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: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/18/2005 10:04:56 PM   
Yamato hugger

 

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline 		Japs had 11,000 planes ready to go in 1945 for Olympic. Numbers of planes doesnt matter. As someone pointed out in another thread all the airplanes in the world with 30 experience pilots arent going to hit anything.

The limiting factor to the Japs isnt airplanes.

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 91
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/18/2005 10:08:43 PM   
worr

 

Posts: 901
Joined: 2/7/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen


(2) I've yet to see an AAR that lasts into late 1942 where this (Japanese plane production) did lead to shortages in armament production or ship construction for the Japanese. As far as I know, CHS did not change Japanese production figures (factories and HI), thus one can compare "vanilla" with CHS in this regard.


Can anyone verify that?

I'm play CHS 1.6 now as allies...never tried it as Japan. I do feel it is taking a lot longer to fill out fighter squadrons as the allies, but I feel like I have more bomber squadrons than before.





(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 92
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/18/2005 10:08:49 PM   
mlees


Posts: 2263
Joined: 9/20/2003
From: San Diego
Status: offline 		"Herkey-Jerkey"? Never heard of that.

Do you mean unorganised? Nope. Consider:

Converting automobile factories to bomber factories was done rather quickly, considering that the equipment in the factories needed to be replaced, and the workforce retrained. B24 Liberator production increased at an astonishing rate through 1942 and 1943: Consolidated had tripled the size of their plant at San Diego and built a big new plant outside Fort Worth, Texas. More production came from Douglas in Tulsa, Oklahoma. North American was building a plant at Dallas, Texas. None of these were minor operations, but they were dwarfed by the vast new greenfield factory built by Ford at Willow Run near Detroit, which began operation in 1942 August. This was easily the largest factory in the United States, and the largest anywhere outside the USSR.

The shipbuilding mogul Henry Kaiser revamped the industry and how ships were built. Sixteen American shipyards built 2,751 Liberties between 1941 and 1945, easily the largest number of ships produced to a single design.

These are two examples of a team effort, not some "willy nilly" scramble to CYA...

< Message edited by mlees -- 10/18/2005 10:10:51 PM >

(in reply to worr)
Post #: 93
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/18/2005 10:12:04 PM   
worr

 

Posts: 901
Joined: 2/7/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
Do you mean unorganised?


No I meant organized...not unorganized. Herky Jerky would describe the on again off again approach of the axis.

It wasn't that the allied production plan was monolithic...but that it was wise. Hence it changed very little from what Roosevelt commended to it from the beginning.



(in reply to mlees)
Post #: 94
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/18/2005 10:34:19 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

THE ARMY ACQUIESED...

It is those believing that the Army controlled production that are missing the point. Acquiescense is not generally construed as a hallmark of control.

The military was subservient to the real powers in Japan: the noble families who had traditionally controlled the country and who had become the leaders of Japanese industry. Those leaders of industry were more than happy to allow the military to embark on a program of imperialistic expansion because it would increase their wealth and power. The military may have recognized that all their pretty toys could not for long stand up to the vast economic resources of the United States and the Commonwealth but their lords, the Zaibatsu, did not.
It is hard to fathom why any patriotic soldier/sailor would launch their country on a course almost certainly suicidal. Then as now in Japan today, the political leaders (who were the military in the 1940s) are heavily influenced at the very least by the powerful industrial conglomerates, who are themselves remnants of the feudal society of ancient Japan. Those leaders, untrained in matters strictly military and unlikely to fully fathom the hard calculus of war, were the ones who set Japan on its course to destruction. It is ironic and unfortunate that unlike many of their German counterparts they were not held personally accountable in their defeat.

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 95
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/18/2005 10:58:56 PM   
EUBanana


Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy


quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana


quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

quote:

such as EUBanana's blatantly political avatar and profile


Please tell me you're joking.


Hey, I'm famous!


Infamous?



