RE: IJFB R+D question (Full Version)

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



Message

Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/21/2019 7:36:31 PM)

Obvert you certainly diversified your setup, and no one can argue that it didn't work. [&o]



ITAKLinus -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/21/2019 7:55:28 PM)

Thank you for posting your R&D scheme, I didn't remember it.

I am much more focused. I mean, when I say "I go for Frank-b" I am putting 15 factories on it.

Oscar has currently 8 factories in my PBEM. I don't have too much waiting once I do research the first model. On the other side, I have to pick very few models at the beginning of the game.


Generally, for fighters other than the initial ones, I decide how much I will produce of each model and I run overproduction until I complete the production level I decided.
I produce in "lots".

To make an example. I decide I want 7.000 Oscar-IV. I calculate whether I can afford that even before deciding the total amount and then I run over-production until I have completed my production, then I redirect my efforts. It's weird, but it works somehow and it's quite an easy way to manage production.
This approach allows me to over invest in a model, skip intermediate ones, overproduce it for a while and then redirect my efforts.


I am lazy as hell currently, but I'll post my notes somewhere sometime and it makes sense. It's more expensive in terms of supplies, though, so there is a need to, at least partially, counterbalance this cost.



The very basic idea is:
1 - Heavy investment in few models
2 - Once they are researched, massive production thanks to factories going online
3 - Once you reach the desired production level, i.e. the total amount of the "lot" you decided beforehand to produce, you redirect your industrial efforts
4 - All these factories are redirected toward late game a/c, which would have a very ROI starting early R&D


Take Oscar-IV. You say you want to produce 7.000 Oscar-IV. You have an initial production of 100 Oscar-Ic/month. Put 12x30 with engine bonus. Once you research every model, you have 12x30+100 = 460 Oscar-IV/month. You start producing Oscar-IV in, say, 01.01.1943
Since you need 15 months to have your Oscar-IV lot completed, you will complete your "lot" on 26.03.1944
On that date, you increase your investment in other models such as late late fighters or other stuff.

It's just an example to show my state of mind.


I introduced this way of producing stuff for embarked fighters, which is somehow easy to define. I found it extremely efficient and simple and I decided to give it a try in general. It's good, provided you dedicate some time to calculate everything when you start the game and that you are able to make somewhat accurate calculations of your needs. Also, some models have to remain "open", meaning with no pre-defined production numbers.


Ehi, you are far more experienced than me and a better player for sure. I am just writing few considerations I employ with some success.


Last but not least, don't think it's an inflexible way of managing industry: it's actually quite solid and modifiable accordingly to unexpected situations.
Take also into consideration that I have never reached very late '45 in any game. I don't know whether this approach can have devastating effectes once you survive the first few monts of '45.



EDIT: oooops, little edit. I forgot to mention that I made a very simplified example of that. It's not that I decide for 7k oscars, overproduce them and then f@ck off. I probably decide for 7k Oscars, overproduce it for a while and then redirect part of the efforts. To make it more clear: I might produce 5k through overproduction, then I switch most of the factories leaving 200/month in order to complete the "lot". Don't think I do switch all those 13 factories of the example! I'm not so mad.



PaxMondo -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/21/2019 9:29:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger

Wow what a huge mistake on my part about the Frank. Why ppl have not scolded me for that? I will have to edit my post as I no longer have that original file. [:@]
Looking over things over until late last night, the george does not have many groups. Am I missing something here?
Currently only putting them on 3 factories.
I too am going for stream line tactics.

In PDU ON, all IJN fighter groups not on a CV can upgrade to N1K. It matters a GREAT deal whether your game is PDU ON or OFF. All of these discussions are assuming PDU ON.



Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/22/2019 1:01:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger

Wow what a huge mistake on my part about the Frank. Why ppl have not scolded me for that? I will have to edit my post as I no longer have that original file. [:@]
Looking over things over until late last night, the george does not have many groups. Am I missing something here?
Currently only putting them on 3 factories.
I too am going for stream line tactics.

In PDU ON, all IJN fighter groups not on a CV can upgrade to N1K. It matters a GREAT deal whether your game is PDU ON or OFF. All of these discussions are assuming PDU ON.

wait so zeros too?
edit: So looking at paper so to speak, the N1k2-J is equal to the A7m, and 11 months sooner. Your confusing my confused brain Pax...
edit, edit: I originally selected the N1K2-J over the Sam, then only gave it.....3 factories in favor of the Sam. (test build)in favor of the overwhelmingly favorite, the Sam
Im ready to shred my plans and go with Obvert style of diversification. I wonder if he's rich?[X(]



Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/22/2019 1:14:52 AM)

gonna run a test turn, and I will post where I am at.....and they call this fun....[sm=dizzy.gif]



PaxMondo -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/22/2019 1:30:31 AM)

N1K is not quite as good as A7M, but yes close and comes much sooner. A7M is CV capable, N1K is not in all stock scenarios.



Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/22/2019 1:45:03 AM)

Ok so what did I miss or where am I off?

[image]local://upfiles/20521/392B3372D7EE42C2BED0CC99BD97BFD5.jpg[/image]



Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/22/2019 3:56:19 AM)

Ok so sitting here thinking about things, not sure this will work in regards to engines.
With scen1 data, this is tuff. 20 factories. I have 13 producing now which isn't enough, and 7 for R+D, which isn't enough.
Can an air frame arrive before an engine?



PaxMondo -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/22/2019 9:47:12 AM)

HB,

OK, so with your investments in Judy/Jill you are saying that you intend to have a major CV confrontation with the allies late '42 or early '43. Thus, you had better have a series of tactics in place to make this happen or you have squandered a lot of RnD.

Against the AI, this strategy is quite achievable. In a PBEM, it is a measure of your opponent as to whether you think you can get him to commit his CV's B4 he gets F6F's.

Next, where is a Dinah factory? You commit 2 factories to IJN RC (and you get only a few IJN recon airgroups), but no factories to IJA airgroups (you get something like 5x the IJN recon airgroups for the IJA). Dinah is the best recon in the game, you want to build it for sure.

Next: you have 4+4+17+3 = 28 RnD on IJN fighters and 1+6+4+16+2=29 on IJA Balanced, and in total not inappropriate. Here's my rationale about either go big or don't bother. There are two reasons to go big:
1. when a new model is available, how long will it take to upgrade an average size airgroup to the new model.
EX: 6x30 means you will build 6 AC/day or it will take you 8 production days to be able to upgrade a size 48 airgroup. Not bad, in the first month you will have almost 4 air groups flying the new model; ie you can have a small impact in the war.
EX 2: 16x30 means an airgroup every 3 days, 10 air groups in the first month. This is a HUGE potential impact if you are moving from Oscar to Frank (or A6M to A7M).
1. How much sooner will you actually get the new model.
EX 1: 3x30 will get a model somewhere between 60 to 90 days early depending upon a lot of factors, call it 75. So in your plan, you will pull N1K in from 9/43 to sometime in 6/43 meaning that by 9/1/43 you will be fielding 4 or maybe 5 airgroups with N1K's.
EX 2: 15x30 on N1K will get you that same aircraft 3/43 and you would be able to field 60 (sixty) airgroups by 9/1/43. Of course you don't have 60, so it really means that ALL of your IJN non-CV fighter groups will be upgraded well before 9/43 AND 12x30 will be RnD on the N1K2 by then with 3x30 building replacements for your ongoing losses. NiK2 will be available early '44 where the same thing happens again (fast upgrade of all airgroups followed by large RnD push on the N1K5).

Clearly, this strategy of GO BIG can only work on 2 or maybe 3 models total. The decision of which ones to build is really tough. To use this on only 2 models, will allow you to go after a few other models with a 3x30 RnD effort. To go after 3 models means that ALL other models that you build will be 1x30 RnD (meaning you get them pretty much when they historically arrive, and then you will INCREASE that one factory to be as big as you need it. EX: D4Y will easily be built up to 120x1 or even 180x1 to support needs.)

Are any of these RnD strategies going to win the war for you? I doubt it. For me, I just HATE flying Nates/Claudes (or anything like them). A7M and Ki-84 are among the best aircraft the IJ gets and I want those ASAP.



PaxMondo -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/22/2019 10:01:33 AM)

A7M
You read about this a lot and you may think that IJFB's are over obsessive about the A7M. As you point out the N1K is almost as good and lot sooner. So what's the big deal?

The difference, and it is huge, is about coordination. CV attacks are your best coordinated attacks. Take 1000 LBA aircraft and assign them one target. You will get ~10 separate attacks on that target. Take the KB 1000 aircraft and you can get that punch in one single attack.

