RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (Full Version)

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



Message

timtom -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/3/2009 11:59:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CJ Martin

quote:

ORIGINAL: timtom

As always, if one has any data that might be helpful in this or any other regard, don't be shy :)


Have you checked out all the data available at this site?

http://www.history.navy.mil/a-record/ww-ii/loc-ac/loc-ac.htm

There are *weekly* inventory/locations for all USN/USMC squadrons (as well as the locations of tenders and some other ships). These appear to be actual declassified USN reports from that period.

-CJ



Cheers, CJ :)

When I wrote "a historical OOB is (almost) done based on primary documents outlining the location and complement of USN carrier units", I was obliquely refering to these documents. If one knew the historical loss rates of particular aircraft, one could arrive at an decent approximation of PTO airframe allocations - providing one was able&willing to sink the necesary time into it - with the same material.




Jaypea -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/4/2009 1:56:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

IF you cut the AI production, come 43 I will bet you that you will be hard pressed to find an air threat from the AI. By then you will have probably sunk the AI's carriers, then what will you do? Where is the fun if you are simply taking islands with no threat or effort other than logistics.

The bottom line is the Allies are going to win against the AI, the only question is what strategy does the human player use and how fast can he do it.


My game is in January of 1943 and the AI has lost a total of 17K a/c and in reserve, the AI has 34k a/c plus all full groups on the map. I have lost 5k a/c with 1/2 of my airgroups idle due to lack of a/c. Up until late 1942, I was able to just keep up with the AI in terms of holding back the hordes. As of Jan 1943, my last reserves of planes hav ran out and my air groups are being decimated 1 by 1. With no chance to keep the AI numbers lower, I have stopped playing the game. Its very hopeless at this point and look forward its probably not until end 1943 that I would have suffient ARMY planes to go back on the offensive. Fighters, medium & heavy US bombers are pathetic in production. My only saving grace was canadian and british fighter groups which had enough fighters to help keep the horde at bay (but these reserves have just run out and now its all going down hill).

Jaypea



witpqs -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/4/2009 2:19:21 AM)

I'm in January '43 and things are not nearly as bad as you say. Things are a bit tight, but by focusing strong groups together I can systematically close enemy airfields. Here and there it's a bloodbath and takes time to break the AI strength, but why should it all be one way? And new a/c are coming on production, like Corsairs. I have loads of P-40E & K models, P-39 and P-400's, various Hurricane models, some Spitfires, P-38's, etc.

I think the trick is to treat the bombers like precious resources: train them up, concentrate them, provide escort, provide sweeps if possible, and definitely rest them between missions. Check your squadron leaders regularly and change them out when necessary. Oh yeah - perform recon for a few turns before you first hit an enemy airfield. It makes a big difference in how much damage you can do.

Good luck.



SuluSea -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/4/2009 3:09:56 AM)

I was alarmed at all the talk about allied players struggling for aircraft but then started to think about my playing style. I've played over 100 hours on the GC since release and was only on Jan 3, '42 before restart with the beta patch and can't understand how a person in '43 can be as meticulous with his forces as I am on 1 day turns. My forces are nothing to write home about but nothing unexpected either.

I have to wonder if an allied player uses-
size 5 airfields or better/ at the very least size 4
checks all his air forces every turn and don't abuse his forces
Leadership
uses escorts when possible and only attacks soft targets
gets air HQs at the airfield ASAP if none are there
Airfield at a safe location
Attacks from safe heights depending on the AAA expected
flies in good weather and not at extreme distances

will he be in a pinch with his LBA forces? I'd be surprised if this were the case.


I will ask a question to the air team/experts.

I usually refrain from attacking in extreme weather. I realize less damage will be inflicted on the enemy and believe it the weather take a bigger toll on my forces than if I attacked in decent weather. Is that modelled?

Is that modelled being will I suffer more operational casualties flying in extreme weather with LBA.
Thanks for all you guys do. [&o]



Mike Scholl -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/4/2009 3:46:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jaypea
My game is in January of 1943 and the AI has lost a total of 17K a/c and in reserve, the AI has 34k a/c plus all full groups on the map.



Does anyone else think these figures are absurd? Japan started the war with less than 4000 military A/C of all types, and built 8861 during 1942 (including 2935 fighters and 2433 bombers). So historically we're talking about less than 13,000 A/C (of which only perhaps 70% are actually represented in the game) ballooning to almost 55,0000 A/C (all of which are represented in the game).

