Matrix Games Forums

Space Program Manager gets mini-site and Twitch SessionBuzz Aldrin: Ask Me Anything (AMA) on redditDeal of the week Fantasy Kommander: Eukarion WarsSpace Program Manager Launch Contest Announced!Battle Academy 2 is out now on iPad!A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: IJA fighter research/production plans?

 
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: IJA fighter research/production plans? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/7/2013 12:37:19 AM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18293
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DivePac88

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.

I thought I'd just leave it as it for this next game, Des. No sense messing about with the historical production schedule, wouldn't you say?

_____________________________


(in reply to DivePac88)
Post #: 31
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/7/2013 2:38:59 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5925
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu


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

I don't consider it pointless. Allow me to elaborate a bit on my thoughts why.

As the war moves into '45, I tend to ignore the whole IJA/IJN thing. Everything is moving back to the HI for defense and there isn't much fleet left so everything is LBA.

Having said that, I'm looking for specific fighters to perform specific roles. To me, there are 3 roles that need to be filled:
1. A2A Fighter
2. A2A 4E
3. NF

A2A Fighter
Meaning, what am I going to send toe2toe up against the Stangs and Bolts? I don't beleive in ablative fighters, so that's out for me. There are only a few choices here as you need to be within 40 of the Stang which is at 487 to avoid the heavy delta speed penalty. That means 448 min, and that means: Shinden, Karyu, or Shusei. Shinden is generally my choice, but I sometimes go for Karyu. Having chosen Shinden, it means I'm putting the other two roles on the IJA side because I need a LOT of these fighters and fighter groups.

A2A 4E and NF
These have to be at least 20 faster than the B-29 (364), looking for +385. What you can't catch, you can't hit. And the more armament, the better. Again, this is a short list: Ki-83, Ki-84b*. Armament between these two is a wash. Ki-83 is faster ... 46 faster which is a lot. It is also exactly 2x the cost as it is a 2E. I consider this a coin-flip. Personally, I don't think it matters that much. I prefer the Frank, but I readily accept that the 83 is a fine choice.

So, in the end, all of my IJN fighter groups will be Shinden, all of my IJA groups will be Franks. Tiered CAP. With production focused, I can build lots. I also have my production spread out so it is hard to take down. If I did my 42/43/44 builds right, I have lots of potential kami's in my pools. I think I can keep the allies off the shores of the HI. Keeping thrm out of Korea will be harder.

These are all SR3 fighters. Oh well, they are fighting over their bases and the allies have to fly from far out. And by mid 43 every base in the HI is maxxed out, right? SR3 is not an issue unless I let my Base Forces and Air HQ's get caught out on the frontier leaving me naked at home. In which case, SR3 is really not my biggest problem, is it?


* you could include Karyu and Shusei again in this if you wish, but both are SR5 and you need to think that through carefully before you commit to either one.

Anyway, just my thoughts.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to koniu)
Post #: 32
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/7/2013 3:22:41 AM   
srv24243

 

Posts: 52
Joined: 11/18/2012
Status: offline
I am a rookie and have only made it until august 42 in the campaign but i find the tojos in respectable numbers do very well against the b-17's and i use the A6M3 zero very well against the b-24's that pester me over gasmata. Since i have not encountered any advanced allied fighters yet i dont know what works on them. Of course pilot skill helps considerably.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 33
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/7/2013 5:45:25 AM   
koniu

 

Posts: 2243
Joined: 2/28/2011
From: Konin, Poland, European Union
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu


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

I don't consider it pointless. Allow me to elaborate a bit on my thoughts why.

As the war moves into '45, I tend to ignore the whole IJA/IJN thing. Everything is moving back to the HI for defense and there isn't much fleet left so everything is LBA.

Having said that, I'm looking for specific fighters to perform specific roles. To me, there are 3 roles that need to be filled:
1. A2A Fighter
2. A2A 4E
3. NF

A2A Fighter
Meaning, what am I going to send toe2toe up against the Stangs and Bolts? I don't beleive in ablative fighters, so that's out for me. There are only a few choices here as you need to be within 40 of the Stang which is at 487 to avoid the heavy delta speed penalty. That means 448 min, and that means: Shinden, Karyu, or Shusei. Shinden is generally my choice, but I sometimes go for Karyu. Having chosen Shinden, it means I'm putting the other two roles on the IJA side because I need a LOT of these fighters and fighter groups.

