RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ?

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 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 10:22:08 AM

Bliztk

Posts: 779
Joined: 4/24/2002
From: Electronic City
Status: offline

Air to air combat

, and operational losses, but that`s not the problem.

The problem is the Japanese production.

If we limit the Allied Production, I think that the Japanese should limited too.

Japan produced between 1940 and 1941 520 Zero Airframes, and 1250 in 1942, the peak years were 1943 and 1944.

Thus in my game the japanese should had run out of Zeros, and I still see strong CAPs on enemy airbases.

Also in the Tom Hunter`s AAR war vs Imperialism, the losses were way up higher, and the Japanese still had planes to throw. In RL Japan would have run out of airframes and in WitP that`s not the case.

Take note that in WitP the Allies are always with their pool of planes empty in 1942, that`s fine, but Japan can overproduce USA until 43 in *modern* airframes

Here is the Aircraft losses from my game

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Bliztk -- 10/19/2005 10:48:07 AM >

(in reply to worr)

Post #: 121

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 2:55:27 PM

worr

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

I have a game out that far also and I'm struggling to keep zeros in the air. When I finally get a PBEM I'll check again.

My guess is he seriously bumped production for some other sacrifices.

< Message edited by worr -- 10/19/2005 2:56:28 PM >

(in reply to Bliztk)

Post #: 122

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 3:39:32 PM

Gen.Hoepner

Posts: 3645
Joined: 9/4/2001
From: italy
Status: offline

yes, i agree. If you produce too many planes you will lack of HI or other important things(armaments,vehicles etc). The resources are limited for Japan.

_____________________________

[image]http://yfrog.com/2m70331348022314716641664j [/image]

(in reply to worr)

Post #: 123

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 3:42:09 PM

Kereguelen

Posts: 1829
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

Air to air combat , and operational losses, but that`s not the problem.

The problem is the Japanese production.

Yes, but not only aircraft production. Japan seems to produce too many tanks, artillery and squads as well. I've never heard about a Japanese player who had shortages with these. While the Japanese had enough manpower, they historically faced some problems to gather the necessary equipment for newly raised formations. Actually many Japanese combat formations did never receive the necessary reinforcements to make up for losses taken.

quote:

If we limit the Allied Production, I think that the Japanese should limited too.

They should experience the limits of their industrial capacity while keeping the choice to alter their production according to their needs - producing more planes, yes, but problems with ship construction and land equipment as a result.

quote:

Japan produced between 1940 and 1941 520 Zero Airframes, and 1250 in 1942, the peak years were 1943 and 1944.

Thus in my game the japanese should had run out of Zeros, and I still see strong CAPs on enemy airbases.

I noticed the same in one of my PBEM's. My opponent had lost about 1,100 Zeros by the end of May 1942. The Allies were running out of planes then, but my opponent still had plenty of Zeros (the quality of his pilots had surely dropped, but he trained them up with air strikes on isolated Allied bases and did not face major problems with pilot quality then) and was able to mount major invasions involving multiple divisions at the same time.

quote:

Take note that in WitP the Allies are always with their pool of planes empty in 1942, that`s fine, but Japan can overproduce USA until 43 in *modern* airframes

Well, to be fair, the number of planes in the Allied pool mainly depends on the agressiveness of the Japanese player. In one PBEM, playing the Allies, I've more than 500 Warhawks and more than 400 Hurricanes in my plane pool by November 1942. But that was an "unbloody" game thusfar.

Two things:

(1) Reduce available HI for the Japanese at start.

(2) Either completely remove the Japanese factories doing research in PBEM games (that is, reduce them to 1 to keep the factory locations) or use a houserule that the Japanese player may not convert these factories to production factories. These factories are in the game for use by the AI, they did not exist as factories then (they represent research, not production). They're only in the game because the AI would otherwise never produce that planes, Japan literally "gets them for free" when they start production. In PBEM this is not necessary because a human player tends to be somewhat smarter than the AI!

K

(in reply to Bliztk)

Post #: 124

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 3:45:55 PM

Kereguelen

Posts: 1829
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gen.Hoepner

yes, i agree. If you produce too many planes you will lack of HI or other important things(armaments,vehicles etc). The resources are limited for Japan.