I don't care how dumb the AI is, it shouldn't need a 500% increase in A/C from historical reality to be competative. That's just rediculous....



racndoc -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/4/2009 6:17:07 AM)

Actually, I think that the game designers just got things reversed....it was Japan that had the AC replacement shortages. According to "Shattered Sword", Japan produced a grand total of "just 56 carrier attack aircraft for all of 1942-a pathetically low figure." Akagi carried 66 AC at Pearl Harbor....at Midway she carried 54...18 Zeros, 18 Vals and 18 Kates. Kaga carried 75 AC at Pearl Harbor....at Midway she carried 18 Zeros, 18 Vals(plus 2 spares) and 27 Kates. Soryu and Hiryu carried 63 AC apiece at Pearl Harbor. At Midway, Soryu carried 18 Zeros, 16 Vals(plus 2 D4Y1s as recon AC) and 18 Kates while Hiryu carried 18 Zeros, 18 Vals and 18 Kates.

In effect "Kido Butai carriers had suffered a 16% decrease in their fighting power since December. Any casualties to the operating air groups, even damaged aircraft, would immediately impact the tactical cohesion of the air units, since there were no spare aircraft to feed into the formations."

Imagine a Japanese player in WitP sending his carriers into the penultimate air superiority battle to destroy the USN carriers with sub strength air groups due to a lack of AC production.....dont think Ive ever seen or heard of that one before.



Mike Scholl -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/4/2009 9:31:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AdmSpruance

Actually, I think that the game designers just got things reversed....it was Japan that had the AC replacement shortages. According to "Shattered Sword", Japan produced a grand total of "just 56 carrier attack aircraft for all of 1942-a pathetically low figure." Akagi carried 66 AC at Pearl Harbor....at Midway she carried 54...18 Zeros, 18 Vals and 18 Kates. Kaga carried 75 AC at Pearl Harbor....at Midway she carried 18 Zeros, 18 Vals(plus 2 spares) and 27 Kates. Soryu and Hiryu carried 63 AC apiece at Pearl Harbor. At Midway, Soryu carried 18 Zeros, 16 Vals(plus 2 D4Y1s as recon AC) and 18 Kates while Hiryu carried 18 Zeros, 18 Vals and 18 Kates.

In effect "Kido Butai carriers had suffered a 16% decrease in their fighting power since December. Any casualties to the operating air groups, even damaged aircraft, would immediately impact the tactical cohesion of the air units, since there were no spare aircraft to feed into the formations."

Imagine a Japanese player in WitP sending his carriers into the penultimate air superiority battle to destroy the USN carriers with sub strength air groups due to a lack of AC production.....dont think Ive ever seen or heard of that one before.



At least someone out there grasps the absurdity of this situation. [&o] And I would bet money that you, like me, would not have any problem if the game allowed the Japanese player to increase that pitiful historical output up to 200 or 250. [8D] But to THOUSANDS? [&:] This is just WRONG! And made worse by very tight restrictions on Allied carrier A/C availability. [8|]



jomni -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/4/2009 10:03:09 AM)

I'm playing Japanese and I'm glad I have all the produciton I can get. I'm losing more planes than allies and I fear the pilot drought in the future. This coulpled with my inexperienced air group management (a lot of may squadrions are tired and refuse to fly)and clueless production goals.

But of course I don't the the AI bonuses.



Smeulders -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/4/2009 10:56:30 AM)

A question to all those seeing such high AC numbers for the Japanese, at what difficulty level are you playing ?



m10bob -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/4/2009 11:53:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arimus


quote:

ORIGINAL: mullk

I'm not looking to change U.S. production but want to stop the 3000 aircraft Japan is producing by telling the AI to not expand to 400 airframes at game start.


Is there an AI script that increases Jap aircraft production?

Also, what would we call a community designed scenario that corrects historical problems in the GC?




Heresy.[:D]



Arimus -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/4/2009 1:00:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arimus


quote:

ORIGINAL: mullk

I'm not looking to change U.S. production but want to stop the 3000 aircraft Japan is producing by telling the AI to not expand to 400 airframes at game start.


Is there an AI script that increases Jap aircraft production?

Also, what would we call a community designed scenario that corrects historical problems in the GC?



Heresy.[:D]


Thank you! I thought I was going to get left hanging![:D]




Jaypea -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/4/2009 2:33:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Smeulders

A question to all those seeing such high AC numbers for the Japanese, at what difficulty level are you playing ?


I was playing HARD



pat.casey -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/4/2009 2:40:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Smeulders

A question to all those seeing such high AC numbers for the Japanese, at what difficulty level are you playing ?


