RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

treespider -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/11/2006 5:26:07 AM)

Let's revisit Admiral Laurents analysis...I am not suggesting he is wrong just providing it in a different light

Per the manual AC costs are

Single Engine plane - 1E (18 HI points) + 1 AC (18 HI points) = 36 HI points
Twin Engine plane - 2E (36 HI points) + 1 AC (36 HI points) = 72 HI Points
4E Plane - 4E (72 points) + 1 AC (72 HI points) = 144 HI Points

Using Admiral laurents calculated figure of 5200 HI ponits to continue the analysis:

5200 HI Points = 144 single engine AC/day= 52560 1E AC/year

If we devote two thirds of the HI to 1E AC we can achieve:
96 1E AC/day = 3456 HI
24 2E AC/day = 1728 HI

Historically in 1943 Japan produced

7147 fighters or c. 20/day
4189 bombers or c. 11/day
2070 reconnaisance or c. 6/day

using round number lets say

9200 1E A/C
4200 2E A/C

working backwards this equates to

9200x36HI=331200 HI points on 1E A/C = c.907 HI points on 1E AC/day
4200x72 HI = 302400 HI points on 2E A/C = c. 828 HI points on 2E AC/ day

in 1944

13,811 fighters or c 38 /day
5,100 bombers or c. 14/day
2147 reconn or c. 6 /day

using round numbers lets say

16,000 1E A/C x 36 HI = 576000 HI Points on 1E AC/year = 1578 HI points on 1E AC/day
5,000 2E AC x 72 HI = 367200 HI points on 2E AC/year = 1006 Hi Points on 2E AC/day








ChezDaJez -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/11/2006 8:05:33 AM)

quote:

But let’s first start by giving the US at least what it had to begin with and then limit Japan to realistic levels as well. Then we can hold a discussion about what might have been.


Isn't that basically what I said? I do believe I said that the allies had issues with aircraft levels that need to be addressed but that Japan should be able to at least build to 1944 levels and with enough resources and oil reaching the home islands she could have produced much more. She had plenty of excess capacity. It was the interdiction of imports that limited her production, not an inability to expand.
Chez



ChezDaJez -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/11/2006 8:19:38 AM)

quote:

Sorry Chez..., but this one you got wrong. US Production wasn't nearly as dependent on "skilled labor" as that of the Axis because of the Assemply Line and Mass Production Practices, and while labor allocation was a problem from time to time it was more a matter of workers seeking the best paying jobs. US Ship Production Orders started to scale back in 1944 simply because it was obvious that what had already been scheduled was going to be sufficient to win the war. DE orders were cancelled right, left. and center in the 2nd half of 1943 when the U-Boat Menace was seen to be under control. B-29's were still ramping up, and 1944 A/C production was enormous (by weight it exceeded that of ALL the other powers - Axis and Allied - that year).



I think you might have misunderstood part of what I said concerning production and cutbacks. I probably didn't make it clear enough in my post.

What I was trying to say was that the expansion of US industry had pretty much reached their maximum levels by late 43 and early 44. I think they would have found it much harder to expand anywhere near the rate they did in 41 and 42 because the manpower pool just wasn't there to support another great round of expansion. Pretty much everyone was either in the military, already in the defense workforce or engaged in some other vital occupation such as agriculture and others. The available manpower pool wasn't empty but it was limited.

I recognize that the cutbacks had nothing to do with any perceived shortages in material or personnel. Just the opposite was true. The cutbacks came about because they couldn't use any more of that particular material or weapon. You are correct that B-29 production continued to ramp up but many other aircraft types were discontinued and some assembly lines closed.

Chez



ChezDaJez -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/11/2006 9:35:15 AM)

quote:

It would be great if some Japanese players would give total air frame figures for their games in 1943 and 1944 so we can verify if Admiral Laurent’s figures actually play out in game. I suspect they do since its simple math, not a lot to it really.


I don't have any beyond January 43 but I think it will be an eye opener for you AFBs that think Japan can expand to whatever levels it wants. As I said before Japan's expansion depends solely upon the condition of the SRA oil fields and resources at the time of capture or the allied attempts to interdict its movement.