Hi General,

I've seen some screenshots posted by you from your game vs. mc some time ago. I've noticed that you produced more planes in the game than Japan did historically. Do you really have any shortages in other areas? I'ld rather think that your force pools (squads, artillery) are still full?

K

(in reply to Gen.Hoepner)

Post #: 125

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 4:00:13 PM

Gen.Hoepner

Posts: 3645
Joined: 9/4/2001
From: italy
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gen.Hoepner

yes, i agree. If you produce too many planes you will lack of HI or other important things(armaments,vehicles etc). The resources are limited for Japan.

Hi General,

I've seen some screenshots posted by you from your game vs. mc some time ago. I've noticed that you produced more planes in the game than Japan did historically. Do you really have any shortages in other areas? I'ld rather think that your force pools (squads, artillery) are still full?

K

The pool of squads,artillery ( except for the 47mm and the 37mm) and engeneers are being empty since may 42( now sept).
Pool of Vehicles keep dropping.
Pool of armament is rising back after a sensible production enanchement.
But consider that i've halted since Feb the Betty,Sonia,Dinah,Alfs,Jake production to save my HI. Zero production have been halted for the 50% since last June in order to boost the Tonies/Tojos production

_____________________________

[image]http://yfrog.com/2m70331348022314716641664j [/image]

(in reply to Kereguelen)

Post #: 126

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 4:04:17 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

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).

From what i understand, Roosevelt pretty much had control over things as he was the one who was (more or less) directly responsible for picking the people who were in charge of these things, both IN the military and out of the military. It was Roosevelt that sparkplugged the whole thing, and his decisions on who should be on the various industrial mobilization boards were the key ones. From my readings, it was not the Army/Navy awarding the contracts before PH (although they had input).

And, being (a) much smaller than they are now (in comparison to percent of economy) and (b) affiliated with the party out of power, Big Business did NOT wield as big a club as they do today. The Military-Industrial complex had not developed that much (yet, but it would get its start here). Roosevelt, however, was eager to get cooperation from the Republicans on the matter, and so courted them, and appointed Republicans to some of the key positions in the mobilization efforts - again, both within the military and outside of it.

(in reply to eMonticello)

Post #: 127

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 4:12:03 PM

tsimmonds

Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline

quote:

The pool of squads,artillery ( except for the 47mm and the 37mm) and engeneers are being empty since may 42( now sept).
Pool of Vehicles keep dropping.
Pool of armament is rising back after a sensible production enanchement.

IJ does not build vehicles, squads and devices for the pool. IJ builds vehicles, squads and devices as called for to fill out LCUs; the vehicles, squads and devices go directly into LCUs as they are created using vehicle, armament and manpower points from the pool. What you see in the pool are either odd leftovers (vehicles, squads and devices are created in batches of a particular size), or else they are obsolescent ones that were pulled from LCUs when they got upgraded. Your true pools are vehicle, armament and manpower points.

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to Gen.Hoepner)

Post #: 128

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 5:58:09 PM

Andy Mac

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline

OK done a little more digging

USAAF had
P36 (all marks) 483
P35 (all marks) 136
P26 (all marks) 111
P43 (all marks) 272

Now I am not at my computer but I am guessing that there are a lot of P36's on map at start so a replacement rate of 1 is probably not unreasonable especially as some P36's will be in Central and East Coast Sqns. (although a replacement rate to reflect sqns accross US being upgraded to modern types not available in WITP i.e. Warhawks, P38's upgrading P36's on East Coast Sqns returning them to the pool)

P35's and P26's were all with PI or USAAF units (or with trainers or in mothballs) so there may be a little scope for placing some more of these types into starting pools but I wouldnt increase the replacement rate as they were obselete and out of production and not in use among other USAAF Sqns so no off map reservoir of aircraft was available.

P43 at total production of 272 replacement rate of 10 doesnt feel wrong when there are so few on the map.

I cannot find anything to disagree with CHS teams assessment of modern aircraft availability although someone is looking at P38's I believe.

Andy

(in reply to Bliztk)

Post #: 129

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 6:03:45 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

I cannot find anything to disagree with CHS teams assessment of modern aircraft availability although someone is looking at P38's I believe.

Yeah - still waiting on a couple of books that i think will allow me to (partly) solve the puzzle, i.e. - get a good first order approximation of the numbers. Hopefully they will arrive by the weekend. If not, work requirements may slow this by another week...