This is why getting the A7M is so important: it greatly improves the KB attack. The F6F was designed to kill the A6M and it does so with incredible efficiency. Likewise, the A7M was designed to kill the F6F which is also does very nicely. With the A7M, you have the muscle to get your KB attack through the Deathstar CAP … you are still going to lose +50% of your bombers to AA, but you should get some solid hits. Crap shoot if it works, but with the A6M it almost never works. See recent AAR results to once again prove it. If the A7M KB is supported with good LBA, an attack against the DeathStar can actually work … 50/50, maybe 40/60 … something like that. With the A6M, in all my sandboxing, I have gotten that to work exactly once. years ago, and I have never been able to repeat it.*

I need to add here, that in my sandboxing with the KB against the DS, the KB never survives. The best outcome is that the DS is crippled (down to like 1000 AC, about 50% of its original size). For the KB, whatever doesn't sink outright is in docks until the war is over mostly. But a 1000 plane DS is no longer supremely powerful, LBA can penetrate that and so the allies are in real trouble.

*It was a 10 hex attack AND miraculously the allies attacked a base on the same turn. It allowed the KB attack to face FAR fewer than normal CAP and it actually got through and achieved maybe 20 hits dropping the DS potency by about 25%. That is the one and only good result I have gotten with A6M.

**All my DS sandboxing is against a 9/44 DS. Still an early one, not fully developed.



Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/22/2019 2:24:48 PM)

Ok, so it's been probably a decade since playing Scen1 data. In fact I may switch to 101?hard. My current refresh game was not on hard, my mistake. I have reached out to Kull to see if the nasty can be placed into that scenario. Comparing data, the biggest change is 8 more engine factories. 20 vs 28. Supply is only up 300k and AC factories up only 10. My ultimate goal is to have a long and satisfying game. Restarts are just killer.

The Dinah fell on the cutting floor. I eliminated the Ha-31 completely. Please note, that I do understand the game, I just do not have that future experience you have, which is the reason for the post and I am very appreciative of the responses.
So the second Dinah will be built with the Ha-33. Now I know you are going to disagree probably from reading your posts, which I highly respect, but this is how and why I did this part. Engines at the start. Based on my refresh game, big issue at the start. I will build the Ki-15 using up the engines already available. (250)
This factory will then be the Dinah2.
Now, please scold me if need be, but here's my thinking on this next part.
In my refresh game, call me crazy, but the Ki-21-lc performed slightly better or the same. Ok, well on paper, it is better.
Also, in contrary to Obverts observations, the Ann was the best performing single engine plane. (250 bomb)
Transport, I changed this during the game (big no no on any model) and had a hard time filling things up. Here I went with Mc-21 this time.(3000 vs 2300 or less)
I played with some things and transports will be playing a role.
So these three planes have the Ha-5 in common. I've allocated 2x Ha-5. Maybe change this down the road, see how it goes.
Also, I never was able to fill all the groups, which bugged me. Hopefully the Ann can help out.

Investments in the Jill/Judy. Well again, lack of experience. Just wanted them sooner then later. I could scale this back and get other models I wish were in the plan. Judy vs Val, no brainer. Same for Jill. Thoughts were, basically what you stated. Build and build quickly when they come on line.
So keep 3 to build and the rest move on.(skip Y2 straight to Y3) Judy has more groups available, hence the difference in factory sizes.
The Jill thinking, build 2 move 3 on. I would still be building the Kate, when does the MAD become active? depending on factors at the time, I may skip the N1.
Again, lack of late war experience.
Fighters: Well here I was just going off you guys(es) experience. Too much? I have the A7m2 as per Pax. And I switched the Frank around a bit. (I followed my failed wire chart initially. DOH I did post a correction. [:-] So 8x 84a, 2x 84b. (went with 2 per Obvert)
[&o] Mistakes.

Recon. So my thoughts were purely based on the refresh game which is at the end of 2/42. I have not seen any Allied carriers. 0 In recent weeks, I did what I could to entice them into battle but they are hiding very well. I just thought if, this happens again and for other reasons, that placing the Judy on a carrier for the extended reach. Probably only a single group, hence the need for the Irving. Am I really that far off here?

