Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45

 
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 >> JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/4/2013 2:00:23 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14046
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
JAPANESE FIGHTER PRODUCTION

This is an attempt to get a general overview of a possible production path for a Japanese player in Scenario 1. Every player will most likely take a slightly different course, and that is part of the fun.

The zero line is generally boosted in the beginning to fill out A5M groups and get a surplus for offensive operations to proceed.

A6M2 - 110/month

The Ki-43 Ic production is increased for the same reasons to fill out units still using earlier Ia and Ib and the Ki-27.

Ki-43 - 110/month

From this point on the Japanese production can vary significantly from player to player. I'll simply try to give a general idea of what an 'average' player in scenario 1 with PDU-ON might produce, also using the majority of models available to get an idea of when they would arrive. This will result in a multitude of models being produced into 44-45, whereas many players choose to streamline to one or two models each for the IJNAF and IJAAF.

This may be slightly high for some or low for others, but based on looking around at quite a few AARs these numbers seem to me to be close to an average amount projected into 45. Many of the AARs are not Scenario 1 though so I've tried to keep things somewhat reasonable at least until the late game brings a lot of new models online, and to consider economic implications of overproduction.

This is open for all kinds of discussions and alterations if the consensus is that the levels are too high or too low. Let me know what you think.

Here are also the actual approximated numbers from a US document about Japanese production during the war.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIGHTERS

DECEMBER 41 - DECEMBER 42

As production ramps up the new fighters come out agonizingly slowly.

DECEMBER 41


A6M2 Zero
75

Ki-43 Ic Oscar
75
----------------------------------------------
150



JANUARY 42


A6M2 Zero
95

Ki-43 Ic Oscar
95
----------------------
180



FEBRUARY 42


A6M2 Zero
110

Ki-43 Ic Oscar
110
----------------------
220



MARCH 42


A6M2 Zero
110

Ki-43 Ic Oscar
110
-----------------------
220



APRIL 42


A6M2 Zero
110

Ki-43 Ic Oscar
110

A6M2-N Rufe (one size 30 R n D factory converted to production).
30

A6M3 Hamp (-2 months accelerated, and one size 30 R n D factory converted to production).
30

----------------------
250



MAY 42


A6M2 Zero
110

Ki-43 Ic Oscar
110

A6M2-N Rufe
30

A6M3 Hamp
30

Ki-45 Ia Nick (One size 30 R n D factory converted to production).
30

-------------------
310



JUNE 42


A6M2 Zero
110

Ki-43 Ic Oscar
110

A6M2-N Rufe
30

A6M3 Hamp
30

Ki-45 Ia Nick (built to size 40)
40
-------------------
320



JULY 42


A6M2 Zero
110

Ki-43 Ic Oscar
110

A6M2-N Rufe
30

A6M3 Hamp
30

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo (-3 months accelerated, and five R n D factories converted to production).
150
-------------------
470



AUGUST 42


A6M2 Zero
110

Ki-43 Ic Oscar
110

A6M2-N Rufe
30

A6M3 Hamp
30

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo (built to 160)
160
-------------------
480



SEPTEMBER 42

A6M2 Zero
110

Ki-43 IIa Oscar (IIa accelerated - 2 months from 11/42)
110

A6M2-N Rufe
30

A6M3 Hamp
30

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
480



OCTOBER 42


A6M3a (factory upgrade accelerated - 2 months from 12/42, one size 30 factory upgraded from A6M3)
30

A6M3a (A6M2 factory changed to A6M3a production line. Because this is not in the same path the factory must be retooled and start from 0 to produce this plane).
15

Ki-43 IIa Oscar
110

A6M2-N Rufe
30

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
385



NOVEMBER 42


A6M3a Zero
75

Ki-43 IIa Oscar
110

A6M2-N Rufe
30

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
415


DECEMBER 42


A6M3a Zero
105

Ki-43 IIa Oscar
110

A6M2-N Rufe
30

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
445

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4325/13 = 332.7/month DEC 41 - DEC 42



This number being ~1,300 airframes higher than the Japanese production for this period according to the chart above. (This list includes December 41 where the chart separates 41 and 42 production).