Take note all you Sir Robins! In this particular game (Scenario 15, PDU On), my opponent fought tooth and nail for every major oil and resource center. ALL were captured at less than 25% of capacity. Palembang had 13 operational oil points and Balikpapan had 81 of 600 resources when captured. Yeah, it cost him a lot of troops and aircraft but he did a number on me. He has pretty much ensured an early end to the game, especially now that his offensive has recaptured the Celebes and Timor. I don't have the aircraft to stop him. Most of my squadrons are at less than 75% strength and average around 50 experience. The only bright spot is that I have sunk 6 Cvs and 6 BBs.

Note the oil points on the chart below. Now note the HI available. I'm screwed. As it is I can't even finish expanding Kawasaki engine production. You will note that I have not touched naval, merchant or repair yards, I have not accelerated any ship production, I have not increased research. I haven't touched anything with the exception of engine and aircraft factories.

Here is my monthly fighter production:
A6M3: 83
A6M3a: 150
Ki-43: 28
Ki-44: 124
Ki-61: 260

I am producing 1503 engines and 1005 aircraft per month.

Chez



[image]local://upfiles/14613/2545319461A246599604414FDDC4C90D.jpg[/image]



ChezDaJez -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/11/2006 9:37:37 AM)

Here is a shot of my aircraft pools. I simply do not have the HI produce enough aircraft meet current production requirements, let alone expand. The production stats you see here are theoretical, not actual. Actual aircraft production is far less.

Chez

[image]local://upfiles/14613/600627112A98409E8C0F5D9217A69C0A.jpg[/image]



ChezDaJez -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/11/2006 9:54:45 AM)

This screen shot shows my "best" fighter squadrons. Note only one is above 70. Also note that I do not have enough aircraft to fill them out completely. (This particular shot was taken before I assigned what few replacements I had).

Chez




[image]local://upfiles/14613/C0F50148E7F24BB4BC7807A9BBBB1C63.jpg[/image]



ctangus -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/11/2006 2:18:40 PM)

I'd like to see more samples. How many 43 & later games are like Chez's and how many are like PzB's?

I play allies only (at least so far), but here's a contrary view. I like the fact that the Japanese have a dynamic production model. Japan's primary motive for the war was economic afterall. If the Japanese do better in the early game IRL, why shouldn't they have benefits? Conversely, as in Chez's game, if the allies do a good job fighting for the SRA Japan's situation should be more dire.

I also like the added dimension the dynamic production gives to the game - forcing the allied player (if he's smart) to interdict Japan's SLOCs, keep attrition warfare going as much as possible, etc.

Now if 80-90% of all games wind up with Japan far outproducing historical numbers, I'd agree Japan had the ability to produce too many airframes. I doubt we'd see that, though that's only my impression.

Fortunately, for those who don't like it, the game can be played with production off.

P.S. Andy Mac does have a valid point on F6F numbers. (Yes, Andy, we've heard you. [;)])



Sneer -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/11/2006 2:25:12 PM)

Jim

40k in 42 ???[X(][X(][X(]- most players is happy seing 1k per month for total of 12k in year - you need to build these factories in conditions where you are permanently short on supplies
it shows ignorancy on japenase side play
wake up
stop wet dreaming
stoping armament / naval/ vehicles for the whole war - no reinforcement - only planes
it is not even weird



Sneer -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/11/2006 2:42:29 PM)

ok my game is certainly in upper part of WITP universe - i had better than historical results and my SRA resources were not badly damaged - with china eliminated and lazy allied player - not many reasons to burn precious supplies

i had 0.9-1.1k planes produced in 42 /monthly/
I have 1.1-1,7k production estimated for 43 /monthly/ - in August i have 1.4 k
notice that to preserve HI points 20-25% of this value is not working all the time
in 44 george and frank will join so at least 600-700 planes/month from them
i would say that my forecast for 44 are 1.7 -2.8k per month / under the assumption i will be able to defend against offensive from darwin area /
average values for
42 12-13k planes built
43 16-18k planes built
44 24-26k planes built - forecast
45 hell only knows

considering that for most time 20% potential is off to save HI for 45 and that i had perfect conditions to develop.....



