RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (Full Version)

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



Message

Hokum -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 4:53:20 PM)

quote:

Japan SHOULD lose the war. Any other result would only prove the game was a hopelessly broken piece of garbage. That doesn't mean the Japanese PLAYER can't win by doing better than his historical counterparts..., making the Allies pay more for their triumphs..., holding out longer..., tossing monkey wrenches into the works.


So what you want is Japan in a better position and the US in a worst position? Isn't it what we have already?
For all its empire, Japan was a small country, its industrial capacity was lower than France's. If you want a challenge (i.e a game) you must help her in a significant way.




EUBanana -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 5:02:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hokum
For all its empire, Japan was a small country, its industrial capacity was lower than France's. If you want a challenge (i.e a game) you must help her in a significant way.


This is a game where history is agonised over, where killratios and surface engagements and every last xAP has been lovingly worked on and considered and matched up to history.

Allied aircraft production is supposedly as close to the real world figures as could be obtained. Air combat is supposedly as close to the real world as a game can manage.

...and yet Japanese aircraft production figures are orders of magnitude out in some cases.



DrewMatrix -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 5:20:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana


[
Allied aircraft production is supposedly as close to the real world figures as could be obtained. Air combat is supposedly as close to the real world as a game can manage.

...and yet Japanese aircraft production figures are orders of magnitude out in some cases.


Actually I disagree. I take the other side of that.

Boosting AI Japanese A/C production for play balance I could see. it's the Allied A/C prodcution rates that are silly. As I said, it would take 11 years at this rate to produce the numbers of F4Fs produced.




pmelheck1 -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 5:30:28 PM)

When I have looked at some of the production numbers for A/C primarily used in the pacific theater (f4f and others) allied production seems to be around 50% off.  As Beezle pointed out it would take 11 years for the player to produce the number of f4f's produced in real life where the Japanese AI produces more betties in one year than were produced in the entire war. I for one would like to see the Japanese AI restricted to what Japan produced historically if I'm playing a historical scenario. If I want a What if Scenario, and some time I do, I should pick a different scenario than historic. I don't want both those scenarios the same as they seem to be now. I don't know how difficult the AI programing is but maybe something like if production is at historic levels then don't expand. I haven't played Japan as yet but I always thought Japan should be able to increment factories at less than double amounts as it was WITP.



anarchyintheuk -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 5:38:16 PM)

Make sure you include FM-1 and FM-2 production in that calculation. The production number I see most often for USN F4F-4s is 1169.

I don't have AE handy atm. If someone can find more accurate numbers feel free to modify. Imo a very approximate per month replacement rate for F4F-4 would be 50-60/month.

1169 F4F-4 produced
(36) Essex (1x36)
(84) CVLs (4x21)
(144) Marine squadrons (6x24)

905 available for replacements/12/41-2/43 production run = 60/month




aztez -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 5:49:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns


quote:

ORIGINAL: jomni
But one thing that I fear is that playing Japanese with historical production is not winnable.



No one is really arguing that they reduce Japanese production. Only that they give the allies their historical capabilities. As it stands now the ONLY side that attrition war favors is Japan, and that flies in the face of history.

Jim


Very well said. This issue needs to be fixed with the patch.



pmelheck1 -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 5:56:14 PM)

I for one would like to reduce Japanese production IF your playing against the AI and it's production levels are above historical levels.  Again My issues with production isn't with 2 player but rather with the AI production figures.  Another alternative is give me control of the allied economy and I can crank out 300-600 P-40's a month.  Not historic but if the AI completely ignores history why should I forced to abide by it.



DrewMatrix -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 6:00:29 PM)

The high number (7000+) does include FM models.

so you are saying the F4F-4s (not FM etc) to USN and USMC only total ~1100-1200? And if you remove the F4Fs that show up in units (ie don't come from production pool) that is only ~900. 900/53 = 16 months. Better. What are the dates of F4F-4 production in the game? About 12 months?




