RE: "J" Key - Nice addition (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room



Message

SqzMyLemon -> RE: "J" Key - Nice addition (1/19/2010 4:18:54 AM)

I hear you there ny59giants, I wish in hindsight I'd have known that patch 2 would let you really tweak production in as small an increment as a single engine/airframe, what a huge difference. The doubling option was the only choice at the time when I expanded, but like a marine I'll adapt and overcome. That being said, the developers have been fantastic trying to make this a great gaming experience by constantly improving things.



FatR -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (1/19/2010 1:15:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
For IJA bombers, the Sally line is clearly the class choice. Best payload, decent range and the like.

Helen gets armor starting from 8/1942, and Sally never does. IMO, Helens should be the main type of IJAAF bombers throughout 1943-44 (the late versions are nearly as good as Ki-67s). Yes, Ki-49 has a unique engine, but armor greatly affects both casualties and pilot survival. I thing it is absolutely vital.






Chickenboy -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (1/19/2010 1:26:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
For IJA bombers, the Sally line is clearly the class choice. Best payload, decent range and the like.

Helen gets armor starting from 8/1942, and Sally never does. IMO, Helens should be the main type of IJAAF bombers throughout 1943-44 (the late versions are nearly as good as Ki-67s). Yes, Ki-49 has a unique engine, but armor greatly affects both casualties and pilot survival. I thing it is absolutely vital.

I hadn't thought that far out in my comments, but you're right when comparing the later war Helen to the early war Sally.



FatR -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (1/19/2010 1:35:18 PM)

Early in the war you cannot reconfigure your airforce the way you want too, any major shifts in plane park take several months. But if you can allow it economically, yes, Sally is better. Light bombers hardly do any damage, except to Chinese. Also, in RL Helen never completely replaced Sally, in AE it should.



Mark Weston -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/5/2010 1:12:11 PM)

I'm into the first few turns of my first CG as Japan. And I have to say that the planning and logistics side of being a JFB is disturbingly addictive.

Informed by the fantastic discussion in this and other threads I have a fairly clear idea of what I need to do to get fuel and resources in the amounts I need. I have a plan for aircraft and engine production. I've planned a modest increase to the shipyards so that I can accelerate a few shiny toys. But without any previous CG experience I have no idea how much is needed in the way of armaments and vehicles, and that seems to get much less coverage here.

Perhaps the Japanese vets could share their experiences? Can Japan get by on current production in armaments and vehicles? If not, how much do you expand them? And when?



xj900uk -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/5/2010 1:28:26 PM)

Ahh, but that's half the fun of it you see.  No two persons ideas & experiences are quite the same.
There are lots of ideas and decisions you can make regarding Japan.  You have to safeguard & build up the economy, and to do that you need to protect the mercantile marine to get oil, resources and fuel back to the Home Islands - if you don't do that then all your ideas will just stay that way & never get put into fruition.



Mike Solli -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/5/2010 1:29:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Weston
Perhaps the Japanese vets could share their experiences? Can Japan get by on current production in armaments and vehicles? If not, how much do you expand them? And when?


Initially, I don't expand armaments or vehicles at all. The 72 vehicles does look a little thin though. I expect to increase vehicles to ~100 by Spring 42. So far, I'm ok with vehicles (mid-Jan 42), but that can change pretty quickly with one bad attack. I did lose half a Tank regiment when a cargo ship went down (proof that you need to put every LCU in at least 2 cargos). It's been rebuilt so that took a good chunk of the vehicle production.

Armaments, I'm still not sure about. It's growing nicely, but that will drop when you get major units. Gotta keep an eye on that too.



Mike Solli -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/5/2010 1:29:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Weston
Perhaps the Japanese vets could share their experiences? Can Japan get by on current production in armaments and vehicles? If not, how much do you expand them? And when?


Initially, I don't expand armaments or vehicles at all. The 72 vehicles does look a little thin though. I expect to increase vehicles to ~100 by Spring 42. So far, I'm ok with vehicles (mid-Jan 42), but that can change pretty quickly with one bad attack. I did lose half a Tank regiment when a cargo ship went down (proof that you need to put every LCU in at least 2 cargos). It's been rebuilt so that took a good chunk of the vehicle production.

Armaments, I'm still not sure about. It's growing nicely, but that will drop when you get major units. Gotta keep an eye on that too.



String -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/5/2010 4:29:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli



Armaments, I'm still not sure about. It's growing nicely, but that will drop when you get major units. Gotta keep an eye on that too.



Especially if you're playing scenario 2 where the japanese get extra reinforcements.



n01487477 -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/7/2010 4:28:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: String


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli



Armaments, I'm still not sure about. It's growing nicely, but that will drop when you get major units. Gotta keep an eye on that too.



Especially if you're playing scenario 2 where the japanese get extra reinforcements.

And even in Scenario 1, you'll need to bump it up ... this just shows LCU's arrival with VEH needs, without dealing with losses. The green line is the accumulated need, the blue is the production points and the red, when each arrives and the cost.


[image]local://upfiles/19798/712758D94CB042E591E80174A8C1FB52.jpg[/image]



Athius -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/7/2010 10:23:55 AM)

Doesnt seem to bad, the japanese player had enough points for the first 200 turns and it seems to restore afterwards



Mark Weston -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/7/2010 1:14:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Athius

Doesnt seem to bad, the japanese player had enough points for the first 200 turns and it seems to restore afterwards


Well yeah, assuming he suffers no combat losses!



Mike Solli -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/8/2010 4:12:07 PM)

Thanks Damian.  You just convinced me to increase armaments now.



Mike Solli -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/8/2010 4:12:08 PM)

Thanks Damian.  You just convinced me to increase armaments now.



Kitakami -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/8/2010 5:39:02 PM)

Mike,

Armaments or vehicles?



Mike Solli -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/8/2010 6:15:07 PM)

Duh, I thought he was talking armaments. [sm=dizzy.gif] I have already increased vehicles.  I'm thinking that 100 is good.  What's the verdict on armament factories?  Is 620 enough?



n01487477 -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/8/2010 10:02:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Duh, I thought he was talking armaments. [sm=dizzy.gif] I have already increased vehicles.  I'm thinking that 100 is good.  What's the verdict on armament factories?  Is 620 enough?

Mike,
I think I'm the culprit responsible for confused you by answering a question about Armaments with Vehicles ... sorry[8|]

Armaments at 650 will be fine ... and in fact you'll be turning them off for a bit sometime during the game as long as you don't lose too much.

Cheers
--Damian--



Mike Solli -> RE: Japan fuel/Oil requirements (2/9/2010 12:17:58 AM)

Thanks Damian. I was hoping you'd say that. [:D]



Page: <<   < prev  8 9 10 11 [12]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.6572266