Andy Mac -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/11/2006 3:11:36 PM)

Going back to the original question Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

My answer is NO



ChezDaJez -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/11/2006 10:13:15 PM)

quote:

I've seen lots of rationalizations from the Japanese but the only person who has actually posted their aircraft production totals was for a game that was a complete blowout for Japan and is lost by the end of 42. Not an average example by any means. How about posting your production totals Pauk. How many first line fighters are you pumping out?


Jim, I assume you are referring to my game. The thing about it is that this "blowout" was entirely created by the allied player's tough defence of the SRA's oilfields and resources. You dismiss this game as not being an average example yet you want to use a game where the Brits have been nullified by the loss of India along with several other abnormal factors. I would submit that my game is closer to the average than is Andy's.

Andy's game, as he himself admits, is hardly an average example. It simply represents a game at the opposite end of the spectrum as mine.

Jim, have you played a PBEM as the Japanese player? If you haven't, I would strongly suggest that you do. You have a lot of misconceptions about Japanese production that only experience will correct. You neglect to mention the number of obsolete aircraft factories Japan is stuck with at the start and she can't upgrade them without using a significant portion of her available supply.

I’ve listed the beginning Japanese production values for fighters at the start of a stock Scenario 15 game. As you can readily, Japan starts with a very limited production ability and it is very expensive in oil, resources and supply to upgrade her factories. Upgrades must be done over a long period of time otherwise the Japanese player will bankrupt himself.

Engines:
Mitsubishi: 865
Nakajima: 360
Kawasaki: 110 (can’t be used until the Ki-61 Tony comes on line in Aug 42.

Fighter Production:
A5M4 Claude: 6
A6M2 Zero: 104
A6M2-N Rufe: 14
Ki-27 Nate: 70
Ki-43 Oscar: 62

Fighters Available in Pools:
A5M4 Claude: 220
A6M2 Zero: 51
A6M2-N Rufe: 7
Ki-27 Nate: 710
Ki-43 Oscar: 67

Fighters assigned to Land Units
Ki-27 Nate: 18 squadrons totaling 447 Nates
Ki-43 Oscar: 2 squadrons totaling 59 Oscars
Ki-44 Tojo: 1 squadron totaling 9 Tojos (none being produced)
A5M4 Claude: 12 squadrons totaling 219 Claudes
A6M2 Zero: 5 squadrons totaling 132 Zeros

Fighters assigned to Carriers
A5M4 Claude: 3 squadrons totaling 30 Claudes
A6M2 Zero: 6 squadrons totaling 126 Zeros

As you can see, Japanese production and aircraft strength in fighters at the start of the game is quite anemic. (Makes you wonder why they even chose war with these levels). Many of the squadrons begin under strength and short of pilots (so much for saving the pilots to replace combat losses).

Let’s see what it takes to optimize production without increasing it. First we upgrade all Nate factories to build Oscars. That will give us a total monthly production of 132 Oscars. It will be 1-2 months and 70,000 supply to fully upgrade. Then it will take over 3 months to upgrade all Nate squadrons and that’s assuming we have no combat or ops losses. With losses, the true upgrade time is closer to 6-9 months.

Let’s do the same for the A5M4 and A6M2 units. We upgrade A5M4 factories to the A6M2. Wow, only cost 6000 supply to do but of course we only get 6 more Zeros for a total A6M2 production of 110 aircraft. It will take about 3 months of production before all Claude units can upgrade to the Zero, assuming again no combat or ops losses. As the Zeros are in heavy action from the start we know there will be significant combat and ops losses. Let’s assume a loss rate of 100 a month. So that gives us only 10 Zeros added to the pool each month! At that rate it will take 24 months to upgrade all Claudes. It will be far worse once the Zero bonus goes away.

The simple fact is the Japanese player must upgrade his factories and must do it early (but in moderation) otherwise the war is over by the end of 42 because he will be out of aircraft. I haven’t figured in the total resources, oil and HI required to produce these aircraft but suffice to say that if the SRA oil and resources is damaged more than 50%, the Japanese player will not be able to provide an effective defense for very long.

I do agree that there are issues with allied production. I do not agree that the ability of Japan to increase her production is the cause of the problem. This issue wouldn’t be present with a more realistic air model and more accurate allied production numbers.