Eventually:
Going back to the dawn of time. I am still building some of what is given. Now granted in my refresh game I need to do better with AF losses.
So the Ki-21 lla stays, but not expanded. The Ki-48lb stays, but not expanded. Why?
Within the first year we are very short to start without losses.(based on 317 days or less)
Ki-21-lc -75
Ki-21-lla -51
Ki-30 -4
Ki-36 -32 (worst plane ever so really -117)
Ki-48-lb -35
Ki-51 -74
Total -271 Now I do understand most of these will not see front line action and be trainers, but if your training ranks are not filled then training suffers.
Having said all that, some factories can be converted withing the first year.
I will be using Glens on subs, and paying PP's.
The Glen will open up eventually
I will probably shut down the Nate factory sometime in 2/42.
Then later, if my plan succeeds, the C5M2, Lily and Sally factories.
Followed by Mavis, Kate, Val possibilities.
I was hoping to then look to the Tony, Nf's or whatever holes need to be filled.
Final thoughts and regrets.
So before I begin again, I started this thread so hopefully I can have a long lasting game.
Late last night, I was thinking of trying a different scenario. Mostly because there are AF I
am really curious about. EX Can the Rex play a role? I'm sure the Spruce needs love too. Ok, just checking to see if your still reading...
Also is this 17 too hard, is 101 too easy. decisions....
But as always I appreciate everyone's help.






PaxMondo -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/22/2019 6:19:01 PM)

HB:
There are no mistakes. Just be sure your build plan supports the overall strategy that you intend to use.

Some general thoughts about what you wrote above, I may have more later.
1. build to use up old engines. Sure, why not. I generally do.
2. Ann is good, BUT Ha-5 also builds Ki-21-Ic and this one is MUCH better than the ANN (4x250 vs 1x250x2). Right?
3. build Glen the entire war or until you have no more Glen type subs (mostly B1 type). No expansion needed. When done, then you get one more engine factory and one more AC factory.
4. LR recon: Glen. I don't use them much for NavSearch, too valuable for LR recon. Then, Jake/Nell/Mavis for the IJN. For the IJA the Dinah III is the best recon in the game, Bar-None. Fast, low SR, good range. The allies wish they had one as good. I build a lot of them as I lose a lot of them because I will put them in harm's way to get intel. Recon Pilots are cheap to train (cheaper than fighter pilots as only 1 skill).
5. Transports: All of the IJA transport s___. The IJN has two good ones, I tend to choose the Tina because of range, but you can't go wrong with the Tabby. I rarely build both, TP's are a bit of a luxury and remember they are $$$$. It costs you 1 or 2 supply each turn for each plane on an active mission. That can be a lot of supply.
6. MAD is a very minor device. I never build for it, I simply use it when it is available. (In the db it adds 5 to the detection, no idea what the scale is, but I can tell you in my sandbox yes, MAD does help a bit, but not much. Pilot skill/exp seems to be FAR more important. So, sure if a plane has MAD great, but I never plan around it.)
7. Get your engine plan in place and start expanding on Dec 7 and don't stop. You should be spending ~15,000 supply each day until about Mar just expanding engine production. That means you are only expanding AC production about the same as you only generate 24,000 supply/day to start (Ergo dropping ~10,000 supply/day).

hope these thoughts help a bit ...





Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/22/2019 7:52:49 PM)

The plan was to build the Ki-21-lc, keeping the lla that is given at the start for just temporary. (see how it goes type thing)
Ok so the final question is engines.....