A2A 4E and NF
These have to be at least 20 faster than the B-29 (364), looking for +385. What you can't catch, you can't hit. And the more armament, the better. Again, this is a short list: Ki-83, Ki-84b*. Armament between these two is a wash. Ki-83 is faster ... 46 faster which is a lot. It is also exactly 2x the cost as it is a 2E. I consider this a coin-flip. Personally, I don't think it matters that much. I prefer the Frank, but I readily accept that the 83 is a fine choice.

So, in the end, all of my IJN fighter groups will be Shinden, all of my IJA groups will be Franks. Tiered CAP. With production focused, I can build lots. I also have my production spread out so it is hard to take down. If I did my 42/43/44 builds right, I have lots of potential kami's in my pools. I think I can keep the allies off the shores of the HI. Keeping thrm out of Korea will be harder.

These are all SR3 fighters. Oh well, they are fighting over their bases and the allies have to fly from far out. And by mid 43 every base in the HI is maxxed out, right? SR3 is not an issue unless I let my Base Forces and Air HQ's get caught out on the frontier leaving me naked at home. In which case, SR3 is really not my biggest problem, is it?


* you could include Karyu and Shusei again in this if you wish, but both are SR5 and you need to think that through carefully before you commit to either one.

Anyway, just my thoughts.

Very interesting. Must rethink those information. Maybe i will make few adjustments in my r&d program. Most interesting for me is A2A Fighter part because in A2A 4E a arledy done that
From where You have 40miles delta between speeds part. Is that experience or You have that from one of devs.

PS. When those 487 fast P-51 and P-47 arrive. I am at work. Is it that q3 of `45 or later?


< Message edited by koniu -- 1/7/2013 5:49:54 AM >


_____________________________

"Only the Dead Have Seen the End of War"

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 34
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/7/2013 9:51:34 AM   
Miller


Posts: 1644
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy


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


Yes, all good points. The Tojo still uses the Ha-35 in one of my games.

< Message edited by Miller -- 1/7/2013 9:53:03 AM >

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 35
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/7/2013 11:09:44 AM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6311
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu


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

I don't consider it pointless. Allow me to elaborate a bit on my thoughts why.

As the war moves into '45, I tend to ignore the whole IJA/IJN thing. Everything is moving back to the HI for defense and there isn't much fleet left so everything is LBA.

Having said that, I'm looking for specific fighters to perform specific roles. To me, there are 3 roles that need to be filled:
1. A2A Fighter
2. A2A 4E
3. NF

A2A Fighter
Meaning, what am I going to send toe2toe up against the Stangs and Bolts? I don't beleive in ablative fighters, so that's out for me. There are only a few choices here as you need to be within 40 of the Stang which is at 487 to avoid the heavy delta speed penalty. That means 448 min, and that means: Shinden, Karyu, or Shusei. Shinden is generally my choice, but I sometimes go for Karyu. Having chosen Shinden, it means I'm putting the other two roles on the IJA side because I need a LOT of these fighters and fighter groups.

A2A 4E and NF
These have to be at least 20 faster than the B-29 (364), looking for +385. What you can't catch, you can't hit. And the more armament, the better. Again, this is a short list: Ki-83, Ki-84b*. Armament between these two is a wash. Ki-83 is faster ... 46 faster which is a lot. It is also exactly 2x the cost as it is a 2E. I consider this a coin-flip. Personally, I don't think it matters that much. I prefer the Frank, but I readily accept that the 83 is a fine choice.

So, in the end, all of my IJN fighter groups will be Shinden, all of my IJA groups will be Franks. Tiered CAP. With production focused, I can build lots. I also have my production spread out so it is hard to take down. If I did my 42/43/44 builds right, I have lots of potential kami's in my pools. I think I can keep the allies off the shores of the HI. Keeping thrm out of Korea will be harder.

These are all SR3 fighters. Oh well, they are fighting over their bases and the allies have to fly from far out. And by mid 43 every base in the HI is maxxed out, right? SR3 is not an issue unless I let my Base Forces and Air HQ's get caught out on the frontier leaving me naked at home. In which case, SR3 is really not my biggest problem, is it?


* you could include Karyu and Shusei again in this if you wish, but both are SR5 and you need to think that through carefully before you commit to either one.

Anyway, just my thoughts.



This is very interesting Pax! Thanks for sharing!

