Some questions for JFBs

Some questions for JFBs (Full Version)

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

Message

Uncivil Engineer -> Some questions for JFBs (9/10/2018 7:54:58 PM)
Sally bombers have no armor. Their eventual replacement is Peggy (Apr 44), which has armor, but at the cost of one less bomb in the load. Helen's upgrade from unarmored to armored with the Helen-IIa (Sep 42). Is the Helen-IIa a suitable replacement for the Sally-IIa? The Sally-IIb arrives in Dec 42, but is really no improvement on the -IIa. What does the S in SAP stand for? S_____ Armor Piercing The online aircraft data show the Helen carrys 4x250kg SAP bombs, but I've noticed when bombing ground targets they use GP bombs. What do Betty's carry when bombing ground targets at less than extended range? Aircraft data shows torpedo, and 2x250kg GP bombs at extended range. Combat reports I've seen suggest 2x250kg GP bombs AND 4x60kg GP bombs for less than extended. Why not 4x250kg? Does anyone replace the Val D3A1 with the D3A2? I don't recall seeing any of these questions discussed on the forum and a search for SAP got zero hits. Thanks.

rustysi -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/10/2018 8:21:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Uncivil Engineer Sally bombers have no armor. Their eventual replacement is Peggy (Apr 44), which has armor, but at the cost of one less bomb in the load. Helen's upgrade from unarmored to armored with the Helen-IIa (Sep 42). Is the Helen-IIa a suitable replacement for the Sally-IIa? The Sally-IIb arrives in Dec 42, but is really no improvement on the -IIa. I go for Helen's, but that's in stock scen 1. Stock 2 has the Tojo using the Ha-35 instead of the Ha-34, thus making the Helen a one engine wonder as no other plane will use its engine. From my experience armor or not Japanese bombers get slaughtered by Allied fighters, so not sure its worth it when its the only A/C using the engine. What does the S in SAP stand for? S_____ Armor Piercing Not sure. The online aircraft data show the Helen carrys 4x250kg SAP bombs, but I've noticed when bombing ground targets they use GP bombs. SAP bombs are for hard targets. GP or HE bombs are much better for ground targets, even airfields back then. SAP bombs don't have much 'boom' for the buck. What do Betty's carry when bombing ground targets at less than extended range? Aircraft data shows torpedo, and 2x250kg GP bombs at extended range. Combat reports I've seen suggest 2x250kg GP bombs AND 4x60kg GP bombs for less than extended. Why not 4x250kg? The combat reports are correct as the Betty couldn't carry 4x250kg. Something to do with the required hard points, or some such. These aircraft had no internal bomb-bay AFAIK. Does anyone replace the Val D3A1 with the D3A2? I don't. I don't recall seeing any of these questions discussed on the forum and a search for SAP got zero hits. Thanks.

Lecivius -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/10/2018 8:36:02 PM)
SAP = Semi Armor Piercing. A hardened casing with a delayed fuse

Chickenboy -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/10/2018 9:09:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Uncivil Engineer Sally bombers have no armor. Their eventual replacement is Peggy (Apr 44), which has armor, but at the cost of one less bomb in the load. Helen's upgrade from unarmored to armored with the Helen-IIa (Sep 42). Is the Helen-IIa a suitable replacement for the Sally-IIa? The Sally-IIb arrives in Dec 42, but is really no improvement on the -IIa. I prefer the Helen-IIa to the Sallys. But IMO you pick one line and produce it and phase the other out. quote: Does anyone replace the Val D3A1 with the D3A2? Goodness, no. Don't do that. Focus on the D4Y series wholeheartedly.

Lokasenna -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/10/2018 9:48:56 PM)
I actually see the Helen (and its transport sister) being the sole plane using the Ha-34 engine in scenario 2 to be a boon. It actually simplifies production - if it's the only plane using it, it's easier to plan and manage. Easy to not overbuild, easy to build just enough, easy to turn it off without worrying about ripple effects, etc. There's enough factory changing and expanding going on for engines in the early game that if you can't make room for 1 (or 2 small) Ha-34 factories in your plans... I also transition to the Peggy(t) later on, but the Helen is still an improvement over the Sally. It's your only mid-war ground bombing option, really - for what little ground bombing you'll be able to conduct.