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by obvert -- 7/4/2013 2:44:20 PM >


_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
Post #: 1
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/4/2013 2:07:12 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14046
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
JANUARY 43 - DECEMBER 43


JANUARY 43


A6M3a Zero
135

Ki-43 IIa Oscar
110

A6M2-N Rufe
30

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
475



FEBRUARY 43


A6M3a Zero
140

Ki-43 IIa Oscar
110

A6M2-N Rufe
30

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
480


MARCH 43


A6M5 Zero (Upgrading to the accelerated -5 month A6M5 and incorporating the upgraded A6M2-N factories)
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar (Upgrading to the accelerated -2 month Ki-43 IIb)
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
480


APRIL 43


A6M5 Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
480


MAY 43


N1K1 Rex (-2 months accelerated)
30

A6M5 Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
510



JUNE 43


N1K1-J George (-3 months accelerated)
120

N1K1 Rex
30

A6M5 Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
630


JULY 43


Ki-61 Ib Tony (-2 months accelerated)
30

J2M2 Jack (-2 months accelerated)
60

N1K1-J George
120

N1K1 Rex
30

A6M5 Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
720



AUGUST 43


Ki-61 Ib Tony
30

J2M2 Jack
60

N1K1-J George
120

N1K1 Rex
30

A6M5 Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
720



SEPTEMBER 43


Ki-61 Ic Tony (converted to Ic)
30

J2M2 Jack
60

N1K1-J George
120

N1K1 Rex
30

A6M5 Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIa Tojo
160
-------------------
720



OCTOBER 43


Ki-61 Ic Tony
30

J2M2 Jack
60

N1K1-J George
120

N1K1 Rex
30

A6M5 Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIc Tojo (converted to the IIc, -5 months accelerated after skipping the IIb, and with the two size 30 R n D factories now converted to production).
220

J1N1-S Irving NF
30
-------------------
810



NOVEMBER 43


Ki-61 Ic Tony
30

J2M2 Jack
60

N1K1-J George
120

N1K1 Rex
30

A6M5 Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

J1N1-S Irving NF
30
-------------------
810



DECEMBER 43


Ki-61 Ic Tony
30

J2M2 Jack
60

N1K1-J George
120

N1K1 Rex
30

A6M5 Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank (-5 months accelerated, one size 55 and four size 30 factories converted from R n D to production).
175

J1N1-S Irving NF
30
-------------------
985

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7,820/12 = 651.6/month JAN 43 - DEC 43


This number being ~ 700 airframes higher than actual Japanese production of fighters according to the chart on the first post.


-


< Message edited by obvert -- 7/4/2013 5:23:33 PM >


_____________________________

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

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 2
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/4/2013 2:15:32 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14046
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
JANUARY 44 - DECEMBER 44


Production numbers listed here assume an active and continuing role for the KB, hence the continuing of the A6M line at a high level of production. Many players would choose to taper this airframe off as the KB either becomes less of a factor and/or as better LBA airframes are emphasized.

Continuing high production numbers also assume that no bombing of factories has taken place during 44.


JANUARY 44

Ki-61 Ic Tony
30

J2M3 Jack (-3 months accelerated, one size 30 R n D factory converted to production).
90

N1K1-J George (Rex factory converted to N1K1-J and begins to produce as it repairs).
135

N1K1 Rex (production terminated)
0

A6M5b Zero (-5 months accelerated)
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank
175

J1N1-S Irving NF
30
-------------------
1000



FEBRUARY 44


Ki-61 Id Tony (-2 months accelerated)
30

J2M3 Jack
90

N1K1-J George
150

A6M5b Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank
175

J1N1-S Irving NF
30
-------------------
1015


MARCH 44


Ki-61 Id Tony
30

J2M3 Jack
90

N1K1-J George
150

A6M5b Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank
175

J1N1-S Irving NF
30
-------------------
1015


APRIL 44


Ki-61 Id Tony
30

J2M3 Jack
90

N1K1-J George
150

A6M5b Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank
175

J1N1-S Irving NF
30
-------------------
1015



MAY 44


Ki-61 Id Tony
30

J2M3 Jack
90

N1K1-J George
150

A6M5b Zero
170

Ki-43 IIb Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank
175

J1N1-S Irving NF
30
-------------------
1015



JUNE 44


Ki-61 Id Tony
30

J2M3 Jack
90

N1K1-J George
150

A6M5b Zero
170

A6M5c Zero (-4 months accelerated, two size 30 R n D factories converted to production).
60

Ki-43 IIIa Oscar (-4 months accelerated)
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank
175

J1N1-S Irving NF
30
-------------------
1075



JULY 44


Ki-61 Id Tony
30

J2M3 Jack
90

N1K2-J George (-4 months accelerated, two size 30 R n D factories converted to production).
210

A6M5b Zero
170

A6M5c Zero
60

Ki-43 IIIa Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank
175

J1N1-S Irving NF
30
-------------------
1135



AUGUST 44


Ki-61 Id Tony
30

J2M3 Jack
90

N1K2-J George
210

A6M5b Zero
170

A6M5c Zero
60

Ki-43 IIIa Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick
40

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank
175

J1N1-S Irving NF
30
-------------------
1135



SEPTEMBER 44


Ki-61 Id Tony
30

J2M3 Jack
90

N1K2-J George
210

A6M5b Zero
170

A6M5c Zero
60

Ki-43 IIIa Oscar
110

Ki-45 Ia Nick (production terminated)
0

Ki-102b Randy (-2 months accelerated, one size 30 R n D factory converted to production)
30

