IJA fighter research/production plans? (Full Version)

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



Message


abulbulian -> IJA fighter research/production plans? (9/27/2012 6:18:52 PM)

Just curious what people are producing/researching for 42, 43, 44, 45 as far as fighters go with the IJA? For the IJN it doesn't look like there are many choices on which way to go.

Thanks for any thoughts. Not looking for any particular details, just some friendly advice for a noob Japanese player starting a campaign.

Thanks in advance for any tips/advice.




Numdydar -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (9/27/2012 6:22:16 PM)

Franks and Tojos are what you need to concetrate on for the bulk of your AF.




koniu -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (9/28/2012 9:12:47 AM)

For `42

Army: Get Ki-44IIa Tojo asap and start r&D IIc version for armor(you can skip building IIb)
Navy: asap upgrade to A6M3a Zero

For `43 `44
Army: Ki-44IIc Tojo and Ki-84 Frank
Navy A6M5 Zero and N1K George

`45
Army: Nakajima Ki-201
Navy: A7M2 Sam

Of course it all depends if you playing PDU on or off. With off You must focus on production of other fighters also

EDIT: change of `45 army model




GreyJoy -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (9/28/2012 10:40:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu

For `42

Army: Get Ki-44IIa Tojo asap and start r&D IIc version for armor(you can skip building IIb)
Navy: asap upgrade to A6M3a Zero

For `43 `44
Army: Ki-44IIc Tojo and Ki-84 Frank
Navy A6M5 Zero and N1K George

`45
Army: Nakajima Ki-201
Navy: A7M2 Sam

Of course it all depends if you playing PDU on or off. With off You must focus on production of other fighters also

EDIT: change of `45 army model


Don't forget the KI-45 Nick. It comes online in mid 42 and it has armour and a 20mm cannon, which is something all the other japanese aircrafts don't have untill 1943.
Agree with Koniu for the rest, except for the fact that in late war contest the Ki-201 isn't your best choice IMHO. Yes, it's fast, no surprise, but its range is limited and those 30mm cannons aren't that accurate (they aren't CL but F, which makes all the difference). Believe me: the best late war jap all around plane is the KI-83. I've faced them... deadly

The Sam is good obviously...but it comes online so late that i doubt it's worth to invest so much in that production line...They will fall like flies against the sweeping hordes of P-47s exactly like the Zeros... and as ablative armour they are just as good as the Oscars IV... so why bother?




koniu -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (9/28/2012 10:49:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
Don't forget the KI-45 Nick. It comes online in mid 42 and it has armour and a 20mm cannon, which is something all the other japanese aircrafts don't have untill 1943.
Agree with Koniu for the rest, except for the fact that in late war contest the Ki-201 isn't your best choice IMHO. Yes, it's fast, no surprise, but its range is limited and those 30mm cannons aren't that accurate (they aren't CL but F, which makes all the difference). Believe me: the best late war jap all around plane is the KI-83. I've faced them... deadly

The Sam is good obviously...but it comes online so late that i doubt it's worth to invest so much in that production line...They will fall like flies against the sweeping hordes of P-47s exactly like the Zeros... and as ablative armour they are just as good as the Oscars IV... so why bother?


So You telling Ki-83. I will need to look at his stats when back home.




janh -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (9/28/2012 10:50:24 AM)

I also try to develop the Ki-45 Nick as a 4EB hunter. The past the KAIb type the later versions at least on paper look somewhat useful if covered with single-engined fighters. I use them also in the night-fighter role against nuissance bombing, and also in ground attack. The 20mm or 37mm guns on the earlier types is more of psychological importance, though.
Probably unquestionably the Frank is still a better fighter, also better in the bomber killer role, and requires only one engine, but the Nick can be useful as well. It is quite durable, at least in stats.




GreyJoy -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (9/28/2012 11:11:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: janh

I also try to develop the Ki-45 Nick as a 4EB hunter. The past the KAIb type the later versions at least on paper look somewhat useful if covered with single-engined fighters. I use them also in the night-fighter role against nuissance bombing, and also in ground attack. The 20mm or 37mm guns on the earlier types is more of psychological importance, though.
Probably unquestionably the Frank is still a better fighter, also better in the bomber killer role, and requires only one engine, but the Nick can be useful as well. It is quite durable, at least in stats.