Q-Ball -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 6:00:44 PM)

What is a long-term sustainable rate of A/C production in AE for the Japanese?

That is an long calculation, anyone figure that out yet, given the HI commitments to merchant, navy, armaments, and certainly engines?

Is this potential significantly lower than in WITP?

Certainly in WITP, the Japanese could produce way beyond the historical capability.

The other factor is pilot training: How sustainable are pilot losses with the new training model?

I think both of these questions should have educated answers before addressing a play balance issue. I am assuming that the AE designers meticulously researched the air production figures, and I trust they put alot of effort into it. It's one thing to change combat routines, which is a "game" issue and not a historical data issue, but it's another to change historical data. Maybe Timtom can weight in on this, because this is certainly a topic with alot of passion around it.



Mike Scholl -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 6:08:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hokum

quote:

Japan SHOULD lose the war. Any other result would only prove the game was a hopelessly broken piece of garbage. That doesn't mean the Japanese PLAYER can't win by doing better than his historical counterparts..., making the Allies pay more for their triumphs..., holding out longer..., tossing monkey wrenches into the works.


So what you want is Japan in a better position and the US in a worst position? Isn't it what we have already? For all its empire, Japan was a small country, its industrial capacity was lower than France's. If you want a challenge (i.e a game) you must help her in a significant way.



Then you shouldn't be able to call it "The War in the Pacific". How about "A Mind Fart in the Andromeda Galaxy"? Or "Pablum for Folks Who Can't Deal with Reality"?

Please understand me. I don't object to the "Tojo has a Wet Dream" scenario included in AE. Players should be able to explore this option if they want. But the rediculous production figures possible in the "Historical" scenarios, coupled with the reduction of Allied capabilities, means that there is no historical scenario at all. That I find objectionable.

As I pointed out before, give the Allies this kind of "production" capability and the Pacific would be overrun with hundreds of F4U's, P-38's, B-24's and B-25's before the end of 1942. Would anyone call this fair or realistic? I wouldn't, and I'm a dyed in the wool AFB. So why are we argueing that it's OK if Japan does it?




anarchyintheuk -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 6:08:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beezle

The high number (7000+) does include FM models.

so you are saying the F4F-4s (not FM etc) to USN and USMC only total ~1100-1200? And if you remove the F4Fs that show up in units (ie don't come from production pool) that is only ~900. 900/53 = 16 months. Better. What are the dates of F4F-4 production in the game? About 12 months?




I don't have access to AE atm so I don't know the production dates in the game. IIRC the F4F-4 production at Grumman ended in early 43 when the line was switched to F6Fs. Only about 100 F4F-4s were produced at Grumman in 43 so ending it at 2/43 is a good approximation.

Didn't see your last sentence. 12/41-2/43 = 15 months



Jzanes -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 6:15:26 PM)

I have not yet played an AE PBEM but I'm anticipating that the only viable tactic for the allied airforces will be to hit and run at least until 1944.  A half-way decent japanese player will know you can't stand and fight due to airframe shortages and will mass assault your airfields hoping you'll stand and fight.  The best the allies will be able to do is fly in their forces for one or two turns and then fly them back to the rear before they are shredded by massive japanese retaliation.  This is what I had to do in CHS and the replacement rates are even lower in AE.  Any allied base within the zero's range is gonna be untenable until 1944.  My two cents.



Mike Solli -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 6:22:42 PM)

Japan will have a difficult time massing due to the shortage of air support.  Their air forces will most likely be spread out.  Occasionally, they will be able to coordinate air strikes from different airfields, but that won't be the norm.

*Sorry if this post happens 3 times.  I'm just trying to bump up my post count. [:'(]



Jim D Burns -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 6:31:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk
I don't have access to AE atm so I don't know the production dates in the game. IIRC the F4F-4 production at Grumman ended in early 43 when the line was switched to F6Fs. Only about 100 F4F-4s were produced at Grumman in 43 so ending it at 2/43 is a good approximation.