I sat here for a couple of hours looking over the plan and I am not happy with the number of engines given.
So, yes I understand the ramping up of engines, but again, no late war experience so here is my setup, will this work?
Engine x# Primary AF's
Ha-5 x2 Ki-21-lc, Mc, Ann
Ha-32 x1 Betty, (Sally-temp?)
Ha-33 x4 Nell, Jake, Val I plan on going for mostly Nell's over Bettys
Ha-34 x1 Helen
Ha-35 x5 Zero, Oscar, future
```````````````````````````````````
Ha-60 x2 Judy
Ha-44 x2 Jill
Ha-45 x2 Frank
Ha-43 x1 Sam

Now from my calculation and this is where I need help, I'm thinking it will be a real struggle due to the lack of engine factories.
1)can I get away with only 1x engine of the R+D side of things?
2)or keep it like it is until Judy arrives, move one engine to Jill, then 2 engines to Sam?

Ha-32 is -1 but this will work itself out, I know
Ha-33 is -2 at least, could really use another. again, I know time will heal but...
Ha-34 should be ok here keep expanding
Ha-35 +1 so to speak, need to bank for the future
Ha-5 is -3 ouch, I know this is the part that is non conventional, but 2Ex2 1Ex1 = 5 need them sooner then later
Ha-5 branch is designed to fill the ranks as quickly as possible including conversion. Converted planes could then help fill the ranks of existing non converted
Af's. I'm thinking of robbing the Jill of it's second engine factory. Converting the second Judy engine factory to Sam, down the road.
Future R+D would be
1x ha-60
1x ha-44
2x ha-45
2x ha-43


So...
do I rob my R+D?




Kull -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/22/2019 9:14:16 PM)

As an FYI, the Japan Air-Engine Plan link in my sig leads to a spreadsheet that does all the math for you. Figure out how many airframes your factories will build each month, and the spreadsheet tells you if you have an engine surplus or deficit...and then it's easy to plug in engine numbers to make deficits go away and/or prevent building too many. Easy to add rows if you are changing the items built by your factories, too.

Best of all, it will do all your "what-ifs" without actually changing outputs in-game. Don't change any of the actual production until you have your plan mapped out in the spreadsheet.



Chickenboy -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/23/2019 1:32:51 AM)

Hanzberger,

My engine pools in 1942 are meant to:

Get Ha-35 above 500-WAY above 500 and keep it there in the face of Ki-44-IIa/c production / A6M2 production, Oscar and Sally production. In Sc. 2, the Ki-44-IIc is an Ha-35 engine, so maximizing the research tree as well as getting the pool >500 helps to pull forward my Ki-44-IIc into 1942. Same with Ha-32 and the Ki-100-I. Exploit and enlarge while you can.

Likewise with my Ha-45s: I had a number of research factories going into that. Now, in August 1942, I am producing this late-war engine model in bulk and am over 500 in the pool. Just in time to start using that surplus for research bonus on George, Frank and a bunch of other wonderful late war planes.



Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/23/2019 3:40:28 AM)

CB your not helping....[:D]I am about to embark on Scenario 1 data, that means 8 less engine factories...so I doubt I will be able to achieve any bonus.
Maybe on the 35.
I guess we shall see how it goes, if I had 3-6 more I would feel much better.



Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/23/2019 3:49:00 AM)

Revised R+D hot off the press.

4 Ruffe
4 A6m3
18 A7m2

4 B6N1
4 D4Y1

6 Ki-43-lla
3 Ki-44-lla

1 Ki-45 KAla

4 Ki-49la

18 Ki-84a
3 Ki-84b

6 N1K1

3 Ki-67-la(T)

Now to head to Washington one last time to negotiate peace. [sm=00000924.gif]



Chickenboy -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/23/2019 2:44:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger

Revised R+D hot off the press.

4 Ruffe
4 A6m3
18 A7m2


The only way that I would say this makes sense is you plan on switching all those 4 Ruffe (or at least 3 of them) factories to A6M5 straight away. Also, you say A6M3. Not A6M3a or A6M5? A6M3 is not carrier capable, as you may recall. I certainly wouldn't waste precious research factories on their limited value.

quote:


4 B6N1
4 D4Y1


I think I started each of these with either 5 or 6 apiece.

quote:


6 Ki-43-lla
3 Ki-44-lla

1 Ki-45 KAla

4 Ki-49la

18 Ki-84a
3 Ki-84b

6 N1K1

3 Ki-67-la(T)


Only 3 Tojo R&D factories? You'll be sorry...[:'(][;)]

quote:


Now to head to Washington one last time to negotiate peace. [sm=00000924.gif]


Goodie! Let us know how that works out for 'ya. [:D]



GetAssista -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/23/2019 3:11:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger
...
18 A7m2
...
18 Ki-84a
...

Returns from additional R&D factories are quickly diminishing because they all still take ~2/3 time to arrival on average to fully repair, and R&D proceeds really fast since then. I have a formula for repair probability estimated somewhere here and run many simulations at the time. Even posted it somewhere on the forum but forgot where (I remember my pictures were near Lowpe's messages [:D]).

