RE: The Japanese Economy (Full Version)

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



Message

Historiker -> RE: The Japanese Economy (7/31/2009 4:28:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Xargun


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitakami
The problem with seeking a production of 45+ airframes per month is that we may only have a few factories to spare, even if we are VERY agressive in airframe production decisions (eliminating Ki-27b, Ki-36, Ki-51, and/or Ki-56 production), depending on style of play. So to assign a second factory to B5N2 production is not going to be easy, especially since A6M2, C5M2, Ki-43-Ic, and/or Ki-48-Ib might be competing for additional factory space. So for the airframes that we can only spare one factory for, the decision for most airframes is either production of <a value> or 2x <the value> airframes, due to how the expansion of factories works. Not easy to come up with an intermediate number.

One exception, but that is with the big Ha-35 engine factory... it goes from 180 to 280, and then to 380 (if anyone were inclined to increase production to that level). It does not go from 180 to 360. Jumps are in increments of 100 engines.

Hope the ravings of this lunatic are making some sense :)


Actually I believe all factories follow the same upgrade rule - if under 100 it doubles... Over 100 it adds 100 to it. But be careful of enlarging your engine factories too big as later in the war when you are short on HI you won't get any engines out of the factory as you have to have enough HI for the ENTIRE factory to run in order to get any... SO if you
are 1 HI short you will produce no Ha-35s that turn. I try not to have any factories over 100 as they get problematic to keep running on a daily basis. Usually 120 or so is ok, but I refuse to go much higher as I'm afraid of losing production.

Xargun


But does it matter? It won't cost HI if nothing is produced, so there's no difference in a 200 factory only producing every 2nd day or a 100 factory producing each day.
But if there are the necessary ressources/engines/Hi etc., the 200 factory may produce 200 day after day.
I consequently prefer huge factorys if I can afford them. They are turned off very often but if the losses are high and I need urgent replacements, a big factory can produce them, a smal can't.
Big factorys also keep a good output even after being bombed...



Mike Solli -> RE: The Japanese Economy (7/31/2009 4:30:53 PM)

I guess I have a different philosophy.  I don't overbuild factories.  That seems to be a waste of supply.  I'd prefer to put my excess supply into forts. 

That's not to say I don't like to pad my pool.  I like a lot of oil, resources and HI in the pool.  That way, when the inevitable isolation of Japan and bombing of the homeland starts, I can keep the economy going.



Historiker -> RE: The Japanese Economy (7/31/2009 4:32:45 PM)

The question always is: Would you be able to slow down or even stop the enemy (for some time) if spending more early?
And as I sayed: "If I can afford it", so there must be enough of all...



n01487477 -> RE: The Japanese Economy (7/31/2009 4:33:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker
quote:

Big factorys also keep a good output even after being bombed...


Have to disagree with you there Historiker ... I've yet to test the strategic model in AE, but in WITP huge factories will become rubble in no time ... I've seen it time and again in my game V Nemo121 ...

and this the real concern I have for AE, half the HI, for twice the output, but strategic bombing as powerful ... a nasty conundrum ... sure less means being better able to cap it, but ...

--Damian--

[edit] and lets face it, it was easy to accumulate in stock witp, maybe not so easy here, but still you start with HI in positive numbers.



Historiker -> RE: The Japanese Economy (7/31/2009 4:37:52 PM)

Ok, I was never strategically bombed so far. Guess I should consider this, too.
Which facilities have supply output, now? Heavy Industry, Light industriy and Oil Refinerys?

What about moveing Fuel over land, does that work? I've noticed there's oil and refinerys in norhtern Burma. Is the Fuel lost as it would be in witp?



Captain Cruft -> RE: The Japanese Economy (7/31/2009 5:49:58 PM)

You will find Fuel at numerous inland bases since it is an input for Heavy Industry, and it will move overland.

---
One thing I immediately noticed. At the start there are huge quantities of Resources sitting in Korean, Manchurian and Chinese ports which I would suggest getting back to the Home Islands ASAP. It's "free" and a lot nearer than the yet to be conquered SRA. The only problem is getting the shipping there to move the stuff. This may be where the xAKL type proves its worth ...

Suggested delivery points are Shimonoseki (port size 9) and Fukuoka (port size 10).



Mike Solli -> RE: The Japanese Economy (7/31/2009 5:55:46 PM)

Yeah, I agree.  In WitP, I always based some AKs in the ports you mentioned above and would scan them daily for a shipload of resources to send to the Home Islands.  Not sure how much excess there will be now, but I suspect there'll be plenty.



Q-Ball -> RE: The Japanese Economy (7/31/2009 7:20:31 PM)

Speaking of AKs, are you guys starting to feel like a crash program of xAK-ts is necessary right off the bat? The Home Islands are woefully short of troops lift capacity, and I hate to drive AK's around with 360 troops on the deck and an empty cargo hold.