Do you think the Shindens are better than the Franks ("r" and "b") against fighters? My limited experience says the opposite. I remember i lost way more P-47D-25s against Franks than against Shindens when i swept Tokyo against Rader. His Shindens seemed to perform way worse at those high altitudes than the Franks (also probably because of the lack of accurancy of the 30mm cannons).
However i do agree that speed is the key for A2A combat...i just don't feel Japan can field anything good enough to meet the allied late war fighters...
I didn't even had any problems downing hundreds of KI-201s... despite their superior speed they seemed impotent against high alt sweeps of P-47s

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 36
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/7/2013 11:48:08 PM   
Zigurat666


Posts: 253
Joined: 9/26/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

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.



+1 !!!

Todays George victims...






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

***Schulzstaffen SS***

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 37
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/8/2013 3:43:59 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5925
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu

PS. When those 487 fast P-51 and P-47 arrive. I am at work. Is it that q3 of `45 or later?


P47N = 3/45 Build rate >100/mo
P51H = 9/45 Build rate >250/mo



_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to koniu)
Post #: 38
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/8/2013 3:45:03 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5925
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

The Tojo still uses the Ha-35 in one of my games.

Scen 2. The devs fixed it in Scen 1, but decided to leave it as the Ha-35 in Scen 2.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 39
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/8/2013 4:01:21 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5925
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy


This is very interesting Pax! Thanks for sharing!

Do you think the Shindens are better than the Franks ("r" and "b") against fighters? My limited experience says the opposite. I remember i lost way more P-47D-25s against Franks than against Shindens when i swept Tokyo against Rader. His Shindens seemed to perform way worse at those high altitudes than the Franks (also probably because of the lack of accurancy of the 30mm cannons).
However i do agree that speed is the key for A2A combat...i just don't feel Japan can field anything good enough to meet the allied late war fighters...
I didn't even had any problems downing hundreds of KI-201s... despite their superior speed they seemed impotent against high alt sweeps of P-47s

When I tested in Armageddon, yes Shinden and Karyu worked really well.

Karyu is tough with SR5, but if you can field 400 of them the allied sweeps will have a really, really bad day. However, it is a unique R&D along with a unique engine. Takes a lot of investment. And of course, there are tactics to deal with it. There are no silver bullets.

Shinden SR3 isn't that bad for me. I can easily deal with it in the HI by cycling groups. At 466, only the Stang is faster, but they have (hopefully) had a long flight already so I am facing slightly fatigued pilots and a/c. Shinden and Karyu have the best armament in game for the IJ. 4 CL cannon. You can only wish they were 4x20mm instead of the 2x20mm and 2x30mm. Still a good punch.

Frank b is ok, but at 392 the Stang's speed advantage is really telling. What I really found is that they work well in tandem with something fast. Frank on it own was just so-so. But paired with something fast, like Shinden or Karyo, I got much better results.

The Frank 'r' I never upgrade to from the 'b'. The loss of the cl 20mm more than negates the speed and manouver bonus. Punching power counts and 2x20mm CL is a lot of punch.

Just my thoughts here.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 40
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/8/2013 4:10:05 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5925
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu

From where You have 40miles delta between speeds part. Is that experience or You have that from one of devs.



I remember that from a discussion about the ACM couple years back. Pretty sure it was one of the devs. It also shows up though in game testing.

Look what happens when the Corsair shows upearly '43 at 430. We've all been on one side or the other looking at the same combat reports. It ain't the armament creating the difference nor the manouver. It's all speed. 430 .vs. Zero at 336. Tojo struggles as well.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to koniu)
Post #: 41
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/8/2013 6:13:04 AM   
koniu

 

Posts: 2243
Joined: 2/28/2011
From: Konin, Poland, European Union
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu

From where You have 40miles delta between speeds part. Is that experience or You have that from one of devs.



I remember that from a discussion about the ACM couple years back. Pretty sure it was one of the devs. It also shows up though in game testing.

Look what happens when the Corsair shows upearly '43 at 430. We've all been on one side or the other looking at the same combat reports. It ain't the armament creating the difference nor the manouver. It's all speed. 430 .vs. Zero at 336. Tojo struggles as well.

I was driving my car last day on highway and i was driving something 70mph and suddenly i was outrun by another car i think he have 120-140mph, very very fast. There where only seconds until he was few hundred meeter in from of me and i don`t have even chance to see him in mirror so i can imagine how this works for planes. Usually Japanese pilots not even seen what hit him. And even if he manage to avoid enemy fire he have no time to counter attack because enemy was already to far. It suck to be Japanese pilot.