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 130

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 6:21:57 PM

mdiehl

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

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.

Actually you do see a substantial deviation because the statement is not entirely accurate. Production did not "grow right to this goal." Production substantially exceeded the goal. In part this was because of optimization efforts that no one (certainly not FDR) conceived in 1940, such as the invention of manufacturer production demo specimens that could be entirely disassembled by licensees. The most famous of these being for example the F6F and F4F-6 (largely produced by GM as the FM2) held together not with rivets but with nylon pegs so that the manufacturer could not only make the parts (from blueprints) but dissassemble the production specimen to see how they all fit correctly together.

But the other point (about the Axis never coming close to this level of efficiency) is substantially correct. Between the overproduction, the substantial lend-lease, and the downscaling of production of aircraft in 1944 I think the US could have responded to any MATERIAL crisis fully and beyond the material demands that any loss rate could have inflicted.

_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to worr)

Post #: 131

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 6:30:23 PM

worr

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

Would you accept "grow right through this goal"?

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 132

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 6:36:21 PM

worr

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

I think the US could have responded to any MATERIAL crisis fully and beyond the material demands that any loss rate could have inflicted.

Not if you are talking 1942, however. And I think that is the point of discussion here.

Worr, out

P.S. I posted up some figures on the P-38 and P-47 which would impact the game during the turning point mid 1943. We may have given some attention to Allied Aircraft production figures in the CHS mods...but the ranges could use a look see also and perhaps change play balance in the other direction. Thread started in Scenario Design area.

< Message edited by worr -- 10/19/2005 6:41:54 PM >

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 133

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 6:55:40 PM

esteban

Posts: 618
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline

I would just say that the Allied players still have significant amounts of operational flexibility that their historical counterparts did not. The Allies can still pull ships and troops out of Malaya, the SRA and Phillipines that would have not been politically possible to do in WW2. Also, the Allied player has access to Canadian and U.S. Marine units that were not deployed until mid-late 1942, if they were deployed at all. The U.S. Marine units cost no PPs if you want to ship them off to the front lines in December, 1941.

(in reply to worr)

Post #: 134

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 7:00:36 PM

Andy Mac

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline

True but they are at 33% strenght if you do that so personally I wouldnt ship them off

Andy

(in reply to esteban)

Post #: 135

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 7:13:26 PM

spence

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

A corollary game effect of a shortage of Allied fighters will be that the present minimal concern the IJN Player has for the safety of the KB in the presence of Allied LBA will be reduced to very near zero.

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 136

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 7:14:40 PM

dereck

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

quote:

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).

From what i understand, Roosevelt pretty much had control over things as he was the one who was (more or less) directly responsible for picking the people who were in charge of these things, both IN the military and out of the military. It was Roosevelt that sparkplugged the whole thing, and his decisions on who should be on the various industrial mobilization boards were the key ones. From my readings, it was not the Army/Navy awarding the contracts before PH (although they had input).

And, being (a) much smaller than they are now (in comparison to percent of economy) and (b) affiliated with the party out of power, Big Business did NOT wield as big a club as they do today. The Military-Industrial complex had not developed that much (yet, but it would get its start here). Roosevelt, however, was eager to get cooperation from the Republicans on the matter, and so courted them, and appointed Republicans to some of the key positions in the mobilization efforts - again, both within the military and outside of it.

It should also be noted that Roosevelt appointed two Republicans to the highest positions in the military bureaucracy: Frank Knox as Secretary of the Navy and Henry Stimson as Secretary of War.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to rtrapasso)

Post #: 137

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 7:19:59 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

I would just say that the Allied players still have significant amounts of operational flexibility that their historical counterparts did not. The Allies can still pull ships and troops out of Malaya, the SRA and Phillipines that would have not been politically possible to do in WW2. Also, the Allied player has access to Canadian and U.S. Marine units that were not deployed until mid-late 1942, if they were deployed at all. The U.S. Marine units cost no PPs if you want to ship them off to the front lines in December, 1941.

Both sides have operational flexibility not seen in real life. The IJN and IJA were practically at war themselves, and cooperation between the two was minimal. There is no reflection of that in WITP.

