Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: SBD-3 production is wrong

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: SBD-3 production is wrong Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/7/2010 12:42:33 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735
If you think PDU ON is equally beneficial to both sides, then you're smoking something. Is it nice for the Allied player? sure. But, it's about a factor of 10 less in importance when you can't change the types of planes you're producing.

Only if you don't know how to use it or, conversely, so incredibly good at micromanagement and forward planning, that it doesn't matter much, but I, somehow, don't see any of the known great Allied players among the usual complainer crowd.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735
And, Japan has 2 "countries" or nationalities to constrain him. Allies have at least 12 "countries", several of them don't even produce planes to have a choice in upgrades (Marines and India come to mind.)

Marines use the same pools as USN.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735
Want to have a decent Dutch fighter in 42? tough.

They get Hurricanes normally, and Hurricanes are the kings of air combat. Also, try making them survive to March of 1942, one day.





you donīt have to be a great Allied player to see and accept that the Japanese in the game still are far from what the Japanese were in real life and Iīm saying this as a JFB. Fact is that one carrier engagement can completely drain the Alliedīs SBD replacement for something like a year for example while taking down 250 IJAAF bombers mostly will only result in "click" production doubled, will have replaced my losses (including pilots of course) in two months.

And no matter what great Allied player you are, that wonīt change the fact that a Hurricane flies lower than a Tojo and will therefore lose against a Tojo sweep in pretty horrible kill ratios, but thatīs another issue.

If you say Hurricanes are the kings of air combat I wonder if you are a god like Allied player or the worst Japanese player. Want to see the kill rates of my Lightnings on 39000ft sweeps? They must be the kingīs father then...



< Message edited by castor troy -- 6/7/2010 12:44:07 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 91
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 3:20:25 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		With PDU off, the dutch get only one squadron that upgrades to the Hurri IIbTrop. That's hardly a war winner. 

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 92
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 3:54:07 AM   
Bradley7735


Posts: 2073
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

With PDU off, the dutch get only one squadron that upgrades to the Hurri IIbTrop. That's hardly a war winner. 


Yeah, but by 43, assuming you saved all the squadrons, those Dutch groups are still worthless. They can't upgrade to any other plane. PDU on or off, those Dutch groups are worthless after mid-42. Now, if you could upgrade them to P-38's, P-47's, Spitfires, etc. then PDU On for Allies starts to get a little better. The same is true for the bomber groups. They're obsolete by late 42 and no choices for upgrades regardless of PDU on or off.

That's why PDU on is not that great of a benefit to the Allies. You're limited to choices because of static production and 11 or 12 nationalities.

PDU on is a HUGE benefit to Japan. Choice of changing production and only 2 "nationalities" to hinder your groups.

That's why I made the comment that I wondered why so many AAR's are having these options available to the Japanese without concessions for the Allies. Then you see some whining about how hard it is to get air superiority. Duh. Japan's not flying Nates. They're flying Tojo's or Tony's. And, the Allies are flying the same obsolete Dutch, Brit, Aussie and US planes because that's half of what's being produced or there are no nationality options available.


_____________________________

The older I get, the better I was.

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 93
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 4:41:09 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		"Yeah, but by 43, assuming you saved all the squadrons, those Dutch groups are still worthless. They can't upgrade to any other plane. PDU on or off, those Dutch groups are worthless after mid-42."

The only way you can save those squadrons is to keep possession of one or more of the NEI airbases. All those squadrons are permanently restricted to KNIL command. I don't expect to have any ofter mid-42 or so...


_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 94
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 5:27:01 AM   
Bradley7735


Posts: 2073
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"Yeah, but by 43, assuming you saved all the squadrons, those Dutch groups are still worthless. They can't upgrade to any other plane. PDU on or off, those Dutch groups are worthless after mid-42."

The only way you can save those squadrons is to keep possession of one or more of the NEI airbases. All those squadrons are permanently restricted to KNIL command. I don't expect to have any ofter mid-42 or so...


You can change a base in Australia to ABDA command and fly all of them there. It costs about 300 PP to do so.