Didn't see your last sentence. 12/41-2/43 = 15 months


Here's a good site for Wildcat numbers. http://www.uswarplanes.net/wildcat.html Of note is the fact 746 FM-2s were cancelled, so excess production capacity was there, it just wasn't needed.

The F4F-4 saw 1169 produced in about 24 months, so that's a production rate of 48 a month from the start of the game to the end of 1943, but I'm sure production ramped up as time went on.

Currently F4F-4 production doesn't begin until 3/42 in game, and it ends in 5/43, for a total of 525 produced over 15 months. No F4F-4s start the game on map, and only 5 air squadrons enter the game using the F4F-4, and all five only have 2 airframes in them, so the game only gives a total of 535 F4F-4s to the US.

If you divide the 1169 historically produced by the 15 months the game has F4F-4s in production, that would give you a monthly rate of 78 airframes. I wonder if a second replacement rate can be added as a factory that comes on line later (June 42 perhaps?) to increase F4F-4 production from the tiny numbers we have in game now?

Jim




m10bob -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 6:42:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk
I don't have access to AE atm so I don't know the production dates in the game. IIRC the F4F-4 production at Grumman ended in early 43 when the line was switched to F6Fs. Only about 100 F4F-4s were produced at Grumman in 43 so ending it at 2/43 is a good approximation.

Didn't see your last sentence. 12/41-2/43 = 15 months


Here's a good site for Wildcat numbers. http://www.uswarplanes.net/wildcat.html Of note is the fact 746 FM-2s were cancelled, so excess production capacity was there, it just wasn't needed.

The F4F-4 saw 1169 produced in about 24 months, so that's a production rate of 48 a month from the start of the game to the end of 1943, but I'm sure production ramped up as time went on.

Currently F4F-4 production doesn't begin until 3/42 in game, and it ends in 5/43, for a total of 525 produced over 15 months. No F4F-4s start the game on map, and only 5 air squadrons enter the game using the F4F-4, and all five only have 2 airframes in them, so the game only gives a total of 535 F4F-4s to the US.

If you divide the 1169 historically produced by the 15 months the game has F4F-4s in production, that would give you a monthly rate of 78 airframes. I wonder if a second replacement rate can be added as a factory that comes on line later (June 42 perhaps?) to increase F4F-4 production from the tiny numbers we have in game now?

Jim





Excellent site Jim, thank you..It underlines the point made by many.



anarchyintheuk -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 6:43:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk
I don't have access to AE atm so I don't know the production dates in the game. IIRC the F4F-4 production at Grumman ended in early 43 when the line was switched to F6Fs. Only about 100 F4F-4s were produced at Grumman in 43 so ending it at 2/43 is a good approximation.

Didn't see your last sentence. 12/41-2/43 = 15 months


Here's a good site for Wildcat numbers. http://www.uswarplanes.net/wildcat.html Of note is the fact 746 FM-2s were cancelled, so excess production capacity was there, it just wasn't needed.

The F4F-4 saw 1169 produced in about 24 months, so that's a production rate of 48 a month from the start of the game to the end of 1943, but I'm sure production ramped up as time went on.

Currently F4F-4 production doesn't begin until 3/42 in game, and it ends in 5/43, for a total of 525 produced over 15 months. No F4F-4s start the game on map, and only 5 air squadrons enter the game using the F4F-4, and all five only have 2 airframes in them, so the game only gives a total of 535 F4F-4s to the US.

If you divide the 1169 historically produced by the 15 months the game has F4F-4s in production, that would give you a monthly rate of 78 airframes. I wonder if a second replacement rate can be added as a factory that comes on line later (June 42 perhaps?) to increase F4F-4 production from the tiny numbers we have in game now?

