RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J)

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: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J)

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: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J)

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 3:15:09 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Soll

That's all good info. I'm torn between the (small) range increase and the load capacity. Most of the time, the transports are hauling supply so the capacity is meaningless.

My transports almost never carry supplies...they are transporting or evacuating troops.

So decision criteria is different.

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 91

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 3:20:18 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

Now engines. Note that when I list the models that use an engine, it does not mean I'm going to produce it throughout the war.

Operational

Ha-31: Size 45, 245 pool. Factory will stay off and be converted. I'll produce Ki-46-II until the III arrives 1/43. I'll also produce some Ki-57-II.

Ha-32: Size 60, 45 pool. Factory will produce. I won't increase it now, probably will at some point in the future. Models that will use it: B6N2, E15K1, G4M series, H8k series, N1K1 Rex, Ki-21-IIa (until Helen appears).

Ha-33: Size 65, 116 pool. Will increase size to 90 pretty soon. Models: D3A2, D4Y3/4, E13A1, G3M series, H6K series, L3Y2, L2D2, Ki-46-III.

Ha-34: Size 10, pool 3. Will increase it to 90 on 7 Dec 41. Will convert another factory to this engine. Models: Ki-44-IIc, Ki-49-IIa. Not sure when I'll shut this line off.

Ha-35: Size 180, pool 166. Will increase to 210 on 7 Dec 41. Will convert another factory to 30 on 7 Dec 41. Models: A6M series, B5N2, Toka, Ki-43 series, Ki-45 KAIa, Ki-56, Ki-115.

Hitachi (early): Size 40, pool 332. Factory will stay off and be converted. Engines are big paper weights.

Hitachi Amakaze: Size 11, pool 122. Factory will stay off and be converted. Model: E14Y1 - should be enough for the war.

Ha-5: Size 7, pool 101. I used to use it for the Ann, but not this time. I had boatloads of them sitting in the pool and used them in China and for ASW. Model: MC-21. Yep, last engine for the museum.

Nakajima Kotobuki: Size 25, pool 254. Factory will stay off and be converted. Engines are paper weights.

Nakajima Hikari: No factory, pool 99. Model: B5N1 - will be used on MKB and for training (when needed).

Kawasaki (early): No factory, pool 85. Model Ki-32 Ann. Yeah, it's short range, but I'll use it in China at small airfields and as ASW in choke points.

R&D

Aichi Ha-60: Size 80, 40, 5. Size 5 factory will convert to Ha-43 and increase to 30. The other 2 will accelerate. When it becomes operational, the 80 will become operational and the 40 will convert to either Ha-43 or Ha-45.

Kawasaki Ha-60: Size 20. Will convert to Ha-43 and increase to 30.

Kayaba Argus: Size 5. Will convert to Ha-43 and increase to 30.

Ha-42: Size 2. Will convert to Ha-45 and increase to 30.

Ha-43: Size 10. Will increase to 30.

Ha-44: Size 10. Will convert to Ha-45 and increase to 30.

Ha-45: Size 30. Will remain as is.

NE Turbojet: Size 2. Will convert to Ha-45 and increase to 30.

Toko Rocket: Size 2. Will convert to Ha-45 and increase to 30.

Basically, I'm going to have 4x30 Ha-43 and 5x30 Ha-45 R&D factories. I may adjust which ones convert to which factory based on location. I want to get the Ha-45 out as soon as possible so I can build engines to 500+. I'll convert some of them to Ha-43 and let the remaining become operational.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 92

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 3:23:13 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

Plane choices:

I rank, imo, the A6M8 as the third best plane to research early. Frank and Sam being the other two.

I rank the Peggy T as incredibly important. Far more important than switching from Sally to Helen.

I strongly disagree that all IJ NFs are poor.

I enjoy using FB and Lilly DB.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 93

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 3:33:45 PM

mind_messing

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

On engines (and production more generally), I get the impression that you're adopting a "just in time" approach.

I'd discourage this, simply because airframes and engines in the pool are effectively indestructible. Building extra capacity, especially for your key late war airframes, will stand you in good stead when the '44 strategic bombing campaign starts to develop.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 94

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 3:57:01 PM

RangerJoe

Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

On engines (and production more generally), I get the impression that you're adopting a "just in time" approach.