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank (Nick factory converted to Frank)
195

J1N1-S Irving NF
30
-------------------
1145



OCTOBER 44


Ki-61 Id Tony
30

J2M3 Jack
90

N1K2-J George
210

A6M5b Zero
170

A6M5c Zero
60

Ki-43 IIIa Oscar
110

Ki-102b Randy
30

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank
215

J1N1-Sa Irving NF (upgrade to new model)
30
-------------------
1165



NOVEMBER 44


Ki-100-I Tony (-4 months accelerated, one size 30 R n D factory converted to production)
60

J2M3 Jack
90

J2M5 Jack (-2 months accelerated, two size 30 R n D factories converted to production).
60

N1K2-J George
210

A6M5b Zero
170

A6M5c Zero
60

Ki-43 IIIa Oscar
110

Ki-102b Randy
30

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank
215

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30
-------------------
1255



DECEMBER 44


Ki-100-I Tony
60

J2M3 Jack
90

J2M5 Jack
60

N1K2-J George
210

A6M5b Zero
170

A6M5c Zero
60

Ki-43 IIIa Oscar
110

Ki-102b Randy
30

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank
215

Ki-84b Frank (-3 months accelerated, three size 30 R n D factories converted to production).
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30
-------------------
1345

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13,315/12 = 1,109.6/month JAN 44 to DEC 44


Almost the exact number (but in fact under by ~500 airframes) the number produced by the Japanese in 1944 according to the chart in the first post. (All other years being higher production than listed there).




-


< Message edited by obvert -- 7/4/2013 2:30:42 PM >


_____________________________

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

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 3
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/4/2013 2:16:34 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14046
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
JANUARY 45 - DECEMBER 45


All numbers in 1945 are highly speculative depending on the course the campaign has taken and assume again that no factory bombing has occurred.

The ability of the Japanese economy to produce the full range of fighters presented here for 45 is highly dependent on the accumulation of surplus fuel, resources and HI.



JANUARY 45


Ki-100-I Tony
60

J2M3 Jack
90

J2M5 Jack
60

N1K2-J George
210

A7M2 Sam (-8 months accelerated, four size 30 R n D factories converted to production. All 230 A6M factories converted to Sam).
220

A6M5b Zero (production terminated)
0

A6M5c Zero (production terminated)
0

Ki-43 IV Oscar (-7 months accelerated, two size 30 R n D factories converted to production)
170

Ki-102b Randy
30

Ki-44 IIc Tojo
220

Ki-84a Frank
215

Ki-84b Frank
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30
-------------------
1395



FEBRUARY 45


Ki-100-I Tony (All Tojo factories converted to Ki-100 production).
160

J2M3 Jack
0

J2M5 Jack (All J2M3 factories converted to J2M5)
150

N1K2-J George
210

A7M2 Sam
320

Ki-43 IV Oscar
170

Ki-102b Randy
30

Ki-44 IIc Tojo (production terminated)
0

Ki-84r Frank (-7 months accelerated, two size 30 R n D factories converted to production)
275

Ki-84b Frank
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30
-------------------
1375



MARCH 45


Ki-100-I Tony
260

J2M5 Jack
150

N1K2-J George
210

A7M2 Sam
320

Ki-43 IV Oscar
170

Ki-102b Randy
30

Ki-84r Frank
275

Ki-84b Frank
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30
-------------------
1535



APRIL 45


Ki-100-I Tony
260

J2M5 Jack
150

N1K2-J George
210

A7M2 Sam
320

Ki-43 IV Oscar
170

Ki-102b Randy (production terminated)
0

Ki-84r Frank
275

Ki-84b Frank
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30

Ki-83 (-6 months accelerated, three size 30 R n D factories converted to production, one Randy factory converted to Ki-83 production).
105
-------------------
1610



MAY 45


Ki-100-II Tony (-4 months accelerated, one size 30 R n D factory converted to production)
290

J2M5 Jack
150

N1K2-J George
210

A7M2 Sam
320

Ki-43 IV Oscar
170

Ki-102c Randy NF (-5 months accelerated, one size 30 R n D factory converted to production)
30

Ki-84r Frank
275

Ki-84b Frank
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30

Ki-83
120
-------------------
1685



JUNE 45


Ki-100-II Tony
290

J2M5 Jack
150

N1K2-J George
210

A7M2 Sam
320

J7W1 Shinden (-6 months accelerated, three size 30 R n D factories converted to production).
90