I was playing on normal. As somebody suggested, I could *eventually* attrit the quality level of particular AI groups (which the AI doesn't seem to like to rotate) so in my most recent game I've managed to reduce the IJA and IJN pilot quality levels in the DEI significantly, but that doesn't stop a steady stream of full strength groups coming at me. I don't have the save game handy, but Japanese losses for hte first year of the war were dramatically higher than their entire historical production rate (like 3000 betties destroyed year one of the war for example) and the Japanese still had full groups.



Scott_USN -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/5/2009 9:27:05 AM)

The US produced about 2300 P40E's delievery starting around 9-41 (most built in 1942 many 2/3rds went to the allied nations)

1300 P40F's little different more engine little more control surface delievery started 12-41

There were about 2000 B/C/D models built starting in early 1941. With Brits/Commonwealth taking most of the D's

Of course some went to allied nations but still that is about 6000 fighters missing... :)

Anyway I used the editor an created the P40F and will build a few hundred. Even if 2/3rds went to allied nations that leaves 400+ for American inventory.

I just don't see Allied production as accurate in the early war.



eMonticello -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/5/2009 2:03:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

The US produced about 2300 P40E's delivery starting around 9-41 (most built in 1942 many 2/3rds went to the allied nations)

1300 P40F's little different more engine little more control surface delivery started 12-41

There were about 2000 B/C/D models built starting in early 1941. With Brits/Commonwealth taking most of the D's

Of course some went to allied nations but still that is about 6000 fighters missing... :)

Anyway I used the editor an created the P40F and will build a few hundred. Even if 2/3rds went to allied nations that leaves 400+ for American inventory.

I just don't see Allied production as accurate in the early war.


Don't forget that there were advanced training units that used and abused aircraft, too.

If you absolutely must know what happened to the P-40s or any other aircraft...

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher/usafserials.html



Sardaukar -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/5/2009 2:06:41 PM)

"Fire in the Sky" says quite conclusively, that problem until 43 was not lack of pilots, but lack of planes. Seems quite historical. 



DivePac88 -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/5/2009 2:13:43 PM)

Yes I have checked theater figures for P-40s (all Hawk models) for 1942, and if you add arriving P-40 units with replacement pools, they come out very close to historical figures.



stuman -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/5/2009 8:40:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

I was alarmed at all the talk about allied players struggling for aircraft but then started to think about my playing style. I've played over 100 hours on the GC since release and was only on Jan 3, '42 before restart with the beta patch and can't understand how a person in '43 can be as meticulous with his forces as I am on 1 day turns. My forces are nothing to write home about but nothing unexpected either.

I have to wonder if an allied player uses-
size 5 airfields or better/ at the very least size 4
checks all his air forces every turn and don't abuse his forces
Leadership
uses escorts when possible and only attacks soft targets
gets air HQs at the airfield ASAP if none are there
Airfield at a safe location
Attacks from safe heights depending on the AAA expected
flies in good weather and not at extreme distances

will he be in a pinch with his LBA forces? I'd be surprised if this were the case.


I will ask a question to the air team/experts.

I usually refrain from attacking in extreme weather. I realize less damage will be inflicted on the enemy and believe it the weather take a bigger toll on my forces than if I attacked in decent weather. Is that modelled?

Is that modelled being will I suffer more operational casualties flying in extreme weather with LBA.
Thanks for all you guys do. [&o]


Actually I was thinking the same thing. I never seem to run into most of these issues. Maybe I just have a methodical, boring style of play.



Reg -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/6/2009 12:25:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DivePac88

Yes I have checked theater figures for P-40s (all Hawk models) for 1942, and if you add arriving P-40 units with replacement pools, they come out very close to historical figures.


The problem with the mismatch in production is not with the allied figures......... [:(]




Djordje -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/6/2009 2:39:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Reg

The problem with the mismatch in production is not with the allied figures......... [:(]



The problem is on the side that AI plays. So if you play against allied AI they will also receive insane amounts of planes. Compared with Jap AI maybe not so many times out of proportion, but still huge and ahistorical numbers.
And like it was said many times, it is made that way to allow AI to be a challenge.
If you are asking for AI (especially Jap AI) to have historical A/C replacements be prepared to win the game before 1943 comes. And after first few months of the game it will become very boring experience.
PBEM replacements are completely different story and should not be mixed with AI replacements.



oldman45 -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/6/2009 4:00:52 AM)

Its Oct of 43, I sailed to Hokkaido(sp) and landed 2 divisions plus assets. Never saw a plane. I am a sloppy lazy player, you guys amaze me with the amount of work you do in a turn. Hats off to all of ya.