Thats -more- than famous.


_____________________________


(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 96
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/18/2005 11:22:04 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		OK I did a little simplistic analysis of CHS versus stock I dont think I missed anything but I may have.

In a stock game the USAAF starts with 140 Aircraft per month of which 50 are P40's and 50 are P39D's both are aguably frontline fighters.

The other 40 are a mix of P36/ 35 and 26's

This rises in October to 220 per month by adding 80 P38's a month giving 180 1st line fighters and 220 total frames

Under CHS the USAAF starts at 126 per month of which 42 are P40's 11 are P38's and 50 are P39D's i.e. 103 front line fighters. Where things are lower in 2nd line fighters with only 23 of which 10 are P400's and 10 are Lancers.

Where CHS differs is in October the USAAF recieves 36 P38's a month taking to totals to 162 for all frames or 139 front line fighters.

So CHS has reduced late 42 USAAF fighters by 58 per month of which 41 are front line fighters.

For the RAF/RAAF the situation is worse comparatively but as the loss is in Buffaloes and Mohawks the situation is less crucial as the allies eventually end up with 70 Hurricanes, 40 Spitfies and 40 Kittyhawks per month.

Anyway thats what the analysis tells us

Andy




Attachment (1)

(in reply to EUBanana)
Post #: 97
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/18/2005 11:27:20 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		p.s. I ignored USN and FAA as they are both ok and relatively untouched

Andy

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 98
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/18/2005 11:49:05 PM   
Bradley7735


Posts: 2073
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline 		Andy,

I think the issue here is not whether the US gets too few airframes. I think the issue is whether Japan gets too many. AB implied that the Japanese side wasn't looked at much, because the interest and expertise is in the allied side. I can understand this as I really don't know where to start to get an idea of how many airframes were produced each month by Japan. I can't research anything not in english. I assume the CHS guys are mostly in the same boat.

I do think what needs to be done is to see how many airframes were produced in 12/41 by japan. Modify any factory to make that number, and reduce all R&D factories to zero. The japanese player should expand any factory to expand production. They basically get their expanded factories at game start (they are all the R&D factories.) without paying the HI to expand them.

It would probably be a good idea to try and look at supply/resources/HI/factories/etc for Japan in general. Some folks think that Japan really never suffers a shortage of supply or fuel in the game. That's not historic. But, I can't really prove that it's true in CHS either. I'm not sure if there is even a person in the forums that can figure out that information. And, this thread probably belongs in the scenario sub-forum.

bc

_____________________________

The older I get, the better I was.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 99
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/18/2005 11:53:29 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Bradley I agree not saying the figures are right or wrong.

In fact CHS are probably a lot more accurate no question.

This all started for me from a simple question that in GAME terms given the speed a ferocity and losses of WITP compared to actual. A loss rate the Japanese can sustain the game may be unbalanced.

No for a second am I suggesting the CHS team got it wrong but the increased accuracy does have game impacts !!!!

(p.s. I still havnt played a game so I could be talking rot)

Andy

(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 100
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/18/2005 11:55:52 PM   
Yamato hugger

 

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline 		Fuel for certain is never an issue with anyone.

Supply on the other hand is a different issue. Most Jap players experience a severe supply shotage in Apr-Jun 42. Probably because they are expanding all their bases at once.

Historically the Japs didnt start suffering from Supply issues until sometime in 43. Before one runs off and cuts supply at the faucet, maybe there is another cause. Jap merchant losses were up, but not that much to cause a severe drop in supplies. Could it be because Japan changed its emphisis from moving goods/material to moving troops?

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 10/18/2005 11:57:21 PM >

(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 101
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 1:55:04 AM   
ChezDaJez


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline
quote:

Fuel for certain is never an issue with anyone.