I'd discourage this, simply because airframes and engines in the pool are effectively indestructible. Building extra capacity, especially for your key late war airframes, will stand you in good stead when the '44 strategic bombing campaign starts to develop.

I agree with this. That is why I suggest building the aircraft that use a common engine and not a unique one. Excess engines in the pool will not hurt you until the factories can no longer use them.

Meanwhile, see the lady dressed in red . . .

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

�Illegitemus non carborundum est (�Don�t let the bastards grind you down�).�
― Julia Child

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 95

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 4:02:09 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

On planes and engines there is no correct answer, but what works for you and how you use the planes.

I think overall there are three big questions: will I have enough planes to win the air war in 1942 especially if the Allies fight hard?

Secondly: How do I plan on countering P38/Hellcat/Corsair/Jugs until 1945. Your answer very well could be a refusal to engage and AA.

Finally: Am I prepared to win the night bombing war, should it develop?

A lot of this should work with your plans as Japan: aggressive, defensive, etc. etc. For example, a less than historical expansion with a fairly quiet China might give you many more supplies to be aggressive and be able to afford an aggressive r&d program switch. Conversely, taking portions of India should generate lots of supply which also will allow a more aggressive r&d program.

Or you might opt to expand your naval shipyards and streamline or limit your r&d putting more faith in an accelerated DD & CV program.

I always look to see how back ended the r&d program is...I heavily question allocating factories in Dec of 1941 to something that can't arrive earlier than summer-fall 44. If Japan does well I can recover that r&d easily enough, but if Japan does poorly that means the Home Islands are being bombed early and recovering is much harder to impossible.

Of the possible game changing planes there are very few: Frank, A6M3a, A6M5, A6M8, Sam, Judy and 2nd tier Peggy T, Frances NF, George.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 96

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 4:39:55 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Oscar - 3 - to the III. I can be persuaded to dump this line altogether and just take them as they come. It's mainly for the range. I hate Oscars. Can't keep them alive. All 3 will remain R&D.

Tojo - 6 - to the IIc. I really like the Tojo IIc. It served me very well in the last game. Three will become operational and 3 will remain R&D.

IMO if there's anything to dump it should be the Tojo, but I've been banging the drum on that enough in this thread.

Oscar is pretty essential as it gives you something in the IJA that has reasonably long legs, which is key for the eastern section of the map where distances are.

Operationally, you need to be quite disciplined in how you use Oscars to get the best from them. I keep them sitting exceptionally low, and with good pilots and their fantastic MVR, they can get good outcomes against substantially better Allied planes. After 1942 they are primarily defensive planes, but they do yeoman like work in the CAP furballs at 1-3k altitude.

quote:

George - 12 - to the K5. Three will become operational with the K1 and the remaining 9 will advance through the K2 to the K5.

Is R&D'ing all the way to the K5 with 9 factories worth it? I've felt that the initial benefit of the George comes from the first model, the subsequent two aren't really that much of an improvement compared to the first.

I'd take the first model and move the 9 on to the Shinden. That will do more for the IJNAAF than a slightly better version of the George will.

quote:

Zero: I want the A6M3a (range) and A6M5c (armor) models to use. I don't care about the rest. This is primarily for the carriers, with the 3a in a secondary role there. The 5c using drop tanks does a nice job.

What specific advantage are you hoping to get from the extra range of the M3a using them in carriers?

quote:

I'm not bothering with the Peggy (T). I have no R&D factories to allocate to it and I have plenty of other R&D projects that will need factories down the line. They arrive 9/44 so there won't be any IJAAF torpedo trained pilots until the end of 44. To late, in my opinion, to matter.

That's a mistake IMO.

You want the Peggy anyways as it's faster and longer legged than the Helen.

The torpedo is a nice bonus, and one that you can take advantage of with appropriate planning.

By 1944 you should be swimming in trained IJA bombing pilots, so assuming a 3 month advance on the Peggy T, you can start training NavT on already trained pilots. This will enable you to get pilots able to conduct torpedo attacks effectively in a comparatively short space of time, and boost this as more Peggy squadrons come online.

