Matrix Games Forums

A look through the keyhole #10!The Age of Shadows on Distant Worlds starts now!Paypal System UpdateDistant Worlds: Shadows Final Teaser!Distant Worlds: Legends gets Updated!Recruiting Testers for Commander: the Great War on Mac!Armageddon invasion starts in 2014Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!Servers UpdateThe Deal goes Fourth!		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: No Yamatos! What would you build?

 
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 >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/1/2012 6:14:36 AM   
fodder


Posts: 590
Joined: 4/11/2010
From: Daytona Beach
Status: offline 		Again it looks like I have a little more drydock time to use. Hull No. 111 was not cancelled in March of 1942. Like the Shinano cnstruction was halted in march of 42. Hull 111 was not cancelled until Sept 42 when it was decided not to convert it to a carrier. The hull was broken up in 43 is the best info I've found so far. Don't know if that means they finished breaking it up in 43 or started to break it up then. For now the Yamato/hull No 111 drydock is available till the end of 12/42. This will make little differance to my build list. I'll probably just build another batch of sub chasers to fill in the extra time.

_____________________________


(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)
Post #: 31
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/1/2012 6:22:23 AM   
fodder


Posts: 590
Joined: 4/11/2010
From: Daytona Beach
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Insano

interesting you didn't build any more capital ships. 54 more DD would be VERY nice to have. However, early on I wouldn't put all my eggs in to the front line destroyer basket. Japan is also direly lacking in quality ASW escorts with long legs at wars start.

My .02, I've always liked the Shimushu class corvettes. I think the later Etorofu class escorts are basically the same as the Shimushu's. I just would have built more of these earlier. Also how about some more large and fast tankers?



I thought long about building Shimushu class Es. Their 12 month build time did not fit in well on the build list and the fact that they only start out carrying 12DCs giving them a ASW rating of 1 for the first year of the war were the reasons I didn't build any.

Tankers were not built by the navy, they were commercal ships.

_____________________________


(in reply to Insano)
Post #: 32
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/1/2012 6:25:11 AM   
fodder


Posts: 590
Joined: 4/11/2010
From: Daytona Beach
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Why not simply expand the historical DD Yards detailed in Kaigun?

Use those two big slipways for something 'fun.'


quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Big slipways are too important to tie them up with smaller ships that can easily be built in smaller yards.

Bill


Using other shipyards was not an option here.


_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 33
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/1/2012 6:27:23 AM   
fodder


Posts: 590
Joined: 4/11/2010
From: Daytona Beach
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis

fodder is looking for alternative use of 190.000 tons of steel and big shipyards. You can't use steel or slipways to produce aircrafts.




_____________________________


(in reply to Puhis)
Post #: 34
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/1/2012 6:37:45 AM   
fodder


Posts: 590
Joined: 4/11/2010
From: Daytona Beach
Status: offline 		As for all the other suggestions after the fact. Carriers were my first choice to build, but they really didn't go with the original purpose of this mod. I did try to work in CA, CS, CL, AO and SS on my build lists I have a legal pad with four pages front and back with build lists on them. In the end none of them matched up well against going with all DDs.
A pair of CAs equaled 18 DDs. A pair of CLs = 12 DDs. For me the best bang for the buck was the DDs.


_____________________________


(in reply to fodder)
Post #: 35
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/1/2012 10:03:32 AM   
RisingSun


Posts: 502
Joined: 11/5/2009
From: Clifton Park, NY
Status: offline 		Well guess some of you dont use your common sense on war situations, like Stormwolf, what doesnt quite understand the details i am saying. Of course you cant build aircrafts out of battleship that made mostly from steels. But instead they should have focus on building aircrafts instead. You dont build what you want, without manpowers who make them as well resources. Believe it or not, Japan had good surplus of alluminums. In the last four years since war with China back in July 1937, Japan pay wages only for workers mostly in homeland. Not mention alluminum ores scatter out in south and north Korea at that time. So the workers is what make em, shipyards, plants, etcs.

So the way the game is laid out is a different story, go ahead and do what you like. Personally, with steels, she need alot of destroyers to protect her convoy of resources that shipped from Palembang and other important sites. Those carriers she had should be enough. Imagine having 200+ Akizuki Class, but that didnt take place sometime in 1942. After seatrial and shankdown cruise, she was pretty effective destroyer. Most older ships, like the Nagara, Tenryu classes can be scrapped to make useful destroyers. Those Yamato class as it is are Yamamoto Flagship as well Headquarter, so two should be enough.

Most islands after war broke out will be unstinkable carriers, all those carriers she was making should be plenty, if they use them right.

< Message edited by RisingSun -- 11/1/2012 10:05:26 AM >

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)
Post #: 36
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/1/2012 12:13:38 PM   
Commander Stormwolf

 

Posts: 1531
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

In 1941, bauxite was mined in Arkansas, the Caribbean, and South America. Smaller amounts were produced in India. The only source under Japanese control at the start of the Pacific War was in the Palau Islands. However, Japan seized rich deposits in Malaya and the Netherlands East Indies early in the war. When these became inaccessible due to the submarine blockade later in the war, attempts were made to use aluminiferous shale from Manchuria, but this proved to be a poor source of aluminum, and production plummeted.

