Matrix Games Forums

To End All Wars: Mountain InfantryPandora: Eclipse of Nashira Announced! Deal of the Week: Command Ops goes half price!New Fronts are opening up for Commander: The Great WarCharacters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great War
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: a6m2

 
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 >> The War Room >> RE: a6m2 Page: <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: a6m2 - 4/11/2011 6:51:07 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12262
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred


quote:

edit: fantasy mod in terms of not historical, I don´t want to piss someone off if he get´s it wrong.


Its ok, castor. We realy are just having fun!!! Be advised even w/ these advanced carrier planes whenever I go against land based CAP I still get creamed and take heavy loses.



sorry again for commenting while not being aware it´s an ahistorical scenario.

_____________________________


(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 451
RE: a6m2 - 4/12/2011 1:43:40 AM   
vonTirpitz


Posts: 511
Joined: 3/1/2005
From: Wilmington, NC
Status: offline
bigred,

I am curious, and my apologies if I missed reading an earlier post, but what exactly is at the first facility (listed at Maebashi 40(0))? I couldn't tell if it is a mod database error or if you blanked it out. :)



quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred

And here we have the conversion to a6m5 at no cost to the factory.  I just clicked the a6m5 button on the left.





_____________________________


(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 452
RE: a6m2 - 4/13/2011 3:00:22 AM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vonTirpitz

bigred,

I am curious, and my apologies if I missed reading an earlier post, but what exactly is at the first facility (listed at Maebashi 40(0))? I couldn't tell if it is a mod database error or if you blanked it out. :)



quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred

And here we have the conversion to a6m5 at no cost to the factory.  I just clicked the a6m5 button on the left.





I dont know...I never figured it out...I tried to change it to a frame but nothing is there to change...guess it is a senario bug.

(in reply to vonTirpitz)
Post #: 453
FYI - 4/13/2011 3:14:33 AM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
BTW, all readers, I do appriciate your commentary, no matter how critical.  I do feel honored that Castor reads this thread as he is a well known player(and maybe I will get to play him later and manipulate IJAAF research against him!!!).

I honestly did not know that manipulation of the IJA R/D was considered gamey and I also can now see caster's point of View.  My attitude when I began was to modify production as hard and as fast as possible for increase in IJA operational advantage.

I am also sure when I play my next game my opponent and I will hash out a few HRs, but I really like topeverest attitude.
quote:

quote:

From: topeverest
To: bigred
Date: 12/8/2010 9:12:53 PM
Subject: RE: house rule

Sorry for the delay...hectic work schedule.

Keeping in mind I do play with 'No New Allied TF's on dec 7" but I believe that is universal if you are playing surprise on first turn. It wont do for the Americans to move the BB's out of Pearl. The only HR I play with is "No strategic bombing until Jan 1, 1943." I find the game loses balance quickly if the allies can strat bomb in 42. Burma, china, and Malaya can go, and enterprising allied players will find a way to SB the Home islands and DEI before the empire can shore up reasonably. The empire can and will get behind in booty hauling and never recover against a skilled allied opponent that can do this - and significantly shorten the war...but that is a topic for another day.

Every HR I can think of is a player rationalization to take away a combat option of the enemy under the ruse of some proposed 'lack of accuracy' or 'lack of realism' in the game. Example, No HB naval attack under 10K - that has to be the silliest HR yet. Players that agree to this have never even looked and seen that no allied HB starts with any skill in naval bombardment. It would take a minimum of 3 to 4 months of straight training to gain 60+ skill to have any possible chance of hitting an enemy ship. If the owning player spends the time to train some and then deploy them at 6K to bomb, why shouldn't that be possible. Just because the allies rarely committed HB's this way does not mean it was impossible to do or would not have worked. Another example is invading only at base hexes. We all know the opposite occurred on a number of occasions where it was feasible.

The game is already packed with practically impossible and highly improbable capabilities in favor of good gaming, and I think that is a good thing in most cases. Perhaps the quintessential example - restricted HQ's, units, and releases that are meant to slow down the allied war and delay the allied strength from deployment at the same time the Empire has large land unit availability. This creates the quite artificial (but most exciting) ability to smash 14-17 Empire divisions most at any place in the Pacific and force desperate allied defensive gaming with artificially limited ground forces in 42.

