Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A)

 
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 >> After Action Reports >> Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 12:11:18 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 1767
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
With our current game reaching the middle of 1945 and coming to a close, Lokasenna and I have agreed to start up another game upon it's conclusion.

While that likely won't happen for a while yet, I wanted to open a new AAR thread, mostly for the sake of discussion while I've still got a chance to make changes, and party as an aide memoir for myself. On top of that, there's been a great deal of interesting conversation via PM that would be good to have a more open discussion on.

And another thing: if Obvert and Lowpe can have two AAR's running, so can I!

Game Details

Scenario 1

FOW ON
advanced Weather On
Allied damage control On
PDU On
historical first turn Off
Dec 7 surprise On
reliable USN torps Off
realistic R&D On
no unit withdrawals Off

House Rules

Again, we're not going to bother with house rules. For all the bemoaning we've both done over aspects of the game, I think we both enjoy the degrees of freedom it offers too much to give it up.

I'll detail long-term goals later, but for the next while I'll transfer most of my handwritten notes here to provide some reference for myself later.
Post #: 1
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 12:44:06 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 1767
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
Aircraft R&D - IJA

Odd to start with this first, but it't the notes I have immediately to hand, plus I've recent experience fresh in mind.

Feel free to chip in with contributions, as this is far from set in stone.

Most of my R&D program will be geared towards the mid/late war air game, as that seems to be the key aspect for a successful Japanese resistance in to 1945. The issue is that most of the late-war air-frames are complete pipe-dreams in any average game.

Fighters

Oscar - I'll be moving this line up to the IV model and use it all war. You can't really knock a IJA SR1 plane with massive range.

Tojo - Limited build of the IIa model. I'm not really sold on this airframe, and I'll use it as a stop-gap for 1942. Once the Frank A arrives I'll switch them all over to that. I am debating simply not building it altogether.

Ki-100 Tony - Moderate emphasis on this. I like it as a SR1 CAP fighter, even if it doesn't seem much different from the Oscar in terms of stats.

Frank - Big emphasis on the A model, but I'll push through and try to get the R model ASAP. It's a big mid-war fighter for the IJA.

Late-war

Ki-102a Randy - A really nice plane. Good altitude, durability and armament. Essentially a fighter bomber with the F designation.

Ki-83 - Must have for late-war sweeps and LR escort.

Ki-94-II - Amazing high altitude performance. The Japanese Mustang, basically.

Fighter-Bombers

Ki-45 KAIa Nick - Pretty much all I'll build. Decent airframe, reasonable armament, 4E killer until later on. I'm not sold that the Randy B is an improvement, so I'll stick with this model for the war. Once it's done on CAP duty I'll switch it to a NF/anti-shipping role. I plan to pay PP's to convert some IJA bomber squadrons to FB as well, so I'll need a fair few of these airframes.

Night Fighters

Ki-45 KAId Nick - Only option, the rest all suck.

Dive Bombers

Lily DB - Decent aircraft, even if the bombs are weak. Well worth the investment to give the IJA some decent anti-shipping ability in the mid-war.

Level Bombers

Sally/Lily - No R&D investment, just to tide me over until the Helen.

Helen - Limited investment, only as far as the IIa model. I don't really like this air-plane much, and IJA level bombing is pretty much worthless after 1944.

Peggy (T) - Massive investment. Once this is online all IJA level bomber production will go on to this.

Ki-115a Tsurugi - Massive investment. One of the key late-war kami planes.

Recon

Dinah - Only choice. The Ki-95 looks nice but won't be worth it.

Transport

Thalia - Can't argue with 15 hexes of range.


(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 2
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 12:45:32 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 23317
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

Again, we're not going to bother with house rules. For all the bemoaning we've both done over aspects of the game, I think we both enjoy the degrees of freedom it offers too much to give it up.


_____________________________


(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 3
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 1:01:40 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8389
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Aircraft R&D - IJA

Odd to start with this first, but it't the notes I have immediately to hand, plus I've recent experience fresh in mind.

Feel free to chip in with contributions, as this is far from set in stone.

Most of my R&D program will be geared towards the mid/late war air game, as that seems to be the key aspect for a successful Japanese resistance in to 1945. The issue is that most of the late-war air-frames are complete pipe-dreams in any average game.

Fighters

Oscar - I'll be moving this line up to the IV model and use it all war. You can't really knock a IJA SR1 plane with massive range.

Tojo - Limited build of the IIa model. I'm not really sold on this airframe, and I'll use it as a stop-gap for 1942. Once the Frank A arrives I'll switch them all over to that. I am debating simply not building it altogether.

Ki-100 Tony - Moderate emphasis on this. I like it as a SR1 CAP fighter, even if it doesn't seem much different from the Oscar in terms of stats.

Frank - Big emphasis on the A model, but I'll push through and try to get the R model ASAP. It's a big mid-war fighter for the IJA.

Late-war

Ki-102a Randy - A really nice plane. Good altitude, durability and armament. Essentially a fighter bomber with the F designation.

Ki-83 - Must have for late-war sweeps and LR escort.

Ki-94-II - Amazing high altitude performance. The Japanese Mustang, basically.

Fighter-Bombers

Ki-45 KAIa Nick - Pretty much all I'll build. Decent airframe, reasonable armament, 4E killer until later on. I'm not sold that the Randy B is an improvement, so I'll stick with this model for the war. Once it's done on CAP duty I'll switch it to a NF/anti-shipping role. I plan to pay PP's to convert some IJA bomber squadrons to FB as well, so I'll need a fair few of these airframes.

Night Fighters

Ki-45 KAId Nick - Only option, the rest all suck.