Japan had imported five to ten thousands tons of aluminum per year prior to 1934, but thereafter made strenuous efforts to increase domestic production. Abundant hydroelectric power aided the development of the aluminum smelting industry. Japanese production of aluminum in 1941 was 71,740 metric tons and peaked at 151,000 tons in 1944, while U.S. production was 309,100 tons in 1941 and peaked at 920,200 tons in 1943. At the time war broke out, Japan had stockpiled 254,740 tons of bauxite.


http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/A/l/Aluminum.htm

for your information, it takes 4 tons of bauxite to make 1 ton of aluminum

Japanese had to import their bauxite from this island of Bintan (that one below singapore) during the war, and once they lost the philipines,
they were completely done fore (1945 they made a total of.. SEVEN kilotons of aluminum, versus NINE HUNDRED kilotons by the usa)


AE becomes ridiculous when the japanese player starts turning off ships to build ac, when that was impossible


back to the topic:

the Yamato battleships really had to be built, only a fool would stop the development of any particular weapon system in peacetime


but if you want to make a custom scenario, where they are not built

then only ships or tanks can be made from yamato's materials

probably carriers



< Message edited by Commander Stormwolf -- 11/1/2012 12:14:29 PM >

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to fodder)
Post #: 37
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/1/2012 2:51:44 PM   
fodder


Posts: 590
Joined: 4/11/2010
From: Daytona Beach
Status: offline 		Political: We must keep on building this weapons system even though all our neighbors concider it a hostel act, have allied against us, have put in place sanctions agaist us and have threated to attack us if we continue to build this weapon system.

Economic: We must keep on building this weapons system even though the cost over runs are unsustainable and will bankrupt the nation.

Technical: we must keep on building this weapons system even though recent advances have made it obsolete.

Need: We must keep on building this weapon system even though the original reason for building it no longer exists and when it is finished we will have absolutlly no use for it.

There are many more reasons why we must continue to build this weapons system, but most importantly we must keep on building this weapons sytem because:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Stormwolf
only a fool would stop the development of any particular weapon system in peacetime



Only a _______ (you can fill in the blank yourself) would make the above statment.

_____________________________


(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)
Post #: 38
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/1/2012 5:46:50 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12000
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Stormwolf

AE becomes ridiculous when the japanese player starts turning off ships to build ac, when that was impossible




I rarely (if ever) agreed with you but you are spot on here. As it's just all about HI in the game when it comes down to production (don't even want to comment on the possibility to stockpile HI) the game doesn't do a good job on simulating production. As it's not a simulation it got a Command & Conquer production system. The initial devs should have either gone with historic production numbers or should have tried to come up with a somewhat more realistic production system.

_____________________________


(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)
Post #: 39
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/1/2012 8:47:31 PM   
Commander Stormwolf

 

Posts: 1531
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline


if battleships were given the absolute maximum development effort,
they could have been superior to warplanes

if:

1) radar assisted rotary-cannon AA was available

2) reactive armor torpedo bulges

try to fly a torpedo plane today into a CIWS defended task force..


when assessing historical decisions, hindsight is the biggest advantage to the
so-called historian

the supremacy of warplanes was never demonstrated priort to the outbreak of war

all they had were experiments that stacked in favor of one or the other
(mitchell for example)



japanese did exactly what they were supposed to - develop all the technologies
then shift production to that weapon system that proved itself superior and cancel the others

and that's exactly what they did.. convert yamato #3, cancel yamato #4

unfortunately for them, their advantages in some fields (torpedoes, airframe designs,)

were migitated and outweighed by their disadvantages in other fields (industry, politics, AA artillery, tanks)


now if you want to say, the powers sign a treaty that says "no more battleships"
then probably all powers would have built more carriers / cruisers / etc instead of battleships

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to fodder)
Post #: 40
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/1/2012 8:49:58 PM   
Commander Stormwolf

 

Posts: 1531
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

it got a Command & Conquer production system.
The initial devs should have either gone with historic production numbers
or should have tried to come up with a somewhat more realistic production system


Even a Starcraft production system (2 materials: mineral/gas , steel/duralumin)

would basically solve it


petition needed

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)
Post #: 41
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/1/2012 11:07:54 PM   
trojan


Posts: 238
Joined: 8/8/2004
From: bendigo, Victoria, Australia
Status: offline 		A system similar to Hearts of Iron II could work although I'm not sure the current game engine could accommodate it.

Have basic resouces, iron ore, coal, oil and rare metals.

This way rare metals would be needed for aircraft production, steel for ships etc, oil for industry/fuel and coal/iron ore for industry (steel production).