GetAssista -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/10/2018 9:53:47 PM)
I ditch Sally as frontline bomber as soon as Helen-IIa arrives. Armor helps a lot against AA. Val variants were discussed ad nauseam, you just did not search properly. IMO +1 range is much more important than some speed + so D3A1 all the way until Judy arrives

rustysi -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/10/2018 10:26:09 PM)
quote: Easy to not overbuild, easy to build just enough, easy to turn it off without worrying about ripple effects, etc. OK, agreed... quote: There's enough factory changing and expanding going on for engines in the early game that if you can't make room for 1 (or 2 small) Ha-34 factories in your plans... ...but you are spending a lot of supply to get just one plane operational. In addition to that its not a plane that you'll use for the entire game as your bombing efforts will be curtailed at some point. Then factor in a late war replacement and its probable IMHO that the expense is better spent elsewhere.[:)]

Uncivil Engineer -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/10/2018 11:41:41 PM)
Thanks for the quick replies. I'm playing Japan against the AI (now March 43) specifically to find out how aircraft production "flows" through the game. I just recently realized that Helen is a good replacement for Sally, which had I known in Dec 41 would have changed my plans a lot. I'm playing Scenario 1, so the Tojo is taking some engines, which to date I've under-produced as I didn't previously contemplate building so many Helen's. I now have a lot of Sally's that might make good kamikazes, if they can be used in that roll later on. I didn't search about Vals. I stick with the original until the Judy replaces them. I wanted to see if anyone disagreed with that, apparently no one does. Good to know I'm not a total idiot.

mind_messing -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/11/2018 1:45:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Uncivil Engineer Sally bombers have no armor. Their eventual replacement is Peggy (Apr 44), which has armor, but at the cost of one less bomb in the load. Helen's upgrade from unarmored to armored with the Helen-IIa (Sep 42). Is the Helen-IIa a suitable replacement for the Sally-IIa? The Sally-IIb arrives in Dec 42, but is really no improvement on the -IIa. Helen is much better than the Sally due to armour, and will tide you over till the Peggy arrives. The Lily line should not be neglected however - the Lily dive bomber is a massive boon to the IJN! quote: What does the S in SAP stand for? S_____ Armor Piercing The online aircraft data show the Helen carrys 4x250kg SAP bombs, but I've noticed when bombing ground targets they use GP bombs. What do Betty's carry when bombing ground targets at less than extended range? Aircraft data shows torpedo, and 2x250kg GP bombs at extended range. Combat reports I've seen suggest 2x250kg GP bombs AND 4x60kg GP bombs for less than extended. Why not 4x250kg? As others have noted, it stands for Semi-Armour Piercing - designed to puncture a moderate layer (ie. a ships deck) of armour and detonate. GP bombs are filled with explosive with a contact fuse. You can check the different values of bombs using the in-game database. For "Effect" read "explosive power", while penetration gives an indication of how much armour a bomb will defeat. You can check in-game aircraft data to see what the loadout for Betty on extended range is. You can also use the editor to see loadouts for varying missions, but that's right off the deep end. quote: Does anyone replace the Val D3A1 with the D3A2? D4Y chain is your friend for IJN dive bombers. D3A only carries a 250kg bomb, while the D4 line goes up to 500kg and even 800kg bombs, in addition to being a better plane.

durnedwolf -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/11/2018 4:05:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Uncivil Engineer Sally bombers have no armor. Their eventual replacement is Peggy (Apr 44), which has armor, but at the cost of one less bomb in the load. Helen's upgrade from unarmored to armored with the Helen-IIa (Sep 42). Is the Helen-IIa a suitable replacement for the Sally-IIa? The Sally-IIb arrives in Dec 42, but is really no improvement on the -IIa. I stay Sally, but later the Helen get MAD. I stock up on about 200 Helen and then I stop. quote: What does the S in SAP stand for? S_____ Armor Piercing Shtty Armor Piercing quote:* Does anyone replace the Val D3A1 with the D3A2? I'm with GetAssista on selecting Range over speed.