Dive Bombers

Lily DB - Decent aircraft, even if the bombs are weak. Well worth the investment to give the IJA some decent anti-shipping ability in the mid-war.

Level Bombers

Sally/Lily - No R&D investment, just to tide me over until the Helen.

Helen - Limited investment, only as far as the IIa model. I don't really like this air-plane much, and IJA level bombing is pretty much worthless after 1944.

Peggy (T) - Massive investment. Once this is online all IJA level bomber production will go on to this.

Ki-115a Tsurugi - Massive investment. One of the key late-war kami planes.

Recon

Dinah - Only choice. The Ki-95 looks nice but won't be worth it.

Transport

Thalia - Can't argue with 15 hexes of range.



So, you're proposing 9? RnD projects here just for the IJA ... what about the IJN?

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 4
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 1:25:05 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 1767
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
Aircraft R&D - IJN

The IJA is pretty simple in comparison to the IJN, as there's somehow more freedom and more restrictions with the IJN air groups.

Fighters

A6M Zero - Limited R&D investment to bring forward the A6M8 model, though I may stop at the M5c model. Still undecided. Once the Sam is out, everything will switch over to that.

N1K George - Moderate investment.

J2M Jack - Slight investment. Might phase out entirely if someone can convince me.

A7M2 Sam - Massive investment. I'd like to get this one for mid-44.

J7W1 Shinden - Massive investment. This will be my late-war IJN plane.

Fighter Bombers

Fighter bomber models based off the Zero air-frame? What a joke. Not even bothering.

Night Fighter

Irving NF - Must have. Arrives nice and early.

Frances NF - Armor, radar and good durability. Worth a go. Might not die en-mass to B-29s.

Myrt NF - In terms of confirmed kills, this seems to be the most successful NF, so I'll be building it again.

Dive Bombers

D4Y Judy - Big investment here. Pushing this line all the way to the D4Y4 model ASAP. Val's suck.

B7A2 Grace - Big investment in this. I like it the 500 & 800kg bombs on the Judy's, but there's something to be said for either a torpedo or 2x250kg bombs. I'll likely use it as a torpedo bomber more than a dive bomber

Level Bombers

Betty's and Nell's suck. No R&D investment on any of them. I'll build them both until the Frances comes online, then I'll keep the Nell for it's range and move the Betty over to Frances production.

P1Y2 Frances - Pretty much a requirement for Japan. Miles better than anything else. I'll go for the Y2 model for the SR 2.

Toka - Key late-war kamikaze. Lot's of these, as they're miles better than the trainers.

Recon

D4Y1-C Recon - 17/21 hexes of search and recon. I like it. I don't think I'll R&D it, however, as 9/42 is early enough.

C6N1 Myrt - 23/29 hexes. Wow. I've missed this previously. I'll bring this one forward.

Transport

Emily TR model and the Tabby. I doubt I'll R&D either of them. I might build a fair few Emily transports, as they're nifty for getting troops around fast, even if they are expensive.

Patrol

No R&D needed here. I'm content to wait until the H6K5 Mavis arrives in 6/42, then wait again until 3/43 for the H8K2 Emily for the armor and additional guns. Might not even bother and save supply. We'll see.

Float Plane

Nothing to see here. Jake's all round. I won't bother moving the Jake B model up, as I don't think the radar is much of an improvement.

Float Fighter

I'll bring the Rufe forward to shortcut the Zero line, and I might produce a few to use aboard the CS's and in remote bases, otherwise this is getting no attention.

Torpedo Bombers

Pretty conventional here. Produce the B5N2 Kate initally.

B6N Jill - Big investment in to the Jill line. I'll start to produce them all at the N2 model and just wait for 11/44 to convert up to the 2a model.

Might shift in with the Grace on some groups, depending on circumstances.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 5
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 1:27:31 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 1767
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Aircraft R&D - IJA

Odd to start with this first, but it't the notes I have immediately to hand, plus I've recent experience fresh in mind.

Feel free to chip in with contributions, as this is far from set in stone.

Most of my R&D program will be geared towards the mid/late war air game, as that seems to be the key aspect for a successful Japanese resistance in to 1945. The issue is that most of the late-war air-frames are complete pipe-dreams in any average game.

Fighters

Oscar - I'll be moving this line up to the IV model and use it all war. You can't really knock a IJA SR1 plane with massive range.

Tojo - Limited build of the IIa model. I'm not really sold on this airframe, and I'll use it as a stop-gap for 1942. Once the Frank A arrives I'll switch them all over to that. I am debating simply not building it altogether.

Ki-100 Tony - Moderate emphasis on this. I like it as a SR1 CAP fighter, even if it doesn't seem much different from the Oscar in terms of stats.

Frank - Big emphasis on the A model, but I'll push through and try to get the R model ASAP. It's a big mid-war fighter for the IJA.

Late-war

Ki-102a Randy - A really nice plane. Good altitude, durability and armament. Essentially a fighter bomber with the F designation.

Ki-83 - Must have for late-war sweeps and LR escort.

Ki-94-II - Amazing high altitude performance. The Japanese Mustang, basically.

Fighter-Bombers

Ki-45 KAIa Nick - Pretty much all I'll build. Decent airframe, reasonable armament, 4E killer until later on. I'm not sold that the Randy B is an improvement, so I'll stick with this model for the war. Once it's done on CAP duty I'll switch it to a NF/anti-shipping role. I plan to pay PP's to convert some IJA bomber squadrons to FB as well, so I'll need a fair few of these airframes.

Night Fighters

Ki-45 KAId Nick - Only option, the rest all suck.

Dive Bombers

Lily DB - Decent aircraft, even if the bombs are weak. Well worth the investment to give the IJA some decent anti-shipping ability in the mid-war.

