in 1942. The ABDA CA task force in the Coral Sea is big on that list with about 200 points in it.

Even if I just sink allied merchants, I am planning to conduct a deep raid in both the Pacific and Indian Oceans to hunt for points.

Not sure why you want so many factories on Rufe. I typically have only 1. Granted, it might 1x75 or larger, but still I only commit one. Remember, once in production a factory can be any sized and will produce multiple aircraft each day if large enough.

Rufe's have a lot of nice uses, I probably use them as much as anyone*. BUT they are all secondary to a main fighter. My main fighters MUST be priority at all times.

* They make really good CAT traps.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to jdsrae)

Post #: 332

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/1/2019 8:25:30 PM

ITAKLinus

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline

Hi Pax, I might have misread but I think he means that only one industry goes online. That's my understanding.

Anyway, I think the entire VPs thing has a major flaw. Or more than one. 200 points are nothing. And CVs are a nice prize, but not that much in the overall score. It's always quite cool to sink them for practical reasons, and because in the long-run Allies have to compensate a lot in order to meet the '45 autovictory requirements, but for a Japanese autovictory perspective, it's quite irrelevant in terms of VPs.

I am quite new to the forum and probably even quite dumb, therefore I am unable to post more than one image on a single reply.

Here are few links to better explain what I mean in terms of VPs (hope this dropbox sharing works...).

VPs : https://www.dropbox.com/s/fs9anjh1wq6p62q/STEFANO_PUNTI.JPG?dl=0
BASES: https://www.dropbox.com/s/e35wvzoq42pi5k9/STEFANO_BASI.JPG?dl=0

This PBEM's screens are quite out of date since we went few months further. I still have to get Karachi, but as you can see I am at 3,63:1 in the moment I took this screen. Not that much and quite short of 4:1. And I'm in '43. With quite a big territorial extension.

The whole Royal Navy sleeps under the Ocean. Many, points but not that much if you look at the points breakdown.

Now the other PBEM in which I am entangled. It's again quite later than the screen taking but just 10 days or so.

VPs : https://www.dropbox.com/s/3v9amjtawbnbymi/PATRICK_PUNTI.JPG?dl=0
BASES : https://www.dropbox.com/s/qghvkrynmlvfbiu/PATRICK_BASI.JPG?dl=0

I am near the famous 4:1 but as you can see I got a lot of extremely important bases (Sydney hasn't fallen yet) rather than ships.

What I am trying to show is that, from my perspective, sinking enemy CVs has little meaning in the VP count. It has of course primary importance in basically every other aspect, but not VPs. At least, that's my own idea on the matter.
I prefer to harvest VPs through massive land fights and conquests rather than relying on CV clashes.

Moreover, I don't know whether 3:1 on 1-JAN-44 is a realistic expectation.

Again, it's just my 2 cents and the reasons I take the subject in this way.

Regarding the range topic. We shouldn't forget that CVs have a maximum strike distance and so we are somehow bound to that. Or it has been eliminated and it has always been dumb luck I haven't had long range clashes until now?

I am quite prone to say that, especially mid-game, you either adopt a line of thought of trying to strike at maximum distance, where US CVs cannot strike back, or you just go close and hope to bring down in the hell with you as many yanks as possible.

< Message edited by ITAKLinus -- 12/1/2019 8:26:14 PM >

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 333

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/1/2019 8:27:33 PM

ITAKLinus

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline

DELETED. Double posting.

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to ITAKLinus)

Post #: 334

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 7:44:53 AM

jdsrae

Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline

Only 1x Rufe factory will produce, the rest can skip ahead to A6M5c research once repaired to size 30.
I don�t have to research A6M5 before starting research on the 5c.
Every day delay starting 5c research is a delay to its potential production start date.
Researching A6M5 does not help bring the 5c production date forward.

I�ve come up with an option to get the 5c in Nov 42 with no engine bonus, so possibly earlier, by moving 4 x Grace research factories to it.
Now the Grace is a good plane, but if I left 4x30 researching it won�t arrive until Apr 44.
If the war is still going by then I don�t think Grace will help as much as getting the 5c in late 1942 would.
That would get me a lot more months of service out of the 5c.
I didn�t check the date, but it should also bring the A6M8 into play as a Fleet defender a good few months before the Sam arrives.