I did look at RL Hellcat production stats and they actually don’t appear to be that far off from the game from a monthly production standpoint. A total of 4402 F6F-3 Hellcats were produced between Jan 43 (only 32 were produced in 1942) and April 44. Deliveries began in Jan 43. 209 of these were given the Marines and 252 were given to the RN FAA. That leaves 3941 Hellcats produced for the Navy in 16 months of production. Approximately 300 were provided to Atlantic fleet for operations on CVEs and in Corsica. So that leaves 3641. Using Jan 43 as a start date that gives 16 months worth of production for an average of 227 aircraft per month. Some of these were earmarked for various training commands probably totaling 400-500. Assuming 400 given to training commands, that leaves 3241 or 202 per month. So it appears that the monthly WitP rate is off by about 60 aircraft. The problem is further compounded by the fact that WitP lists initial production as July 43 vice January 43 basically removes 7 months of production for the allies.

Chez



RETIRED -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 7:31:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

Let’s see what it takes to optimize production without increasing it. First we upgrade all Nate factories to build Oscars. That will give us a total monthly production of 132 Oscars. It will be 1-2 months and 70,000 supply to fully upgrade. Then it will take over 3 months to upgrade all Nate squadrons and that’s assuming we have no combat or ops losses. With losses, the true upgrade time is closer to 6-9 months.

Let’s do the same for the A5M4 and A6M2 units. We upgrade A5M4 factories to the A6M2. Wow, only cost 6000 supply to do but of course we only get 6 more Zeros for a total A6M2 production of 110 aircraft. It will take about 3 months of production before all Claude units can upgrade to the Zero, assuming again no combat or ops losses. As the Zeros are in heavy action from the start we know there will be significant combat and ops losses. Let’s assume a loss rate of 100 a month. So that gives us only 10 Zeros added to the pool each month! At that rate it will take 24 months to upgrade all Claudes. It will be far worse once the Zero bonus goes away.

The simple fact is the Japanese player must upgrade his factories and must do it early (but in moderation) otherwise the war is over by the end of 42 because he will be out of aircraft. I haven’t figured in the total resources, oil and HI required to produce these aircraft but suffice to say that if the SRA oil and resources is damaged more than 50%, the Japanese player will not be able to provide an effective defense for very long.

I do agree that there are issues with allied production. I do not agree that the ability of Japan to increase her production is the cause of the problem. This issue wouldn’t be present with a more realistic air model and more accurate allied production numbers.

I did look at RL Hellcat production stats and they actually don’t appear to be that far off from the game from a monthly production standpoint. A total of 4402 F6F-3 Hellcats were produced between Jan 43 (only 32 were produced in 1942) and April 44. Deliveries began in Jan 43. 209 of these were given the Marines and 252 were given to the RN FAA. That leaves 3941 Hellcats produced for the Navy in 16 months of production. Approximately 300 were provided to Atlantic fleet for operations on CVEs and in Corsica. So that leaves 3641. Using Jan 43 as a start date that gives 16 months worth of production for an average of 227 aircraft per month. Some of these were earmarked for various training commands probably totaling 400-500. Assuming 400 given to training commands, that leaves 3241 or 202 per month. So it appears that the monthly WitP rate is off by about 60 aircraft. The problem is further compounded by the fact that WitP lists initial production as July 43 vice January 43 basically removes 7 months of production for the allies.

Chez


CHEZ. This is the most level-headed post from the Japanese side I've seen in this discussion. At least you admit there IS a production discrepancy (and even identify a problem area.). That was the point the Allied posters were trying to make..., that there was something WRONG happening in A/C production as the game progressed. And you are probably right in that it is in the Allied Production figures that most of the corrections need to be made. Kudo's to you...



bradfordkay -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 8:14:11 AM)

I understand and applaud the idea that in the game the Japanese can exceed historical production figures. I would hope that the average result will be close to historical, with increased rates being the reward for getting more resources to Japan than they managed to import during the war. It is the whole purpose of the inclusion of resources in the game.

I do want allied production figures to be within historical ranges as well. I'm old school enough to want it to be slightly random; with historical being the median but a chance that each month you get a few less or more of each type (maybe add a modifier for how many bases each side owns), representing the fluctuating needs of other theatres.