PaxMondo -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/11/2018 4:31:22 AM)
The game allows for unlimited Helen production; a real EASTER EGG for the IJN. IRL, the Helen was very limited production and should have an SR=10 as the engines utilized a 2 stage twin charger that they struggled mightily with until sometime in '44. That is why the Sally stayed in production so long. So, yes build the Helen, a far better aircraft. The IJ need every Easter Egg the devs gave and even then it is an uphill battle. The D3A1 vs A2 models is a bit sad. It is more about rounding due to the 40 mile hex than anything. The range difference between the two was very minor 20-30 miles (maybe, pilot efficiency is greater than this due to manual engine lean trim), but in the game it costs you a hex. I have to say that given all the other Easter Eggs the devs gave IJ, this is one that they really should have given up. As it is, very few player upgrade whereas historically the A2 was a much better plane (more stable, faster, more accurate in dive) with a very minor loss of range. I think keeping the range the same to get players to upgrade would have been worth the minor 'rounding' error to make it happen and better match history. Particularly as a great number of aircraft ranges were juggled a bit for the exact same reasons. Just my thoughts....

Uncivil Engineer -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/11/2018 12:21:43 PM)
Many of these answers (much appreciated) encourage more questions. Judy 1-C and 2-C: Granted they are CV capable, but does anyone buy them out to put on a CV? And train them for CV duty? The Irving 1-C has +5 hexes more range and better maneuverability and durability. Lily: Not much of a bomb load for a 2-engine bomber. I've assigned most of them to ASW roles. Some have been replaced by Helen's for the extra range, but I'd rather be using the Helen's as replacements for the Sally (as discussed earlier). Use of 1-engine bombers for ASW, their 1 bomb load (Ida, Ann, Mary, Sonia) and short range, gives those planes something to do, but replacement by a 2-engine bomber costs PP in most (all?) cases. The Sonia camera is good for photo recon, but the range is too short. Should these crappy planes be bought out and replaced? I've done 1 or 2. Those not performing ASW on China's coast are trainers. Betty 2-L: Same range as Mavis 5 and Mavis 4-L, but only 57% of the load capacity. I changed the R&D to Mavis back on Dec 7. Ditto Hickory.

ElvisDaKing -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/11/2018 1:18:16 PM)
Ki-49 Helen is to be my level bomber until end of the war It has slighlty better range than Ki-21 Sally and carry 4x250kgs bombs vs only 3 for Ki-67 Furthermore Helen has better defensive armement....if it makes any different Armor, as per my understanding, only increases survivability of your pilot if plane is shot down : it does not make plane more resistant to damage , for which you have to consider the Durability of the plane So armor is very valuable if you want to fight above your own territory, but if plane is shot down above ennemy base, few chance to get your pilot back even if he managed to bail out... I don t build D3A2 due to its reduced range, and as suggested you need to push for D4Y serie and target to have the D4Y3 asap (it has much better service rating than D4Y1 and D4Y2, which are using less reliable Aichi Ha-60 engine) To boost the R&D for the Judy, i had to produce more than 500 Aichi Ha-60 to get the engine bonus, even if i was not to build so many D4Y1 and D4Y2... So i ended with great number of unused Aichi Ha-60 in my pool, reason why i decided to build the D4Y1-C as IJN recon plane : it has an acceptble service rate and i can dry off my Aichi Ha-60 stock, instead of producing the more expensive J1N1-C Irving with its 2x Ha-35 Not planning to use D4Y1-C on carrier, but it is single engine, so better for use on forward bases with small airfield, than twin engine Irving D4Y1-C Judy will be replaced in Aug 44 by C6N1 Myrt I dont produce Ki-48 Lily : it has a too light bomb load : with its 100kgs bombs, it is useless even if you manage to hit the target. All my IJAF bomber squadrons are on Ki-49 II Helen, even if some groups are still using early produced Ki-21 Sally (mainly in China, or for ASW purpose) You can spare the Ki-30 Ann, with its 250kgs bomb and 6 hex range, for ASW mission on the potential choke point. All other light bombers are only good for training duty For IJN transport, I produce H8K2-L Mavis : surely it has a very bad SR, so you cannot use intensively, but it has a formidable cargo load, 12400, and its main point : it is a float plane, so very useful to supply them, and to renforce/evacuate your troops when US bombers will start to smash all your bases, one by one, destroying the runways... Otherwise, i relay on IJAF transport groups with Ki-49 II KAI Helen, after they have replaced initial production of Ki-57 Topsy, using the Ha-5 engine pool available at the start of the campaign