What say the IJGS / peanut gallery to this option of moving 4 x Grace research to give me 8x30 A6M5c research factories?
If I make the changes tonight those Rufe factories will be repaired in about 30 days and will skip straight to 5c research at that point

< Message edited by jdsrae -- 12/2/2019 7:58:03 AM >

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to ITAKLinus)

Post #: 335

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 9:02:51 AM

jdsrae

Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline

Maybe not the Grace... odds are I will still be fighting hard in 1944 so changing some very late war research factories might be a better option.
The Generals aren�t going to like this idea, but something like the 4x Ki-94 research factories might be better moved to the A6M5c...
If I promise the Generals some tbc excess research factories that I don�t need for production in return they should accept that trade off...

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to jdsrae)

Post #: 336

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 10:32:53 AM

ITAKLinus

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline

Ok, here is my perspective.

Probably it has some shortcomings somewhere. And probably others have different opinions.

Individually, I think that in R&D the rule is "go big or go home". Thinking in industrial and strategic terms, you don't achieve much anticipating a model of few months. Suppose you put 4 factories on KI-94-II. You get it few months before it's scheduled. Say 6 months (and it would be quite a miracle such an advance).
It's 1-SEPT-1945. Does it change something? At that point the war is either lost or won (with "won" I do mean a draw which is, accordingly to me, a Jap victory).

Now think you put a lot of factories on the KI-94-II from 7-DEC. I use the excel tool I link you in this discussion to make my calculations usually.

If you put enough factories, you have it in mid-44 if I remember correctly. It is a game-changer.

There are many tradeoffs, but it's my personal idea about R&D. Just an example with KI-94-II, a model I am researching in one of my PBEM. I think I have more than 30 factories on it. Way more, probably. I am far behind on the rest of the R&D, though.

Again, it's a matter of your grand strategy and your doctrine. For example, if you privilege a sort of kantai kessen to be done somewhere in late '43, you probably need an approach which is completely different from a doctrine based on elastic response.

I feel that the best way to organize R&D is figuring out your grand strategy and doctrine first of all. Then you define what you need and when to accomplish your strategy. Finally, you allocate resources to that.
So, if your idea is to have a quick 4:1 autovictory (or 3:1 at 1-JAN-1944), you require to implement your vision (a sort of blitzkrieg defeating the Allies and making them ask for peace) into operations. And these operations require assets. Assets you can either produce outright from 7-DEC or research and then put into production.
In this reasoning, it's contradictory to research KI-94-II, for example: why do you research half-heartedly (is it an actually existing word, btw?) if you do not plan to reach the date in which it will become operational?

I give you a brief example of what I do mean. I decided to go for India in one of the two PBEM I posted above. Leaving aside the whole strategic reasoning behind that, I started researching and producing what I needed to accomplish my operational objectives, based on the strategic ones. Therefore I invested relatively a lot in researching Helen-IIa to have it soon and mass-produce it (200/month) and I privileged long-legged IJAAF fighters (Oscars) instead of good sweepers such as Tojos, reasoning being that I the territory is huge, AFs are available in great numbers but long range offensive assets are to be preferred to short-legged tojos. Moreover, I figured out I couls sweep Karachi from a base WEST of Ahamadabad or how the hell is spelled without triggering emergency reinforcements. Mass production of an inferior plane, Oscar, has been therefore preferred to the better Tojo because of operational reasons, which find their grounds in my strategic goals.

Here the link to the research excel spreadsheet. Don't know whether it is 100% accurate, I found it on the forum and so far it has been correct for most of the models. Not for my current heavy investment in KI-94-II but it's because I got lucky.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/44qps38pynyw8cs/research.xls?dl=0

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to jdsrae)

Post #: 337

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 10:46:12 AM

jdsrae

Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline

My calcs suggest 4x Ki94 factories from day 1 would get it into production Mar 45, so 11 months early excluding engine bonus.
It�s a form of insurance policy in case the war isn�t won earlier.

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to ITAKLinus)

Post #: 338

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 11:48:47 AM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

The fundamental problem with Judy is range, until the D4Y4 and Grace. It gives the allies a real advantage in a CV fight, one that almost always turns out costly for the IJ.

For me, after Oct '42, I really don't want a CV duel as IJ. I want to fight allied CV's with LBA using KB as bait. The KB is very brittle, I've lost so many CV's to a single hit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

SBD-5 is 9 hex with 1000lb, SBD-6 is 10 hex. AND their fighters have better range than the A7M � after 10/42 you are fighting with a range DISADVANTAGE, which mean they can hit you and you cannot retaliate. THat is the scenario you enjoy right now until 10/42.