Yamato Hugger:

That's not quite true. If the Japanese player does not capture the SRA intact, he will suffer a fuel shortage by the end of 42. As I posted in an earlier thread concerning oil production, I have enough fuel left for about 6 months. More importantly, I will be out of oil within 3 months and then not only will fuel supplies drop quickly but my HI will also dry up. I'm trying to repair Palembang now but the going is slow.

Chez

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to Yamato hugger)
Post #: 102
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 2:38:05 AM   
ADavidB


Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline 		Okay, here is a link to a series of pages that attempt to piece together the data on Japanese aircraft production in WW II. Dig around in the links at the bottom and you will even find monthly production rates. I have no idea how good this is, but it seems reasonable to me.

http://users.belgacom.net/aircrstat/stats/11054.html#230066

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 103
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 3:14:46 AM   
worr

 

Posts: 901
Joined: 2/7/2001
Status: offline 		Arsenal of Democracy

Roosevelt called for 50,000 planes per year and the men to fly them. This was in January of 1940 already.

Roosevelt was way ahead of his time...and production grew right to this goal as stated.

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/Dip/PaW/PaW-11.html

You really do not see a deviation from this plan throughout the war...and the numbers compared to Germany and Japan are staggering. They no capabilites let alone the vision of Roosevelt to plan on such production on an annual basis.

(in reply to ADavidB)
Post #: 104
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 3:44:22 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

OK I did a little simplistic analysis of CHS versus stock I dont think I missed anything but I may have.


Thanks, Andy. This is the kind of analysis we need. Of course it is only part of the picture. As others (and I) have already stated the questions are:


  1. How does Allied production in CHS compare to stock? (You have partly answered that)
  2. How do both of these compare to Real Life? (rtrapasso is doing some work on P38s along these lines which will be very helpful).
  3. How does Japanese aircraft production compare to Real Life?


What will probably get modified in CHS, if anything, depends on the answers to these difficult (and time consuming) questions. I wish I had time to look at these questions myself but I do not.

Then there is the resources/oil/production questions - a whole new kettle of fish - but an area I have always been interested in and I want to keep looking at. I am still updating the CHS scenario, and the net area I will be looking at is resources and supply, specifically in China.

Any help from anyone for these questions is greatly appreciated, at least by me.

Andrew


_____________________________

Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 105
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 4:09:08 AM   
jwilkerson


Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline 		Note - read and heed what Andrew is saying. To a large extent, CHS is a group effort. A volunteer group effort. Hence the word C=Combined ... a number of people have combined their efforts to reduce the number of primary mods ( currently there are 4 threads of mods that seem to be played by multiple player groups .. in no particular order ... CHS ... Andrew's Stock mods for his map ... Prys and Niks ) but there might have been 2 or more additional ones, if not for CHS ( Lemurs! and Don's anyway ).

But many(12+?) people have subsequently contributed. So ... that is what is needed if we are to see this move forward. Who wants to review air replacements for both Allies and Japanese ? Lemurs! and Don did do this for 1.6 CHS .. resulting in reductions for the Allies in accordance with the data that reviewed at that time ( which is what started up this thread in the first place). The same level of review has not happened on the Japanese side yet - frankly because no one has been inclined to take that on. But if someone wants to volunteer, let Andrew know.

Another way of looking at CHS, is that it is an open source mod ... pretty much anyone on the forum can contribute .. but there should always be a gate keeper, a release manager .. whatever term you prefer ... open source usually has this ... and I think that is Andrew right now ( was Don for a while before that ). But there is no team of people working in the background ... covering all the bases ... continually at work ... like little elves ... cranking out new stuff ... there are people working independently for the most part ... like on art and OB things ... and they "donate" their efforts to CHS to reduce the total number of overall mods ... and give us a "combined" offering ... and their efforts come together in a "release" which does get some review by other team members, prior to it going public ... but there are no 100s of hours of play testing for example.





_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 106
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 4:12:55 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		I am playing CHS1.06 (1.6?) on Andrews Basic map.