The other side of the coin is that in the context of 1944 and 1945, the IJN alone will not be able to sustain the losses of trained torpedo bomber pilots and so any weight the IJA can carry (with their increased training capacity) will give the IJN more resilience. Simply put, there are too many demands for IJN torpedo bomber pilots (carrier squadrons, 1E land-based, 2E land-based) and this will get worse as the war progresses and depending on aiframe choice (e.g you want to use the Grace as a multirole).

quote:

Night fighters. *Sigh* They all suck. I chose the Dinah and Myrt mainly because of the speed.

They do all suck.

Dinah seems the most realistic bet for the IJA. The Myrt didn't impress me, I might try the Frances NF going forward in the hopes a more durable airframe will get more mileage.

Some omissions that are key in my mind are:
- IJN recon: The Myrt recon version is a real gem and needs to be brought forward. 29 hex range and radar. Effectively a 4E patrol boat with much less cost that you can run off of carriers. The Judy recon comes early enough that you don't need to R&D that, but the Myrt is a must-have. 29 hexes of naval search is great, 29 hexes of recon is fantastic. For context, you can recon Colombo from Rangoon with that kind of range.

- IJN 2E: Nothing on the P1Y2 Frances seems absolutely insane to my mind. The Y1 model has an SR of 4, so is very hard to use. The more useful Y2 model arrives in 11/44, and it is absolutely essential that it arrives as early in 1944 as it can. The Betty and Nell are simply far to slow (not to mention unarmoured) to be on the frontlines in 1943 and beyond.

- IJA Heavy fighter: I'd like to see the Randy A. If only to supplement the NF squadrons, as you just don't have enough of them to go around.

As always, outstanding arguments. With 77 factories, we can't have everything. So what do I cut? The Tojo served me really well in my last game. I don't want to rely on the Oscar as the main IJAAF fighter through 42. That would force me to use IJN pilots in more of a ground role than I want. Especially before the A6M5c comes along. In my previous game, I shut off Tojo production but they were still relevant in Jan 44. I got a good 18 months use of them. I'm sticking with them. But, I can see making 2 operational and keeping 4 R&D.

George - Your argument is good. The George is primarily a mid-war fighter. The N1 will suffice. Then 9 R&D to the Shinden.

Frank - a vs. r. I'll probably work toward the r. Once the a becomes operational and I pull 3 factories, I'll gain 5.4 months per month of R&D on the r model. Probably 3-4 months to get that one. Then the 9 factories can switch to something else.

Zero - now that I think about it, I researched up the Zero chain. By using the Rufe upline, I'll skip the 3a altogether. No reason for it.

Let me consider the Peggy (T). I'm still not convinced it's worthwhile, even as early as 6/44. But, it is better than the Helen. I'm not sure there's much use for an IJA bomber that late in the war. I'll add it to the R&D list, just in case.

Same thing with the Francis. I understand the value for speed and armor, but are they of real use by the end of 43 and into 44?

I'll post the updated R&D list in a minute.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 97

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 4:40:48 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Soll

That's all good info. I'm torn between the (small) range increase and the load capacity. Most of the time, the transports are hauling supply so the capacity is meaningless.

My transports almost never carry supplies...they are transporting or evacuating troops. So decision criteria is different.

Good point. That need increases quite a bit over time...

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 98

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 4:46:26 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Plane choices:

I rank, imo, the A6M8 as the third best plane to research early. Frank and Sam being the other two.

I rank the Peggy T as incredibly important. Far more important than switching from Sally to Helen.

I strongly disagree that all IJ NFs are poor.

I enjoy using FB and Lilly DB.

Interesting comment on the A6M8. I'm trying to focus on keeping the number of R&D models as low as possible so I can actually get some of them. Tough decisions here.

I'm just not convinced that the Peggy (T) can actually make an impact unless you devote a lot of R&D factories to it. I'm not willing to do that. I'm not saying the Peggy (T) isn't good, I think it comes too late to matter.

Ok, so what NFs do you like and why?

I like FBs too, but take them as I get them. No R&D factories to spare. The Lily DB, no thank you. 100kg bombs just don't do it for me.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 99

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 4:49:45 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

On engines (and production more generally), I get the impression that you're adopting a "just in time" approach.