The only good Nick is the "A" version.
Clearly when the Frank comes online (late 43 at best) the Nick is obsolete in every role, but untill that date, you only have KI-44a or KI-61 to tangle with the enemy bombers...and none of them is armoured, nor they have any cannon... so the Nick is a valuable asset for the well over a year. Then those fighter bomber groups can be upgraded to the KI-109b (if i'm not mistaken), which is the best FB Japan has for the second part of the war. Once again a decent bomber killer




Gräfin Zeppelin -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (9/28/2012 12:30:55 PM)

The later Nick versions are good low ground / low Naval attackers. I leave it to you if that is desirable or not. I tend to stick with the Nick A.




Miller -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (9/28/2012 6:39:03 PM)

IMO you need a fighter with 4 x 20MM Cannon to dent the Allied 4E hordes........hence the George is the best choice, especially the -2 model which has a service rating of 2.




abulbulian -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (12/14/2012 7:11:46 AM)

Looks like the N1K1-J George is the best for combating the allies HB threat? So TOJOs for Army?




koniu -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (12/14/2012 8:47:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

Looks like the N1K1-J George is the best for combating the allies HB threat? So TOJOs for Army?


Yes. George(mostly N1K2 with SR 2) for navy, until Sam show up. And Tojo for Army until Frank(b version is the best against bombers) show up.
In early months of war Ki-45a will work also

What You need to fight HB is firepower, armor and numbers




SenToku -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (12/14/2012 9:34:10 AM)

Option for IJA - Forget Frank. Even at best model, Ki-84 is still service rating 3 plane and needs huge investment on ground in aviation support.

Instead IJA can start research for Ki-61-Ia. Once fully repaired, move the research forward along Tony line, until you get your aviation people to believe that copying a liquid cooled DB-601 (Ha-60) is a bad idea and air cooled Mitsubishi Kinsei (Ha-33) is ONLY engine for the otherwise fine airframe of Tony.

That means you get the Ki-100-II into full research mode with 500 engines in pool by late 1942 and plane into production by mid/late 1943. Far surperior to Frank in altitude (expect the -r model), but appearing earlier, Ki-100 is one of the best interceptors you can get. As service rating 1 plane it can fully replace the Ki-44 as front line fighter (something Frank can't do).




koniu -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (12/14/2012 9:46:18 AM)

Without Frank You can forget about surviving late war battles.
Modern Allied fighters F4U, P-47 will eat Ki-100 for breakfast. Frank is only figtrer capable of resistance.

I am not telling that K-100 cant be useful but Frank is must have type of plane.
Also Ki-100 is not much better from Tojo so i will not expect much better result with it.

Ask any alied player who played PBEM in `44, `45, What they will fear more 100 Franks or 200 Ki-100 in air.





janh -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (12/14/2012 9:55:08 AM)

What do you think about night fighters, esp. those with upwards pointing guns/cannons? So far I never bothered much and just used standard fighters to interrupt nightly raids, but maybe it's worth to invest something there, too?





GreyJoy -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (12/14/2012 10:34:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu

Without Frank You can forget about surviving late war battles.
Modern Allied fighters F4U, P-47 will eat Ki-100 for breakfast. Frank is only figtrer capable of resistance.

I am not telling that K-100 cant be useful but Frank is must have type of plane.
Also Ki-100 is not much better from Tojo so i will not expect much better result with it.

Ask any alied player who played PBEM in `44, `45, What they will fear more 100 Franks or 200 Ki-100 in air.




The KI-100 ha a 20mm cannon CL...which is way good!
However the KI-100 is slow (only 360 mph) and it occupies entirely a production line, so i don't consider it a good choice.

The KI-84b is probably the best IJA single-engine fighter you can get...unfortunately, like the KI-83, it has a unique R&D line[:(]




SenToku -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (12/14/2012 10:44:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu

Without Frank You can forget about surviving late war battles.
Modern Allied fighters F4U, P-47 will eat Ki-100 for breakfast. Frank is only figtrer capable of resistance.

I am not telling that K-100 cant be useful but Frank is must have type of plane.
Also Ki-100 is not much better from Tojo so i will not expect much better result with it.

Ask any alied player who played PBEM in `44, `45, What they will fear more 100 Franks or 200 Ki-100 in air.




I would think that the need of huge aribase would limit Ki-84 over Ki-100.

In Downfall scenario, most Franks end up grounded after 4-5 days of fighting with service/repair times over 6 days, while service rating 1 planes keep fighting even with damaged airbase.