(where's my nomex underwear?)



dtravel -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 10:06:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay
(where's my nomex underwear?)


Thirty years in the future. It wasn't discovered until the '70s. Since this is the '40s, no nomex underwear for you!



1275psi -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 3:26:55 PM)


here you go

another example that shows a far more realistic example
captured SRA in badly damaged condition
Mid 43
total production - 1500 frames a month theoretical -actually about 900

another game -42 start -all resources intact -very careful conservative production, making sure supplies do not dip -historical captures -1500 frames a month.

3rd game april 42-going great, but many resources destroyed -plenty of oil -800 frames a month -will not be able to expand this at all until 1000000 supplies have been spent merely on repairing captured resources.

BIG LESSON
(in my opinion) any Allied player who sir robins has no right to complain if japan builds a lot of stuff, and if the japanese player plays well enough to capture the resources he should be rewarded.

I really think that too many allied players think that 43, 44 should be total cake walks
Well it was not -we owe an awful lot to the courage of the marines, sailors, soldiers and airmen who actually overcame equally brave and committed men.
War in the pacific was a hard horrible slog, if the game does not go into 45 then it in a small way dis honours those who fought it.

If everyone fought their game as if the units were real men -i wonder how it would go then!



SamCole -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 3:36:16 PM)

I really think the OP asked the question wrong or the wrong question. The question should be "Are the Allies properly represented?" It appears that some production may be low( some coule be too high ) and possibly some of the start dates need adjustment. At the same time I feel strongly that the USN pilot pool is very unders reality. As Andy Mac has stated in his AAR and in various threads, it is not the number of Japanese aircraft that is a problem, it is the lack of quality second generation Allied aircraft and pilots that is. This can all be changed or fixed in the editor.



ChezDaJez -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 5:24:26 PM)

quote:

CHEZ. This is the most level-headed post from the Japanese side I've seen in this discussion.


Aw, gees! Now I've gone and ruined my reputation! [:D]

Have fun guys, I'm off on holiday. See y'all Friday.

Chez



Bombur -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 6:04:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1275psi


here you go

another example that shows a far more realistic example
captured SRA in badly damaged condition
Mid 43
total production - 1500 frames a month theoretical -actually about 900

another game -42 start -all resources intact -very careful conservative production, making sure supplies do not dip -historical captures -1500 frames a month.

3rd game april 42-going great, but many resources destroyed -plenty of oil -800 frames a month -will not be able to expand this at all until 1000000 supplies have been spent merely on repairing captured resources.

BIG LESSON
(in my opinion) any Allied player who sir robins has no right to complain if japan builds a lot of stuff, and if the japanese player plays well enough to capture the resources he should be rewarded.

I really think that too many allied players think that 43, 44 should be total cake walks
Well it was not -we owe an awful lot to the courage of the marines, sailors, soldiers and airmen who actually overcame equally brave and committed men.
War in the pacific was a hard horrible slog, if the game does not go into 45 then it in a small way dis honours those who fought it.

If everyone fought their game as if the units were real men -i wonder how it would go then!


-Excellent point. The allied player has a good chance to ruin Japanese economy if he attempts to fight for resource rich locations. I´m playing a PBEM game (Nik mod v5.2) as allies and I´m holding Palembang in May/42. Score is 11000 (Japan) vs 6000 (Allies) as I lost 5800 points in land forces (vs. 300). However, my opponent´s economy is likely to collapse in 1943 as (1) Taking Palembang will damage local oil (2) Balikpapan´s oil suffered almost 100% damage and is recovering slowly (3) Brunei suffered about 25% damage. Despite the fact I´m wrong with my first calculations, I still think that there should be more oil resources for Japan to capture, since it´s easy for the allied player, even a horrendous land general like me, to cause significant damage to resources as consequence of land battles.



SamCole -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 6:56:56 PM)

Back a couple of months I set up a test. I moved a total of 4 Dutch base forces to Palembang. then I ran two sets of test.

1. I just landed a division of troops at Palembang and took it. Usually there was heavy damage to the oil wells.

2. I procedded the landing with heavy air and naval bombardment. the damage was minimal.

My observation, prepare your objective.



pauk -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 6:59:59 PM)

sometimes(most times) will work, sometimes wont. bad dice roll can ruin JFB day.