I'd discourage this, simply because airframes and engines in the pool are effectively indestructible. Building extra capacity, especially for your key late war airframes, will stand you in good stead when the '44 strategic bombing campaign starts to develop.

I totally agree with you. And you're right, it is just in time production. I use that method at the beginning of the war, until late 42. At that point, the Japanese economy is at the high water mark. Then I'll ramp things up for the late game and increase production dramatically where needed.

Edit: My fear is to have huge pools of obsolete aircraft in the late game. That's just wasted HI.

< Message edited by Mike Solli -- 8/10/2021 4:50:28 PM >

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 100

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 4:56:46 PM

ITAKLinus

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

Mike, I don't think there is any need to give suggestion to a logs, but I suspect what mind_messing means is that you can get away with your approach for the early game, especially if you don't go for wild things, but in the late game you actually need to produce as much as you can of everything.

I'll give you an hint on my basic logic later on, now I'm too messed up by the gym and by my opponent's moves.

PS. Is it only me or I can no longer see Mike's signature with the Jap fella and all the tanks and so on?

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 101

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 5:08:25 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

Updated thoughts on R&D:

Oscar to IIIa. 3 R&D will remain R&D.
Tojo to IIc. 6 R&D, 4 will remain R&D.
Frank to r. 12 R&D, 9 will remain R&D.
Ki-83. 12 R&D. ? will remain R&D depending on when it becomes operational.
Helen to IIa. 1 R&D will remain R&D.
Dinah NF. 3 R&D will remain R&D.
Patsy. 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.
Peggy (T). 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.
Ki-115. 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.

Sam. 12 R&D. ? will remain R&D depending on when it becomes operational.
George to K1. 12 R&D, 9 will remain R&D.
Rufe to A6M5c. 4 R&D will remain R&D.
Judy to Y4. 3 R&D will remain R&D.
Grace. 3 R&D, 1-2 will remain R&D.
Jill to B6N2. 3 R&D, 1-2 will remain R&D.
Myrt NF. 3 R&D, ? will remain R&D depending on when it becomes operational.
Shinden. 0 R&D, will eventually have 12 R&D.
Francis. 0 R&D, will eventually have 3 R&D.
Toka. 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.

Until it changes later.

Edit: Forgot the George.

< Message edited by Mike Solli -- 8/10/2021 5:38:25 PM >

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 102

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 5:10:24 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

The 100kg SAP is I believe more effective than the 6" guns on a Brooklyn class cruiser and is the best antiFletcher weapon Japan has.

The Frances is of course the NF with serious chops. Peggy is a good upgrade over Nicks and Nicks are better than Dinah. The Zero lets you resize your Navy groups and gives your carriers good enough defense. The Irving Sa is outstanding from mid 43 to mid 44.

Myrt does punch above its stats, but not as good as Frances.

Dinah lets you convert all your Army groups to NF...but is very weak. Maybe you need a few Nicks too.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 8/10/2021 5:11:52 PM >

(in reply to ITAKLinus)

Post #: 103

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 5:12:54 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus

Mike, I don't think there is any need to give suggestion to a logs, but I suspect what mind_messing means is that you can get away with your approach for the early game, especially if you don't go for wild things, but in the late game you actually need to produce as much as you can of everything.

I'll give you an hint on my basic logic later on, now I'm too messed up by the gym and by my opponent's moves.

PS. Is it only me or I can no longer see Mike's signature with the Jap fella and all the tanks and so on?

I value everyone's input here. We all learn from it. I understand the need to produce large numbers of end game materials, but I'm very frugal early game. I do tailor it to my opponent and will increase production as needed. My first WitP game (way back in 2004-5) I ended up with a couple thousand A6M2s in the pool when I moved on to the next model. That's when I realized the need to be cautious with Japanese production.

Edit: No one can see my signature. I need to find a new place to put it so it will be visible again. Any suggestions?

< Message edited by Mike Solli -- 8/10/2021 5:13:50 PM >

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to ITAKLinus)

Post #: 104

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 5:20:42 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

The 100kg SAP is I believe more effective than the 6" guns on a Brooklyn class cruiser and is the best antiFletcher weapon Japan has.