Not sure what you mean here Pax. CV battles are limited regardless of airframe range, right? Allies to 7 hexes and IJ to 8 hexes. So range is not so important as long as planes can cary their biggest bomb to those ranges, and the Judy can with drop tanks.

I do want a CV duel because anytime the Allies have less is a good time to lengthen their schedule. If they have taken lopsided losses in 42-43 then their challenge is to move forward without a dominant CV advantage into 44, so they have to use different strategies. DEI or SW Pac rather than home runs like the Kuriles. If smart the IJN should have an advantage into 44 with the KB, especially if the Allies expose themselves early while at a severe disadvantage.

< Message edited by obvert -- 12/2/2019 11:49:15 AM >

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 339

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 11:56:07 AM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

Only 1x Rufe factory will produce, the rest can skip ahead to A6M5c research once repaired to size 30.
I don�t have to research A6M5 before starting research on the 5c.
Every day delay starting 5c research is a delay to its potential production start date.
Researching A6M5 does not help bring the 5c production date forward.

I�ve come up with an option to get the 5c in Nov 42 with no engine bonus, so possibly earlier, by moving 4 x Grace research factories to it.
Now the Grace is a good plane, but if I left 4x30 researching it won�t arrive until Apr 44.
If the war is still going by then I don�t think Grace will help as much as getting the 5c in late 1942 would.
That would get me a lot more months of service out of the 5c.
I didn�t check the date, but it should also bring the A6M8 into play as a Fleet defender a good few months before the Sam arrives.

Don't do it. Use the A6M5 instead.

As Pax mentioned, the extra speed and durability fo the A6M5 is going to give you a bigger advantage than the +1 armour (with lower speed and manoeuvre and reduced range). When you sail around waiting for a battle you have to keep your CAP/escorts set, and when you use drop tanks and have to set them to extended range they take more ops damage and are in worse shape for the upcoming battle (one of the big drawbacks of the early Wildcats too actually).

You're fixated on the 5c for some reason I can't understand in spite of the evidence that shows its a decent airframe but not better than the M5 or M5b. Of course, it's your game and customisation is the fun part of the IJ game, so do what you will.

quote:

What say the IJGS / peanut gallery to this option of moving 4 x Grace research to give me 8x30 A6M5c research factories?
If I make the changes tonight those Rufe factories will be repaired in about 30 days and will skip straight to 5c research at that point

Waste of supply and you'll lose out on having the best strike plane the IJN gets in the war, which late is also one of your best kamis.

< Message edited by obvert -- 12/2/2019 1:24:10 PM >

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to jdsrae)

Post #: 340

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 5:43:18 PM

ITAKLinus

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline

Hi Obvert,

Since it looks like you have a strong preference for the A6M5 over the A6M5c (and I agree), can I ask you why you simply don't skip everything and go for A6M8 instead?

Range is crappy but I honestly don't have many fights at 8 hex with no strike back from the US Armada. I find that the additional few months you wait for it in '42 are quite doable through good positioning and co (something it should be done in any case). Also considering that I am quite passionate for Judy-IV and their nice 800kg bomb, preferring it to the 500Kg.

Please note that I generally play with an HR over which I have a sort of fetish, which is "max 500 embarked a/c per hex", so it probably changes a lot.

Also, I add to the discussion that in terms of sheer CVs and CVLs numbers, the Jap can be in numeric advantage in terms of embarked a/c well into 1944. Presence of many allied CVEs and relative quality of the equipment is another story, though.

Finally, I think the whole problem under discussion is whether a strategy focused on sinking enemy CVs and grabbing points to achieve a 4:1 at 01.01.1943 or 3:1 at 01.01.1944 is feasible. If it is, and I do not think so for reasons exposed above in the topic, extreme research patterns and throwing supplies away is somehow kosher. Also, the doctrine of employment of Jap flattops is quite important under this point of view.
Afterall, who cares about Grace if I am planning to win through 4:1 at 01.01.1943? And who cares about being somehow weaker for few months in '42 if I do not plan an over-aggressive KB use in those months, relying instead of a solid engagement doctrine employing large numbers of LBA?

Just my humble opinion and, maybe, food for thought.

PS. I did again the calculations for KI-94-II. 4 factories in '41 show indeed quite a huge jump in the final outcome. I suspect there is something not real there. Even knowing that R&D factories have diminishing returns, I find strange the result if compared to what I am achieving with much more efforts and a lot of good luck in factories reparations. Is "4 factories with no engine bonus" = "KI-94-II advanced 1 year" real? I hope somebody here has direct experience of that and can share it.