It takes a little luck as well as some thought to the escape path. But, saving obsolete groups is kind of silly. It reinforces the point, though.

_____________________________

The older I get, the better I was.

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 95
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 9:01:45 AM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

you donīt have to be a great Allied player to see and accept that the Japanese in the game still are far from what the Japanese were in real life

I don't see this, and don't accept this (because this is not true). Judging by AARs Japanese are somewhat weaker that they should be to keep the war going as long as it did in RL, or just about right, hard to tell precisely, because we can withness examples of unsuccesful Japanese play right now, but the examples of success (if any) mostly won't be available until late in the war.

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
Fact is that one carrier engagement can completely drain the Alliedīs SBD replacement for something like a year for example while taking down 250 IJAAF bombers mostly will only result in "click" production doubled, will have replaced my losses (including pilots of course) in two months.

No, it cannot. Even in the worst-case of major (exceeding historical SBD losses in carrier battles for the entire 1942) one-sided plane losses without any permanent impact on the enemy, USN can recover near-instantly in Autumn 1942, unless you seriously wasted your pools before. Again, go look at Q-Ball vs. Cuttlefish AARs, that's just what happened in their game once.

As about your claim for IJN losses replacement, it cannot be true, because the original KB cadre is literally irreplaceable, whether you take two months or two years. Not even against AI will Japan ever again field the concentration of uberpilots that is present in KB airgroups on December 7th. You'll never ever be able to train pilots to such levels. You'll never be able to pull out of frontline units hundreds of veterans with EXP 70+ and additionally train them in two-three skills. You'll need at least half a year to train the best possible approximation to the original KB Kate pilot as well. And the combined size of units that can do such training is far below the combined size of carrier torpedo squadrons, so you'll need to withdraw some carriers from battlelines for retraining (DB and fighter pilot take less time to drill, thankfully).

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
And no matter what great Allied player you are, that wonīt change the fact that a Hurricane flies lower than a Tojo and will therefore lose against a Tojo sweep in pretty horrible kill ratios, but thatīs another issue.

No, they won't, because they don't. Stop projecting the results of gamey deliberate hunting of leaking CAP in your game to the air model in general. And in fact, after playing with a HR which pretty much ensures that CAP will always be flying higher than the sweep, I'm starting to doubt if the altitude bonus is that significant in the first place.

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
If you say Hurricanes are the kings of air combat I wonder if you are a god like Allied player or the worst Japanese player. Want to see the kill rates of my Lightnings on 39000ft sweeps? They must be the kingīs father then...

Lightnings inflict disproportional casualties picking off small groups, but manage only about 1:1 against tough CAP. Of course, the very fact that I'm using Lightnings almost exclusively for attack means that the Allied airforce is in superior position. My Hurricanes generally have a better position to fight, either over their airfield or a friendly hex.



(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 96
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 9:07:57 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline 		have you got an AAR with combat reports running? If so, I will take a close look. If not, further discussing is senseless because without any ongoing combat reports there is no evidence for anything you are saying. Iīve been posting crs since day one and all but a couple of days that got lost are in my AAR. And thereīs lot of evidence. I donīt agree to any of your statements except you canīt replace 80 exp KB pilots but thatīs something you donīt have to. Indefinite numbers of skill 70 pilots work just fine.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 6/8/2010 9:08:12 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 97
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 9:53:05 AM   
Smeulders

 

Posts: 1879
Joined: 8/9/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR
And in fact, after playing with a HR which pretty much ensures that CAP will always be flying higher than the sweep, I'm starting to doubt if the altitude bonus is that significant in the first place.


What HR is that ? Could also be that the altitude bonus for CAP cancels out the sweep bonus to an extent, so as to even up the odds a bit.

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 98
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 2:54:27 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		So, if japanese production can get out of hand (esp with PDU on), why not have a house rule that says something like,

"If PDUs are on, Japan can only ~convert~ production of factories, but not ~expand~ production."