The need for aviation support would also mean that they can not be disperced in multiple small satelite airfields, which makes them rather easy targets for enemy aiming at their airbase.

Or is there some way to keep Franks in the air I do not know?

As for top of the line allied fighters; To my knowledge no Japanese fighter (outside some experimental last war year models) can take the P-47 1:1 on altitude, but I feel I have better chances of getting Ki-100s into air at 4:1 against them than getting Ki-84 at 2:1.




Captain Cruft -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (12/14/2012 5:37:35 PM)

Oscars and Nicks are superb low-level bombers.

The key to the late war is to avoid wherever possible taking on the Allied fighters with your own since you just can't compete. Try to engineer situations where you can get at the bombers. Any fighters (Nates/Claudes excepted) can make a mess of bombers given good pilots and numbers. The Ki-83 is particularly awesome though.




crsutton -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (12/14/2012 5:57:38 PM)

Take it from an Allied fanboy. You are going to need to keep producing some low service rated fighters for front line point defense and escort service. I like nothing better than taking on high service rating top line fighters at isolated forward bases. It just becomes a kill fest after a few sweeps and all those Franks and Georges are sitting on the tarmac out of service.

When Allied bombers begin to dominate, service ratings become very important for Japanese aircraft. We AFBs learn this early on when we are trying to defend with buffalos, P40s and lightnings vs overwhelming numbers.




Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (12/14/2012 7:46:13 PM)

Sometime ago, I read somewhere in this forum that:
Frank --> for airbases with "rail"
Tojo --> point defense for isolated airbases
Oscar --> for escort, in masses

But at the slow pace of my game vs AI, I will not find out soon




jzardos -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (1/5/2013 8:45:52 PM)

What are the better night fighters that Japan can make in 42? 43? 44-45?

Thanks




jzardos -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (1/5/2013 9:08:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

Looks like the N1K1-J George is the best for combating the allies HB threat? So TOJOs for Army?


Yes. George(mostly N1K2 with SR 2) for navy, until Sam show up. And Tojo for Army until Frank(b version is the best against bombers) show up.
In early months of war Ki-45a will work also

What You need to fight HB is firepower, armor and numbers




Where is the Ki-45a? Don't seem to see it in game? Oh never mind, ic the Nick.

The Tojo seems like crap with a gun rating of only 6. How can you shoot down bombers with that pea shooter? Don't see any decent IJA planes in 43 ... [:(]




PaxMondo -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (1/6/2013 4:31:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
Don't forget the KI-45 Nick. It comes online in mid 42 and it has armour and a 20mm cannon, which is something all the other japanese aircrafts don't have untill 1943.
Agree with Koniu for the rest, except for the fact that in late war contest the Ki-201 isn't your best choice IMHO. Yes, it's fast, no surprise, but its range is limited and those 30mm cannons aren't that accurate (they aren't CL but F, which makes all the difference). Believe me: the best late war jap all around plane is the KI-83. I've faced them... deadly

The Sam is good obviously...but it comes online so late that i doubt it's worth to invest so much in that production line...They will fall like flies against the sweeping hordes of P-47s exactly like the Zeros... and as ablative armour they are just as good as the Oscars IV... so why bother?


So You telling Ki-83. I will need to look at his stats when back home.


Ki-83 is a good design ... stats like the Shinden, except it is 2E and a little slower.




crsutton -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (1/6/2013 5:48:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jzardos

What are the better night fighters that Japan can make in 42? 43? 44-45?

Thanks



You do not need any night fighters as they really do not work. Putting any old fighter up at night works just as well. You will not shoot anything down but the mere presence of any fighters at night will greatly lessen the impact of the bombing attack. Night fighters are total chrome.




Alfred -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (1/6/2013 7:12:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton


quote:

ORIGINAL: jzardos

What are the better night fighters that Japan can make in 42? 43? 44-45?

Thanks



You do not need any night fighters as they really do not work. Putting any old fighter up at night works just as well. You will not shoot anything down but the mere presence of any fighters at night will greatly lessen the impact of the bombing attack. Night fighters are total chrome.


An arguable position to hold before the last big official path But with the increased importance now given to having airborne radar to locate the enemy (planes and terrestrial targets) at night, perhaps no longer such a definitive position to hold.