The Frances is of course the NF with serious chops. Peggy is a good upgrade over Nicks and Nicks are better than Dinah. The Zero lets you resize your Navy groups and gives your carriers good enough defense. The Irving Sa is outstanding from mid 43 to mid 44.

Myrt does punch above its stats, but not as good as Frances.

Dinah lets you convert all your Army groups to NF...but is very weak. Maybe you need a few Nicks too.

All good arguments. We can't produce everything though. I will produce the Nick a model when it arrives in 5/42 and use that one throughout the war. It's not bad and I will use it as a bomber killer early and night fighter later.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 105

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 5:25:32 PM

mind_messing

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

As always, outstanding arguments. With 77 factories, we can't have everything. So what do I cut? The Tojo served me really well in my last game. I don't want to rely on the Oscar as the main IJAAF fighter through 42. That would force me to use IJN pilots in more of a ground role than I want. Especially before the A6M5c comes along. In my previous game, I shut off Tojo production but they were still relevant in Jan 44. I got a good 18 months use of them. I'm sticking with them. But, I can see making 2 operational and keeping 4 R&D.

As you say, you can't have everything. Building the Tojo means you will have 4 IJA fighters in production at various points (Oscar, Tojo, Ki84, Ki83). That's probably one too many, if you're going for a very streamlined R&D establishment (ideally you want a early, mid and late war fighter).

The choice of what to cut is a hard one. My view is that you can cut the Tojo - it doesn't have any outstanding feature that will keep it in frontline service once the Ki84 is online, while the Oscar will keep the range and manoeuvrability through in to the late-game models.

My view is that the Oscar is good enough (given it's combination of range and fantastic manoeuvrability) to hold the fort until the Ki84 comes online to take over.

quote:

Let me consider the Peggy (T). I'm still not convinced it's worthwhile, even as early as 6/44. But, it is better than the Helen. I'm not sure there's much use for an IJA bomber that late in the war. I'll add it to the R&D list, just in case.

The Peggy is worthwhile for the extra pilot training capacity for torpedo bomber pilots alone. That it's a reasonable improvement over the Helen is just an extra bonus.

quote:

Same thing with the Francis. I understand the value for speed and armor, but are they of real use by the end of 43 and into 44?

Absolutely. At the end of the day, there's only so many places you can cover with your carriers. The single engine IJN aircraft have fairly limited range. You'll need them as a replacement for the Betty and Nell. The Nell you can keep as a secondary naval search platform, but you need the Frances for torpedo attacks against serious opposition.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

On engines (and production more generally), I get the impression that you're adopting a "just in time" approach.

I'd discourage this, simply because airframes and engines in the pool are effectively indestructible. Building extra capacity, especially for your key late war airframes, will stand you in good stead when the '44 strategic bombing campaign starts to develop.

I totally agree with you. And you're right, it is just in time production. I use that method at the beginning of the war, until late 42. At that point, the Japanese economy is at the high water mark. Then I'll ramp things up for the late game and increase production dramatically where needed.

Edit: My fear is to have huge pools of obsolete aircraft in the late game. That's just wasted HI.

What's "obsolete" is relative.

The Judy is made obsolete by the Grace, but having "obsolete" Judy fly a kamikaze mission is substantially better than having the same mission being carried out by a biplane.

Come 1945, you tend to find a use for these planes.

It's also important to make the point that I've yet to see or hear of any game that has ended due to the IJ player running out of HI points. It's always been supply that has been the pressure point.

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 106

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 5:30:55 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

Here are the models I may (or may not) produce throughout the war by engine type:

Ha-31: Ki-46-II, Ki-57-II
Ha-32: B6N2, E15K1, G4M, H8K, N1K1 Rex, Ki-21-IIa, P1Y2
Ha-33: D3A2, D4Y3/4, E13A1, G3M, H6K, L3Y2, L2D2, Ki-46-III, Ki-46-III NF
Ha-34: Ki-44-IIc, Ki-49-IIa
Ha-35: A6M, B5N2, Toka, Ki-43, Ki-45 KAIa, Ki-56, Ki-115, A6M2-N
Hitachi Amakaze: E14Y1
Ha-5: MC-21
Ha-60: D4Y1/2
Nakajima Hikari: B5N1
Kawasaki (early): Ki-32
Ha-43: A7M, J7W1, Ki-74, Ki-83
Ha-45: B7A2, C6N1-S, N1K1, Ki-84, Ki-67-Ia (T)