Against the AI, up to late November 1942, I FEEL the Allied Fighters are low on numbers.

It has been a struggle to keep the AVG in P40E's, I've even sent some West Coast FG's back the P-36 & P40B's

However there are plenty of Bombers around, 4 Bomber Groups each on Eniwetock & PM dont seem to have numbers problems.(B24's)

Would a solution to the total lack of variabilty to Allied Production be an ability to increase Production of a type(by percentage increments?) with a hefty Victory point penalty. We cannot say what the US reaction to the loss of the Hawaiian Islands but I'm sure a increase in priority to Pacific would be a given.

I feel the Japanese has too much ability to "tweak" production in their favour, in reality the world of manufacturing in Japan was a mess, add to this the rivalry between IJN & IJA which this game makes dissapear by having one "Supremo" running everything.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 107
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 5:43:06 AM   
eMonticello


Posts: 525
Joined: 3/15/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

quote:

ORIGINAL: testarossa

Allies produced whatever they needed. If they would’ve needed 5000 more P-40E they would’ve produced 5000 more P-40Es. Same for B-17 and P-38.


Exactly. And thats the problem with any game really is it doesnt take this into effect. Same with CHS. If the fighting is heavier and the losses greater, the industrial machine that was the United States would have pumped out more to make up the losses. Look what happens when the Japs get too close to the US mainland. Reinforcements are speeded up 6 months and additional units deployed.

US industry wasn't in a position to pump out more stuff to make up for large losses in the Pacific, since they would have needed to shift the priority of other stuff that required the same scarce strategic resources. If there was any chance that it would have impacted the Allied policy of "Germany First" or further reduced civilian production, Roosevelt would have curtailed offensive operations in the Pacific.

_____________________________


Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example. -- Pudd'nhead Wilson

(in reply to Yamato hugger)
Post #: 108
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 5:53:28 AM   
jwilkerson


Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eMonticello

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

quote:

ORIGINAL: testarossa

Allies produced whatever they needed. If they would’ve needed 5000 more P-40E they would’ve produced 5000 more P-40Es. Same for B-17 and P-38.


Exactly. And thats the problem with any game really is it doesnt take this into effect. Same with CHS. If the fighting is heavier and the losses greater, the industrial machine that was the United States would have pumped out more to make up the losses. Look what happens when the Japs get too close to the US mainland. Reinforcements are speeded up 6 months and additional units deployed.

US industry wasn't in a position to pump out more stuff to make up for large losses in the Pacific, since they would have needed to shift the priority of other stuff that required the same scarce strategic resources. If there was any chance that it would have impacted the Allied policy of "Germany First" or further reduced civilian production, Roosevelt would have curtailed offensive operations in the Pacific.


One of King's major victories, was getting support for the Guadalcanal invasion in the first place ... but once he got it ... Roosevelt came to his rescue, when Guadalcanal got "into trouble" ... Roosevelt ordered all available weapons into the battle. Roosevelt couldn't abandon engaged son's of his voters. In theory there was a Europe first - in practice things were much more based on shorter term decisions and competing priorities.

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to eMonticello)
Post #: 109
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 5:56:52 AM   
worr

 

Posts: 901
Joined: 2/7/2001
Status: offline 		Yep, Guadalcanal was a political episode as much as a military one in the war. It wasn't supposed to happen.

This connects up with the fight for P-38s in theather. Hap Arnold argued that if all we are doing in the PTO is a holding action, than the 38 is too much for point defense....it's range is for offensive operations. Therefore any 38s going to the Pactific had political overtones to them as well. But the best defense is an offense was the counter arguement.

Worr, out

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 110
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 6:09:02 AM   
eMonticello


Posts: 525
Joined: 3/15/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

In WitP, the 2nd-4th rate Japanese economy is given enormous flexibility. The 1st rate US economy is given none. JUST LIKE REAL


Matter of perspective. US economy was driven by politics and lets face it, the greed of the manufacturers. Jap economy WAS controlled by the military. Seems logical to me that the Jap can control his production and the allies cant.