Don't get swayed by the 'masses'. The game is well balanced in that it provides actual and potential capabilities (and the chance for other even greater capabilities). Play her as she is, and she will run true.

Let me know if you have questions on specific HR's.


_____________________________

Andy M


This is my first long term WitP/AE game so I learn as I go.


< Message edited by bigred -- 4/13/2011 3:24:41 AM >

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 454
Vision - 4/13/2011 3:58:49 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10914
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Sorry I didn't jump in earlier but life has been pretty insane at my home and work.

BigRed put me onto this discussion a few days ago but I haven't had a chance to contribute. Let me hit a few points and I'll ask BK and FatR to jump in if they can:

1. There were little-to-no changes to the IJA. RA is a Yamamoto 'what if' scenario and, thus, the Army forces are barely touched. Only real difference between Scenario 1 and this with the IJA is a slight redeployment of opening ground units and a few additions to existing AA units.

2. The IJN Fighters are, obviously, massively changed. As quoted earlier the Japanese don't get the Jack. The creators and designers of the Zero airframe devote their entire time to getting the maximum bang for the Japanese buck with that aircraft.

Zero develops into two lines of production:
a. The carrier-based version M2-M5 is the same. These planes are simply brought in earlier.

b. The ground-based interceptor is the new development line. IRL the IJN worked with this a bit, however, nothing was really accomplished. Here we see the line change with M3-M4 and later models.

The changed fighters, in my RA Campaign (Nov 1942), are an improvement but the Tojo is still the best Japanese land-based fighter at the time.

BigRed: What questions do you have regarding the Mod that we can help with?


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/13/2011 3:59:48 PM >


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/


(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 455
Vision - 4/13/2011 4:03:48 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10914
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
In case Stanislav doesn't have the chance to jump in (he is deeply involved in finishing off RA 3.0) these are his comments Posted at the start of the RA Thread as to the aircraft industry:


This scenario assumes, that with Yamamoto assuming the position of the Aeronautics Department's head in 1936 and becoming the Naval Minister later, he intensifies Japanese naval aviation development a bit, and attempts to optimize the utilization of limited engineering and production resourses. Chief engineers of aircraft design teams are given slightly greater input in formulating development directions and cooperation between various aircraft manufacturers is assumed to be somewhat improved.

In particular, the concept of dedicated land-based interceptor is abandoned and the Mitshubishi fighter design team under Jiro Horikoshi remains free to concentrate all of its efforts on modifying A6M and creating its successor A7M. Horikoshi's proposal to install the more powerful Mitsubishi Kinsei engine on Zero is approved in 1942, instead of late 1944, and A7M is developed to use Mitsubishi Ha-43 engine, as he desired, from the beginning. A6M3 is developed into a whole line of Zeros that sacrifice range in favor of superior armament and pilot protection, and eventually are officially designated as pure land-based models. IJN maintains the policy of sticking to just one single-engine fighter airframe, until Kawanishi team develops N1K1-J Shiden as a private initiative (this happens slighltly earlier than in RL, because alternate projects of land-based interceptors, that tied Kawanishi resourses, do not exist). It is adopted as a stopgap measure until availability of A7M.

As a side effect of greater effort put into development and production of Mitsubishi Kinsei (Ha-33) and Mitsubishi Ha-43 engines, several planes that historically used these engines are added to the mod (if they existed only as prototypes by the war's end), or accelerated.

Aircraft weapon development is streamlined, with a push for unification with IJAAF in this area (historically, IJN and IJA did cooperate in aircraft weapon production, in this scenario their cooperation becomes much broader). Instead of attempts to produce licensed German machine guns, that ultimately failed to provide the fleet with sufficient numbers of them, IJN switches to the more powerful Army 7.7 catridge and eventually adopts 12.7 Ho-103, the first aircraft HMG developed in Japan. This allows for improved armament on some planes, mostly 2E bombers.