Level Bombers

Sally/Lily - No R&D investment, just to tide me over until the Helen.

Helen - Limited investment, only as far as the IIa model. I don't really like this air-plane much, and IJA level bombing is pretty much worthless after 1944.

Peggy (T) - Massive investment. Once this is online all IJA level bomber production will go on to this.

Ki-115a Tsurugi - Massive investment. One of the key late-war kami planes.

Recon

Dinah - Only choice. The Ki-95 looks nice but won't be worth it.

Transport

Thalia - Can't argue with 15 hexes of range.



So, you're proposing 9? RnD projects here just for the IJA ... what about the IJN?



I say R&D, when what I should say is production and research. What I think of as R&D is what most would think of production.

I've taken most of this directly from my notes on production/R&D, so it may not make sense to you, but it evidently made sense to me (at some point)

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 6
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 2:30:50 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 4235
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
Is the Ki-102c Randy NF not very good? It looks good on paper. Is it the late arrival that puts you off, or does it not perform well in your experience?



< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 3/30/2017 2:31:07 PM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 7
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 2:47:03 PM   
obvert


Posts: 11592
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
Looks good to me. Not much I'd do differently.

Good to see you to are already getting a new one planned. Anything you'll do differently in the opening?

_____________________________


"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 8
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 4:04:54 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 15630
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
The Myrt series of planes all very good I think. However, they are seriously neglected in PDU off.

I think you can skip the Tojo II totally. If you do, your Nicks should be able to carry their weight until George,Jack and Frank show up.

Seriously, think about allocating 3 r&d factories to the Frank B. Might be overkill, with your 83, 94 approach however.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 9
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 9:33:32 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 1767
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Is the Ki-102c Randy NF not very good? It looks good on paper. Is it the late arrival that puts you off, or does it not perform well in your experience?




It looks very good on paper. Probably performs very well in practice.

I don't think it's worth it based on the fact that the radar device that it uses (the major selling point IMO) activates very, very late (8/45 IIRC).

Given that you've essentially just got a regular Randy air-frame until 8/45, you'd be as well using another air-frame.


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Looks good to me. Not much I'd do differently.

Good to see you to are already getting a new one planned. Anything you'll do differently in the opening?


Yes, but we'll get to that :)

Spent the last while mucking around with the PH strike, but generally I'm in favour of a standard, conservative opening. I've been weaned off my previous habits of constant shoestring landings all over the place in 1941 and 1942. Shoestring OPS will still be present, but they'll be much more controlled.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

The Myrt series of planes all very good I think. However, they are seriously neglected in PDU off.

I think you can skip the Tojo II totally. If you do, your Nicks should be able to carry their weight until George,Jack and Frank show up.

Seriously, think about allocating 3 r&d factories to the Frank B. Might be overkill, with your 83, 94 approach however.


Yeah, I'm kind of shocked I overlooked them myself. The Myrt is essentially a flying boat using a single engine and used by many more squadrons. I like the notion of nearly 30 hexes of recon to see what's happening...

I am just cutting out the Tojo completely. There's not much that really seems an improvement over the Oscar, and the Oscar is just a more flexible air-frame. The only theatre where the Tojo shined for me was in Burma; everywhere else it was a defensive fighter. Sure, there may be a period in 42/43 where the Lightnings rule supreme, but from what I've seen they shot down Tojo's much as they did Oscars.

I've adopted the view that there's no overkill with late-war air-frames. Factories can be bombed, planes in the pool can't. There's pretty much always a use for for Frank's anyways - they're decent for Home Islands CAP and at a pinch they're decent kami's. In my current game I've something like 500 Tony's and Tojos and a couple hundred Oscars in the pools - I'd much rather they were all Frank's.

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 10
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 10:06:04 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 16249
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

Again, we're not going to bother with house rules. For all the bemoaning we've both done over aspects of the game, I think we both enjoy the degrees of freedom it offers too much to give it up.



+218

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 11
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 10:10:30 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 16249
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

With our current game reaching the middle of 1945 and coming to a close, Lokasenna and I have agreed to start up another game upon it's conclusion.

While that likely won't happen for a while yet...



Is this inspired by Geoff Lambert's epic non-start and epically pre-war prefaced AAR?

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 12
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/30/2017 10:32:53 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 1767
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

With our current game reaching the middle of 1945 and coming to a close, Lokasenna and I have agreed to start up another game upon it's conclusion.

While that likely won't happen for a while yet...



Is this inspired by Geoff Lambert's epic non-start and epically pre-war prefaced AAR?


Of course! If the rabid Gorn can do it, I'll be damned if I can't!

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 13
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/31/2017 2:40:16 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8389
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing




I say R&D, when what I should say is production and research. What I think of as R&D is what most would think of production.

I've taken most of this directly from my notes on production/R&D, so it may not make sense to you, but it evidently made sense to me (at some point)

Got it, that makes more sense. So how about the IJN aircraft?

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 14
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 3/31/2017 4:20:20 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 1767
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing




I say R&D, when what I should say is production and research. What I think of as R&D is what most would think of production.

I've taken most of this directly from my notes on production/R&D, so it may not make sense to you, but it evidently made sense to me (at some point)

Got it, that makes more sense. So how about the IJN aircraft?


See post #5 :)

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 15
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/1/2017 3:30:20 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8389
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Aircraft R&D - IJN

The IJA is pretty simple in comparison to the IJN, as there's somehow more freedom and more restrictions with the IJN air groups.

Fighters

A6M Zero - Limited R&D investment to bring forward the A6M8 model, though I may stop at the M5c model. Still undecided. Once the Sam is out, everything will switch over to that.