_____________________________

"Only the Dead Have Seen the End of War"

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 42
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/9/2013 4:15:57 AM   
jzardos


Posts: 302
Joined: 3/15/2011
Status: offline
Is there any reason not to skip the Ki-43-IIa and just stay with the Ki-43-Ic as a pure fighter and try hard for the IIb? The IIa has more range and better cruise speed, however it's maneuver is only 39 and the Ic has 46 at the 10k-15k range. I suppose the IIa still has a 39 from 16-20k while the Ic is only a 37. Also, the IIa does have a range +1 better than the Ic.

What do others think and do with the period between the Ic and the IIa?

Thanks

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 43
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/9/2013 5:31:27 AM   
koniu

 

Posts: 2243
Joined: 2/28/2011
From: Konin, Poland, European Union
Status: offline
It depend in what kind of mission You see them
When flaying as escort with bombers bombers there should be no difference at all they bot dieing equal.
When at sweep or CAP You must remember speed is a key. If i understand PaxMondo correctly maneuverability start to have impact when planes speed difference is ~40mph or smaller

On Your place i will go forward IIa


_____________________________

"Only the Dead Have Seen the End of War"

(in reply to jzardos)
Post #: 44
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/9/2013 6:15:27 AM   
Kull


Posts: 1066
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline
Always keep in mind that whatever airframes you decide to use, there's a concurrent need for specific engine types to power them. And that can be complicated by the need to use those same engines to power other airframes. So once you have made your decisions, it might be useful to use my Japan Airframe and Engine Planner spreadsheet (see third link in my sig) to figure out what the impact will be on engine needs, and to make plans accordingly (it's very easy to run what-if scenarios).

< Message edited by Kull -- 1/21/2013 9:07:06 PM >


_____________________________

AE-Japan Setup

AE-Allied Setup

Japan Air-Engine Plan

(in reply to koniu)
Post #: 45
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/11/2013 6:17:29 AM   
jzardos


Posts: 302
Joined: 3/15/2011
Status: offline
Thanks great advice and planners!

(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 46
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/11/2013 1:07:59 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18293
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu


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

I don't consider it pointless. Allow me to elaborate a bit on my thoughts why.

As the war moves into '45, I tend to ignore the whole IJA/IJN thing. Everything is moving back to the HI for defense and there isn't much fleet left so everything is LBA.

Having said that, I'm looking for specific fighters to perform specific roles. To me, there are 3 roles that need to be filled:
1. A2A Fighter
2. A2A 4E
3. NF

A2A Fighter
Meaning, what am I going to send toe2toe up against the Stangs and Bolts? I don't beleive in ablative fighters, so that's out for me. There are only a few choices here as you need to be within 40 of the Stang which is at 487 to avoid the heavy delta speed penalty. That means 448 min, and that means: Shinden, Karyu, or Shusei. Shinden is generally my choice, but I sometimes go for Karyu. Having chosen Shinden, it means I'm putting the other two roles on the IJA side because I need a LOT of these fighters and fighter groups.

A2A 4E and NF
These have to be at least 20 faster than the B-29 (364), looking for +385. What you can't catch, you can't hit. And the more armament, the better. Again, this is a short list: Ki-83, Ki-84b*. Armament between these two is a wash. Ki-83 is faster ... 46 faster which is a lot. It is also exactly 2x the cost as it is a 2E. I consider this a coin-flip. Personally, I don't think it matters that much. I prefer the Frank, but I readily accept that the 83 is a fine choice.

So, in the end, all of my IJN fighter groups will be Shinden, all of my IJA groups will be Franks. Tiered CAP. With production focused, I can build lots. I also have my production spread out so it is hard to take down. If I did my 42/43/44 builds right, I have lots of potential kami's in my pools. I think I can keep the allies off the shores of the HI. Keeping thrm out of Korea will be harder.

These are all SR3 fighters. Oh well, they are fighting over their bases and the allies have to fly from far out. And by mid 43 every base in the HI is maxxed out, right? SR3 is not an issue unless I let my Base Forces and Air HQ's get caught out on the frontier leaving me naked at home. In which case, SR3 is really not my biggest problem, is it?


* you could include Karyu and Shusei again in this if you wish, but both are SR5 and you need to think that through carefully before you commit to either one.