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 107

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 5:31:54 PM

mind_messing

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Updated thoughts on R&D:

Oscar to IIIa. 3 R&D will remain R&D.
Tojo to IIc. 6 R&D, 4 will remain R&D.
Frank to r. 12 R&D, 9 will remain R&D.
Ki-83. 12 R&D. ? will remain R&D depending on when it becomes operational.
Helen to IIa. 1 R&D will remain R&D.
Dinah NF. 3 R&D will remain R&D.
Patsy. 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.
Peggy (T). 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.
Ki-115. 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.

Sam. 12 R&D. ? will remain R&D depending on when it becomes operational.
Rufe to A6M5c. 4 R&D will remain R&D.
Judy to Y4. 3 R&D will remain R&D.
Grace. 3 R&D, 1-2 will remain R&D.
Jill to B6N2. 3 R&D, 1-2 will remain R&D.
Myrt NF. 3 R&D, ? will remain R&D depending on when it becomes operational.
Shinden. 0 R&D, will eventually have 12 R&D.
Francis. 0 R&D, will eventually have 3 R&D.
Toka. 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.

Until it changes later.

I'm not convinced from my experiences with them that the Toka and the 115 are a worthwhile target for R&D. They're both exceptionally fast aircraft, but with a very limited range.

I think they can be dispensed with, given that:

1) The IJA will be producing both the Peggy and Patsy, which can fill this role in much the same way.
2) The IJN will have a number of aircraft that can fill this role better (Judy, Frances). While the conversions incur a PP cost, there's not much for the IJ to spend PP's on come 1945 so this isn't much of a limiting factor.

In short, I think that R&D on purpose built kamikazes is a bit of a waste.

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 108

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 6:03:32 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

It's also important to make the point that I've yet to see or hear of any game that has ended due to the IJ player running out of HI points. It's always been supply that has been the pressure point.

Supply and I will add Fighters and Victory Points. Screw the pooch on fighters and you have all of sudden lost your carriers because you had the A6M5-5c versus Hellcats and Corsairs, or you can't stop anything within Lightning/Corsair/Jugs range or you are night bombed out of existence.

Sadly, I played a game and ran out of resources. Something only I could do.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 8/10/2021 6:23:18 PM >

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 109

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 6:14:37 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

The 100kg SAP is I believe more effective than the 6" guns on a Brooklyn class cruiser and is the best antiFletcher weapon Japan has.

The Frances is of course the NF with serious chops. Peggy is a good upgrade over Nicks and Nicks are better than Dinah. The Zero lets you resize your Navy groups and gives your carriers good enough defense. The Irving Sa is outstanding from mid 43 to mid 44.

Myrt does punch above its stats, but not as good as Frances.

Dinah lets you convert all your Army groups to NF...but is very weak. Maybe you need a few Nicks too.

All good arguments. We can't produce everything though. I will produce the Nick a model when it arrives in 5/42 and use that one throughout the war. It's not bad and I will use it as a bomber killer early and night fighter later.

Not suggesting you produce everything. Also not suggesting you minimize your supply expenditure. Sometimes you can generate more supply over the course of the game by spending it up front or once again in late 1942 as your first round of r&d factories finish.

I don't see much point in researching in Dec of 1941 for a plane that arrives later than the Sam. My supposition is that those factories would better serve you in getting some of the earlier models sooner and help guarantee a very strong opening for Japan.

I wouldn't bother putting Nick FB on night fighting duty. Better off with Petes, they are probably more effective and cost less when they do get shot down (which will be less often than the Nick).

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 110

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 6:18:52 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Updated thoughts on R&D:

Oscar to IIIa. 3 R&D will remain R&D.
Tojo to IIc. 6 R&D, 4 will remain R&D.
Frank to r. 12 R&D, 9 will remain R&D.
Ki-83. 12 R&D. ? will remain R&D depending on when it becomes operational.
Helen to IIa. 1 R&D will remain R&D.
Dinah NF. 3 R&D will remain R&D.
Patsy. 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.
Peggy (T). 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.
Ki-115. 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.