mind_messing -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/11/2018 2:23:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Uncivil Engineer Many of these answers (much appreciated) encourage more questions. Ask away! You'll rarely get a consensus as every Japan player has their own little ticks... quote: Judy 1-C and 2-C: Granted they are CV capable, but does anyone buy them out to put on a CV? And train them for CV duty? The Irving 1-C has +5 hexes more range and better maneuverability and durability. Besides using one engine less than the Irving, the Judy C's have fantastic range with droptanks, but the main attraction of them is to enable you to turn the IJN land-based recon squadrons into land or carrier based long-range recon/naval search platforms. Japan has a lot of ocean to seach and too few patrol planes to do it. As an added bonus, it doesn't cost PP's to fly a carrier capable squadron on to a carrier, and due to the code it actually "unlocks" the unit to the "Independent" command, meaning you can move it where ever you like afterwards. quote: Lily: Not much of a bomb load for a 2-engine bomber. I've assigned most of them to ASW roles. Some have been replaced by Helen's for the extra range, but I'd rather be using the Helen's as replacements for the Sally (as discussed earlier). Use of 1-engine bombers for ASW, their 1 bomb load (Ida, Ann, Mary, Sonia) and short range, gives those planes something to do, but replacement by a 2-engine bomber costs PP in most (all?) cases. The Sonia camera is good for photo recon, but the range is too short. Should these crappy planes be bought out and replaced? I've done 1 or 2. Those not performing ASW on China's coast are trainers. The general consensus is that the IJA early war single-engine bombers are all rubbish. Of the lot, the Ann is the best for combat usage. The meta with Japan is to convert the frontline/ASW squadrons to 2E airframes and keep a cadre of squadrons flying the single-engine bombers for training purposes. You can use the single-engine planes for ASW, but it tends to be the 250kg bombs (found on most IJA 2E bombers) that kill or seriously wound subs. Don't be so keen to write off the Lily line. The Lily IIb/c is classed in the game as a dive bomber, and thus gains extra accuracy when on bombing missions. It's the only dive bomber the IJA get, it's the only dive bomber with armour and it has the highest durability of any Japanese dive bomber. Granted, the 100kg bombs are pretty sub-par but they'll do damage to everything with less deck armour than a heavy cruiser (and even then, they'll do some damage). In effect, the LilyIIb/c enables you to build an anti-shipping capability into the IJAAF long before the Peggy (T) arrives. quote: Betty 2-L: Same range as Mavis 5 and Mavis 4-L, but only 57% of the load capacity. I changed the R&D to Mavis back on Dec 7. Ditto Hickory. Yup, the flying boat transports are more expensive due to lots of engines needed, but well worth the flexibility as you can operate without the need for airbases to pick troops up and drop them off. A massive boon for Japan in the late-war if they need to evacuate garrisons cut off by Allied advances or reinforce a base.

Uncivil Engineer -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/11/2018 2:58:31 PM)
quote: As an added bonus, it doesn't cost PP's to fly a carrier capable squadron on to a carrier, and due to the code it actually "unlocks" the unit to the "Independent" command, meaning you can move it where ever you like afterwards. Yes, I realize you can "unlock" a squadron in a restricted command by flying it onto a carrier; but in the spirit of paying PP's to reassign restricted LCU's, shouldn't you also be required to pay PP's to "unlock" a restricted squadron. I'm playing against the AI so I can do whatever the hell I want and the AI doesn't object; I'm thinking in terms of a PBEM game. And, yeah, the extra engine on the Irving is a "cost" I had neglected. Can you upgrade a squadron directly to Judy 3 from Judy 1 without going through Judy 2? The SR 3 on the first 2 Judy's is the only reason to accelerate the Judy 3, as the other parameters are identical (unless I missed something). I haven't written of the Lily; I'm just trying to figure out how to use it - ASW or LCU/airfield bombing. I'm producing 30/month of the -IIb (DB variety) now and have a decent surplus of the older -Ib (unarmored) and -IIa (armored) in inventory. All are being used for ASW, except one squadron in training mode as it redeploys from Japan to the South Pacific.

mind_messing -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/11/2018 3:28:47 PM)
With IJ research, you can invest into the Judy 1 R&D factories, wait for them to repair, then move the R&D factories up to the Judy 2 and then the Judy 3. It's worth reading in to how IJ research works so that you can capitalize fully on this. The Lily DB version is the anti-shipping arm of the IJAAF, to be used the same way as you'd use Nell's or Betty's. The ideal ASW platform for Japan is the Helen, but pretty much anything with bombs can send subs home!