I'm very interested in the thread, because I'd certainly like to play a full campaign at some point. But neither do wish to get into late '43 only to "discover" some of the fundamental flaws in the game. I'd rather y'all discover them for me, have several hotly debated threads on the forums, then some form of reasonable house rules surface, so I can enjoy my game when it finally time for it...

:^)

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 99
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 3:03:37 PM   
Puhis


Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline 		On average Japan produced something like 900 planes/month, total 42000 combat/recon/patrol planes. Why not make this HR? Japanese player can produce whatever he likes, but only 900-1000 planes per month.

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 100
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 4:35:40 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

So, if japanese production can get out of hand (esp with PDU on), why not have a house rule that says something like,

"If PDUs are on, Japan can only ~convert~ production of factories, but not ~expand~ production."

I'm very interested in the thread, because I'd certainly like to play a full campaign at some point. But neither do wish to get into late '43 only to "discover" some of the fundamental flaws in the game. I'd rather y'all discover them for me, have several hotly debated threads on the forums, then some form of reasonable house rules surface, so I can enjoy my game when it finally time for it...

:^)

-F-




you lose production capability from switching production though. Or has this been changed?

_____________________________


(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 101
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 4:38:01 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

On average Japan produced something like 900 planes/month, total 42000 combat/recon/patrol planes. Why not make this HR? Japanese player can produce whatever he likes, but only 900-1000 planes per month.



that would make it pretty restrictive IMO as that would mean no matter how good or bad the Japanese are doing, they canīt ever produce more. Iīm really more a fan of making it at least twice as expensive to ramp up production the longer Iīm thinking about it. This would also tie it more to the succesful or unsuccesful conquests.

_____________________________


(in reply to Puhis)
Post #: 102
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 6:55:48 PM   
Puhis


Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

On average Japan produced something like 900 planes/month, total 42000 combat/recon/patrol planes. Why not make this HR? Japanese player can produce whatever he likes, but only 900-1000 planes per month.



that would make it pretty restrictive IMO as that would mean no matter how good or bad the Japanese are doing, they canīt ever produce more. Iīm really more a fan of making it at least twice as expensive to ramp up production the longer Iīm thinking about it. This would also tie it more to the succesful or unsuccesful conquests.


My suggestion was just for those people who think Japan should not be able to produce more than x number of airplanes. I agree that if japanese player is playing a good game, he should be able to build more planes.

My suggestions are:
1) Factory repair should be slower, not one point/day
2) Factory expansion should cost more
3) Halting ships should only release 50 % of shipyard capacity (that's got nothing to do with planes, but come on, Shinano is not going to dissappear from the shipyard when construction is halted...)

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 103
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 8:10:49 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

On average Japan produced something like 900 planes/month, total 42000 combat/recon/patrol planes. Why not make this HR? Japanese player can produce whatever he likes, but only 900-1000 planes per month.



that would make it pretty restrictive IMO as that would mean no matter how good or bad the Japanese are doing, they canīt ever produce more. Iīm really more a fan of making it at least twice as expensive to ramp up production the longer Iīm thinking about it. This would also tie it more to the succesful or unsuccesful conquests.


My suggestion was just for those people who think Japan should not be able to produce more than x number of airplanes. I agree that if japanese player is playing a good game, he should be able to build more planes.

My suggestions are:
1) Factory repair should be slower, not one point/day
2) Factory expansion should cost more
3) Halting ships should only release 50 % of shipyard capacity (that's got nothing to do with planes, but come on, Shinano is not going to dissappear from the shipyard when construction is halted...)



some good points, especially the thinking about the relationship between the capacity of building ships and building aircraft.

_____________________________


(in reply to Puhis)
Post #: 104
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 8:29:20 PM   
bilbow


Posts: 741
Joined: 8/22/2002
From: Concord NH
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

So, if japanese production can get out of hand (esp with PDU on), why not have a house rule that says something like,

"If PDUs are on, Japan can only ~convert~ production of factories, but not ~expand~ production."

I'm very interested in the thread, because I'd certainly like to play a full campaign at some point. But neither do wish to get into late '43 only to "discover" some of the fundamental flaws in the game. I'd rather y'all discover them for me, have several hotly debated threads on the forums, then some form of reasonable house rules surface, so I can enjoy my game when it finally time for it...