N1K George - Moderate investment.

J2M Jack - Slight investment. Might phase out entirely if someone can convince me.

A7M2 Sam - Massive investment. I'd like to get this one for mid-44.

J7W1 Shinden - Massive investment. This will be my late-war IJN plane.

Fighter Bombers

Fighter bomber models based off the Zero air-frame? What a joke. Not even bothering.

Night Fighter

Irving NF - Must have. Arrives nice and early.

Frances NF - Armor, radar and good durability. Worth a go. Might not die en-mass to B-29s.

Myrt NF - In terms of confirmed kills, this seems to be the most successful NF, so I'll be building it again.

Dive Bombers

D4Y Judy - Big investment here. Pushing this line all the way to the D4Y4 model ASAP. Val's suck.

B7A2 Grace - Big investment in this. I like it the 500 & 800kg bombs on the Judy's, but there's something to be said for either a torpedo or 2x250kg bombs. I'll likely use it as a torpedo bomber more than a dive bomber

Level Bombers

Betty's and Nell's suck. No R&D investment on any of them. I'll build them both until the Frances comes online, then I'll keep the Nell for it's range and move the Betty over to Frances production.

P1Y2 Frances - Pretty much a requirement for Japan. Miles better than anything else. I'll go for the Y2 model for the SR 2.

Toka - Key late-war kamikaze. Lot's of these, as they're miles better than the trainers.

Recon

D4Y1-C Recon - 17/21 hexes of search and recon. I like it. I don't think I'll R&D it, however, as 9/42 is early enough.

C6N1 Myrt - 23/29 hexes. Wow. I've missed this previously. I'll bring this one forward.

Transport

Emily TR model and the Tabby. I doubt I'll R&D either of them. I might build a fair few Emily transports, as they're nifty for getting troops around fast, even if they are expensive.

Patrol

No R&D needed here. I'm content to wait until the H6K5 Mavis arrives in 6/42, then wait again until 3/43 for the H8K2 Emily for the armor and additional guns. Might not even bother and save supply. We'll see.

Float Plane

Nothing to see here. Jake's all round. I won't bother moving the Jake B model up, as I don't think the radar is much of an improvement.

Float Fighter

I'll bring the Rufe forward to shortcut the Zero line, and I might produce a few to use aboard the CS's and in remote bases, otherwise this is getting no attention.

Torpedo Bombers

Pretty conventional here. Produce the B5N2 Kate initally.

B6N Jill - Big investment in to the Jill line. I'll start to produce them all at the N2 model and just wait for 11/44 to convert up to the 2a model.

Might shift in with the Grace on some groups, depending on circumstances.

All I'll say here is to look at how many groups of NF and R you actually get, and then decide how big investment to make.

I've mentioned before George/Jack are interchangeable to me. Both good, but I never build both simply for logistic costs. choose one and then build it. Both are good LBA fighters that will bridge you from A6M to A7M.

How I choose? Simple: George is more offensive (range) and Jack more defensive (climb rate). Build the one to fit your style of play at the time they are around.

I agree about Grace: 350mph and RANGE.

Toka, like the Tsurugi, are good, I just wish they had another 2-3 hex range. 6 is just so short ... but 350mph with an 800kg bomb ... and they use the Ha-35 which by then isn't used anywhere else ... yeah. These are a no brainer and I budget 500K supply for them. Every 4 months to have 2000 of them. If I can get them in early '44, by '45 I have 6000 in pool, enough for 3 death star attacks ....

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 16
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/1/2017 9:44:45 AM   
obvert


Posts: 11592
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Aircraft R&D - IJN

The IJA is pretty simple in comparison to the IJN, as there's somehow more freedom and more restrictions with the IJN air groups.

Fighters

A6M Zero - Limited R&D investment to bring forward the A6M8 model, though I may stop at the M5c model. Still undecided. Once the Sam is out, everything will switch over to that.

N1K George - Moderate investment.

J2M Jack - Slight investment. Might phase out entirely if someone can convince me.

A7M2 Sam - Massive investment. I'd like to get this one for mid-44.

J7W1 Shinden - Massive investment. This will be my late-war IJN plane.

Fighter Bombers

Fighter bomber models based off the Zero air-frame? What a joke. Not even bothering.

Night Fighter

Irving NF - Must have. Arrives nice and early.

Frances NF - Armor, radar and good durability. Worth a go. Might not die en-mass to B-29s.

Myrt NF - In terms of confirmed kills, this seems to be the most successful NF, so I'll be building it again.

Dive Bombers

D4Y Judy - Big investment here. Pushing this line all the way to the D4Y4 model ASAP. Val's suck.

B7A2 Grace - Big investment in this. I like it the 500 & 800kg bombs on the Judy's, but there's something to be said for either a torpedo or 2x250kg bombs. I'll likely use it as a torpedo bomber more than a dive bomber

Level Bombers

Betty's and Nell's suck. No R&D investment on any of them. I'll build them both until the Frances comes online, then I'll keep the Nell for it's range and move the Betty over to Frances production.

P1Y2 Frances - Pretty much a requirement for Japan. Miles better than anything else. I'll go for the Y2 model for the SR 2.

Toka - Key late-war kamikaze. Lot's of these, as they're miles better than the trainers.

Recon

D4Y1-C Recon - 17/21 hexes of search and recon. I like it. I don't think I'll R&D it, however, as 9/42 is early enough.

C6N1 Myrt - 23/29 hexes. Wow. I've missed this previously. I'll bring this one forward.

Transport

Emily TR model and the Tabby. I doubt I'll R&D either of them. I might build a fair few Emily transports, as they're nifty for getting troops around fast, even if they are expensive.