< Message edited by ITAKLinus -- 12/2/2019 5:44:58 PM >

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 341

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 5:55:12 PM

PaxMondo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

The fundamental problem with Judy is range, until the D4Y4 and Grace. It gives the allies a real advantage in a CV fight, one that almost always turns out costly for the IJ.

For me, after Oct '42, I really don't want a CV duel as IJ. I want to fight allied CV's with LBA using KB as bait. The KB is very brittle, I've lost so many CV's to a single hit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

SBD-5 is 9 hex with 1000lb, SBD-6 is 10 hex. AND their fighters have better range than the A7M � after 10/42 you are fighting with a range DISADVANTAGE, which mean they can hit you and you cannot retaliate. THat is the scenario you enjoy right now until 10/42.

Not sure what you mean here Pax. CV battles are limited regardless of airframe range, right? Allies to 7 hexes and IJ to 8 hexes. So range is not so important as long as planes can cary their biggest bomb to those ranges, and the Judy can with drop tanks.

No, there are always probabilities for longer range IF the aircraft are capable. There was a dev discussion way, way back about this. You can have combat at up to 10 hex, but probabilities are low. DL has a lot to do with it, other factors as well. The discussion was triggered IIRC, but a 9 hex strike �.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 342

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 6:04:30 PM

PaxMondo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

I do want a CV duel because anytime the Allies have less is a good time to lengthen their schedule. If they have taken lopsided losses in 42-43 then their challenge is to move forward without a dominant CV advantage into 44, so they have to use different strategies. DEI or SW Pac rather than home runs like the Kuriles. If smart the IJN should have an advantage into 44 with the KB, especially if the Allies expose themselves early while at a severe disadvantage.

My point is that after the allies get the F6F, they have a serious AC quality advantage. A6M vs F6F is a BIG advantage to the allies. SBD is better than early Judy. Allied AA is way better. Allied damage control exists. So after mid-43 the KB is at a serious disadvantage. The allies always want a fight and the IJ needs to be have LBA support to get equal.

Prior to the F6F, or anytime the allied player is foolish enough to show their CV's not in the DS, the IJ needs to take advantage of that.

The A7M can make a difference in early '44 if you can get it in numbers. But, you know what kind of commitment that takes.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 343

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 6:06:32 PM

PaxMondo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus

Hi Obvert,

Since it looks like you have a strong preference for the A6M5 over the A6M5c (and I agree), can I ask you why you simply don't skip everything and go for A6M8 instead?

Because the fastest way to get the A6M8 is to get the A6M5 first. This is the point you are missing and it is affecting your RnD strategy badly.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to ITAKLinus)

Post #: 344

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 6:16:47 PM

GetAssista

Posts: 2732
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
Not sure what you mean here Pax. CV battles are limited regardless of airframe range, right? Allies to 7 hexes and IJ to 8 hexes. So range is not so important as long as planes can cary their biggest bomb to those ranges, and the Judy can with drop tanks.

No, there are always probabilities for longer range IF the aircraft are capable. There was a dev discussion way, way back about this. You can have combat at up to 10 hex, but probabilities are low. DL has a lot to do with it, other factors as well. The discussion was triggered IIRC, but a 9 hex strike �.

That would be new to me. And to Alfred too https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3245238&mpage=1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
1. TF Reaction has nothing to do with plane operations. It deals only wih the movement of the ships in the TF itself.

2. Aircraft, whether land based or carrier based, will only launch a naval strike against enemy enemy task forces if the detection level is high enough and they fall within the range set for the aircraft unit.

3. There is a hard coded maximum limit at which carrier aircraft will launch; 7 hexes for the Allies, 8 hexes for Japan.

You should read pages 217-221 of the manual for how spotting works and how it operates.
Alfred

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 345

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 6:24:41 PM

jdsrae

Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline

So here it is, I locked the IGHQ War Council in a room last night and forced them to decide.

The end result is that 4 of my 8 Sam research factories were moved to the Rufe.
That will delay the Sam arriving by about 2-3 months to late 44, but some engine bonus will bring that forward from there.
The first Rufe factory has already moved to the A6M5c, so I�ll leave that one.
I�ll move 7 to the A6M5 and leave the last one to build Rufes.

Excluding any engine bonus assistance, that should get me the A6M5 in about Aug 42, I�ll leave 4 of 8 factories to go into production.
The A6M5c calc is more complicated now but about Mar 43 and then A6M8 in early 44.
KB will be staying under land based air support by mid-late 43 for the reasons outlined by Pax above.