Sam. 12 R&D. ? will remain R&D depending on when it becomes operational.
Rufe to A6M5c. 4 R&D will remain R&D.
Judy to Y4. 3 R&D will remain R&D.
Grace. 3 R&D, 1-2 will remain R&D.
Jill to B6N2. 3 R&D, 1-2 will remain R&D.
Myrt NF. 3 R&D, ? will remain R&D depending on when it becomes operational.
Shinden. 0 R&D, will eventually have 12 R&D.
Francis. 0 R&D, will eventually have 3 R&D.
Toka. 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.

Until it changes later.

I'm not convinced from my experiences with them that the Toka and the 115 are a worthwhile target for R&D. They're both exceptionally fast aircraft, but with a very limited range.

I think they can be dispensed with, given that:

1) The IJA will be producing both the Peggy and Patsy, which can fill this role in much the same way.
2) The IJN will have a number of aircraft that can fill this role better (Judy, Frances). While the conversions incur a PP cost, there's not much for the IJ to spend PP's on come 1945 so this isn't much of a limiting factor.

In short, I think that R&D on purpose built kamikazes is a bit of a waste.

+1, other than role playing or for flavor the dedicated kamikazes are very weak. Kind of sad, to be honest.

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 111

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 6:22:58 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

What's "obsolete" is relative.

The Judy is made obsolete by the Grace, but having "obsolete" Judy fly a kamikaze mission is substantially better than having the same mission being carried out by a biplane.

Come 1945, you tend to find a use for these planes.

+1
Japan is desperately trying to trade their devices at favorable victory points and generally you can. I even used Claudes and Nates in late 1944 in good trades. I would liked to have used Frank R though.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 8/10/2021 6:24:04 PM >

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 112

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 7:29:22 PM

obvert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Updated thoughts on R&D:

Oscar to IIIa. 3 R&D will remain R&D.

Do keep going to the Oscar IV. It's decent late war and obviously cheap. Better than Tojo or Ki-100 as service 1.

quote:

Tojo to IIc. 6 R&D, 4 will remain R&D.
Frank to r. 12 R&D, 9 will remain R&D.
Ki-83. 12 R&D. ? will remain R&D depending on when it becomes operational.

This is a huge commitment, but I do love this plane. The Frank will be your mainstay. The Ki-83 is your IJAAF sweeper.

quote:

Helen to IIa. 1 R&D will remain R&D.
Dinah NF. 3 R&D will remain R&D.

Don't bother. Not useful. Get the Nick NF as there is one group that only uses it, and it's way better than other IJAAF planes (durability, firepower). I also used the Nick FB effectively as a supplement NF. I hate using any day fighter on night duty as losses are usually much higher, but the Nick Fb did okay and the bomber groups can convert to it. Works on day duty as a part of your CAP (low layered CAP hopefully) at bomber level.

quote:

Patsy. 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.
Peggy (T). 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.
Ki-115. 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.

Range too short. I agree with Mindmessing. Not worth it. Also durability is a secondary hindrance as few can make it through even in range.

quote:

Sam. 12 R&D. ? will remain R&D depending on when it becomes operational.
George to K1. 12 R&D, 9 will remain R&D.

George K5 is an amazing plane. It was my most surprising find of the late war. Firepower allowed it to be a great sweeper as well as a defensive CAP specialist.

quote:

Rufe to A6M5c. 4 R&D will remain R&D.
Judy to Y4. 3 R&D will remain R&D.
Grace. 3 R&D, 1-2 will remain R&D.
Jill to B6N2. 3 R&D, 1-2 will remain R&D.
Myrt NF. 3 R&D, ? will remain R&D depending on when it becomes operational.

Mey. Not worth it when you have the Irving line much easier, and earlier. The Irving SA with radar stands up in the late war just fine.

You will not get this early enough to matter against a good opponent, and unless you have a limiting HR against NF (I still think it is a decent idea, although I've learned how to defend more effectively through several late war games), you will get pummeled in 44 by night raids. The Irving intercepts well in spite of its speed. Use it.

quote:

Shinden. 0 R&D, will eventually have 12 R&D.
Francis. 0 R&D, will eventually have 3 R&D.
Toka. 0 R&D, will eventually have 6 R&D.