Patrol

No R&D needed here. I'm content to wait until the H6K5 Mavis arrives in 6/42, then wait again until 3/43 for the H8K2 Emily for the armor and additional guns. Might not even bother and save supply. We'll see.

Float Plane

Nothing to see here. Jake's all round. I won't bother moving the Jake B model up, as I don't think the radar is much of an improvement.

Float Fighter

I'll bring the Rufe forward to shortcut the Zero line, and I might produce a few to use aboard the CS's and in remote bases, otherwise this is getting no attention.

Torpedo Bombers

Pretty conventional here. Produce the B5N2 Kate initally.

B6N Jill - Big investment in to the Jill line. I'll start to produce them all at the N2 model and just wait for 11/44 to convert up to the 2a model.

Might shift in with the Grace on some groups, depending on circumstances.

All I'll say here is to look at how many groups of NF and R you actually get, and then decide how big investment to make.

I've mentioned before George/Jack are interchangeable to me. Both good, but I never build both simply for logistic costs. choose one and then build it. Both are good LBA fighters that will bridge you from A6M to A7M.

How I choose? Simple: George is more offensive (range) and Jack more defensive (climb rate). Build the one to fit your style of play at the time they are around.

I agree about Grace: 350mph and RANGE.

Toka, like the Tsurugi, are good, I just wish they had another 2-3 hex range. 6 is just so short ... but 350mph with an 800kg bomb ... and they use the Ha-35 which by then isn't used anywhere else ... yeah. These are a no brainer and I budget 500K supply for them. Every 4 months to have 2000 of them. If I can get them in early '44, by '45 I have 6000 in pool, enough for 3 death star attacks ....


Really? Isn't that a bit counter productive VP wise? That many kamis plus the strike planes would be a lot of points to the Allies. Is it worth it if you sink 3-4 CVs per strike?

I didn't like the Toka/Tsurugi for their lack of range and awfully low durability combined with lack of armor. Rather lose half as many fast 2E that get as many through for damage. Or just a bunch of Grace/Judys where I don't have to commit to another line of planes and I just use the training gross for what they are, training.

_____________________________


"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 17
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/4/2017 3:45:57 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 1767
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Aircraft R&D - IJN

The IJA is pretty simple in comparison to the IJN, as there's somehow more freedom and more restrictions with the IJN air groups.

Fighters

A6M Zero - Limited R&D investment to bring forward the A6M8 model, though I may stop at the M5c model. Still undecided. Once the Sam is out, everything will switch over to that.

N1K George - Moderate investment.

J2M Jack - Slight investment. Might phase out entirely if someone can convince me.

A7M2 Sam - Massive investment. I'd like to get this one for mid-44.

J7W1 Shinden - Massive investment. This will be my late-war IJN plane.

Fighter Bombers

Fighter bomber models based off the Zero air-frame? What a joke. Not even bothering.

Night Fighter

Irving NF - Must have. Arrives nice and early.

Frances NF - Armor, radar and good durability. Worth a go. Might not die en-mass to B-29s.

Myrt NF - In terms of confirmed kills, this seems to be the most successful NF, so I'll be building it again.

Dive Bombers

D4Y Judy - Big investment here. Pushing this line all the way to the D4Y4 model ASAP. Val's suck.

B7A2 Grace - Big investment in this. I like it the 500 & 800kg bombs on the Judy's, but there's something to be said for either a torpedo or 2x250kg bombs. I'll likely use it as a torpedo bomber more than a dive bomber

Level Bombers

Betty's and Nell's suck. No R&D investment on any of them. I'll build them both until the Frances comes online, then I'll keep the Nell for it's range and move the Betty over to Frances production.

P1Y2 Frances - Pretty much a requirement for Japan. Miles better than anything else. I'll go for the Y2 model for the SR 2.

Toka - Key late-war kamikaze. Lot's of these, as they're miles better than the trainers.

Recon

D4Y1-C Recon - 17/21 hexes of search and recon. I like it. I don't think I'll R&D it, however, as 9/42 is early enough.

C6N1 Myrt - 23/29 hexes. Wow. I've missed this previously. I'll bring this one forward.

Transport

Emily TR model and the Tabby. I doubt I'll R&D either of them. I might build a fair few Emily transports, as they're nifty for getting troops around fast, even if they are expensive.

Patrol

No R&D needed here. I'm content to wait until the H6K5 Mavis arrives in 6/42, then wait again until 3/43 for the H8K2 Emily for the armor and additional guns. Might not even bother and save supply. We'll see.

Float Plane

Nothing to see here. Jake's all round. I won't bother moving the Jake B model up, as I don't think the radar is much of an improvement.

Float Fighter

I'll bring the Rufe forward to shortcut the Zero line, and I might produce a few to use aboard the CS's and in remote bases, otherwise this is getting no attention.

Torpedo Bombers

Pretty conventional here. Produce the B5N2 Kate initally.

B6N Jill - Big investment in to the Jill line. I'll start to produce them all at the N2 model and just wait for 11/44 to convert up to the 2a model.

Might shift in with the Grace on some groups, depending on circumstances.

All I'll say here is to look at how many groups of NF and R you actually get, and then decide how big investment to make.

I've mentioned before George/Jack are interchangeable to me. Both good, but I never build both simply for logistic costs. choose one and then build it. Both are good LBA fighters that will bridge you from A6M to A7M.

How I choose? Simple: George is more offensive (range) and Jack more defensive (climb rate). Build the one to fit your style of play at the time they are around.

I agree about Grace: 350mph and RANGE.