Lokasenna -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/11/2018 3:50:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rustysi quote: Easy to not overbuild, easy to build just enough, easy to turn it off without worrying about ripple effects, etc. OK, agreed... quote: There's enough factory changing and expanding going on for engines in the early game that if you can't make room for 1 (or 2 small) Ha-34 factories in your plans... ...but you are spending a lot of supply to get just one plane operational. In addition to that its not a plane that you'll use for the entire game as your bombing efforts will be curtailed at some point. Then factor in a late war replacement and its probable IMHO that the expense is better spent elsewhere.[:)] That supply would be spent anyway - it's not like I'm not going to use those factories on something else. If anything, the Ha-34 and Helen factories would be smaller (or at worst equal size) to whatever I used them for instead. I used the Helen extensively in ASW when I was done bombing.

GetAssista -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/11/2018 4:49:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing With IJ research, you can invest into the Judy 1 R&D factories, wait for them to repair, then move the R&D factories up to the Judy 2 and then the Judy 3. It's worth reading in to how IJ research works so that you can capitalize fully on this. You better produce Judy 1 every time. Some of the factories you switch to research later models, but not all of them. It is that much better compared to Val, you cannot afford to wait half a year for later models while in late42/early43, the most balanced phase of CV vs CV confrontation. Judy 2 can be skipped and not produced though.

Lokasenna -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/11/2018 6:52:13 PM)
Shhhh don't give him good advice.

Uncivil Engineer -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/12/2018 1:11:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GetAssista quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing With IJ research, you can invest into the Judy 1 R&D factories, wait for them to repair, then move the R&D factories up to the Judy 2 and then the Judy 3. It's worth reading in to how IJ research works so that you can capitalize fully on this. You better produce Judy 1 every time. Some of the factories you switch to research later models, but not all of them. It is that much better compared to Val, you cannot afford to wait half a year for later models while in late42/early43, the most balanced phase of CV vs CV confrontation. Judy 2 can be skipped and not produced though. I am producing Judy's. Managed to move production up from Apr 43 to Feb 43; I'm now in late Mar 43, so still in the process of replacing all the DB on the CV's, then the few land-based Val's. Can I assume that the upgrade to Judy 2 in Apr 44 is "free", meaning the factories come online fully repaired? And the Judy 3 in Aug 44? And Judy 4 in Feb 45? I don't really care about the Judy 2, as it's no improvement over the original, but I'm going to make some research changes to try to accelerate the Judy 3 to reduce SR from 3 to 1. Sooner rather than Aug 44.

Lokasenna -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/12/2018 2:26:30 AM)
If you have those production factories set to Yes on "Upgrade" in the industry screen, then on 4/2/1944 they will upgrade to the D4Y2. Unfortunately, you will not be able to advance your D4Y1 production factories to the D4Y3 until at least 4/1/1944 when the D4Y2 becomes available unless you have Realistic R&D set to Off (in which case you can change your D4Y1 production factories, if fully repaired, back to R&D). But any R&D factories that you set for the D4Y3 could of course be allowed to enter production whenever it arrives. I typically have the D4Y1 arriving in October 1942.

Uncivil Engineer -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/12/2018 8:20:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lokasenna I typically have the D4Y1 arriving in October 1942. Wow! How many factories do you have researching?

Lokasenna -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/12/2018 3:24:35 PM)
3 or 4. I think 4.

Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/12/2018 5:21:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing The general consensus is that the IJA early war single-engine bombers are all rubbish. Of the lot, the Ann is the best for combat usage. The meta with Japan is to convert the frontline/ASW squadrons to 2E airframes and keep a cadre of squadrons flying the single-engine bombers for training purposes. You can use the single-engine planes for ASW, but it tends to be the 250kg bombs (found on most IJA 2E bombers) that kill or seriously wound subs. 1E bombers are good when flown from small (level 2&3) forward bases, they work well during early offensives, when air support and supply are limited in the forward areas. I also used them in China, to train "green" pilots since bombing there has lower risk due to limited AA and air threats

rustysi -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/12/2018 5:47:10 PM)
quote: I'm playing Scenario 1, so the Tojo is taking some engines, which to date I've under-produced as I didn't previously contemplate building so many Helen's. Good, so in this case the Helen is a no brainer. quote: The Lily line should not be neglected however - the Lily dive bomber is a massive boon to the IJN! I neglect this aircraft habitually, but that's me. I see its small light bomb-load to be the problem. I find that using my twin engine bombers trained in lownav to be useful. Understand losses will be high, but its the results that I'm finding that make it worth it. Don't think two small bombs would give me the same bang for the buck. YMMV. quote: I stay Sally, but later the Helen get MAD. No personal experience with it, but from what I've read here MAD is not much help. In addition to that its only the Helen-1a that gets the MAD, and the Sally is a better plane than that one. There are many other ASW aircraft that will do a much better gob. quote: Just my thoughts.... I always listen to and respect Pax's thoughts. He'e one of the best here. quote: Judy 1-C and 2-C: Granted they are CV capable, I like to have some around to place on my CV's. Good range, not as limited by weather as float planes, fast, and can be added in small numbers as an additional air-group over and above the CV's limits (10%?). Check those limits to be sure. quote: Use of 1-engine bombers for ASW, their 1 bomb load (Ida, Ann, Mary, Sonia) and short range, gives those planes something to do, You seem to be passed the early game, but in the future keep in mind that these planes can be very useful in that early game. They'll operate well from small forward airbases. After that I tend to use them in training. quote: Betty 2-L: Same range as Mavis 5 and Mavis 4-L, but only 57% of the load capacity. Don't get too hung up on % load capacity. When transporting supply its one point supply per 2000 points of load capacity (one if less than 2000). For the most part for Japan that means one supply point per plane. quote: I changed the R&D to Mavis back on Dec 7. Ditto Hickory. I don't R&D such aircraft, I let them come naturally. Too much other need, too few R&D slots. I know it doesn't seem like that, but trust me.[sm=innocent0009.gif] One that note I'll start another post.

rustysi -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/12/2018 6:28:59 PM)
quote: Armor, as per my understanding, only increases survivability of your pilot if plane is shot down News to me, not sure about that one. quote: To boost the R&D for the Judy, i had to produce more than 500 Aichi Ha-60 to get the engine bonus, I wouldn't produce that many Ha-60, I find about half to be sufficient. You can still get the first Judy early '43. I got it in Jan. '43, using four R&D sites from the beginning of the game. quote: I dont produce Ki-48 Lily : it has a too light bomb load Same here. quote: other light bombers are only good for training duty Yes, but see above. quote: Ki-57 Topsy, using the Ha-5 engine pool available at the start of the campaign Don't miss this, you can get a bunch of Topsy-I's with out building engines. Just drain what's already in the pool. quote: Besides using one engine less than the Irving, the Judy C's have fantastic range with droptanks, but the main attraction of them is to enable you to turn the IJN land-based recon squadrons into land or carrier based long-range recon/naval search platforms. Japan has a lot of ocean to seach and too few patrol planes to do it. I still like the Irving. Isn't the Judy C-1 still an SR3 aircraft? At any rate use of drop-tanks still has some drawbacks. One thing for sure, Japan does in fact have a lot of ocean to search and needs aircraft like these. quote: The general consensus is that the IJA early war single-engine bombers are all rubbish. Meh, to a degree. Again see above. quote: keep a cadre of squadrons flying the single-engine bombers for training purposes. Yes, with one small caveat. Understand that these pilots will lose a small amount of experience when shifting to twin engine aircraft. Its really not much, but I just wanted you to know in case you were unaware. quote: Yes, I realize you can "unlock" a squadron in a restricted command by flying it onto a carrier; but in the spirit of paying PP's to reassign restricted LCU's, shouldn't you also be required to pay PP's to "unlock" a restricted squadron. I'm playing against the AI so I can do whatever the hell I want and the AI doesn't object; I'm thinking in terms of a PBEM game. I pay the PP's, and would expect the same to be done in a PBEM. There are those that are permanently restricted though, and you can do the same thing with these. In that case I would expect the player to accept the responsibility to keep track of and not move the unit out of the restricted area. I know its a pain, but that's just me. quote: Can you upgrade a squadron directly to Judy 3 from Judy 1 without going through Judy 2? The SR 3 on the first 2 Judy's is the only reason to accelerate the Judy 3, as the other parameters are identical (unless I missed something). A lot of folks here object to skipping when it comes to R&D. I'd check with my opponent before I'd do so. Yes, you did miss something WRT the Judy-3, its the first one that will carry an 800kg bomb. Boom, big boom.[:D] quote: Can I assume that the upgrade to Judy 2 in Apr 44 is "free", meaning the factories come online fully repaired? Not 100% sure what your point is here, but if you advance the R&D within the same line all factories will begin research on the next aircraft in line 100% repaired and ready to go. This will advance the 'available' date for said aircraft and you'll get it before April '44. quote: Judy 3 to reduce SR from 3 to 1. Yes, SR3 aircraft can be difficult to keep in the fight, but remember when used as a CV plane these actions tend to be short and furious. With that in mind the SR rating of a CV plane is somewhat less of a consideration. Doesn't mean you should ignore it though. Just sayin'.