Congress authorized the President to manage the war economy. In January 1942, Roosevelt created, by Executive Order, the War Production Board whose role was to manage the production and procurement of materials to both meet the military objectives as determined by the Allied leadership and keep the civilian economy in reasonably good shape. Politics and Greed had little to do with the war economy in WWII ... especially after the Truman Committee was created in early 1941.

_____________________________


Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example. -- Pudd'nhead Wilson

(in reply to Yamato hugger)
Post #: 111
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 6:35:00 AM   
eMonticello


Posts: 525
Joined: 3/15/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
Until WW2 (i.e. around 1939), most production was in the hands of small business - it was something like 75% of manufacturing. After WW2 started going, the Roosevelt admin (which was Democratic) started awarding contracts in such a way that resulted in Big Business scarfing up the contracts in such a way that reversed the situation - i.e. Big Business ended up with about 75% of manufacturing. It has slowly slipped from this number.

It is hard to see how the Roosevelt admin could have done otherwise - they just went with the big players because (a) small business could not have ramped up to do the job fast enough; and (b) it was easier to negotiate with 100 or so big companies than 10000 small ones.

Actually, Roosevelt had nothing to do with handing the military contracts to large businesses. The Army had made that decision and they were using the 1936 Industry Survey to select primary contractors (most of which were, surprise, surprise, large businesses). Donald Nelson, the Chairman of the War Production Board, attempted to expand the use of small business in the procurement contracts, but, since he handed procurement to the military instead of keeping it within his organization, it fell upon deaf ears. Big business did use small manufacturers as sub-contractors when they had too much work themselves, but as soon as contracts were being cancelled as early as 1943, they would bring the work in house and cut the small business loose. Of course, they also complained to the Army that these small businesses should not be allowed to produce goods for the civilian market until the large businesses were free to compete.

_____________________________


Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example. -- Pudd'nhead Wilson

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 112
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 6:57:51 AM   
eMonticello


Posts: 525
Joined: 3/15/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: worr

Arsenal of Democracy

Roosevelt called for 50,000 planes per year and the men to fly them. This was in January of 1940 already.

Roosevelt was way ahead of his time...and production grew right to this goal as stated.

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/Dip/PaW/PaW-11.html

You really do not see a deviation from this plan throughout the war...and the numbers compared to Germany and Japan are staggering. They no capabilites let alone the vision of Roosevelt to plan on such production on an annual basis.

To support Worr's point further, the Victory Program, which was a report that outlined the military assets needed to win the war, was completed by September 1941. The Program was used by both the WPB (War Production Board) and the military to make decisions on resource allocation and procurement of military goods. Needless to say, there was little difference between planned and actual production at the macro level. (see page 345)

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/wwii/csppp/ch11.htm

_____________________________


Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example. -- Pudd'nhead Wilson

(in reply to worr)
Post #: 113
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 7:12:56 AM   
eMonticello


Posts: 525
Joined: 3/15/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
One of King's major victories, was getting support for the Guadalcanal invasion in the first place ... but once he got it ... Roosevelt came to his rescue, when Guadalcanal got "into trouble" ... Roosevelt ordered all available weapons into the battle. Roosevelt couldn't abandon engaged son's of his voters. In theory there was a Europe first - in practice things were much more based on shorter term decisions and competing priorities.

Sure, Marshall shifted forces that were headed to Australia to support Guadalcanal and Nimitz was given more freedom to shift forces from the Central Pacific to the South Pacific. There were no troops committed to Europe that were sent to support the Solomons Operation. However, there's no question that if Europe needed additional troops, then they would have gotten them ... even from the Pacific. Roosevelt, Marshall, King, and Arnold all agreed with the Atlantic-first strategy. Of course, we all know one general who disagreed...