I own the DEI, I did it by building up the bombers, picking an airfield and bombing it to the stone age at night. Once it got to where there were few fighters, I switched to days and finished the bombing, then I took the location and moved on the to next one.

I know the AI pilots have little or no exp pilots left, I break up their air attacks if they bother to send any planes at all. My fighters tend to sweep them from the sky. I think the average exp of my non carrier pilots is low 70's high 60's. I have seen the message several times that my pilot training was accelerated, I assume that means I went through too many pilots. Non the less, I have driven the AI out of every where I needed them removed from. I still plan on being in Manila at Christmas. If the AI production was lowered, I would have been there by the summer of 43 and in Hokkaido(sp) about the same time.

I will try the game on hard after the patch, but I have enjoyed it on historical level. Other than the burps of the AI parking ships at ports I own it has been challenging and well worth the investment.





pmelheck1 -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/6/2009 5:02:40 AM)

You mentioned you didn't see a plane. Did you check to see if the Japanese economy has shut down? In my discussions of production levels this same thing was happening in WITP and it almost sounds as if it's happened to you as well. Any force sailing to Japan proper regardless of date should see aircraft even if only kamikaze. This is my primary concern about production.



oldman45 -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/6/2009 6:31:40 AM)

It took 3 days but they are sending over strikes now. I turned off fog of war (too lazy to load their side) and it shows 300+ planes that should be in range. Thats fighters and bombers.

Even if the a/c production didn't shut down the economy, the lack of oil should do it pretty soon. They are not getting oil or resources out of DEI or indochina.



pmelheck1 -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/6/2009 7:10:01 AM)

My only concern is the Japanese economy shutting down.  If this is fixed I'm very happy with that.  I'm not so much concerned with them having more aircraft than me.  I'd like a historical production number as I like historical counts such as the allies get, but with a bonus influx (even a LARGE influx) of aircraft based on difficulty to make the AI more challenging.  The AI cheating doesn't bother me as much as annoy me from time to time as I'm sure it does to others as well. 



pmelheck1 -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/6/2009 7:21:49 AM)

I know when I check economic health of the AI I look at HI, engines, aircraft produced, supply , fuel ect.  If the AI economy is collapsed then lowering production but raising bonus aircraft might be an answer.  I bring this up because of reading some of the well done treatments on the Japanese economy.  In most if not all of those posts overproduction is the #1 bad thing to do.  I'm just thinking if the AI economy can be kept "fat" by lower production it should stay healthy longer and shouldn't crash or if it does maybe help it recover.  I don't know if the AI economy will crash but all the symptoms causing it to crash in WITP are still there in AE and I haven't heard how much more robust the Japanese economy is.



John Lansford -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/6/2009 1:35:34 PM)

I wouldn't really have minded if the ahistorical production rates had been included in an "alternate history" scenario, but when I started the "historical" game I expected to see historical production rates for both sides.  Knowing that the production rates are nerfed to give the AI some extra advantage kind of detracts from the enjoyment of playing the game.



BigJ62 -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/6/2009 8:06:29 PM)

In patch 1 there will be a fix to expansion and in patch 2 there will be production caps that when triggered will turn on or off frames factories as needed.



pat.casey -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/6/2009 9:31:24 PM)

I understand now that the excessive production figures for the AI were done for the purposes of balancing player vs AI, and it probably makes for a more challenging game (in fact, I'm sure it does).

What I don't like about it is that it increases the challenge level by fundamentally altering the mechanics of the game. In human vs human play with relatively balanced production, attritional combat is a highly viable strategy for either side if they can get the ratio in their favor. In human vs Ai play, attritional combat is a waste of time (yes, i can reduce IJN quality, but I can never reduce their airframe quantity). The same thing is true for some of the other AI cheats such as the AI's ability to run aircraft out of bases with no aviation support.

If the AI gets to play by a totally different set of rules than the player, it may be more challenging, but for me at least its not more enjoyable. It'd be like if I bought Madden 2009 and they decided to balance human vs AI play by giving the AI side snipers.



pmelheck1 -> RE: Allied Replacement Aircraft Replacement Rate (9/6/2009 11:42:35 PM)

Thank you to the folks at matrix.  This sounds like a great fix to an already fantastic program.  No mater how heated things can get on the board I want to say how much I appreciate the level of support matrix gives to their products and listening to feedback from their users (fans).  No mater the answer to a perceived issue it's nice to know you do listen to us no matter how loony our ravings can get.



Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 7 [8]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.265625