To cut it short I concluded that there is little reason to bother with R&D factories above 10, more of those better be spent on something else useful like George or Judy or Helen. Surely it is not some kind of hard threshold, just my personal cutoff point I chose from the simulation data

Also remember that Sam has an engine that is also far into the future



Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/24/2019 1:08:31 AM)

Before I rip into my buddy CB, it's nice to see you GetAssista. I followed your link earlier today briefly at work on my phone. Anyone try using their phone to access this web page? sheeesshh. Well, I was going along with others I highly respect. Having said that, I thought, agreed, that there is some kind of snowball effect with numerous factories of the same ilk. I'm gonna reread your link and comments in a few moments.

No CB you scenario 2 dog, I have less factories to deal with~! (it's painful and I'm jealous)
I actually thought the latest version looked better, based on feedback.
The Zero plan is just that, 1 ruff build 3 forward, same for A6M3. You gain some Maneuverability with the A6M3. Not investing much, maybe I'll skip it.
Def want some A6M3a's though. Plan was to build them out.
As far as ToJo, well I plan on having the Frank around the same time as the Ki-44llb lines comes on, or shortly after. No worries. [&:]

I'm gonna dive into GetAssista thread.
Good thing Washington decided to send us a few tankers in the meantime while we plan for war or umm I mean peace...



Chickenboy -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/24/2019 2:46:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger
As far as ToJo, well I plan on having the Frank around the same time as the Ki-44llb lines comes on, or shortly after. No worries. [&:]


I don't think so, mate. First off, the Ki-44-IIb sucks. That central line cannon has a laughable accuracy rate. You won't hit anything with it. For this line, it's the IIa or the IIc. You won't repair the Frank research factories completed in time. By using / exploiting the Ki-44X research line to jump ahead, you can have all of the Ki-44-IIa factories repaired in March-April 1942 then transition them immediately to IIc. So you'll be using research sufficient to get the IIc in 1942. WAY before you'll have any of your Frank research completed. Then you've got to grind out the research to pull it forward from its 1944 timeline. My prediction: almost a year difference between availability of the IIc versus the Frank. But I look forward to your report. [:'(]

[;)]



PaxMondo -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/24/2019 8:48:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
... First off, the Ki-44-IIb sucks. That central line cannon has a laughable accuracy rate. You won't hit anything with it. For this line, it's the IIa or the IIc.

True. IIa or IIc.



PaxMondo -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/24/2019 9:34:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger
As far as ToJo, well I plan on having the Frank around the same time as the Ki-44llb lines comes on, or shortly after. No worries. [&:]


I don't think so, mate. First off, the Ki-44-IIb sucks. That central line cannon has a laughable accuracy rate. You won't hit anything with it. For this line, it's the IIa or the IIc. You won't repair the Frank research factories completed in time. By using / exploiting the Ki-44X research line to jump ahead, you can have all of the Ki-44-IIa factories repaired in March-April 1942 then transition them immediately to IIc. So you'll be using research sufficient to get the IIc in 1942. WAY before you'll have any of your Frank research completed. Then you've got to grind out the research to pull it forward from its 1944 timeline. My prediction: almost a year difference between availability of the IIc versus the Frank. But I look forward to your report. [:'(]

[;)]

CB is correct, but it comes back to strategy.
Tojo is a very strong aircraft in '42, but as the F4U, P38, and Bolt show up it loses its luster. THe IIc is better than the IIa, but you get 90% of the IIc in the IIa with no RnD effort.

Frank is an end game plane. Getting it in late '43 negates the allied Bolt arrival, but moreso, you will be able to have it in numbers, big numbers. The allies don't get numbers in Bolts until '45. That's 18 months of supremacy in the mid-game with a fighter that is still one of your best choices in the end game.

The key is: the IJ economy is a zero sum game. You can only build a fixed, known, number of aircraft in any game. The second fact, and great advantage for the IJ is that you can choose WHEN and WHAT to build. The allies don't get numbers until '45. Those numbers are HUGE and of some of the very BEST designs in the game. So, as the IJ you need to decide the what and the when. The When is easy: everyone wants it as early as possible. The What is the trickier part: Do you want that number to be Oscars, Tojo's, or Franks for the IJA? And remember, all of those Oscars and Tojo's that you build (every single one of them) will become VP's for the allies. Either they are shot down, bombed on a runway, or used as pretty useless kami's. But they are all just VP's in the endgame because they are just not capable.

Listen to CB, he's a good player with a lot of experience. Obvert too, one of the very best players in the game.