:^)

-F-


Hi Steve,

While it is true that Japan can produce whatever amount of planes it wants, all this ignores the fact that there are a limited number of squadrons to put them into. In my campaign it's still early, March 42, but I have already turned off Zero production because I've converted all my frontline IJN fighter groups, and have a pool in reserve, so producing more would be a waste. The limited number of groups makes the whole argument about Japanese production giving a huge advantage meaningless. PDU on gives some flexibility only, as it does for the allies.

_____________________________

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile- hoping it will eat him last
- Winston Churchill

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 105
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 9:19:38 PM   
AcePylut


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline 		What PDU does is allow the Japs to make "only" the best planes.  There's no amount of HI invested in building up some of the crap planes.


_____________________________


(in reply to bilbow)
Post #: 106
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 9:24:36 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		Ack! You have revealed my real name to the internet! Now I shall have to send someone named Luigi to to hunt you down!



Bilbow - but isn't the debate here that that "Yes, Japan can produce airfames to fill out their squadrons. And to your point that the number of squadrons limits the number of AC on map (so over-production do not imply that the map will suddenly be swimming in Tonys or whatever). However, in the case of heavy losses, Japan can replace those losses due to high production, whereas an Allied player may not be able to to do so, because he is limited to the number frames in the (historic) replacement rate".

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to bilbow)
Post #: 107
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 11:35:56 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

have you got an AAR with combat reports running?

Air combat reports are practically meaningless, since losses are almost never reported accurately. Overall statistics are more reliable, but still are subject to later corrections. And simple comparison of the number of lost planes does not tell much. Again I should mention Q-Ball vs. Cuttlefish AAR, where they already ponder Japanese surrender in September of 1943, even though Allied plane losses are slightly heavier.

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
Indefinite numbers of skill 70 pilots work just fine.

Too bad that Japan doesn't have them too. In stock you have just 60 planes worth of IJNAF fighter squadrons to be used for training at the start of the game. Assuming that IJAAF takes over the duties of actual air defence over Home Islands. Assuming a 2-month training cycle, and I believe that this might be way too generous under the latest patch, you produce just 30 half-trained (with subpar EXP and Defense) pilots per month. For the entire IJNAF. With bomber pilots situation is far, far worse, because 80% of them need NavT and NavS just to be minimally competent in their duties.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 108
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/8/2010 11:40:03 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

So, if japanese production can get out of hand (esp with PDU on), why not have a house rule that says something like,

"If PDUs are on, Japan can only ~convert~ production of factories, but not ~expand~ production."

Again, this is just asking the Japanese player to throw the game before it begins. Expect Japan to be pummeled into submission no later than the first half of 1944 if this houserule is in effect, baring a truly staggering difference in skill between players.





< Message edited by FatR -- 6/8/2010 11:41:16 PM >

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 109
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/9/2010 12:16:40 AM   
bilbow


Posts: 741
Joined: 8/22/2002
From: Concord NH
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Ack! You have revealed my real name to the internet! Now I shall have to send someone named Luigi to to hunt you down!



Bilbow - but isn't the debate here that that "Yes, Japan can produce airfames to fill out their squadrons. And to your point that the number of squadrons limits the number of AC on map (so over-production do not imply that the map will suddenly be swimming in Tonys or whatever). However, in the case of heavy losses, Japan can replace those losses due to high production, whereas an Allied player may not be able to to do so, because he is limited to the number frames in the (historic) replacement rate".

-F-


Give me Luigi's contact info and I will email him my address. Maybe he's an AE player.

Japan can more easily relace the airframes, true, but the allies are far better able to take raw pilots from school and train them up to acceptable levels. More Tonies or whatever are worthless when flown by 40 air skill pilots. In my Jap campaign, early March 42 I have at the moment 3 IJN fighter pilots in my reserve pool with 70 air skill, 8 IJAAF. That includes retaining Taiyo and Ryuho airgroups in the HI as training squadrons. In my Allied game, early May 42 I have 95 USAAF pilots, 40 USN, same skill level. In the event of heavy losses building the airframes won't do me much good unless I train them for 2-3 months.