This scenario also assumes mild overall boost to Japanese aircraft industry (at the cost of reduction in starting resources). As a result, several planes that historically faced severe problems with transition from prototypes to mass production, such as B6N, D4Y and G4M2, become available a bit earlier. G8N1, the Japanese 4E bomber that was successfuly tested but not mass-produced in real life, becomes available in 1945.

In addition, there are many minor tweaks to various aircraft, intended to make their statblocks and performance closer to historical. The changes that can affect gameplay most noticeably include:
-Early Japanese fighters (Ha-35 Zeros and Ki-43) have their high-altitude MVR reduced.
-G4M has slightly better durability, G3M sligtly worse, to give G4M an edge over the older plane it historically had.
-E16A1 Paul no longer has artificially reduced normal range.
-Ki-44 uses Nakakima Ha-34 engine, instead of Ha-35, for historical accuracy.
-Late Ki-61 versions are slightly improved. Ki-100s are significantly improved. In RL they were supposed to be good, particularly Ki-100, but in AE they are very underwhelming.
-Ki-67-Ib does not lose the ability to carry torpedos.
-Old Russian fighters no longer have unparalelled MVR. Their clear superiority to Nate has to go.


Following aircraft were added to this scenario (all but new Zeros and G3M4-Q existed in RL as prototypes or even production models):

-A6M3b Zero. Replaces A6M3a and emphasized armor and weapons instead of range.
-A6M4, A6M4-J, A6M8-J. Successors to A6M3b that follow the same design philosopshy but use Mitshubishi Ha-33 engine.
-A7M3. The historical successor to A7M2. Carrier-capable and features 6x20mm armament. A7M2 factory upgrades to it, instead of A7M3-J.
-B7A3. The historical armored successor to B7M2. Uses Mitsubishi Ha-43 engine.
-D4Y5. Mitshubishi Ha-43, armor. D4Y3 upgrades to it. (D4Y4 was a kamikaze plane in RL.)
-G3M4-Q. ASW patrol version of Nell.
-G8N1. Fast, tough, long-ranged 4E bomber.
-J6M1. IJN version of Ki-83.
-N1K4-A. Carrier-capable Shiden.
-N1K5-J. High-altitude interceptor Shiden. Uses Mitsubishi Ha-43 engine.
-Yasukuni. IJN version of Ki-67. "Yasukuni" might actually be the name of the naval unit, that employed these bombers in RL, but I can't find any other designation for them.


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 456
RE: FYI - 4/14/2011 8:18:33 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12262
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred

BTW, all readers, I do appriciate your commentary, no matter how critical.  I do feel honored that Castor reads this thread as he is a well known player(and maybe I will get to play him later and manipulate IJAAF research against him!!!).

I honestly did not know that manipulation of the IJA R/D was considered gamey and I also can now see caster's point of View.  My attitude when I began was to modify production as hard and as fast as possible for increase in IJA operational advantage.

I am also sure when I play my next game my opponent and I will hash out a few HRs, but I really like topeverest attitude.
quote:

quote:

From: topeverest
To: bigred
Date: 12/8/2010 9:12:53 PM
Subject: RE: house rule

Sorry for the delay...hectic work schedule.

Keeping in mind I do play with 'No New Allied TF's on dec 7" but I believe that is universal if you are playing surprise on first turn. It wont do for the Americans to move the BB's out of Pearl. The only HR I play with is "No strategic bombing until Jan 1, 1943." I find the game loses balance quickly if the allies can strat bomb in 42. Burma, china, and Malaya can go, and enterprising allied players will find a way to SB the Home islands and DEI before the empire can shore up reasonably. The empire can and will get behind in booty hauling and never recover against a skilled allied opponent that can do this - and significantly shorten the war...but that is a topic for another day.

Every HR I can think of is a player rationalization to take away a combat option of the enemy under the ruse of some proposed 'lack of accuracy' or 'lack of realism' in the game. Example, No HB naval attack under 10K - that has to be the silliest HR yet. Players that agree to this have never even looked and seen that no allied HB starts with any skill in naval bombardment. It would take a minimum of 3 to 4 months of straight training to gain 60+ skill to have any possible chance of hitting an enemy ship. If the owning player spends the time to train some and then deploy them at 6K to bomb, why shouldn't that be possible. Just because the allies rarely committed HB's this way does not mean it was impossible to do or would not have worked. Another example is invading only at base hexes. We all know the opposite occurred on a number of occasions where it was feasible.