Put these on the Irving NF. Skip the Toka.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 113

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 8:45:38 PM

rustysi

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I'm looking for suggestions on (of all things) IJAAF transports. I really like the Helen transport, but that means more Ha-34 engines for the duration of the war. What do you guys think?

I use this transport as well, and since I will produce a small number of Tojo's to the end I 'll keep one engine factory going with the Ha-34. As has been said the Tojo will still be able to handle the Soviets when they come into the fray. Don't know if that's true, but I hope to find out someday.

I still use every single transport until their stocks run out. I too use the Theresas in Manchukuo. There're also some 'free' engines for one of the Topsey's IIRC. I even produce a handful of Hickory's for later arriving units as there're 'free' engines for this plane too.

I do like the Thalias, but early in the game there's a lot of competition for the Ha-35, and I want to get them to bonus territory ASAP.

BTW, the way I usually play, I don't lose too many transports.

_____________________________

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 Mike Solli)

Post #: 114

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/10/2021 8:47:53 PM

rustysi

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

Well, gotta go now, back for more later.

_____________________________

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 115

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/11/2021 12:14:30 AM

rustysi

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

quote:

the Sally is very good with 3k capacity.

1k, 2k, 3k, doesn't matter, you get 1 supply for every multiple of 2 rounded down (minimum of 1). So with 3k, you get egg-roll

, no wait, 1 supply. Two supply doesn't come in until you have 4k capacity.

_____________________________

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 116

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/11/2021 12:36:25 AM

rustysi

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

quote:

Oscar - 3 - to the III. I can be persuaded to dump this line altogether and just take them as they come.

I like 2 for this one, throw the other one to the Ki-49.

quote:

Dinah NF - 3 - It "may" get more R&D factories, but I doubt it.

I did this too. I base it on getting the aircraft about two months before the historical invasion of the Marianas (6/44). I should come out just so.

quote:

I want the A6M3a (range)

Originally, I liked this plane myself, for the same reason. With their light durability, same as the M2, they die in droves. I'll not develop these again.

These planes are not part of the 'Rufe line'. The Rufe goes straight to the A6M5. The A6M3 is an independent path.

quote:

Night fighters. *Sigh* They all suck. I chose the Dinah and Myrt mainly because of the speed.

It does seem that you are correct and the Japanese NF's suck. That doesn't excuse the fact that you've not selected an army NF. Although you could just get one 'naturally'.

Edit:D'oh, just rechecked, the Dinah is army.

< Message edited by rustysi -- 8/11/2021 1:21:31 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 117

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/11/2021 1:05:12 AM

rustysi

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

quote:

I do like the Sally transport. I'm going to use the 101 Ha-5 engines to build 50 of them

The Topsey I uses this same engine, build them instead and then upgrade to the Topsey II (available 3/42). Now you may build 50 I's, and however many you wish to split with the Ki-46-II. You'll save the cost to change the factory.

BTW, recall that when transporting from friendly base to friendly base the transports base range is used, 1/2 35, for Topsey, 1/2 32, for Sally. Rounded down that means Topsey wins by 1.

IIRC, I got all this from you... Were you been????

quote:

It uses the Ha-31 engine. That's also a dead end engine. I'll never build another one. That factory is destined to be converted.

Edit:Me thinks you may need to go back and read your old AAR.

< Message edited by rustysi -- 8/11/2021 1:07:00 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 118

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/11/2021 1:26:19 AM

rustysi

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

I haven't really checked, but where's this coming from that different transports carry more or less based on something other than 1 device per 2k (rounded down, minimum one) capacity.

_____________________________

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 119

RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) - 8/11/2021 1:47:10 AM

rustysi

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Soll

That's all good info. I'm torn between the (small) range increase and the load capacity. Most of the time, the transports are hauling supply so the capacity is meaningless.

My transports almost never carry supplies...they are transporting or evacuating troops. So decision criteria is different.

I always have mine carrying something once they're trained up, and that includes supply.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 120

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J)