Nemo121 -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 7:02:27 PM)

Aye, I've managed a defence in the DEI which left the Japanese player with just 400 oil points throughout the entire area after he had taken it. This means that far from being a boon to the Japanese player the DEI will act as a drain on their resources for the next 12 to 18 months.

Since all war is, essentially, simply the playing out of the underlying logistics this has had the result of massively shortening the enemy's culmination point and removing the Japanese threat to Australia, Midway, Baker, Canton, Hawaii etc and also greatly increasing the security of India. It has also greatly increased the effectiveness of a strategy of attrition against Japan such that, IMO, the war will definitely be over by the beginning of 1943.

Now the above achievements are entirely within the grasp of most Allied players so any player who does a Sir Robin ( or is just plain outplayed) and thus faces the loss of India, most of the Pacific and portions of Australia plus a logistically much stronger Japan simply deserves whatever he gets.



RETIRED -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 7:42:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SamCole

Back a couple of months I set up a test. I moved a total of 4 Dutch base forces to Palembang. then I ran two sets of test.

1. I just landed a division of troops at Palembang and took it. Usually there was heavy damage to the oil wells.

2. I procedded the landing with heavy air and naval bombardment. the damage was minimal.

My observation, prepare your objective.


Intresting point is that by heavily bombarding your target you "prevent" damage to it. Kinda like "screwing for virginity" or "killing for peace". Notice how the monsterous Coalition Air Campaign kept Saddam from destroying the Kuwaiti Oil Fields in the Gulf War.. Like most things in this game, it's BS.



SamCole -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 7:50:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pauk

sometimes(most times) will work, sometimes wont. bad dice roll can ruin JFB day.


The only answer I can give is "If you want a guarentee - buy a toaster"

Nothing works the same everytime. But, if the Japanese player is in a hurry and does not prepare, the average damage will be much higher.



SamCole -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 7:54:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RETIRED


quote:

ORIGINAL: SamCole

Back a couple of months I set up a test. I moved a total of 4 Dutch base forces to Palembang. then I ran two sets of test.

1. I just landed a division of troops at Palembang and took it. Usually there was heavy damage to the oil wells.

2. I procedded the landing with heavy air and naval bombardment. the damage was minimal.

My observation, prepare your objective.


Intresting point is that by heavily bombarding your target you "prevent" damage to it. Kinda like "screwing for virginity" or "killing for peace". Notice how the monsterous Coalition Air Campaign kept Saddam from destroying the Kuwaiti Oil Fields in the Gulf War.. Like most things in this game, it's BS.



I agree, I think that every attack should have a chance of damaging anything in the hex.



bradfordkay -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 8:59:54 PM)

"Despite the fact I´m wrong with my first calculations, I still think that there should be more oil resources for Japan to capture, since it´s easy for the allied player, even a horrendous land general like me, to cause significant damage to resources as consequence of land battles."


Well, let's see, if any historical oil resources are underrepresented, then certainly this should be fixed. Otherwise, wouldn't you rather see the programming concerning resource damage adjusted?



Bombur -> RE: Are the Japanese now TOO powerful?? (8/12/2006 9:06:46 PM)

quote:


Well, let's see, if any historical oil resources are underrepresented, then certainly this should be fixed. Otherwise, wouldn't you rather see the programming concerning resource damage adjusted?



-Good point, maybe the second alternative would be better (and also adjustments to the costs of repairing resources/oil). But this would need another patch, while you just need the editor to increase resources.....with a similar effect...


quote:


Back a couple of months I set up a test. I moved a total of 4 Dutch base forces to Palembang. then I ran two sets of test.

1. I just landed a division of troops at Palembang and took it. Usually there was heavy damage to the oil wells.

2. I procedded the landing with heavy air and naval bombardment. the damage was minimal.

My observation, prepare your objective.



-In one of my games vs. Nik, I used massive naval bombardment before to support a disembark on Palembang..which was captured with 100% damage. Maybe my troops weren´t enough, since I needed reinforcements before taking the base, but meanwhile more naval bombardment was done, with little effect. Notice however, that in Nik mod level bombers are much less effective in preparing the objective (and I think he is right, btw)



Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 7 [8]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.171875