Jim



Thanks for the site. Essex (maybe another CV?) and some CVLs also arrive with F4F-4s. I forgot to subtract the active/replacement Wildcats from the CVEs to my calculation above. When I get home I'll see what the AE oob has for an in game total.



EUBanana -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 6:58:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jzanes

I have not yet played an AE PBEM but I'm anticipating that the only viable tactic for the allied airforces will be to hit and run at least until 1944.  A half-way decent japanese player will know you can't stand and fight due to airframe shortages and will mass assault your airfields hoping you'll stand and fight.  The best the allies will be able to do is fly in their forces for one or two turns and then fly them back to the rear before they are shredded by massive japanese retaliation.  This is what I had to do in CHS and the replacement rates are even lower in AE.  Any allied base within the zero's range is gonna be untenable until 1944.  My two cents.


While I think it's silly that the Japs can attritt the Allies when I thought the whole point was that it was the other way around, I don't think it'll be this bad, for several reasons.

1) Replacements require a lot of supply, you can't just replace any time you want.

2) The maximum number of a/c you can replenish seems to be rather limited, at least when you consider the tempo of air combat. A week is a long time in a busy sector.

3) The fragility of Japanese aircraft means 2) will be an issue especially for the Japs.

4) Airfield attacks have been nerfed quite badly, and with the negligible bombload of the Japanese bomber force, it's not nearly as much of a threat as it was in AE. Allied bombers can still dish out a fair bit of damage, but Betties seem to do zip to airfields in my experience.



Jim D Burns -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 7:00:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk
Thanks for the site. Essex (maybe another CV?) and some CVLs also arrive with F4F-4s. I forgot to subtract the active/replacement Wildcats from the CVEs to my calculation above. When I get home I'll see what the AE oob has for an in game total.


The Essex arrives with the F6F aboard.

It appears another 204 F4F-4 airframes arrive on carriers, although I only checked the ones that arrived into about mid 1943. So that's an in game total production of 739, a little more than half of the historical production numbers.

It should be noted, that given what is needed to fill out all the arriving under-strength air squadrons and convert the early carriers over from their obsolete planes, the game doesn't even produce enough airframes to replace the squadrons full compliments even once for the squadrons that will be using the F4F-4s.

Jim



Jzanes -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 7:16:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jzanes

I have not yet played an AE PBEM but I'm anticipating that the only viable tactic for the allied airforces will be to hit and run at least until 1944.  A half-way decent japanese player will know you can't stand and fight due to airframe shortages and will mass assault your airfields hoping you'll stand and fight.  The best the allies will be able to do is fly in their forces for one or two turns and then fly them back to the rear before they are shredded by massive japanese retaliation.  This is what I had to do in CHS and the replacement rates are even lower in AE.  Any allied base within the zero's range is gonna be untenable until 1944.  My two cents.


While I think it's silly that the Japs can attritt the Allies when I thought the whole point was that it was the other way around, I don't think it'll be this bad, for several reasons.

1) Replacements require a lot of supply, you can't just replace any time you want.

2) The maximum number of a/c you can replenish seems to be rather limited, at least when you consider the tempo of air combat. A week is a long time in a busy sector.

3) The fragility of Japanese aircraft means 2) will be an issue especially for the Japs.

4) Airfield attacks have been nerfed quite badly, and with the negligible bombload of the Japanese bomber force, it's not nearly as much of a threat as it was in AE. Allied bombers can still dish out a fair bit of damage, but Betties seem to do zip to airfields in my experience.


Only time will tell but I hope you are right. However, even with the various new limitations, I'm afraid the japanese player will ultimately overwhelm any allied air strongpoint because they won't run out of planes. Even if the japanese player loses 2:1 in a-2-a and destroys only 1 plane per 10 bomber sorties, the #s will still add up to defeat for the allies with the current replacement rates.