The game is already packed with practically impossible and highly improbable capabilities in favor of good gaming, and I think that is a good thing in most cases. Perhaps the quintessential example - restricted HQ's, units, and releases that are meant to slow down the allied war and delay the allied strength from deployment at the same time the Empire has large land unit availability. This creates the quite artificial (but most exciting) ability to smash 14-17 Empire divisions most at any place in the Pacific and force desperate allied defensive gaming with artificially limited ground forces in 42.

Don't get swayed by the 'masses'. The game is well balanced in that it provides actual and potential capabilities (and the chance for other even greater capabilities). Play her as she is, and she will run true.

Let me know if you have questions on specific HR's.


_____________________________

Andy M


This is my first long term WitP/AE game so I learn as I go.





R&D for the Japanese is great and I never had a problem with it as long as it stays reasonable. I may apologize again for my ignorance that this is a mod game, so my comment of having the A6M8 two years early was of course wrong as the availability date of this version in this mod was far earlier than real life. If you are able to get an aircraft 3-4 months earlier than the set arrival date then I would never have a problem with it (3-4 months is quite an achievement in war), what I would think would be off would be something like two years early like I´ve thought would have happened when you said you get the A6M8 in mid 43 as I was thinking about an availability date of early/mid 45 due to me being unaware of the mod availability dates.

I find the thread very interesting in general as it´s quite a unique one going into detail for the Japanese production, pity it´s not about stock as I´m only aware of stock so far and haven´t even touched the IJ as I´m still frightened to play transport tycoon in the Pacific. I know, auto convoys have been improved but like with everything else, I tend to do all things myselve so spending another 1000 hours for transport coordination in a full PBEM is too much to me for the moment.

_____________________________


(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 457
RE: Vision - 4/14/2011 8:20:34 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12262
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
John, interesting read, thanks.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 458
RE: Vision - 4/15/2011 3:34:16 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10914
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Thanks Castor. Hope all is well with you.

This thread has been interesting and the topics are timeless for a Japanese player. BigRed has done great work to get into so much detail regarding the economy and 'challenges' facing a Japanese player within AE.



_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 459
turn 310 - 4/23/2011 8:46:16 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
It is October 42.  The allies landed at Lunga but are unable to develop the airfield.  32nd Division just landed at Kopang as the KB was retaking Little andaman.  Japs maintain air superiority.  This chart is a look at empire resources. Feul issue in japan is o the rebound. Sopac and SRA need some supply.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/23/2011 8:48:27 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 460
RE: turn 310 - 4/23/2011 8:49:29 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
This look is at the non buildng factories in Japan airframes.  I was surprised to see the R/D for the a6m5b is notbuilding. I amy be misreading this information. also the tony and the Tojo are the same not building...




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/23/2011 8:51:37 PM >

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 461
RE: turn 310 - 4/23/2011 8:52:08 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
turn 310 shipbuilding future needs...
I finally have more merchant building points to meet my average future needs.



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/23/2011 8:54:08 PM >

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 462
RE: turn 310 - 4/23/2011 8:55:47 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
Look at my resource chart: This causes me to consider advance building my 44 sho carriers.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/23/2011 8:57:28 PM >

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 463
Reasonable - 4/23/2011 9:14:29 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
quote:

R&D for the Japanese is great and I never had a problem with it as long as it stays reasonable.


I understand some may view RA70 as a JFB dream come true. There are a few glaring trade offs for the japs to get their stuff. I perfer to not discuss this issue until much later in both my RA70 games(this thread is from DirtyHarry game and my other game against FatR).

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/23/2011 9:18:50 PM >

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 464
RE: Reasonable - 4/23/2011 9:38:26 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10914
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I'm nearly at December 1942 in my game with Lew. What do you have for stocked HI at this point?

Your 3 Sho-Kai CVs---When do you have them coming in? I've got all three coming in the first week of May 43. All my Unryu's are now accelerated as well. The BCs look pretty good and they will be completed May and early-July 43.