The extra factories will let me research with 4 and build with the other 4.
The Sam �delay� from when I could have had it is the trade off for getting better fighters earlier.

I looked at other options like Ki-94, but if I am still fighting late war in this game I want to still have a bit of fun with new toys while the B29s are pummelling me.

ITAKLinus, you make some good points and I agree with the concept of coordinating aircraft production with the war strategy, but as this game is my first pbem I�m not going �all in� for an early auto victory. I am going to try and maximise points gathering on land, in the air and at sea.
I agree that it�s easier to get more points on land, and sinking allied ships needs the allies to send them into harms way which might not happen.

< Message edited by jdsrae -- 12/2/2019 6:49:55 PM >

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 346

22 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 6:48:23 PM

jdsrae

Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline

CONTACT REPORT:
VF-2 and VF-3 fighters were spotted by a long range 7 x Mavis naval attack from Roi-Namur on a USN DD at Wake Island.
Another strike went after a BB but missed. I think it was reported as the Washington.
The Wildcats on CAP were at 20k feet so missed the Mavises who attacked at 6k.
Looks like the allies were trying to setup a Midway style ambush at Wake.
KB and escorts are a few days from leaving Singapore for the Pacific...

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to jdsrae)

Post #: 347

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 8:12:41 PM

rustysi

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

Just a couple of FYI's if you aren't already aware.

quote:

Repairs completed on CL Tenryu

This and a sister ship can convert early to CLAA's, of sorts. IIRC the conversion take 6 months.

quote:

CM Yaeyama

This ship (and another) can convert to an "E's", while maintaining their ability to lay mines. One vessel carries 60 mine, the other 50. The pool for their mines only increases by 110/month. Hey, works out even.

Gives these vessels something else to do for the rest of the month. After all Japan always needs escorts.

_____________________________

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 PaxMondo)

Post #: 348

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 8:29:24 PM

rustysi

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

quote:

and will want to get the A6M8 as quickly as possible after that. Then the Sam.

May not be possible to do both in a timely fashion, given Japan's other R&D commitments.

quote:

So get the A6M5 in late 42 and the A6M5c in mid-43. Then the A6M8 ASAP after that.

You're looking at armour as some kind of magic solution. Durability difference of 5 points, better range, and a jump in speed of 20mph is going to do more for you than armour.

By that logic the A6M8 and A6M5/5b are the same aircraft, so why go for the M8. I like to stop at the 5c and use the extra time to go for the Sam. Figure I can get the Sam by mid-44 with an engine bonus. (Not in my current game because I screwed up the advancement of the engine, Ha-43(?)).

So my intention is to use the 5b and 5c in 'tandem'. 5b mostly as an escort, 5c as a fleet defender.

_____________________________

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 349

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 8:30:51 PM

jdsrae

Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline

Cheers rusty, yes the CL Tenryu Feb upgrade opens up the CLAA option. I�m going to send them back to Kure for that one as I believe it takes a few months.

Every CM that can will take their E upgrades when they are available. My mine pools are being kept empty anyway and I need more escorts.
There is such a wide variety of CMs. Some like Yaeyama are old CLs while others are more akin to PBs.

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 350

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 8:43:29 PM

jdsrae

Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline

The reasons I�m going for the M8 now are:
1. it is faster than the 5c, effectively an armoured 5,
2. I will have factories otherwise doing nothing, unless i spend supply to change them
3. It will arrive early 44 to split the time difference to the Sam arriving mid 44.

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to jdsrae)

Post #: 351

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 8:50:19 PM

rustysi

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

quote:

Any research on the A6M5 delays the arrival of the A6M5c, and I feel that any plane without armour by 1943 should only be used for training.

I have 8x30 factories on the Sam which will have it arriving in mid 44 about the same time that researched A6M8s would arrive anyway,

Not exactly. This is something I frown upon, but in your no-holds barred game there is a way to get the M8 way early. Here how...

Start by researching the Rufe. Once in operation you can then research the A6M5. But not really. Say what? OK, select the M5. Once done you can now go 'up the ladder' to the M8. So A6M5-> A6M5b->A6M5c->A6M8. All while maintaining the R&D sites at full repair, i.e. 30.

So you get the Rufe in what 4/42(?) and can start researching the M8 then. Add an engine bonus and you get the M8 Feb/Mar-43.