Djordje -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 7:33:08 PM)

Why do you only talk about Japanese AI plane numbers? When you put allies under AI control they also receive insane numbers of aircraft. 2-3 days of bad weather at Takao at start is all that takes for AI to fully recover its forces at Clark Field. Good luck going into attrition war with them as Japanese after that. In January 42 P40s are flying everywhere - PI, PM, Darwin, Burma... All squadrons at full size.
Whichever side is played by AI receives HUGE amount of aircraft to make the game more challenging. And that's how it should be to make the game playable. If you want AI to get historical number of A/C at start what you will get is ahistorical player victory by the end of 1942.
PBEM replacement rates are completely different thing and should not be mixed with the above.



oldman45 -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 7:37:38 PM)

If everything is set to historical, and the AI cannot act accordingly or we as players use hindsight to ambush the AI, where is the fun in that?

The patch upped the production of the F4F and things are much easier. I would like to see the light and medium atk bombers numbers upped a little along with things like the A29. That would make it a bit easier. I am now in July 43 and that is the only issue I have with production.



DrewMatrix -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 7:49:07 PM)

Thinking about it I think this is the problem with the rate of allied A/C prodcution:

People are saying "The USN used 1100 F4Fs" etc, out of a much larger number of F4Fs produced and from an enormous (once it ramped up) production capacity.

So is it that the rate of prodcution has been reduced so that only the number of F4Fs actually used by front line USN units will ever be produced?

That would mean that the US doesn't have a large production capacity to rely one, but is instead limited to not using more units than actually reached the front lines.




Mynok -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 7:55:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jzanes

Only time will tell but I hope you are right. However, even with the various new limitations, I'm afraid the japanese player will ultimately overwhelm any allied air strongpoint because they won't run out of planes. Even if the japanese player loses 2:1 in a-2-a and destroys only 1 plane per 10 bomber sorties, the #s will still add up to defeat for the allies with the current replacement rates.



Only possible against the AI. A human Japanese is limited by pilots. Drastically.



Cathartes -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 8:15:33 PM)

Production at the beginning of WWII was slow, period. There is a common mythology that the US just simply stopped producing cars and tractors and switched to aircraft at the snap of a finger.  Also, that aircraft factories, quite suddenly, on Dec. 8, 1941 began cranking out thousands of additional aircraft that were already in production.

It took some time to figuure out what to order/afford, make the contracts happen through the Bureau of Aeronautics (bureacracy=slow), it took time to build and/or expand factories, tool, and retool as variants improved or the technology and organization to mass-produce them evolved. 

Delivery to the front lines was not instantaneous. Once an aircraft is actually moved outside of the factory, completed, it was no small effort to get the airframe to where it's needed, made combat ready, and matched with a sufficiently trained pilot who has a minimum number of hours in the specific airframe. Then there were the aircraft needed in the Atlantic, ETO, etc. Then there were contracts to other countries, aircraft lost in transit, aircraft lost due to ops before delivery, and others variables I'm failing to mention. Collectively, these factors reduce the number of aircraft that were actually available at the front line by a specific date.

The editor doesn't allow for a specific aircraft variant to have produciton ramp up with time, but using the F4F-4 (in-game) as an example, it's production ceases in May '43.  FM-1 production gets going in May '43.  Before that, F6F-3 production is at 130 beginning April 43. So if you aren't immediately replacing F4F-4s to get those Hellcats (simultaneously adding F4F-4s to the pool as you do so) then you are not playing smart (as PDU on or off allows). A smart Allied player will not overspend his airframes. He will keep an eye to what is currently available, and what will soon be available.

If anyone can give hard and fast records by month/year from the relevant factories and/or deliveries accepted by the Bureau of Aeronautics, for specific variants, and where they were delivered to, we would be happy to review.



DrewMatrix -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 8:21:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cathartes


The editor doesn't allow for a specific aircraft variant to have produciton ramp up with time



What do the on-map allied factories like the ones in LA do? Can you have a factory, in East US maybe, start making F4F-4s 3 months after the off map production starts, to add more A/C?