_____________________________


Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example. -- Pudd'nhead Wilson

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 114
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 7:40:37 AM   
Bliztk


Posts: 779
Joined: 4/24/2002
From: Electronic City
Status: offline 		The problem is not the allied production, is the Japanese production. I ha ve a game where my opponent (japanese) has already lost more Zeros than the entire 1941+1942 production and we are in August 42.

If we want to boost the Allied options, maybe we can pay PPs to increase aircraft production, something in the tone of 150 PPs per 1 more aircradt per month, or something similar.

(in reply to eMonticello)
Post #: 115
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 7:54:04 AM   
worr

 

Posts: 901
Joined: 2/7/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

The problem is not the allied production, is the Japanese production. I ha ve a game where my opponent (japanese) has already lost more Zeros than the entire 1941+1942 production and we are in August 42.



Grand total of Zero-Sen aircraft was 10,938 planes produced mostly by Mitsubishi.

IJN began the war with aoubt four hundered zeros...mostly model 21s. A6M3, or Zeke 32, 560 were built by Mitsubishi
alone.

How many did he lose?







(in reply to Bliztk)
Post #: 116
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 8:10:21 AM   
Blackhorse


Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline
Well, I'm doing my part to unscrew the alleged allied plane shortage in CHS . . .

albeit, very late in the war.

For the next version of CHS I've sent Andrew the OOB for the Allied land and air reinforcements coming over from Europe in 1945 after V-E day. Seventeen divisions, x21 B24 Groups (converting to B29s) and x20 B17 Groups, as well as x5 groups of A26s, x6 of P47s and x2 of P51s. The 2,000 additional heavy bombers nearly triple the Allies strategic bombing force.

OK, so it's not much help when your P40 squadrons are at skeleton-strength in early '42 . . . but it's something to look forward to.

"Ask not what CHS can do for you . . . ask what you can do for CHS."

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to worr)
Post #: 117
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 9:04:08 AM   
dereck


Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/7/2004
From: Romulus, MI
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eMonticello

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
One of King's major victories, was getting support for the Guadalcanal invasion in the first place ... but once he got it ... Roosevelt came to his rescue, when Guadalcanal got "into trouble" ... Roosevelt ordered all available weapons into the battle. Roosevelt couldn't abandon engaged son's of his voters. In theory there was a Europe first - in practice things were much more based on shorter term decisions and competing priorities.

Sure, Marshall shifted forces that were headed to Australia to support Guadalcanal and Nimitz was given more freedom to shift forces from the Central Pacific to the South Pacific. There were no troops committed to Europe that were sent to support the Solomons Operation. However, there's no question that if Europe needed additional troops, then they would have gotten them ... even from the Pacific. Roosevelt, Marshall, King, and Arnold all agreed with the Atlantic-first strategy. Of course, we all know one general who disagreed...


King agreed in theory but he did everything he could to get troops and equipment into the Pacific - and once troops were IN the Pacific theatre they tended to stay there until the war was over.

Also, it should be noted that at the end of 1942 there were only 380,000 American troops deployed to Europe while there were 460,000 American troops deployed to the Pacific.

_____________________________

PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)

(in reply to eMonticello)
Post #: 118
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 9:05:36 AM   
Bliztk


Posts: 779
Joined: 4/24/2002
From: Electronic City
Status: offline 		From the pages that ADavidB provided, Zero production (A6m2 and A6m3) for 1942 is 1250.

We are in August and he has lost 1300 planes of both types.

I think that the problem is the control of production that the japanese player has.

(in reply to Blackhorse)
Post #: 119
RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 9:12:40 AM   
worr

 

Posts: 901
Joined: 2/7/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

From the pages that ADavidB provided, Zero production (A6m2 and A6m3) for 1942 is 1250.



But they were being produced before that also. I don't recall how many the game starts with....as the war was going on before Dec 7th, 1941.

How in the world did you destroy so many? Ground kills?



(in reply to Bliztk)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.875