It's important to get this right, because I think the primary limiting factor now in the initial Japanese expansion will be the availability of transport shipping. We could almost start a new thread on "Managing the Japanese Merchant Fleet", because it's completely different in almost every way from WITP: Needs, capacity, classes, roles, available escort craft, etc.



Mike Solli -> RE: The Japanese Economy (7/31/2009 7:28:06 PM)

Q-Ball, I'm beginning to believe that's the way to go at the start, and for a couple of months, at least.  The need for hauling cargo is (relatively) minimal at the war's start, but will pick up tremendously after the SRA is liberated.  I'm planning on listing all of the available xAKs in the Home Islands as well as the available land units to come up with a plan on what needs to be converted to get them into the war.  Also, we need to look at which xAKs need to be converted to PBs to escort them.  I'm looking hard at the To'sus and Kisos (170 and 795 capacity) for PBs.  Unfortunately, they're really slow.  The To'sus (10 kt) can escort the Gozan (58 hulls) and Miyati (59 hulls), which are also 10 kt.

Just some initial thoughts......



Feltan -> RE: The Japanese Economy (7/31/2009 7:35:39 PM)

For me, the jury is out about doing the conversions.

On one hand it makes sense. You need troop lift capability.

On the other hand, so far, I haven't been hampered getting units afloat and off to distant targets. Sure, it isn't as efficient using xAK's and xAKL's -- but it works.

What I find that I am short of is escorts. Given the lethality of surface combat, I am making sure troop convoys are (relatively) well guarded. At this point, subject to change, my guess the key constraint is escort vessels and not troop carrying vessels. If this initial take on things turns out to be true, doing conversions would probably be a waste of time and resources.

Regards,
Feltan



Mike Solli -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/2/2009 1:30:55 AM)

I've been doing some calculating. It's just preliminary, but I think the Japanese will still have excess refinery capability if they take all of the industry in the SRA and Burma intact. [X(]



Mynok -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/2/2009 2:58:05 AM)


Of course, they won't. Which will require more lift capacity to get supplies in place to repair refineries.



Feltan -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/2/2009 3:00:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Of course, they won't. Which will require more lift capacity to get supplies in place to repair refineries.



Oh ye of paltry faith!

Regards,
Feltan



Mynok -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/2/2009 3:01:47 AM)


It's paltry by reason of experience. [:D]



Nomad -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/2/2009 4:44:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SireChaos


quote:

ORIGINAL: Xargun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitakami
4. Torpedo bombers: 68 on land, 189 on CVs, 144 replacements (only 32 B5N2 though). Production ZERO. 3 CV/CVL-based and 15 land-based torpedo groups as reinforcements. The 0(0) B5N2 factory in Hiroshima/Kure should be increased to 32 or 64/mo. Which? Again, depends on industry. I am siding on 64 at this point though... thse guys are the IJN air arm's sting...


I would only expand to 32 per month. Most land based torpedo bombers will be using bombs 90% of the time and can be changed out for dedicated DBs as your stocks increase - or even upgraded to level bombers for that matter. Where you will need TB is for your carriers - but most times when I lose a lot of TBs from my carriers I am fighting other carriers - thus my flattops need repair time so having to wait a week or 2 to refill the TB squadrons on the ship is not a big deal, since it will take longer than that to repair the ships.

You have to remember an important fact - just like in WitP you get a random 1-30 to add to the size of the aircraft factory and then divide by 30 to get how many planes a day you build. So at 32 planes you will be building 1 a day with an occaisonal bonus plane thrown in. If possible, you want the factory to be in the mid to high 40s so you will usually get 2 planes a day - this is an easy way to double your output without much trouble and affects all aircraft.

I hope to find some spare time this weekend to look over the economy and the mess that we call China and have some insight.

Xargun



I donīt think this is quite what the random number is about. The thing is, with production given per month, daily production is always going to be X planes and Y/30 of a plane; the game rounds production numbers per day down. With rnd(30) added to the monthly number, Y out of 30 times the total of Y+rnd(30) is going to be 30 or more, meaning that the daily production is rounded down to X+1, and (30-Y) times it is going to be less than thirty, meaning that production is rounded down to X. This ensures that, over time, monthly production totals are going to be exactly the monthly production number. Or rather, the production number is for a 30-day period, not exactly a month.



Read section 13.2.2.4



grraven2004 -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 3:47:23 PM)

Question.

Looking at all the extra bases around the home islands I'm wondering if it would be prudent to start digging in early. Once 44/45 rolls around those smaller bases close to home could be havens for LBA leading up to the final invasion. Should I while I still have the ability right from the start dig these in or let them rot. What say you all?

Hokkaido I always get fortified early I don't really expand the airfields there as I don't want them used against me. Also where do you think an invasion would come from on the other islands? I've always believed the Kyushu was prime for AFB's to invade and I try to fortify that island early also.



Mike Solli -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 4:03:31 PM)

I fortify as I can, based on available supply.  I wouldn't build forts everywhere at the same time, just 1-2 at a time constantly.  Keep an eye on your supply levels.  If they drop in the Home Islands, turn the forts off for a time.  Remember, you have many areas all trying to use the same supply.  You will definitely have to set priorities.