Bill


_____________________________

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile- hoping it will eat him last
- Winston Churchill

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 110
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/9/2010 2:30:19 AM   
bklooste

 

Posts: 1104
Joined: 4/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

On average Japan produced something like 900 planes/month, total 42000 combat/recon/patrol planes. Why not make this HR? Japanese player can produce whatever he likes, but only 900-1000 planes per month.



that would make it pretty restrictive IMO as that would mean no matter how good or bad the Japanese are doing, they canīt ever produce more. Iīm really more a fan of making it at least twice as expensive to ramp up production the longer Iīm thinking about it. This would also tie it more to the succesful or unsuccesful conquests.


My suggestion was just for those people who think Japan should not be able to produce more than x number of airplanes. I agree that if japanese player is playing a good game, he should be able to build more planes.

My suggestions are:
1) Factory repair should be slower, not one point/day
2) Factory expansion should cost more
3) Halting ships should only release 50 % of shipyard capacity (that's got nothing to do with planes, but come on, Shinano is not going to dissappear from the shipyard when construction is halted...)


Yes most of these are good , but need some modification.

1) Repairs should be 1 point per day (from air attack) but expansions should be slower and BURSTY eg after 29 days + 0 but after 50 days +30%.
2) Prob correct , retooling which sometimes is needed is expensive.
3) Agreed but then you should also have a scrap option eg Shinanos sister ( hull 111) was in the yards at 30% complete it was scrapped when war broke out. A scrap option should release a significant amount of resources in 111's case it would be 20K tons of steel .

_____________________________

Underdog Fanboy

(in reply to Puhis)
Post #: 111
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/9/2010 2:45:27 AM   
bklooste

 

Posts: 1104
Joined: 4/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Ack! You have revealed my real name to the internet! Now I shall have to send someone named Luigi to to hunt you down!



Bilbow - but isn't the debate here that that "Yes, Japan can produce airfames to fill out their squadrons. And to your point that the number of squadrons limits the number of AC on map (so over-production do not imply that the map will suddenly be swimming in Tonys or whatever). However, in the case of heavy losses, Japan can replace those losses due to high production, whereas an Allied player may not be able to to do so, because he is limited to the number frames in the (historic) replacement rate".

-F-


Correct in AARs with quite games the allies are completely dominant a year ahead of historic. In active games the reverse happens . But the allies did pursue a Europe first policy so as long as Japan doesnt take Hawaii or Alaska the US would not have diverted production.



quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

So, if japanese production can get out of hand (esp with PDU on), why not have a house rule that says something like,

"If PDUs are on, Japan can only ~convert~ production of factories, but not ~expand~ production."

I'm very interested in the thread, because I'd certainly like to play a full campaign at some point. But neither do wish to get into late '43 only to "discover" some of the fundamental flaws in the game. I'd rather y'all discover them for me, have several hotly debated threads on the forums, then some form of reasonable house rules surface, so I can enjoy my game when it finally time for it...

:^)

-F-


I dont think the game is much out of line.
- In a lot of games the allies are destroying the Japanese air much earlier than historic
- To date no one has reached Japanese 44 levels of production ( despit better convoying and less ships lost to subs) .
- The main reaons Japan does better here is 20/20 knowledge they are not going to fight Hell cats and Mustangs in Nates or A6M2s thats a lot of pilots saved...In turn the allies dont risk their CVs in 41-42.
- Most players make hard decisions EARLIER which gives Japan some bonuses in mid 42 , esp in active air war games ( eg spending the supplies to restart Kates , building Mabels etc)
- Japanese non trainer Fighter production in 41 was 1080 , 42 2935 .... 44 13,811. Which would make any option not to expand production be very siilly / a historic.




_____________________________

Underdog Fanboy

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 112
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/9/2010 2:51:24 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder
So, if japanese production can get out of hand (esp with PDU on), why not have a house rule that says something like,
"If PDUs are on, Japan can only ~convert~ production of factories, but not ~expand~ production.