There ARE trade-offs in this scenario. I really like that. Scenario Two--to me--is pure fantasy for the Japanese. In Scen 70 you start with far less supply and fuel (reflecting the industry changes and Naval Expansion) and little-to-no gain for the Army. It is all IJN!

The changes to RA with Version 3 are going to be huge. Japanese Naval Pilots starting with less experience, a streamlined ASW construction program, revamped SS production, and a whole host of other changes will make it feel almost like a new scenario. Cannot wait! Should be a bunch of fun to see how it plays out.


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/


(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 465
RE: Reasonable - 4/23/2011 10:14:17 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
Stocked HI: 768880

quote:

There are a few glaring trade offs for the japs to get their stuff.

In my game w/ FatR(IJN) his betties ran out of torpedoes in hawaii during our last big engagement. This issue also happened to me in my recent turn w/ DH when he invaded Kopang.

When I say the japs have a glaring problem, I refer to the supply issues of insuring all air HQ/bases are well stocked for combat ops. Failure in supply is a good example of the problems the japs have.

I suspect the more the japs wish for and build, the less he will have in supply to be able to fight w/ later.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/23/2011 10:28:50 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 466
RE: Reasonable - 4/23/2011 11:01:00 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10914
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Well said. I have some growing supply concerns and find some real regret for my Indian Adventure. Fuel is great due to the Fleet working out of the DEI but supply is becoming a far more serious issue.

_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/


(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 467
RE: Reasonable - 4/23/2011 11:11:25 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10914
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Looking at your ship screen, you don't have anything accelerated. Do you have a large stockpile of naval points?

_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 468
Naval Building - 4/23/2011 11:14:54 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10914
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Here is my Tracker shot from late-November 42. Shipyards are humming along with all late-CVs accelerated (I moved Sho-Kai's forward to where I want them).

My merchant construction is behind at the moment but it should be OK within a few weeks. Working on that...





Attachment (1)

_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 469
RE: Reasonable - 4/24/2011 5:03:58 AM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Looking at your ship screen, you don't have anything accelerated. Do you have a large stockpile of naval points?

Naval points =42061. In this game w/ DH I have lost one IJN CVL. DH is a tough minded sport and keeps playing while having lost 4 USN fleet carriers and 3 Brit CVs. So I do not feel the need for accelerated IJN CV production. In a strange way I look forward to DH teaching me the end game and him having some fun.

The naval surplus raises a question for me. What is too much naval points?
Or to better phrase the issue, what does japan need saved in 44?
HI=1m?
naval=100000?
arms=10000?
vehicles=20000?
merchies=100000?
I think this was discussed early in the thread by major Mike.

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/24/2011 5:09:53 AM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 470
heavy industry - 4/24/2011 5:15:23 AM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
1m Hi may not be enough according to major mike.  Hum.

John, what is your average HI accumulation per month?

Mine looks like a 40000 increase in 20 days which includes pilot training subtracted.

So if I grow HI at 2000 per day then maybe I have 500 days left before start to have problems w/ the allies. So this would be another million HI. I might need to double HI to 4000 per day...

500 days from now is mid 44. I still have to fight till mid 46.

I know I produce about 26000 supply points a day at Tokyo.
Too get 26000 supply points a turn I need 2 HI and 2 fuel points to get 2 supply points.
I need to do a diagnostic on my light industry to see how much supply it is providing to the home island. then I know the rest is produced by hi/fuel points to give me a view of my inner workings. to be honest I have allowed the readers to advise me when they saw some problems...I think now I am becoming more self aware of my production.

I could have overproduced naval build points.

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/24/2011 5:30:36 AM >

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 471
RE: heavy industry - 4/24/2011 5:32:38 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 10914
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
My accumulation of HI has been severely happered by a continual fuel shortage in Manchuria. No one else seems to have this issue within RA so I am not sure what is causing it. I've currently got 250,000 HI banked at the moment and am adding about 15-20,000 per month at this point. If I can keep the HI in Manchuria RUNNING then that number will go up faster.

I've lost CarDiv2 but have also sunk 4 US CV, 2 Brit CV, and 1 Brit CVL. Am working to get all my major construction done by mid-44 and can then shut down most of the Naval Yards.