Then decide your strategy. You can't have both (or all). If you want endgame fighters early, it means you have to sacrifice some early game ease. If you build 10,000 Tojo's in 42/43 (and you can and its been done), you will have to fight those Tojo's against the Bolts and Stangs in '45. Most experienced players would agree that this is a matchup that heavily favors the allies and you want to avoid that.



Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/24/2019 10:29:05 AM)

Oh I actually highly respect CB and yourself. Just joking around and glad you guys are pointing out mistakes.
Ok, so how many factories should be committed to the Tojo?



Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/24/2019 12:58:55 PM)

Do you guys ever skip the first Jill? This would eliminate an engine factory.



Chickenboy -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/24/2019 5:15:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger
As far as ToJo, well I plan on having the Frank around the same time as the Ki-44llb lines comes on, or shortly after. No worries. [&:]


I don't think so, mate. First off, the Ki-44-IIb sucks. That central line cannon has a laughable accuracy rate. You won't hit anything with it. For this line, it's the IIa or the IIc. You won't repair the Frank research factories completed in time. By using / exploiting the Ki-44X research line to jump ahead, you can have all of the Ki-44-IIa factories repaired in March-April 1942 then transition them immediately to IIc. So you'll be using research sufficient to get the IIc in 1942. WAY before you'll have any of your Frank research completed. Then you've got to grind out the research to pull it forward from its 1944 timeline. My prediction: almost a year difference between availability of the IIc versus the Frank. But I look forward to your report. [:'(]

[;)]

CB is correct, but it comes back to strategy.
Tojo is a very strong aircraft in '42, but as the F4U, P38, and Bolt show up it loses its luster. THe IIc is better than the IIa, but you get 90% of the IIc in the IIa with no RnD effort.

Frank is an end game plane. Getting it in late '43 negates the allied Bolt arrival, but moreso, you will be able to have it in numbers, big numbers. The allies don't get numbers in Bolts until '45. That's 18 months of supremacy in the mid-game with a fighter that is still one of your best choices in the end game.

The key is: the IJ economy is a zero sum game. You can only build a fixed, known, number of aircraft in any game. The second fact, and great advantage for the IJ is that you can choose WHEN and WHAT to build. The allies don't get numbers until '45. Those numbers are HUGE and of some of the very BEST designs in the game. So, as the IJ you need to decide the what and the when. The When is easy: everyone wants it as early as possible. The What is the trickier part: Do you want that number to be Oscars, Tojo's, or Franks for the IJA? And remember, all of those Oscars and Tojo's that you build (every single one of them) will become VP's for the allies. Either they are shot down, bombed on a runway, or used as pretty useless kami's. But they are all just VP's in the endgame because they are just not capable.

Listen to CB, he's a good player with a lot of experience. Obvert too, one of the very best players in the game.

Then decide your strategy. You can't have both (or all). If you want endgame fighters early, it means you have to sacrifice some early game ease. If you build 10,000 Tojo's in 42/43 (and you can and its been done), you will have to fight those Tojo's against the Bolts and Stangs in '45. Most experienced players would agree that this is a matchup that heavily favors the allies and you want to avoid that.


Good points all, Pax.

I do think there's room for compromise. I do think one needs to keep in mind that one has to maintain an edge before 1944 rolls around. Researching ONLY late war models and gutting the mid-war R&D/production (especially those that take advantage of research already done can lead to problems as well. When combined with the fact that most-maybe even the majority of games-never see 1945 due to RL player issues, it seems doubly important to not put all one's eggs in the late war basket. Extremes like building 10,000 Tojos in 1942 are obviously too costly. I've seen some pools of >1,000 A6M2s also, equally silly. But putting dozens of factories to build the Shinden or the Rocket plane (name escapes me) while the air corps is hollowed out in 1942-1943 is also problematic IMO.

Here's my main builds, Hanzberger:

August 12, 1942; Scenario 2:

A6M2/Rufe: current production stopped. <50 inventory reserve A6M2. ~50 inventory reserve Rufe. Both factories will be switched over to A6M5 production when it becomes available in about two weeks.
A6M5 production (September 1942): 1x56; 3x30
A6M5c R&D: 4x30. All R&D fully repaired.

A7M2: 7x30 R&D

B6N1: Production anticipated 12/42. 3x30
B6N2: 2x30 R&D

B7A2: 3x30 R&D

D3A1 production halted. Will be folded into D4Y1 production when this airframe becomes available 11/42.
D4Y1: Production: 4x30 plus above.
D4Y3/4: 3x30 R&D

J2M2: 4x30 R&D

Ki-100-I: 5x30 R&D. All R&D centers fully repaired.

Ki-43 IIa: 2x30 production
Ki-43 III: 2x30 R&D