rustysi -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/12/2018 6:31:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Uncivil Engineer quote: ORIGINAL: Lokasenna I typically have the D4Y1 arriving in October 1942. Wow! How many factories do you have researching? Like Lokasenna I too had four. Got mine Jan. '43. So with some possible differences in approach and die rolls you can see it may vary. I didn't have any engine bonus though so I don't know if that's a factor here.

rustysi -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/12/2018 6:33:09 PM)
quote: 1E bombers are good when flown from small (level 2&3) forward bases, they work well during early offensives, when air support and supply are limited in the forward areas. [sm=Cool-049.gif][sm=happy0005.gif]

obvert -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/12/2018 9:14:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ElvisDaKing Armor, as per my understanding, only increases survivability of your pilot if plane is shot down : it does not make plane more resistant to damage , for which you have to consider the Durability of the plane Armor does make an airframe tougher and harder to shoot down in addition to increasing pilot survivability. I think they lump things like self-sealing tanks into armor, but the pilot not getting shot in the back with a 50cal bullet will also mean the plane is more likely to stay int he air. [;)]

mind_messing -> RE: Some questions for JFBs (9/13/2018 2:42:29 AM)
Herein lies the beauty of playing as Japan, ask five JFB's a question and they'll give you fifteen different answers. quote: I neglect this aircraft habitually, but that's me. I see its small light bomb-load to be the problem. I find that using my twin engine bombers trained in lownav to be useful. Understand losses will be high, but its the results that I'm finding that make it worth it. Don't think two small bombs would give me the same bang for the buck. YMMV. The Lily IIb/c is a dive bomber, so you'd train NavB. I get that only having two 100kg bombs is a downside, but it's a dive bomber...for the IJA. What else is there for the IJA bomber force to do in the late-game when the Allied flak stacks force all bombers above 18k? The rest of the IJA airplanes need to try LowNav or regular NavB attacks, while the Lily IIb/c's get to hurtle down from 15000ft. Amusingly enough, they've the best chance of getting through Allied flak, given that they've the highest durability and only armoured IJ dive bombers. I'll take two 100kg holes in a CV than any number of 800kg misses. I think you shouldn't neglect this plane so much :) It gives you the best anti-shipping platform for the IJA long before the Peggy T - that in itself is massive: it's effectively doubling the Japanese ability to mount land-based anti-shipping strikes. quote: I still like the Irving. Isn't the Judy C-1 still an SR3 aircraft? At any rate use of drop-tanks still has some drawbacks. One thing for sure, Japan does in fact have a lot of ocean to search and needs aircraft like these. Both Judy recons are SR 2. The Judy can go 21 hexes on droptanks, the Irving 22. That's one more hex for twice the production cost. The Judy recon's are better value for money, and as a discount you can slap them on your CV's. quote: Yes, with one small caveat. Understand that these pilots will lose a small amount of experience when shifting to twin engine aircraft. Its really not much, but I just wanted you to know in case you were unaware. I was under the assumption that the different airframe type didn't apply to the bomber category (light, medium, level, heavy bombers). Do you have a source for that? Not that I doubt the sincerity of what you're saying, but there's an abundance of myths and inaccuracies pedalled around the forum that they become gospel.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.388672