The vast majority of this post is not directed at those I quote or anyone in particular ...

I assume because of PDU you're only talking about aircraft factories and not engine (or any other production) and I assume you realise as soon as you manually convert a factory it reduces in size.

While an interesting proposition, I certainly think it would have to be nutted out much more than a broad statement cause it assumes that Japan never increased its production of any airframes and detailed research of the capacity for each month of the war would have to be undertaken... or of course alternatively the max no built of each model during the war be adhered to.
... & what do you know Puhis has chimed in to give the numbers
quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis
On average Japan produced something like 900 planes/month, total 42000 combat/recon/patrol planes. Why not make this HR? Japanese player can produce whatever he likes, but only 900-1000 planes per month.

This seems like a reasonable proposition, except for the auditing and management of that. Still if you guys want to go further why not scrap all airframe and engine production and up the requirements for HI/LI resource-oil use. Have the a/c numbers static (by build numbers) and play as it stands ... I'm sure this will appeal to your sense of historical accuracy and will ensure there are no overly damaged ego's out there.

I agree that the Japanese economy could be made a little more difficult, but there are boundaries on how much a player can absorb and has time to manipulate the production side ... I understand the economy pretty well, many Japanese players don't (and a few well known players come to mind) and it can still be a hard slog for me at times. You forget that the Japanese economy can be run off the rails and damage to critical raw material production can put a very nasty spanner in the works... should we model this adequately and accurately too ... scrap production all together ? or just realise this is not completely historical ... And IMO what a boring game that would be if it were ...
quote:

ORIGINAL: bklooste
quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis
My suggestion was just for those people who think Japan should not be able to produce more than x number of airplanes. I agree that if japanese player is playing a good game, he should be able to build more planes.

My suggestions are:
1) Factory repair should be slower, not one point/day
2) Factory expansion should cost more
3) Halting ships should only release 50 % of shipyard capacity (that's got nothing to do with planes, but come on, Shinano is not going to dissappear from the shipyard when construction is halted...)


Yes most of these are good , but need some modification.

1) Repairs should be 1 point per day (from air attack) but expansions should be slower and BURSTY eg after 29 days + 0 but after 50 days +30%.
2) Prob correct , retooling which sometimes is needed is expensive.
3) Agreed but then you should also have a scrap option eg Shinanos sister ( hull 111) was in the yards at 30% complete it was scrapped when war broke out. A scrap option should release a significant amount of resources in 111's case it would be 20K tons of steel .

This is all a mute point cause there is no way to modify this anyway with the existing editor functionality... but
1)I'd agree repairs should be 1 point per day, not sure how the strategic bombing model is in AE, but it was too strong in witp. To wipe out almost the whole productive capacity of a city in one day multiple raids was just wrong (well if you play Nemo121)
2)1000 supplies per point is adequate IMO, but would be nice if it were editable.
3)What about ships that just click over to building, shouldn't I be able to halt them for no cost... I'm just saying there are more variables here. And then again if you were going for such build options then system based on what you want to build with design options would be great but a pipe-dream in this current version of witp. But something that PTOII did quite well.

As a sidebar it would have been a nice inclusion in the editor to be able to edit the values of HI use for all the industries which produce different war materials (arm/veh/eng/naval/merch/airframes), this would allow better modelling of the economy by outputs not just inputs. And allow less fiddling with cargo requirements and ship capacity to balance the economy... Aircraft production would have been a good area for some tweaking here to assuage the fears of being able to do too much as Japan. (And yes I know different no of engines can change the cost). Also exposing to the editor the cost for pilot training and repair cost and rates would make for some interesting mod development.

Back to the original argument ... Some of the enjoyment I gain from & despite knowing I'm most likely going to lose is to manipulate Japanese production and play such 'what if's'. Similarly, but I concede not a great argument is that being rewarded for my good logistical management surely is some recompense for having to deal with the beast.

Furthermore, as soon as you start entering orders the game no longer is a historical simulation... Insisting that the whole war economy must be played exactly as it was, with exactly as was given, when it was available, thereby rail-roading a forgone conclusion as the second A-Bomb lands exactly on schedule - is a game I'll not be quick to sign up for.