Shark7 -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 4:08:04 PM)

I do make a point of fortifying Iwo Jima, Chichi Jima and Tori Shima and build them up. Iwo is a prime base for the allies, so no point in giving it to them without a hard, bloody fight.



Mike Solli -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 4:11:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

I do make a point of fortifying Iwo Jima, Chichi Jima and Tori Shima and build them up. Iwo is a prime base for the allies, so no point in giving it to them without a hard, bloody fight.


I agree. Marianas too.



Historiker -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 4:11:22 PM)

Iwo isn't necessary any more. Look around, a lot of islands that can also do the job...
Defending will be a really hard job without "a combined air-sea operation" as the General said in Letters from Iwo Jima.



A little question: Ships don't respawn any more, do they?



EUBanana -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 4:39:40 PM)

Speaking as an AFB reading this, you guys probably would need more Betties and less Zeroes than in WITP.

Fighter vs fighter combat is considerably less bloody than it was, but the Betty really is a flying zippo now.  50 a month?  You need more than that.  A lot more.



stuman -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 4:58:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

Speaking as an AFB reading this, you guys probably would need more Betties and less Zeroes than in WITP.

Fighter vs fighter combat is considerably less bloody than it was, but the Betty really is a flying zippo now.  50 a month?  You need more than that.  A lot more.



I am inclined to agree.



Mike Solli -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 5:09:30 PM)

Been thinking about ship class and best use over the weekend.  Then I realized how many bases with resources and/or oil have small ports in the SRA.  Those small xAKs/TKs are going to be needed to get the goods from many of the bases.  Those tiny ports can't handle much tonnage or large ships.  I haven't crunched numbers (and I forgot to list the port sized in the important bases in the SRA ([:@])) so I have to wait until tonight.  Those little ships are going to be important though.



Mynok -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 5:10:43 PM)


Yep, and it's gonna take at least a size 6 port to make a decent hub.



SireChaos -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 6:16:12 PM)

I think maximum tonnage docked is:

size 1: 6,000
size 2: 12,000
size 3: 24,000
size 4: 48,000
size 5: 60,000
size 6: 84,000

since all ports can be built up to 3 at least (at a cost), and I donīt think there is a single resource base that cannot be built up to size 4 ports, I donīt think the need for small freighters is all that urgent. As long as a base has port size 1, you can use a mid-size (3,000-5,000 ton) freighter plus an escort or two.

I agree, though,that there arenīt many candidates for hubs. There are, however, a few well-developed ports in the DEI, with repair shipyards, some industry of their own, etc. Since it is more efficient to let local industry convert what they can, and ship only the rest to the Home Islands, I think these bases make natural hubs. These bases are, IIRC, Singapore, Batavia, Soerabaja, Manila and Hong Kong.

On the home islands, I think itīs best not to use Osaka as a destination, but instead leave its loading capacity for outbound deliveries. Depending on where the traffic comes from, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Tokyo make fairly good destination ports.



Historiker -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 7:03:54 PM)

Depends on the procedure.
If you simply combine the small TFs to one big and send it home, the hub can be anywhere. Only if you tend to unload, you need a big harbour.



Mike Solli -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 7:09:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Depends on the procedure.
If you simply combine the small TFs to one big and send it home, the hub can be anywhere. Only if you tend to unload, you need a big harbour.



I tend to offload at a hub and send the convoy back to get another load from the same base. Then the hub creates a large convoy to haul the stuff to another hub or final destination.



Mynok -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 7:11:53 PM)


It was a no-brainer to unload under WITP. I'm re-thinking that under AE. Still leaning toward unloading for fuel efficiency purposes.



Kitakami -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 7:16:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman


quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

Speaking as an AFB reading this, you guys probably would need more Betties and less Zeroes than in WITP.

Fighter vs fighter combat is considerably less bloody than it was, but the Betty really is a flying zippo now.  50 a month?  You need more than that.  A lot more.



I am inclined to agree.


Well... Zeroes are much needed, as not enough Zeroes also means the zippos are lighted all over the place. But I agree that 50 is not enough. I did not consider that number enough in stock either. The numbers I am currently toying with are:

G4M1 factory: current, 25; increase to 50.
G3M2 factory: current, 22; increase to 44 OR change to G4M1 (becomes 15) and increase to 30... or 60.

110 G4M1 a month might be too much, but 80 sounds a lot more reasonable than 50 at this point.

Just random thoughts... still have to run them through a game or two to see if they hold up.



Mike Solli -> RE: The Japanese Economy (8/3/2009 7:31:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


It was a no-brainer to unload under WITP. I'm re-thinking that under AE. Still leaning toward unloading for fuel efficiency purposes.



Personally, I think it would be easier to keep the small TFs intact to move back and for forth between the base and hub, rather than have to recreate it each time I have to drain the base.



Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.078125