Supply could then be a seperate system based on light industry production using basic resources


regards

_____________________________

There are two types of ships in the world

Submarines and Targets

D.B.F

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)
Post #: 42
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/2/2012 8:40:37 AM   
RisingSun


Posts: 502
Joined: 11/5/2009
From: Clifton Park, NY
Status: offline 		Selected Raw Materials
1940 Japanese Production and Importation

Material
Iron Ores Total 6,846+ %Home 16.4 Imports %Controlled 24.2 %Uncontrolled 59.4
Alloying Ores Total 366 %Home 37.7 Imports %Controlled 0.0 %Uncontrolled 62.3
Aluminum Ores Total 438 %Home 22.6* Imports %Controlled 17.2 %Uncontrolled 60.2
Coal Total 67 %Home 84.7 Imports %Controlled 15.3 %Uncontrolled 0.0
Oil Total 36 %Home 5.5* Imports %Controlled 0.0 %Uncontrolled 94.5

This table uses a sampling of the basic "strategic" materials - those vital for heavy
industry, and military production in particular - to demonstrate Japan's dependence
upon imports in virtually all categories. Imports noted under "% Controlled" came
from areas under Japanese domination: Manchuria, Formosa, Korea and North China.
Those indicated under "%Uncontrolled" are those coming from outside the confines
of the Japanese Empire. All figures in thousands of tons or barrels. "+" indicates
figures are incomplete. "*" indicates that Formosan production is included with Japanese.


(in reply to trojan)
Post #: 43
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/2/2012 9:07:08 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 7047
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Stormwolf
if battleships were given the absolute maximum development effort,
they could have been superior to warplanes

if:

1) radar assisted rotary-cannon AA was available


If you're going to wish for 1970s technology, why don't you equip the KB with F/A-18s in 1941? The electronics to control remote turrets did exist by 1945, though the Japanese didn't have it. The solid state electronics which led to the development of computers capable of automatically directing guns due to radar signals requires solid state microcontrollers with solid state memory. Neither of which existed until the late 1960s and there was little that could have accelerated that development. Solid state digital electronics have been one of the fastest evolving technologies in history.

quote:


2) reactive armor torpedo bulges

try to fly a torpedo plane today into a CIWS defended task force..


The US strategy in dealing with BBs from the air was to take out the AA with dive bombers and rocket armed fighters, then send in the torpedo planes. That worked to great effect with the 1945 attack on the Yamato. It would have worked with your two ideas too. It would have taken a bit more torpedoes and losses to AA may have been a bit heavier, but any defense can be overwhelmed.

quote:


when assessing historical decisions, hindsight is the biggest advantage to the
so-called historian

the supremacy of warplanes was never demonstrated priort to the outbreak of war

all they had were experiments that stacked in favor of one or the other
(mitchell for example)


There were many people who saw the superiority of aircraft. There were few senior enough to influence construction programs before the war. Even still the US started production on quite a few Essex hulls before the war started.

Bill


_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)
Post #: 44
RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? - 11/2/2012 1:08:32 PM   
Commander Stormwolf

 

Posts: 1531
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
New Technologies: no one knows when war will break out, peacetime is the research + development period in between wars

once war begins, typically the superiority of one weapon system will be demonstrated in the opening engagements and industry is organized towards
that particular one at the expense of the others

Strike against Yamato: due to poor japanese AA, overwhelming US numbers, suspect damage control, but most importantly

the concept of sinking a battleship underway with torpedoes was already demonstrated in Dec 1941 with the sinking of PoW/Repulse


The foresight of carriers versus battleships: It would have been foolish to ignore the development of aviation, and it was developed by all sides.


but what if war broke out in 1925? would you really want to be stuck without battleships, wielding biplanes as your nation's defence?

or how about in 1960 (let's say missile technology was never possible, aircraft and warships are still the dominant weapon)

let's even go so far as to say that jet engines were impossible to run for extended periods, thus useless for military applications

now the CIWS armed battleship is king


these are all hypothetical scenarios planners and appropriation committees need to be looking at

they cannot be based on the prophetic words (largely guesswork) of somone like douhet or mitchell


the worst thing to do is neglect the development of any particular form of warfare during peacetime, and be caught with one's pants down in wartime


and aviation was certainly not neglected byt the japanese, they were ahead in a number of areas


1) long-range torpedo planes + escorts

2) deep penetration carrier raids and co-ordination of multiple carriers

3) seaplanes and flying boats (emily, glenn, jakes all far more advanced than anyone)

4) fighter designs (Tojo in particular was ahead of the world until the bearcat)


definitely were behind in some areas

1) fighter configuration (geared towards offence rather than defence, even Tojo was configured wrongly)

2) fuel and engines (less engine power for the same mass)

3) bmbr development and doctrine (army air force insisted on obsolete types of twin-engined designs, well behind USAAF heavies or RAF mosquitos)


honesly if i were around then (in the 1920s/1930s), i would have been most influenced by the sinking of svent istvan

and invested heavily in the development of shipboard torpedoes


oops.. japanese did that as well





















_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to fodder)
Post #: 45
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: No Yamatos! What would you build? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.275