Both sides have more flexibility than in real life - which makes for a more playable game. Heck, look at the screaming now that occurs when a unit doesn't do exactly as a player ordered. If the game were accurate, it might announce to the IJ player that "Due to your decisions that were unpopular with a cadre of fanatics, you have been assasinated. Game over for you!"

(in reply to esteban)

Post #: 138

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 7:37:35 PM

worr

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

Yes, it is all speculation at this point...should of, could of, might have...etc.

Actually History is still the best base line to build a game up from.

(in reply to rtrapasso)

Post #: 139

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 8:05:21 PM

Tom Hunter

Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/14/2004
Status: offline

If the objective of CHS is to make the game more historical then the Japanese should be held to historical production, especially in the early part of the war.

All the Axis powers had low production quotas in the early part of the war for various reasons of politics, or failure to understand what the Soviets and the Democracies were capable of.

From what I have learned from this thread in the CHS the Japanese achieve 1943-44 levels of production some time in early 42. How a scenario can be called historical in that case is beyond me, though it could easily be called fun, especially for Japan.

(in reply to worr)

Post #: 140

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 8:11:00 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

I have a silly question:

Is the point of the game to have fun and make it a challenge to both (or all) players? Or is the point of the game to grind the Japs into the dirt just like they did in history?

I play the game to have fun, personally. If I want to know what they did historically, I'll read a book. In my humble opinion the production firgures should not be based on what was historical or historically possible. I think they should be based on what makes a challenging game for both players.

But maybe I am a renegade

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 10/19/2005 8:13:03 PM >

(in reply to Tom Hunter)

Post #: 141

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 8:11:55 PM

worr

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Hunter

From what I have learned from this thread in the CHS the Japanese achieve 1943-44 levels of production some time in early 42.

Where was that?

(in reply to Tom Hunter)

Post #: 142

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 8:15:37 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

I think they should be based on what makes a challenging game for both players.

This is the basic split in the WITP community. One side thinks "no, play by what is historical, and if you did better than in real life, you win". The other side says "its a game! Make it play balanced!"

As a consequence, we have something that is somewhere in the middle, neither fish nor fowl.

Ideally, i'd like a switch "Historical Reality ON/OFF", or maybe different scenarios (historical/game balance), which is what the CHS people are trying to do, i think.

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 143

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 8:19:18 PM

worr

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

Well, this thread reads like a book.

So what is your excuse? :)

(in reply to rtrapasso)

Post #: 144

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 8:20:52 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
Ideally, i'd like a switch "Historical Reality ON/OFF", or maybe different scenarios (historical/game balance), which is what the CHS people are trying to do, i think.

Thats a very good idea

(in reply to rtrapasso)

Post #: 145

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 8:21:44 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

.

< Message edited by rtrapasso -- 10/19/2005 8:32:32 PM >

(in reply to worr)

Post #: 146

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 8:54:52 PM

spence

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

Japanese Players who think "fun" is so important shouldn't be spending so much time trying to justify all the "let's cripple the Allies for at least a year" rules hard-coded in the game.

< Message edited by spence -- 10/19/2005 8:59:30 PM >

(in reply to Bliztk)

Post #: 147

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 9:06:10 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Japanese Players who think "fun" is so important shouldn't be spending so much time trying to justify all the "let's cripple the Allies for at least a year" rules hard-coded in the game.

Why not? It makes it a lot more fun... for them!!!

(in reply to spence)

Post #: 148

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 9:13:21 PM

jwilkerson

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
Ideally, i'd like a switch "Historical Reality ON/OFF", or maybe different scenarios (historical/game balance), which is what the CHS people are trying to do, i think.

Thats a very good idea

Maybe we need a three-way solution.

"Historical"

"Favors Japan"

"Favors Allies"

It is not unusual in the wargaming genre to have such a triad of solutions. That way, opponent pairs that consistantly find one side is favored when playing the "historical" version .. can switch to the appropriate alternative.

And yes the general design philosophy of CHS has been .. put the historical hardware out there ... regardless of the consequences ( and there have been some "consequences" ! )

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 149

RE: CHS - Did allies get screwed in the air ? - 10/19/2005 9:26:32 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

You could have a "handicap" setting - dial it in from -100 to +100 which could effect CRT and/or production.

Of course, now you can handicap with just score, like a football pool "Give me Japan at 2400 pts!"

(in reply to jwilkerson)

Post #: 150

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 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 ?