Anyway, just my thoughts.


A very helpful post, Pax.

I'm not sure if I agree with the absolute tone of your selections (e.g., all or nothing Franks for IJA), but it's clear you've weighted the choices well.


_____________________________


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 47
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/11/2013 1:12:56 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18293
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jzardos

Is there any reason not to skip the Ki-43-IIa and just stay with the Ki-43-Ic as a pure fighter and try hard for the IIb? The IIa has more range and better cruise speed, however it's maneuver is only 39 and the Ic has 46 at the 10k-15k range. I suppose the IIa still has a 39 from 16-20k while the Ic is only a 37. Also, the IIa does have a range +1 better than the Ic.

What do others think and do with the period between the Ic and the IIa?

Thanks


The Oscar Ic is a nice dogfighter, but a poor frontline fighter against the Allies armored aircraft. It is woefully undergunned. Tojo IIa is better (also with SR=1), but the replacement of two small rifle caliber MGs with two heavy MGs in the IIc really makes a substantial difference.

The IIb, with its incredibly inaccurate cannon, is actually a step back from the IIa in terms of armament. Most players hurry through the Tojo IIb in pursuit of the far better IIc.

So, scenario 2: I have the Ic at the onset. With R&D, I will get the Tojo IIa in either May or June latest. Until then, the Ic can, with A6M support, hold the line.




_____________________________


(in reply to jzardos)
Post #: 48
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/11/2013 2:28:12 PM   
Puhis

 

Posts: 1700
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jzardos

Is there any reason not to skip the Ki-43-IIa and just stay with the Ki-43-Ic as a pure fighter and try hard for the IIb? The IIa has more range and better cruise speed, however it's maneuver is only 39 and the Ic has 46 at the 10k-15k range. I suppose the IIa still has a 39 from 16-20k while the Ic is only a 37. Also, the IIa does have a range +1 better than the Ic.

What do others think and do with the period between the Ic and the IIa?

Thanks


The Oscar Ic is a nice dogfighter, but a poor frontline fighter against the Allies armored aircraft. It is woefully undergunned. Tojo IIa is better (also with SR=1), but the replacement of two small rifle caliber MGs with two heavy MGs in the IIc really makes a substantial difference.

The IIb, with its incredibly inaccurate cannon, is actually a step back from the IIa in terms of armament. Most players hurry through the Tojo IIb in pursuit of the far better IIc.

So, scenario 2: I have the Ic at the onset. With R&D, I will get the Tojo IIa in either May or June latest. Until then, the Ic can, with A6M support, hold the line.




I disagree here. Tojo IIb have actually better armament, because it does have center line 12,7 mm MG. So the accuracy of main gun is much better than IIa. Secondary gun of both models is crap, so it's the 12,7 mm that matters.

But he was asking about Oscar models, not Tojos. I'd say japanese player must replace Oscar Ic as soon as possible. And Oscar IIa is much plane than Ic, and arrives 7 months earlier than Oscar IIb.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 49
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/11/2013 4:02:07 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18293
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jzardos

Is there any reason not to skip the Ki-43-IIa and just stay with the Ki-43-Ic as a pure fighter and try hard for the IIb? The IIa has more range and better cruise speed, however it's maneuver is only 39 and the Ic has 46 at the 10k-15k range. I suppose the IIa still has a 39 from 16-20k while the Ic is only a 37. Also, the IIa does have a range +1 better than the Ic.

What do others think and do with the period between the Ic and the IIa?

Thanks


The Oscar Ic is a nice dogfighter, but a poor frontline fighter against the Allies armored aircraft. It is woefully undergunned. Tojo IIa is better (also with SR=1), but the replacement of two small rifle caliber MGs with two heavy MGs in the IIc really makes a substantial difference.

The IIb, with its incredibly inaccurate cannon, is actually a step back from the IIa in terms of armament. Most players hurry through the Tojo IIb in pursuit of the far better IIc.

So, scenario 2: I have the Ic at the onset. With R&D, I will get the Tojo IIa in either May or June latest. Until then, the Ic can, with A6M support, hold the line.




I disagree here. Tojo IIb have actually better armament, because it does have center line 12,7 mm MG. So the accuracy of main gun is much better than IIa. Secondary gun of both models is crap, so it's the 12,7 mm that matters.

But he was asking about Oscar models, not Tojos. I'd say japanese player must replace Oscar Ic as soon as possible. And Oscar IIa is much plane than Ic, and arrives 7 months earlier than Oscar IIb.