Ki-43 IV: 1x30 R&D

Ki-44-IIa: 3x35 production. Current pools ~50
Ki-44-IIc: 5x30 R&D. Production expected 10/42. All R&D centers fully repaired.

Ki-61a: 2x30 R&D will go into production in 11/42.

Ki-67(T): 3x30 R&D

Ki-84a: 8x30 R&D

N1K1-J: 6x30 R&D

I should mention that I have >500 Nakajima Ha-35 in pools currently, so I'm getting the engine bonuses on the Ki-44-IIc/A6M5/A6M5c, etc. research trees.

Nakajima Ha-45 pools will be >500 within a week, allowing additional acceleration of repaired factories for George, Frank, etc.

Ha-32 pools are more slowly moving to >500 to expedite Ki-100-I R&D.



Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/24/2019 7:48:37 PM)

Thanks for that post CB, I am rethinking things for sure. You make some really good points.
If I choose to proceed with scenario 17 then I will have 8 less engine factories, 10ish less AF factories.
Some hard decisions to make. As of now, the B6N1 and all early Tonys are still on the cutting floor. (engines)



Chickenboy -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/24/2019 8:26:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger
If I choose to proceed with scenario 17 then I will have 8 less engine factories, 10ish less AF factories.


Well, why on Earth would you want to do that? [;)]



Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/25/2019 2:13:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger
If I choose to proceed with scenario 17 then I will have 8 less engine factories, 10ish less AF factories.


Well, why on Earth would you want to do that? [;)]

You know, your probably right. Even though I am doing very well in my 'refresh my brain' game, I still lack later war
experience. I'm gonna take another look at maybe trying 101. Not sure what Michaelm changed, no info given, but it should be better. This would give more flexibility on trying different AF's and practice on other things.



PaxMondo -> RE: IJFB R+D question (12/25/2019 4:41:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger

Oh I actually highly respect CB and yourself. Just joking around and glad you guys are pointing out mistakes.
Ok, so how many factories should be committed to the Tojo?

HB: there is no right answer here. It comes back to your strategy. How do you plan to play? What tactics do you plan to use? What expansion do you plan after the DEI? Are you going to AutoVic and if so when? Are you playing for the end game? etc.

EX: In a previous game my strategy was:
Get Magic Highway up and running by 1/15/42
Finish DEI/Burma by 3/15/42
Finish CK by 8/15/42
Take Calcutta and surrounding environs, link back to Burma by 9/15/42
Hold Burma/Ceylon until 6/44
Get DS into Bay of Bengal and attack by 6/44

I'm not suggesting using this nor would I suggest it is a good one nor is this even a complete game strategy, but it is a start.
As to RnD, what does this mean to me?
OK, so I'm going for a showdown with the DS in mid-44. I will still have relative ac numbers parity, but the USN has significant advantages in aircraft:
F6F v A6M: huge advantage allies. Speed, ARM, Climb, DUR
SBD-5 v D4Y: advantage allies; range, DUR, and bombload until the last Judy then almost parity.
B6N v TBM equal
So, 2 issues to address: Fighter and DB.
Fighter, I need the A7M in early 44 to reach parity. To pull in from 9/45 to 3/44 is really difficult. I know from experience, at least 18 factories. 21 for better odds. 24 to be sure.
DB: I would have to commit at least 4 RnD factories to move the D4Y4 2/45 to 2/44, starting from 4/43. If I start 12/41 with 3 factories, I also achieve the same goal maybe even a month or two sooner with luck.

Taking Calcutta will give me 800*.8=640HI (20% is conquest loss estimate). 640 HI/Day for 21 months => ~400,000 extra HI and more than 1,000,000 supply. The HI is capable of buying 10,000 more planes and the supply will not only get those into service, but also pay for those 10,000 planes (1E equivalents) to fly 100 missions each (roughly 5 months of combat). Average life expectancy of an IJ aircraft in 44 is ~45 days, so I'm covered.
That means I have remaining supply to fund 250 Air+Engine factory growth. More than I need.
So my plan is to put 24x30 on the A7M. High probability that it will arrive 3/44 and I will be able to fill the KB ccompletely in something like 45 days. So, the attack can happen no later than 5/15/44. With some luck a month or two earlier.
With my surfeit of supply from India, I choose to go with 6x30 on the D4Y4 starting 3/43. These will be early engine factories converted to D4Y once their production builds are complete and the D4Y1 RnD is complete.

This is just my KB IJN models to support one item in my strategy. I go through the rest of my stategy, work out what/how I plan to achieve and what I need to do so for the IJN. Repeat for the IJA. RnD plan complete.

Last thought: no plan remains unchanged once you engage the enemy. So, your plans need to be adaptable. I do a lot of what-if analysis once I have my plan in place. Things like What if I lose 3 CV's to SS's prior to 3/44? Or How many CV's can I lose prior to 3/44 and still have a viable strategy? What is my fall back plan if I fail this? etc.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.734375