Still, I understand Allied players are somewhat annoyed by the numbers of a/c they are given, cause PBEM games are possibly more bloody than the actual war (and this is a 2 way streak). And as Bklooste has stated in AAR's there is evidence that the Allies are doing well. So eventually you are given much more than enough to get the job done. Yes ... much more ... Use it well and you'll have a stranglehold on Japan early; not and you'll be languishing and looking for excuses... Good play wins the day...

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 6/9/2010 2:56:38 AM >

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to bklooste)
Post #: 113
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/9/2010 7:29:15 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bilbow


quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

So, if japanese production can get out of hand (esp with PDU on), why not have a house rule that says something like,

"If PDUs are on, Japan can only ~convert~ production of factories, but not ~expand~ production."

I'm very interested in the thread, because I'd certainly like to play a full campaign at some point. But neither do wish to get into late '43 only to "discover" some of the fundamental flaws in the game. I'd rather y'all discover them for me, have several hotly debated threads on the forums, then some form of reasonable house rules surface, so I can enjoy my game when it finally time for it...

:^)

-F-


Hi Steve,

While it is true that Japan can produce whatever amount of planes it wants, all this ignores the fact that there are a limited number of squadrons to put them into. In my campaign it's still early, March 42, but I have already turned off Zero production because I've converted all my frontline IJN fighter groups, and have a pool in reserve, so producing more would be a waste. The limited number of groups makes the whole argument about Japanese production giving a huge advantage meaningless. PDU on gives some flexibility only, as it does for the allies.



what do you preferre? Aircraft and lots of pilots in the pool and fewer squadrons all being filled up that can be refilled from 0-100% in two weeks (you canīt draw all aircraft at once) or lots of squadrons sitting still empty on the West Coast at the end of 43 because there are no aircraft (e.g. bombers) in the pool?

_____________________________


(in reply to bilbow)
Post #: 114
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/9/2010 8:21:18 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

have you got an AAR with combat reports running?

Air combat reports are practically meaningless, since losses are almost never reported accurately. Overall statistics are more reliable, but still are subject to later corrections. And simple comparison of the number of lost planes does not tell much. Again I should mention Q-Ball vs. Cuttlefish AAR, where they already ponder Japanese surrender in September of 1943, even though Allied plane losses are slightly heavier.

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
Indefinite numbers of skill 70 pilots work just fine.

Too bad that Japan doesn't have them too. In stock you have just 60 planes worth of IJNAF fighter squadrons to be used for training at the start of the game. Assuming that IJAAF takes over the duties of actual air defence over Home Islands. Assuming a 2-month training cycle, and I believe that this might be way too generous under the latest patch, you produce just 30 half-trained (with subpar EXP and Defense) pilots per month. For the entire IJNAF. With bomber pilots situation is far, far worse, because 80% of them need NavT and NavS just to be minimally competent in their duties.




air combat reports arenīt useless, ever heard about posting the loss list with them? meaningless (while for sure more interesting to read) are the fairy tale style reporting that says, "my fighters shot down some of his bombers"...

You always mention one AAR that has the Allied being in the Philipines in mid 43 (not that surprising given the Japanese lost all their carriers long before), but I seriously doubt that this is the norm, especially when going through lots of the AARs. Well Aussies vs Amis is going the same way but no offense to any of the players, both of those PBEM are either overwhelmed by the god like Allied players or the (in these cases) not that god like Japanese players. Things like these have happened the same way in WITP when people succesfully invaded the home islands in 43.