Toka, like the Tsurugi, are good, I just wish they had another 2-3 hex range. 6 is just so short ... but 350mph with an 800kg bomb ... and they use the Ha-35 which by then isn't used anywhere else ... yeah. These are a no brainer and I budget 500K supply for them. Every 4 months to have 2000 of them. If I can get them in early '44, by '45 I have 6000 in pool, enough for 3 death star attacks ....


Really? Isn't that a bit counter productive VP wise? That many kamis plus the strike planes would be a lot of points to the Allies. Is it worth it if you sink 3-4 CVs per strike?

I didn't like the Toka/Tsurugi for their lack of range and awfully low durability combined with lack of armor. Rather lose half as many fast 2E that get as many through for damage. Or just a bunch of Grace/Judys where I don't have to commit to another line of planes and I just use the training gross for what they are, training.


3-4 CV's per strike nets you something north of 1k VP's. Well worth the thousand planes in my view. If you've a strike that sinks 3-4 CV's though, then you've likely sank some ships on top of them as well...

While I agree that the Toka/Tsurugi are bad air-frames overall, their advantages are pretty key.

- That speed: it's faster than just about everything that's not a 3rd Gen fighter.
- Upgrade paths: all the late-war training bomber squadrons upgrade to it for no PP cost. Any other work-around either pulls frontline squadrons off duty or drains PP's.
- Massive improvement in capability versus the trainers that the late-war kami squadrons arrive with.

At the end of the day I'd rather have 300 Toka's than 300 Stella's.

I get what you're saying about using the Grace/Judy line for kami's, but you end up paying something like 250 PP's per squadron to convert the training squadrons outside of their line.

On top of that, by 1945, you end up having more capacity to train kami pilots than you do planes for them to fly unless you start to convert those training squadrons over. Otherwise you'd be converting regular squadrons to kami's, which is to be avoided as much as possible IMO. I'm a fan of keeping as many frontline aircraft in action as can be flown.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 18
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/6/2017 9:58:38 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 1767
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
I'm kicking about the idea of a major expansion of LI in Manchuria to the tune of 500 LI centres to use up the resource surplus generated in China, Manchuria and Korea. While it takes until Dec 44/Jan 45 to pay LI expansion fully, I wonder if it wouldn't be worthwhile in helping to beat the late-war supply crunch.

The advantages I see to LI expansion are as follows:
- Utilises the one industrial product Japan has in abundance - resources
- Can be built in out-of-the-way bases.
- Unlikely to be directly targeted by strategic bombing.
- Doesn't use fuel.

Disadvantages
- Expanding LI close to Japan means resources have to be shipped in from further afield to keep the Home Islands industry running.
- Takes till Jan '45 for the investment to pay off.
- Can't be turned off.


I'm curious as to the best location to expand LI however. I think expanding LI in the Home Islands is a waste, and too exposed to strategic bombing.

Current thinking is to expand in Manchuria and Korea. I think this is the best option, as it's the safest area of the map for Japan (until August '45), has a big resource surplus and excellent infrastructure. It also offers the possibility for excess resources in Malaya, Indochina and China to migrate north.

The big stumbling block is that the China/Manchuria/Korea region is one of the big surplus zones for the Home Islands resource deficit, and the expansion of 500 LI centres puts a big dent in it.

I plan to be very aggressive in China, so I should be able to make up for the resource consumption quickly.

I had originally thought of expanding LI to the tune of 1000 LI centres, but Japan simply doesn't have the starting supply on-map in Scen 1 for such an ambitious expansion program, let alone all the other problems that comes with such a maximal plan. Even 500 LI centres is a cool half-million supply, which I'm happy to spend if it makes a difference come 1945. I just wonder if 500 supply a day will feel like an improvement come 1945?

What are people's thoughts?

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 19
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/6/2017 10:32:22 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 15630
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
It is a supply/fuel trade-off...

Do plan on conserving supplies in other areas?

Basically, I think you can expand by 1000 if you take China and really dedicate yourself to dumping resources back into China from SRA and Luzon. Grabbing chunks of India helps too. 700 to 800 absolutely doable.




(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 20
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/7/2017 9:22:30 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8389
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

3-4 CV's per strike nets you something north of 1k VP's. Well worth the thousand planes in my view. If you've a strike that sinks 3-4 CV's though, then you've likely sank some ships on top of them as well...

While I agree that the Toka/Tsurugi are bad air-frames overall, their advantages are pretty key.

- That speed: it's faster than just about everything that's not a 3rd Gen fighter.
- Upgrade paths: all the late-war training bomber squadrons upgrade to it for no PP cost. Any other work-around either pulls frontline squadrons off duty or drains PP's.
- Massive improvement in capability versus the trainers that the late-war kami squadrons arrive with.

At the end of the day I'd rather have 300 Toka's than 300 Stella's.

I get what you're saying about using the Grace/Judy line for kami's, but you end up paying something like 250 PP's per squadron to convert the training squadrons outside of their line.

On top of that, by 1945, you end up having more capacity to train kami pilots than you do planes for them to fly unless you start to convert those training squadrons over. Otherwise you'd be converting regular squadrons to kami's, which is to be avoided as much as possible IMO. I'm a fan of keeping as many frontline aircraft in action as can be flown.

+1

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 21
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/7/2017 9:49:17 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8389
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I'm kicking about the idea of a major expansion of LI in Manchuria to the tune of 500 LI centres to use up the resource surplus generated in China, Manchuria and Korea. While it takes until Dec 44/Jan 45 to pay LI expansion fully, I wonder if it wouldn't be worthwhile in helping to beat the late-war supply crunch.

The advantages I see to LI expansion are as follows:
- Utilises the one industrial product Japan has in abundance - resources
- Can be built in out-of-the-way bases.
- Unlikely to be directly targeted by strategic bombing.
- Doesn't use fuel.