Alfred




koniu -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (1/6/2013 8:35:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
Don't forget the KI-45 Nick. It comes online in mid 42 and it has armour and a 20mm cannon, which is something all the other japanese aircrafts don't have untill 1943.
Agree with Koniu for the rest, except for the fact that in late war contest the Ki-201 isn't your best choice IMHO. Yes, it's fast, no surprise, but its range is limited and those 30mm cannons aren't that accurate (they aren't CL but F, which makes all the difference). Believe me: the best late war jap all around plane is the KI-83. I've faced them... deadly

The Sam is good obviously...but it comes online so late that i doubt it's worth to invest so much in that production line...They will fall like flies against the sweeping hordes of P-47s exactly like the Zeros... and as ablative armour they are just as good as the Oscars IV... so why bother?


So You telling Ki-83. I will need to look at his stats when back home.


Ki-83 is a good design ... stats like the Shinden, except it is 2E and a little slower.



Ki-83 is definitely better from K-201
OK, Ki-83 is 2E fighter but he is using Ha-43 engine. Engine economically chipper to research because can be used also by few important planes (Sam, George K5, Shinden)
Also SR is working on favor of Ki-83 not Ki-201
Ki-83 is also better from Ki-94II , Ki-94 have only better max altitude

We can compare Ki-83 and Shinden only for statistic. But one is army and second navy fighter so for game economy, discussion like that is pointless




leehunt27@bloomberg.net -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (1/6/2013 2:10:13 PM)

These posts above are extremely helpful thank you! I had a follow on question: how many of each type or percent weighting to manufacture? For example, what is a reasonable goal for Franks or Tojos as certain points in the war? Are you producing 2/3 Franks and 1/3 Tojos or some other allocation?

I am in June '42 of a challenging PBEM game. My allied opponent is very good and I realize i have made couple production mistakes that could hurt me-- i've got probably 350 extra A6M2 zeroes produced and just switched to A6M3 on june 1st 1942. I needed more Oscars than i was making after heavy losses at Rabaul fending off B-17's (not so successfully!). thanks!





obvert -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (1/6/2013 3:27:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton


quote:

ORIGINAL: jzardos

What are the better night fighters that Japan can make in 42? 43? 44-45?

Thanks



You do not need any night fighters as they really do not work. Putting any old fighter up at night works just as well. You will not shoot anything down but the mere presence of any fighters at night will greatly lessen the impact of the bombing attack. Night fighters are total chrome.


An arguable position to hold before the last big official path But with the increased importance now given to having airborne radar to locate the enemy (planes and terrestrial targets) at night, perhaps no longer such a definitive position to hold.

Alfred


I found the Allied night fighter P-70 Havocs to do well disrupting and even killing a few incoming strike planes. There was usually the radar message in the combat report. Although nothing like late war strike size and of course IJ planes not having any defensive capability, I'm not sure the same would be true for the IJ night fighters in the Home Islands in 44-45.




DivePac88 -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (1/6/2013 8:05:16 PM)

I think we would all like to hear from Chickenboy in this post, as to what his plans on IJA fighter research/production would be. [;)]




Miller -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (1/6/2013 8:42:14 PM)

The last Oscar model (IV) is not a bad point defence fighter. Not that fast but very manouverable with two centerline 20mm cannons and service rating of 1, plus long ranged for the bullet sponge escort role.

In fact seeing as it uses the same engine as the Tojo IIc I am considering switching over the remaining Tojo production over to the Oscar.




GreyJoy -> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? (1/6/2013 10:19:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

The last Oscar model (IV) is not a bad point defence fighter. Not that fast but very manouverable with two centerline 20mm cannons and service rating of 1, plus long ranged for the bullet sponge escort role.

In fact seeing as it uses the same engine as the Tojo IIc I am considering switching over the remaining Tojo production over to the Oscar.


I may be mistaken but afaik the whole Oscar line uses the Ha-35, never the Ha-34 which is used by the Tojo line.

However the latest Oscar is 364 mph fast... which means is faster than the N1K1 and with 2 very good and accurate cannons... defenelty a MUST build imho. for Kami role i'd use the previous Oscar models (the IIb or the IIIa is more than enough).

I'd build more Tojos/Oscars than Franks simply because you need numbers in the air in late war scenarios... Franks are good obviously but they can only be based in Big Airbases with lots of air support, while the Tojos/Oscars could easily operate in small airfields




Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.600098E-02