As I donīt find it fair to my opponent I havenīt even looked at the Japanese side in AE so I can only take what you say about Japanese pilot training and what I hear and am told on the forum on the other hand. You say 2 months isnīt enough (I know itīs enough for Allied pilots to reach 70 skill and there is no "Japanese pilot training routine" so I wonder why it shouldnīt be enough for Japanese pilots) and you say you donīt have enough units. Other people say they are swimming in pilots while Iīm swimming in trained pilots as the Allied player too. It doesnīt matter if the Allied player is swimming in a thousand pilots in the pool if thatīs twice as many as the Japanese, especially when I donīt have AIRCRAFT to put them into. Iīm in 1/43 now, havenīt lost a single carrier, am on the offense, am playing very conservative and if I sum my USAAF bomber pool up (with all the crappy early bombers) then perhaps Iīve got some 40-50 bombers in the pool. In total, Iīve got perhaps a dozen bombers in the pool for the USAAF that I actually use on the frontline and if I would fill up my frontline squadrons I guess after going through the first three or four squadrons, I would have used up the dozen "usable" bomber types from the pool. And itīs highly doubtful that this is true for the Japanese.



< Message edited by castor troy -- 6/9/2010 8:26:25 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 115
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/9/2010 11:53:35 AM   
bklooste

 

Posts: 1104
Joined: 4/10/2006
Status: offline 		Castor I wouldnt crit skill levels- sure in Nemos game that is the case but Joe and Cuttlefish are not beginners i think your one of the few  ( only) 43 game where its even and you have had some unlucky engadgements.

Japan has a limited capacity due to onboard resources ( eg x * 4 years - shipping losses )  . The thing is Japan can prob ramp up to her end 42- mid 43 level in 6 months with the starting supply & oil pool which makes it difficult for the allies  in 41 but those resources spent do not show till late 43 . Look at Cuttlefish after the resources were cut of he had no stockpile and was down to 3 planes a day  in mid 43 , part of the reason for this is burning through the stockpile in 41-42.

I really liked how in some AARs ( Mike and Seydliz) they kept building Nates, Sallies etc due to engines in the pool and supply costs or turn of light industry these players will be better of in 43-44.

I used to think the best option for Japan was to really force the allied air to battle so the veterans at start exact a maximum toll ,  force the allies to commit badly trained troops and replacements have the most time to train. However this helps the late 42 -early 43 situation it creates huge issues in 44 due to extra supplies used in building new factories and air.   So i think it is a fine balance with little experience in 44 most players have gone with the have lots of planes in 41 strategy which means the allies with a Europe first policy wont have enough to challenge Japan in 42.

IMHO your really need to play Japan against a competent allied player. You cant jusge an AAR from combat reports since you have FOW and the fact the player does not list all air combat only unusual / interesting ones and prob a slight skew to favourable results ( though obv most disasters will be reported) .

< Message edited by bklooste -- 6/10/2010 7:55:03 AM >

_____________________________

Underdog Fanboy

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 116
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/9/2010 9:07:26 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

With PDU off, the dutch get only one squadron that upgrades to the Hurri IIbTrop. That's hardly a war winner. 



You only get about a dozen of these planes produced at best so the ability to assign them to more than one squadron is meaningless. You can save the Dutch Hurricanes and actually assign them to a RAAF fighter squadron. However, since you get so few they are not that useful.

< Message edited by crsutton -- 6/9/2010 9:16:07 PM >

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 117
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/9/2010 9:14:33 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton


quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

With PDU off, the dutch get only one squadron that upgrades to the Hurri IIbTrop. That's hardly a war winner. 



You only get about a dozen of these planese produced at best so the ability to assign them to more than one squadron is meaningless. You can save the Dutch Hurricanes and actually assign them to a RAAF fighter squadron. However, since you get so few they are not that useful.



I used them for the defense of Java. So far, I've lost four of the twelve.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 118
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/9/2010 9:42:14 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		Yeah, I kept them too. They got slaughtered but the Dutch pilots were only average. You can't save the P40s either. However, the Dutch B25s and version of the A20 can be used in one American squadron and two Australian, so I save them as they are two valuable to get shot up in a hopeless cause.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 119
RE: SBD-3 production is wrong - 6/9/2010 10:40:31 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		I used twelve of the B25s and six of the DB-7s for the Dutch and have "diverted" the rest to the new squadrons. I was hoping that maybe they would help in the defense of Java but so far they've only helped to give Chez' pilots more kills...

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: SBD-3 production is wrong Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.063