The accuracy of the wing-mounted 12.7mm in the Tojo IIa is not bad. The two smaller caliber centrally mounted MGs have an excellent accuracy-one not achieved with a "never hits" larger caliber cannon in the IIb. So, would you rather have the additional two small caliber MGs with a slight decrease in accuracy of the 12.7mm guns or a cannon that never hits and only two 12.7mm guns? I'll take the two smaller MGs-at least I know that I can damage some airframes with it regularly.

IIRC, SuluSea 'sandboxed' the Tojo IIa v. IIb against B-24s. As anticipated, the IIb was poor, the IIa better. IIc was the best of the bunch. Maybe I'm losing my mind (always a possibility, I can assure you), but I thought this had been demonstrated with testing.

Yes, the Oscar IIa is superior to the Ic. In scenario 2, I will have access to the Oscar IIa sometime in late summer 1942, some three months after access to the Tojo IIa. I'd choose the Tojo IIa for the intervening three months, rather than stick with an Oscar Ic-IIa upgrade later that Fall.

As for leapfrogging the Oscar IIa and waiting for the IIb? No. The Oscar IIa is a good plane, build (and deploy) it sequentially. Lastly, consider overbuilding it and the Oscar IIb for kamikaze purposes later in the war.

_____________________________


(in reply to Puhis)
Post #: 50
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/11/2013 5:30:28 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6311
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
Afaik those tests made by zulu are showing, pretty clearly, that ki44b is less effective against 4Es than ki44a

The KI43-Ic becomes useless very soon. Wile the later oscar models, starting from IIa, carry 2x250 kg bombs and so can be used as kamis late in the war, the Ic doesn't and its utility remains confined to ablative armour for suicide offensive escort missions

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 51
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/11/2013 5:52:27 PM   
janh

 

Posts: 1226
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
Karyu is tough with SR5, but if you can field 400 of them the allied sweeps will have a really, really bad day. However, it is a unique R&D along with a unique engine. Takes a lot of investment. And of course, there are tactics to deal with it. There are no silver bullets.

Shinden SR3 isn't that bad for me. I can easily deal with it in the HI by cycling groups. At 466, only the Stang is faster, but they have (hopefully) had a long flight already so I am facing slightly fatigued pilots and a/c. Shinden and Karyu have the best armament in game for the IJ. 4 CL cannon. You can only wish they were 4x20mm instead of the 2x20mm and 2x30mm. Still a good punch.


Thx for that info. I never managed to get my games to that late stage unfortunately, so I still am deprived of the opportunity to use these fancy toys. No silver bullets, but at least some out of usual to play with. I should probably just start up a late scenario at some point...

What again was that Japanese counter-piece to the Me-163, the Komet? I forgot. I never invested anything in researching it so far. Have you also tried it? Do I guess correctly that it is rather poor compared to Karyu or Shinden?

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 52
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/15/2013 9:38:26 PM   
abulbulian


Posts: 780
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline
So let me get this straight ... people think the Tojos are better than the Oscars? That is what I should be researching/producing in 43 onward? Up till now have focused on the Oscar and have the Oscar IIa in full production and want to get to the armored version.



_____________________________

- Beta Tester WitE and ATG
- Alpha Tester WitW

"Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack." - Sun Tzu

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 53
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/15/2013 10:12:40 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18293
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

So let me get this straight ... people think the Tojos are better than the Oscars? That is what I should be researching/producing in 43 onward? Up till now have focused on the Oscar and have the Oscar IIa in full production and want to get to the armored version.


Do 'em both would be my advice. Post 1943, there are better airframes to research (N1K1-J, Franks, etc.), but the Ki-44IIa-IIc (Tojo lines) serve as valuable interim mid-war fighters to stem the tide against the Allies' 2nd generation fighters.

Oscars are very good for their range in the escort role. Nature of the beast that escorting fighters are slaughtered outright, but at least there's a chance you'll get your strike package through at range. Tojos, with their limited range, aren't as useful in the escort role.

You should pre-plan your kamikaze production too. Oscar IIa-IIb, with 2x250kg bombs, speed and range is a good candidate. They're capable of ruining the Allies' day if you connect with 'em.