Jzanes -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 8:46:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jzanes

Only time will tell but I hope you are right. However, even with the various new limitations, I'm afraid the japanese player will ultimately overwhelm any allied air strongpoint because they won't run out of planes. Even if the japanese player loses 2:1 in a-2-a and destroys only 1 plane per 10 bomber sorties, the #s will still add up to defeat for the allies with the current replacement rates.



Only possible against the AI. A human Japanese is limited by pilots. Drastically.



Hope you are right but seeing the way things work having played up to May 42 (vs. the AI), I'm afraid the same logic applies to AE that resulted from the low allied replacement rates found in CHS. Maybe even more so.

With the current allied replacement rates, the japanese player only has to attrit the allies for a short time to exhaust the pools and shatter the allied squadrons for months. During those rebuilding months, the japanese player will be happily training both via the training command and in milk runs vs. defenseless allied ground units. The logical thing for any japanese player is to concentrate and smash any allied air buildup. The allied player cannot make good on losses and will inevitably have to withdraw and concede any base the japanese player wants to control. Sure, air support, overstacking, coordination, etc. will limit the japanese player but they only need to maintain a high tempo for a short period to overwhelm the allies. Sure, they will take their lumps and be less than totally efficient but they will win.

If I were to start a PBEM as the japanese today I would;

1. Pick a target area. Malaya, PI, Java, Burma, etc.
2. Concentrate my zeroes in a large airbase outside the range of allied fighter escorts.
3. Load this base and any nearby sizable (4 plus) bases with all the available air support, HQs, supply. Avoid it if you can but don't worry yourself too much about overstacking. We'll take that penalty in order to maintain mass turn after turn.
4. Maintain a moderate CAP over my base to slaughter any unescorted bomber raids. Nates and Oscars can probably handle this duty.
5. Delay any possibly dangerous invasions until air supremacy is won.
6. Sweep allied airbases until the allied player stops CAPing it out of frustration or inability to replace losses.
7. Airfield attack with bombers (preferably IJA) until the base is smashed. Continue to sweep these same bases to keep the allied player at bay.
8. Naval and port attack with IJN bombers to sink any allied ships within zero range.
9. Invade.

Rinse and repeat until you've got everything you want. Only bases outside zero range will be safe from this. Going steps 1 to 8 may take a couple weeks but only if the allied player uses their airforce to contest your target. Then you've still won, as they won't have anything to fight you with for the next several months. This result can arguably be said to be historical in early to mid 1942 but after that, not so much. Looking ahead, allied replacement rates don't really pick up till late 43 or even 44. That's a long depressing road for an allied PBEM player.

Sorry for the length and denseness of all this. I'm not trying to rattle any cages or offend anyone. Just trying to get some feedback to the dev's and hope they consider some changes in the name of enjoyable PBEM play.



erstad -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 8:52:23 PM)

quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: rominet
The japanese player won't probably have any trouble to have many good pilots as in 1 month of map training, the exp is growing from 10 to 70.



With all due respect, this isn't even close. At best, you could get one skill in the neighborhood of 70 with a month of training. Experience moves much more slowly.


I ran a quick test. I used the hotfix version, not the public beta. (The public beta seems to have something wrong with training). Head to head mode.

Group 1: Claude's in Japan. Pulled in 15 green pilots. I didn't properly capture the "pre" save but I assume they were on the order of 35 experience, give or take. Left the starting leader in charge. Set to 100% training on escort for 30 days, then 100% training on general for 30 days, so about 2 months total.

After one month, experience for the 15 "greenies" ranged from 36-46. Air skill was 68-72, but defense ranged from 23 (!) - 43. After the second month of general training, experience was 43-51, and defense was 52-68. Not terrible, but hardly Saburo Sakai stats.