Lots of players (AFB's) won't agree to this if they are aware that its possible. Myself as a JFB, I follow the wire chart for Japanese R&D.

< Message edited by rustysi -- 12/2/2019 8:52:31 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 352

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 9:02:31 PM

rustysi

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

quote:

I do agree that the A6M5 would be better than the A6M2

The A6M2 will get slaughtered by Wildcats with good pilots.

_____________________________

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 353

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 9:27:48 PM

rustysi

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: RADM.Yamaguchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

The fundamental problem with Judy is range, until the D4Y4 and Grace. It gives the allies a real advantage in a CV fight, one that almost always turns out costly for the IJ.

For me, after Oct '42, I really don't want a CV duel as IJ. I want to fight allied CV's with LBA using KB as bait. The KB is very brittle, I've lost so many CV's to a single hit.

Hi Pax,
I didn't realize range was so important. I was going to shoot for the D4Y4 to get the 800kg bomb but i see that is 6/8 hexes normal/extended. The D4Y3 only has the 500kg bomb but it's range is 7/8 hexes normal/extended. Is that extra hex worth it?

D4Y4 is what you want. 8 hex with a 500kg bomb is the best you get. D4Y3 is only 7 hex with 500kg.

I thought carrier ops had a hardwired maximum range. Something like 6 for the Allies, and 7 for Japan.

_____________________________

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 354

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 9:31:39 PM

rustysi

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

quote:

Rufe's have a lot of nice uses,

Yeah, with PDU on they can be upgraded to LB fighters!

_____________________________

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 355

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 9:34:43 PM

rustysi

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

quote:

I am quite new to the forum and probably even quite dumb, therefore I am unable to post more than one image on a single reply.

No, you're not dumb, that's the way the site works.

_____________________________

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 356

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 9:37:59 PM

jdsrae

Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Any research on the A6M5 delays the arrival of the A6M5c, and I feel that any plane without armour by 1943 should only be used for training.

I have 8x30 factories on the Sam which will have it arriving in mid 44 about the same time that researched A6M8s would arrive anyway,

Not exactly. This is something I frown upon, but in your no-holds barred game there is a way to get the M8 way early. Here how...

Start by researching the Rufe. Once in operation you can then research the A6M5. But not really. Say what? OK, select the M5. Once done you can now go 'up the ladder' to the M8. So A6M5-> A6M5b->A6M5c->A6M8. All while maintaining the R&D sites at full repair, i.e. 30.

So you get the Rufe in what 4/42(?) and can start researching the M8 then. Add an engine bonus and you get the M8 Feb/Mar-43.

Lots of players (AFB's) won't agree to this if they are aware that its possible. Myself as a JFB, I follow the wire chart for Japanese R&D.

You don�t even have to wait for the Rufe to enter production, you can skip along the tree to A6M8 as soon as a factory is repaired to 30.
I know many frown upon this as some sort of devilry, but here�s my justification.

Chief Engineer working on the Zeros presents me with concept plans for the various models and target specs of each.
I tell him I want something fast, armoured and highly manoeuvrable with long range.
He tells me I can�t have all of those attributes in one plane, unless I cancel his A6 program and give him a few years to help bring the A7 forward.

I tell the Chief Engineer I need something better in 1942, what to prioritise and focus extra research effort on.

For this game that means:
- Don�t waste your time on the M3 or 3a.
- Once you have the M5, go for the armoured 5c, don�t waste any effort on the 5b.
- Then because the factories are there, go for the M8 specs.

In a future parallel universe when I play as allies, I�ll be fine if Japan goes straight for the M8 or Sam as that means they�ll be flying the M2 for longer.

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 357

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 9:45:51 PM

rustysi

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

quote:

What say the IJGS / peanut gallery to this option of moving 4 x Grace research to give me 8x30 A6M5c research factories?

The Grace is a good plane, but as you say you're pushing for the win by '44 you won't need it. OTOH I don't believe a Japanese points victory is possible after 1/43. So...

_____________________________

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 358

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 9:55:44 PM

rustysi

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

quote:

I feel that the best way to organize R&D is figuring out your grand strategy and doctrine first of all.

We have a winner. Really no other way to do it.

quote:

half-heartedly (is it an actually existing word, btw?)

AFAIK.

_____________________________

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 359

RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 10:27:44 PM

rustysi

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

Just another FYI.

If your opponent is aware of it he can go a long way to defeating your attempted points win just by using his many engineers to increase his base sizes. All those points will add up, and you'll need three or four to overcome each one.

_____________________________

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 360