_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/


(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 472
RE: heavy industry - 4/24/2011 10:20:15 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2515
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
I did have regular problems with keeping Chinese industry running, but until recently I paid little attention to them, because I didn't have oil/fuel to feed all of the industry anyway. Then I realised that shipping fuel for the industry in China requires expending much less fuel on the way, compared to, say, Hokkaido, and since then I try to keep China well-stocked with fuel, turning off some heavy industry in Home Islands instead.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 473
RE: heavy industry - 4/24/2011 10:28:28 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2515
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
Bigred, I advise you to start turning off Naval shipyards and stockpile HI points instead. Having a lot of NSY points in reserve (compared to having a lot of HI points) can only come handy when your shipyards are being bombed, and by then the fleet probably won't be of much use anyway. I notice your oil levels are decreasing over time... by reducing naval production and turning off some HI you can make them stable and still stockpile lots of HI points.

Alternatively, accelerate a couple carriers, if you feel the need.

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 474
new air production commands - 4/26/2011 5:22:30 AM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
1. convert d4y4 rd to d4y1.
2. convert d4y2s rd to d4y1.
3. convert j1n1s rd to d4y1.
4. convert s1a1 rd to d4y1.
After constructed all these factories are to be used to tree research the d4y series in effort to get the d4y4 800 kg bomb on fleet carriers ASAP.   I should have started this day 1.

5. convert g4m2 rd to g4m1.
6. convert g4m2e rd to g4m1.
7.  \convert g4m3a to g4m1.
then work up tree by expand to 30 on each factory to get the armored g4m w/ radar.

Edit note. I did execute the Judy changes. I am hesitating on the betty changes because i am not sure I want 4 factories producing 120 betties per month late in the game. maybe hthis is a good idea for the kamakazi.

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/26/2011 7:18:01 PM >

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 475
RE: new air production commands - 4/26/2011 11:05:50 AM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2515
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
You cannot research models that are already in production. Only the next model available in the future. Also, D4Y4 should be outside of normal D4Y upgrade tree in the current build of Scen 70.

< Message edited by FatR -- 4/26/2011 11:06:19 AM >

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 476
RE: new air production commands - 4/26/2011 7:10:25 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR

You cannot research models that are already in production. Only the next model available in the future. Also, D4Y4 should be outside of normal D4Y upgrade tree in the current build of Scen 70.

FatR thanks for the input. I can take any factory and convert it to production of a frame that is ready for current production. if this factory is a 1 or a 2 or a 3 build factory per month then it only cost me 1000supply per build rate per month to repair. If the factory in question is a 30 frame per month factory then it would cost 30000 supply to convert.

Once I convert the factories to d4y1 at the 1000supply per build rate cost---then I will increase the size of the factory to 30 on all of the above at a repair cost of 100 per point repaired. Then I will switch the fully built factories back to r/d on the d4y2, etc up the tree.

Be advised the Tracker shows the upgrade path for the d4y1 is:
d4y2
d4y3
d4y4
d4y5

Are you sure the d4y3 does not upgrade to the y4 model. My tracker plane comparison screen says it does do so.

Edit: I got curious and looked up the plane in the editor. FatR is correct that the d4y4 is a stand alone. But the d4y3 converts to the d4y5.

Respectfully,
Bigred




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/27/2011 12:42:58 AM >

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 477
RE: D4y5 - 4/26/2011 7:37:40 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
Look at this.  The d4y5 has a 500kg weapon but has nomax payload.  I wonder of a 0 payload has any effect.  i note the d4y3 has a max payload of 1234lbs in the above post.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/27/2011 12:42:01 AM >

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 478
RE: D4y5 - 4/26/2011 7:42:03 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
I cut naval shipyards 400 points....I will wait a few days before I slow down HI production.

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/27/2011 1:43:52 AM >

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 479
800kg - 4/26/2011 7:43:03 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2862
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
I really wanted that 800 kg payload.  Is the d4y4 is worth the R/D?
Ummm.

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 480
Page:   <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> RE: a6m2 Page: <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   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

0.137