Group 2: Dave's in japan. Pulled in 24 green pilots. Put on general training for 60 days. At the end of 30, they were at 38-48. At the end of 60, they were 37-51 (I had replacements on, so I assume some guy died and was replaced by the guy that ended at 37).

Also note that unlike Witp, AE has a finite set of pilot replacements. Basically, a JFB can replace about 10 pilots per day (plus a hefty starting pool). I have a sneaky suspicion that JFBs who try an all-out war of attrition are going to be surprised when they find they burn through the starting pool in 12 or 18 months and are in a downward spiral of pilot quality.

Whether there's overall balance in PBEM, I can't say - I'm only six weeks in. But suggesting that training will easily create uber-pilots is not correct. I can say with confidence it's hard. But one nice thing is that the training function in the engine works so JFBs aren't encouraged to do the bomb the empty airfield thing, which I will grant worked a little too well. That loophole is closed in AE, of course.




pmelheck1 -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 9:00:57 PM)

Personally I'm not looking to increase Allied production unless it brings it more in line with history.  My concern is growth of Japanese production by the AI.  When I played WITP the AI would expand aircraft production so bad that their economy would crash mid to late 42 and never recover because the AI would never cut production.  I would be swamped with aircraft for a while then never see anymore the rest of the game.  I also want historical accuracy in the historical game.  If the Japanese only produced 2000 betties during the war than roughly 2000 should be all they produce not 20000.  If playing against the AI the AI should NEVER change production except perhaps to lower it to account for loss of resources or perhaps a SMALL increase to account for increased resources.  Right now at least in my game betties are being produced at 5 times historical rate.  The AI will by wars end have produced some 13500 betties and Zeros.

Total Zeros produced: 11000
Total Betties produced: 2500

Zero numbers are not far off and I haven't looked at other fighters much.  But Betties are being over produced by some 11000.

Please note these are rounded figures.

in my game currently the Japanese AI is producing 840 fighters a month, 750 medium bombers a month it's producing 50 Mavis a month. For the Mavis at current production it will hit it's total war production in Apr 42.



Mynok -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 9:06:10 PM)

People are way underestimating the training problem. Air battles are less bloody in addition, so 'attrition' is more difficult to do for either side. Sweeps are quite easy to ignore and Japanese bombers are not very good at airfield attack. It is way harder than people think to attrite the Allies.

If your carriers range far and wide conducting massive operations you very well might have a plane problem. The Japanese DEFINITELY would have a serious pilot problem.

It is injudicious at best to project the old Witp Japanese situation to this one. They are radically different.



ChezDaJez -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/1/2009 9:08:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Japan will have a difficult time massing due to the shortage of air support.  Their air forces will most likely be spread out.  Occasionally, they will be able to coordinate air strikes from different airfields, but that won't be the norm.

*Sorry if this post happens 3 times.  I'm just trying to bump up my post count. [:'(]



That is correct. And the allied player can choose the time and place of attacks.

Here is snapshot of my production from my WitP CHS game with BradfordKay. I am the Japanese and PDU is on. It is Jul 44.

I started the war with 3414 acft of all types. I now have 7755 acft of all types on hand.

Air losses have totaled 10585 acft of all types.

Adding the acft currently on hand with those lost totals 18340 airframes. Subtract the 3414 at start and that leaves a total production run of 14926 acft for 32 months of war.

14926 / 32 = 466.44 acft produced on average per month!!! Give me a break!!! Massive Japanese acft production indeed!!! I currently have 9 units organizing because I don't have the aircraft to fill them out.

Every time I have tried to expand production even a modest amount, I have crashed the economy. As Brad can tell you, my airforces are hardly in any position to contest his moves to any large degree. I've had some successes but losses are killing me and he knows where the soft underbelly.

So again, attrite the Japanese airforces and the merchant fleet and allied production is no longer a problem.

I think the problem is that a lot of people want to be able to invade Tokyo on 8 Dec instead of having to play into 1944 to see the substantial allied forces come online.

Chez



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.984375