Disadvantages
- Expanding LI close to Japan means resources have to be shipped in from further afield to keep the Home Islands industry running.
- Takes till Jan '45 for the investment to pay off.
- Can't be turned off.


I'm curious as to the best location to expand LI however. I think expanding LI in the Home Islands is a waste, and too exposed to strategic bombing.

Current thinking is to expand in Manchuria and Korea. I think this is the best option, as it's the safest area of the map for Japan (until August '45), has a big resource surplus and excellent infrastructure. It also offers the possibility for excess resources in Malaya, Indochina and China to migrate north.

The big stumbling block is that the China/Manchuria/Korea region is one of the big surplus zones for the Home Islands resource deficit, and the expansion of 500 LI centres puts a big dent in it.

I plan to be very aggressive in China, so I should be able to make up for the resource consumption quickly.

I had originally thought of expanding LI to the tune of 1000 LI centres, but Japan simply doesn't have the starting supply on-map in Scen 1 for such an ambitious expansion program, let alone all the other problems that comes with such a maximal plan. Even 500 LI centres is a cool half-million supply, which I'm happy to spend if it makes a difference come 1945. I just wonder if 500 supply a day will feel like an improvement come 1945?

What are people's thoughts?

I've argued this several times. I'm always against it. You have the gist of the arguments above. It all boils down to: the return on investment is so small and such high risk.

You need to invest in LI really early when you are normally short of supply due to economy investment and expansion. I'm always short of supply until ~3/42. To pull another million tons of supply, I would have to trade off other factory expansion OR not do this until mid-42 which pushes the 1000 days that much later into the game and then even lower potential ROI.

Next, it needs to be big investment to have any consequence. 1000 min. 2000-3000 really. That's a lot more resources to be moved, consuming that much more fuel. Generally , I have that, but once i commit to LI expansion, it means I have to be prepared to feed this monster which can constrain future decision even more than they typically are (fight for fuel when losses are higher).

Finally, if my opponent gets a whif of this strategy, it is so easy to counter. No matter where I build up the LI, it is vulnerable. I have to disperse it because I need to be building up at least 10 factories to keep the build time of 1000 manageable (100 days), but now those 100 factories will both show up on recon AND that location moves from minor to major target. Sure target dilution has some advantages for me, but 100K supply is awful expensive to create one and to provide so many VP's to my opponent.

I'll never do it at the ROI of 1000 days. HI at 500 days though ... yeah, definitely build some. How much? Oh, that is a really tough answer. All of the above is still true, BUT, since the ROI is so much higher (your breakeven is 500 days, so the risk is far lower and in general you do get +300 days of extra supply out of each factory. 800/500 is a nice return as a minimum ...


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 22
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/17/2017 12:43:07 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 1767
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
Construction Doctrine

My taste of the late-war game for Japan has me rethinking how best to use fortifications to maximise the defensive advantages for Japan.

Previously, I've held the opinion that building forts everywhere was the correct course of action: for an investment in supplies, forts act as a force multiplier that can't be destroyed by naval or air power - it takes boots on the ground to break forts.

However, I'm starting to form the opinion that a limited selection of bases with forts built to level 7, 8 or 9 may be much more effective than a proliferation of bases with level 5 or 6 forts.

Additionally, forts need to be situated where they can take the best advantage of terrain: in effect, x3 or x2 hexes. Forts in open hexes are, in my view, a waste of supply. There are some hexes that deserve forts that have clear terrain, but these exceptions are few.

Fortification Priority

On Dec 7th, there's little scope for the Allies to mount offensive actions on the ground, so there's little need for Japan to develop forts quickly.

To that end, I intend to capitalise on this to develop forts in the Home Islands as quickly as possible. My reasoning behind this is that by 1945, I want to ensure that fort construction in the Home Islands is complete, so as to remove one drain on the limited supply production in the late war.

To that end, I will likely siphon off large numbers of engineer units from China and Manchuria to do a tour of construction duty in Japan before heading off to frontline bases. In general, I'd like to adopt a policy of digging from the inside of the Empire, moving outwards.

Below is my list of priorities:

Japan

This is a thorny issue. In an ideal world, I'd like to dig all the bases here to level 9 forts. However, it's impractical and monstrously expensive.

There are 9 potential invasion sites with clear terrain (One on Hokkaido, one on Kyushu, seven on Honshu). These deserve at least level 7 forts. There are numerous other potential landing sites in less suitable terrain, so these can have forts ranging up to level 6 as a measure of expediency.

Additionally, there are 12 major centres of industrial and aircraft manufacturing that deserve forts ranging from level 6 up to 9 in order to help defend against strategic bombing. Most of these will get level 9 forts, as their industrial value is immense.

Airbases will be developed concurrently with forts, with the goal of building level 9 airbases in suitable locations for late-war air engagements.

Tsushima and Iki-shima will be developed to level 4 and 5 airbases respectively to take advantage of the CD guns. Iki-shima forts will be dug up to level 6 (Tsushima starts with level 6 forts).

Construction priority will go East-to-West. Hokkaido first, moving westward along Honshu.

Kuriles and Sakhalin

The Kuriles will all get level 7 forts, and airbases up to their SPS value (but not beyond). The exception is Ketoi-jima, which will not be developed.

Toyohara will be developed into a level 9 airbase, with level 8 forts to defend it. Shikuka will not be developed beyond a small fighter base (level 2 or 3) to defend the oil.

Bonin Islands

They'll get forts up to their level 6 maximum. Iwo-jima will get a level 1 airbase, but beyond that there will be no development here.

