From: a maze of twisty little passages, all different
I looked over the sizes of Japanese naval shipyards. They don´t seem to conform to what was built there in RL. I went through my reference material and figured ot the maximum number of ships that were built at a single yard at the same time. Under the WitP model, to have the historical building rate, each of the yards should have the capacity to generate building points equaling the sum of the durabilities of all ships building there.
This is the list of the eight most important yards I came up with (only surface ships DD and bigger):
Kure Navy Yard (Loc Hiroshima/Kure) was building in 11/41:
Yokosuka Navy Yard (Loc Tokyo)was building in 8/41:
Uraga Docks, Yokosuka (Loc Tokyo) was building in 8/40:
4 x Kagero DD (44)
1 x Yugumo DD (11)
Sum for Loc Tokyo: 335
Mitsubishi, Nagasaki (Loc Nagasaki) was building in 4/42:
4 x Akitsuki DD (52)
Kawasaki, Kobe (Loc Osaka/Kobe) was building in 8/41:
Fujinagata, Osaka (Loc Osaka/Kobe) was building in 1/40:
5 x Kagero DD (55)
Sum for Loc Osaka/Kobe: 320
Sasebo Navy Yard (Loc Sasebo) was building in 11/43:
2 x Akizuki DD (26)
Maizuru Navy Yard (Loc Maizuru) was building in 8/41:
2 x Yugumo DD (22)
2 x Akizuki DD (26)
The Naval Shipyard numbers as they are:
Nagasaki 292 (should be at least 287)
Sasebo 0 (should be at least 120)
Hiroshima/Kure 45 (should be at least 263)
Maizuru 308 (should be about 61)
Osaka/Kobe 42 (should be at least 320)
Tokyo 280 (should be at least 335)
The reason I say "at least" is because at most of these locations submarines were building, too, amounting to between 60 and 250 building points. I´ve left out submarines because my sources don´t give exact building dates and because I think that their durability numbers don´t properly reflect the time and effort needed to build them, especially the late-war types ST and STS which both have a Durability of 36, surpassing the CL Oyodo(and meaning they draw resources for a year), but were nailed together in RL in a couple of months using sectionalized methods.
So, according to these numbers
- Nagasaki is about right
- Tokyo is a bit small
- Maizuru is wildly oversize
- the other locations are far too small
I´m sure my methodology can be criticized, but in the context of WitP this should make sense.
At least downsize Maizuru and increase Hiroshima and Osaka, they each had one of the "big four" yards.
DON´T PANIC - IT´S ALL JUST ONES AND ZEROES!