_____________________________


(in reply to abulbulian)
Post #: 54
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/15/2013 11:06:38 PM   
abulbulian


Posts: 780
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline
Thanks for the great advice, I will not slack on my research/production on the Tojos anymore. What should be be producing as airframes to best combat the allies HB threat to my production cities in 44-45?

Sounds like there's a trade off between the maintenance/AB capacity of the 2E Japanese fighters vs the 1E counterparts?

Seems like the consensus is the Franks?

< Message edited by abulbulian -- 1/15/2013 11:08:05 PM >


_____________________________

- Beta Tester WitE and ATG
- Alpha Tester WitW

"Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack." - Sun Tzu

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 55
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/20/2013 10:07:00 AM   
JSG


Posts: 45
Joined: 10/16/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

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.


I used my first Beaufighter nightfighter squadron to protect Rangoon (pilots around air combat skill 70). They began to score almost immediately at night and are about as useful as my insane concentration of heavy AAA there (~ 2 kills each per substantial night bomber attack).
Some other times I used them for very successful LR CAP over convoys, since only a G4M threat was expected.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 56
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/20/2013 10:27:48 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2902
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
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 noted if i fly br4e bIII w/ b29s from the same base they all seem to find the target at night! Using beta 1121

< Message edited by bigred -- 1/20/2013 10:59:27 PM >


_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 57
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/20/2013 10:37:19 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2902
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

Thanks for the great advice, I will not slack on my research/production on the Tojos anymore. What should be be producing as airframes to best combat the allies HB threat to my production cities in 44-45?

Sounds like there's a trade off between the maintenance/AB capacity of the 2E Japanese fighters vs the 1E counterparts?

Seems like the consensus is the Franks?

Check post 361 and 362. This was my plan.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400&mpage=13&key=

_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to abulbulian)
Post #: 58
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/22/2013 12:17:13 AM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 1878
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
Here are some numbers and dates when I got the plane in my PBEM game. We are now at July '44.
Feel free to poke fun at my production as this is not only the furthest i have ever gotten in a WitP game but also the very first time as Japan . So this is most likely NOT an optimal setup lol.

The first number is in the pool, the second is Build/month. The last number is the date they were available. If a plane is not on this list then I did not make any and converted their factories to one of these types.

Total Aircraft 6,790 Build/month 2,158

A6M5c - 236, 340, 12/43
Ki-44 IIc - 122, 280, 9/43
Ki-84a - 86, 200, 6/43
J2M5 - 208, 160, 3/44
N1K2-J - 87, 148, 6/44
Ki-67-Ib - 9 (nine), 146, 6/44
P1Y2 - 399, 140, 10/43
B6N2a - 16, 110, 5/44
D4Y2 - 52, 85, 3/44
E13A1 - 56, 80, 12/41
Ki-49-IIb - 69, 70, 6/43
H8K2-L - 108, 55, 7/43
Ki-49 II KAI - 0, 55, 5/43
H8K2 - 47, 50, 3/43
Ki-46-IIIb - 83, 41, 12/42
A6M5d-S - 33, 20, 2/44
Ki-45KAID - 31, 20, 3/44
C6N1 - 2, 12, 7/44

I have the following turned off, but can produce if needed
G4M2 - 338, 50, 10/43
G4M2a - 0, 65, 6/44
J1Ni-C - 98, 20, 11/42
Ki-46-III - 167, 10, 1/43

Engines I have the following that are in production. Everything else was converted to one of these types.
Ha-60 - 93, 100, 3/42
Ha-32 - 541, 1,170, 12/41
Ha-33 - 407, 360, 12/41
Ha-43 - 199, 40, 2/44
Ha-34 - 390, 340, 12/41
Ha-35 - 19, 650, 12/41
Ha-45 - 102, 660, 6/42

Not producing but can if needed
Ha-44 - 82, 100, 3/43

Just some other 'fun' numbers

Total air losses
Japan - 26,260 planes (from all sources, only 12,846 from A2A. The next largest was from ops, i.e. getting bombed to death )
Allied - 15,634 (5,587 A2A)

I still have 100's of old plane types that are no longer active, like over 300 Vals. So these are included in the Total Pool number above.

Hope this helps to see where at least one Japanese player is in a late game situation

< Message edited by Numdydar -- 1/22/2013 12:18:46 AM >

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 59
RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? - 1/23/2013 5:03:54 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 1878
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
No comments on my late war production? Is it good, bad, terrible and no one wants to hurt my feelings lol?

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: IJA fighter research/production plans? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   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

0.117