Ryukyu Islands

Both Naha and Nago on Okinawa will get level 8 forts, and Naha will be developed to a level 5 airbase.

Ishihaki will get level 6 forts and a level 4 airbase, while Amami Oshima and Daito Shoto will get level 6 forts and a level 3 airbase.

Formosa

I doubt I'll bother with forts here, as the clear terrain makes it essentially pointless. There will be extensive development of airbases on Formosa, however.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 23
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/17/2017 1:23:48 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8389
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
Forts protect supply to some extent. Late war, I have to play a shell game pushing supply around to minimize losses to the allied bombing campaign. I identify bases where I'm going to need to hide supply and ensure I have good forts there.

Forts protect air bases to some extent. Late war, I also have to play another shell game as to where I can re-constitute high SR airgroups (almost all of them). It only takes one bad roll to have an airgroup shredded by TBolts or Stangs, which can then require easily 3 - 5 weeks for the group to recover from. These locations have to be identified and built up.

For both of these, there are a lot of good choices.

I do exactly what you proposed, bring a few MAN Egr units across and set them to work. Not too many, as there is plenty of time, but they do start 8Dec41.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 24
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/17/2017 1:57:33 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 1767
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Forts protect supply to some extent. Late war, I have to play a shell game pushing supply around to minimize losses to the allied bombing campaign. I identify bases where I'm going to need to hide supply and ensure I have good forts there.

Forts protect air bases to some extent. Late war, I also have to play another shell game as to where I can re-constitute high SR airgroups (almost all of them). It only takes one bad roll to have an airgroup shredded by TBolts or Stangs, which can then require easily 3 - 5 weeks for the group to recover from. These locations have to be identified and built up.

For both of these, there are a lot of good choices.

I do exactly what you proposed, bring a few MAN Egr units across and set them to work. Not too many, as there is plenty of time, but they do start 8Dec41.


I'd only considered the protection of airbases related to the presence of barrage balloons to limit those sub-6000ft strikes that Loka loves. Protection of supply is something I'd not thought of, but what you say makes sense. How much supply is lost when B-29s get 10 hits on Tokyo airbase supply dump? I'd hate to find out.

I'm thinking of stripping all of the standalone Manchurian engineer units in early '42, after they've finished expanding Fusan's port to maximum. There are enough organic engineers in the infantry divisions in Manchuria to form a respectable engineering corps if you shuffle them around, and China has enough organic engineer units to expand airbases for offensive purposes. Plus, you're not liable to need the forts and airbases in this region until 1945 anyways, which gives even limited resources the best part of three years to get some work done.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 25
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/17/2017 2:35:15 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 15630
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Boost the bases that spoilage occurs at first due to their small size and their plane/engine/vehicle expansion.


(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 26
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/17/2017 7:10:08 PM   
Xargun

 

Posts: 3468
Joined: 2/14/2004
Status: offline
What about Luzon ? Any construction plans there ?

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 27
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/17/2017 7:26:27 PM   
Aurorus

 

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Fortification Priority

On Dec 7th, there's little scope for the Allies to mount offensive actions on the ground, so there's little need for Japan to develop forts quickly.

To that end, I intend to capitalise on this to develop forts in the Home Islands as quickly as possible. My reasoning behind this is that by 1945, I want to ensure that fort construction in the Home Islands is complete, so as to remove one drain on the limited supply production in the late war.

To that end, I will likely siphon off large numbers of engineer units from China and Manchuria to do a tour of construction duty in Japan before heading off to frontline bases. In general, I'd like to adopt a policy of digging from the inside of the Empire, moving outwards.

Frankly (and Frank is important regardless), I would skip Oscar after the Ic and produce Tojo and Tony as my late 42 and 43 fighters. Heavy Tojo and Tony production (within reason) will result in substantially more allied plane kills, much more than Oscar, and can deplete the U.S. fighter pools well into 1943. This is why, in my opinion, PDU:On greatly benefits Japan. To not take advantage of this is to not take advantage of PDU:on.




I would be careful with an extensive fort-building program on the home islands in the early war. You will be short of supply, and this will drain supply very, very quickly.... large amounts, depending upon how many engineers you redeploy there. If you are like me, there is just not enough supply on Honshu to build many forts for at least 6 months.


< Message edited by Aurorus -- 4/17/2017 7:33:48 PM >

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 28
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/17/2017 7:39:40 PM   
Aurorus

 

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


I am just cutting out the Tojo completely. There's not much that really seems an improvement over the Oscar, and the Oscar is just a more flexible air-frame. The only theatre where the Tojo shined for me was in Burma; everywhere else it was a defensive fighter. Sure, there may be a period in 42/43 where the Lightnings rule supreme, but from what I've seen they shot down Tojo's much as they did Oscars.




Frankly (and Frank is important regardless), I would skip the Oscar and focus exclusively on Tonies and Tojos. Tonies and Tojos get kills. Oscar does not. Heavy Tojo and Tony production (within reason) can deplete allied fighter pools into 1943. This cannot be achieved with Oscar. Neglecting Tojo and Tony neglects the biggest advantage that Japan derives from PDU:on, in my opinion.

The P38 may rule supreme, but unlike Japan, the allies have a fixed production of this aircraft, and you will never face more than this fixed production allows. The rest of the allied fighters are kills for Tojo and Tony if these are your front-line fighters, rather than Oscar.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 29
RE: Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 4/17/2017 8:05:23 PM   
Encircled


Posts: 1698
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline
quote:

What about Luzon ? Any construction plans there ?


He's got to take it first!

_____________________________


(in reply to Aurorus)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> Rematch: Ragnarök - mind_messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) Page: [1] 2 3 4   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

0.227