Ki-43 IV Oscar
170

Ki-102c Randy NF
30

Ki-84r Frank
275

Ki-84b Frank
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30

Ki-83
120
-------------------
1775



JULY 45


Ki-100-II Tony
290

J2M5 Jack
150

N1K2-J George
210

A7M2 Sam
320

J7W1 Shinden
90

Ki-43 IV Oscar
170

Ki-102c Randy NF
30

Ki-84r Frank
275

Ki-84b Frank
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30

Ki-83
120
-------------------
1775



AUGUST 45


Ki-100-II Tony
290

J2M5 Jack
150

N1K2-J George
210

A7M2 Sam
320

J7W1 Shinden
90

Ki-43 IV Oscar
170

Ki-102c Randy NF
30

Ki-84r Frank
275

Ki-84b Frank
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30

Ki-83
120
-------------------
1775



SEPTEMBER 45


Ki-100-II Tony
290

J2M5 Jack
150

N1K2-J George
210

A7M3-J Sam (-4 months accelerated, two size 30 R n D factories converted to production).
380

J7W1 Shinden
90

Ki-43 IV Oscar
170

Ki-102c Randy NF
30

Ki-84r Frank
275

Ki-84b Frank
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30

Ki-83
120
-------------------
1835



OCTOBER 45


Ki-100-II Tony
290

J2M5 Jack
150

N1K5-J George (upgraded to K1K5-J)
210

A7M3-J Sam
380

J7W1 Shinden
90

Ki-43 IV Oscar
170

Ki-102c Randy NF
30

Ki-84r Frank
275

Ki-84b Frank
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30

Ki-83
120
-------------------
1835



NOVEMBER 45


Ki-100-II Tony
290

J2M5 Jack
150

N1K5-J George
210

A7M3-J Sam
380

J7W1 Shinden
90

Ki-43 IV Oscar
170

Ki-102c Randy NF
30

Ki-84r Frank
275

Ki-84b Frank
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30

Ki-83
120

Ki-202 Shusei (-2 months accelerated, one size 30 R n D factory converted to production).
30
-------------------
1865



DECEMBER 45


Ki-100-II Tony
290

J2M5 Jack
150

N1K5-J George
210

A7M3-J Sam
380

J7W1 Shinden
90

Ki-43 IV Oscar
170

Ki-102c Randy NF
30

Ki-84r Frank
275

Ki-84b Frank
90

J1N1-Sa Irving NF
30

Ki-83
120

Ki-202 Shusei
30

Ki-201 Karyu (-3 months accelerated, one size 30 R n D factory converted to production).
30

Ki-94 II (-2 months accelerated, two size 30 R n D factory converted to production).
60
-------------------
1955

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
20,415/12 = 1701.3/month JAN 45 - DEC 45






-


< Message edited by obvert -- 7/4/2013 2:21:47 PM >


_____________________________

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

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 4
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/4/2013 2:35:46 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9441
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
IJ fighter production all comes down to trading HI for ac: when do you want to do it and how much? Historically, IJ did this late war. Players can choose. How many you ultimately build is all about fuel.

Fuel
There is a finite amount in the game. The more the IJ grabs, the more potential HI she can build which in turn equates to ac. Countering this are fleet expenditures; the more you move ship, the more fuel you expend, the less you have for HI. Really simple concepts. Don't cloud anything here, it really is that simple.

Now, the goal of the IJ is to take the DEI (and any other producing oil centers) and hold it past historical. Every day that the IJ is holding oil beyond history, they have just increased their potential HI pool. Every day that the IJ can park a ship that historically was sailing, they have just increased their potential HI pool. The penultimate goal: hold the DEI and don't have any ships moving except oil/fuel/resource convoys. Simple.

The devs did a miraculous, amazing job of balancing the base economy. IF (big word in caps here), you steam the IJN about 16 days/month (about historical), capture only historical areas, lose DEI at approximately historical dates, and build historical ships/LCU's you end up with pretty close to historical ac built. WOW! When I did that calc I was stunned ... so many things to balance to achieve that. Andy, John, Keregulan, Bill and TEAM

Given the flexibility of the IJ economy, if you are willing to sacrifice ships and LCU's, then your only constraint early on to ac production is supply and time. You only add one ac production point per day per factory. Committing 60 factories to production, you could after 90 days be producing ~5000 ac/month. No ships, no ARM, no VEH, just ~5000 ac/month. Is this a good strategy? Well, we have 2 AAR's attempting something along these lines now. Go read the AAR's and decide for yourself if this your 'cup of tea'.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 5
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/4/2013 2:57:18 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14046
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

IJ fighter production all comes down to trading HI for ac: when do you want to do it and how much? Historically, IJ did this late war. Players can choose. How many you ultimately build is all about fuel.

Fuel
There is a finite amount in the game. The more the IJ grabs, the more potential HI she can build which in turn equates to ac. Countering this are fleet expenditures; the more you move ship, the more fuel you expend, the less you have for HI. Really simple concepts. Don't cloud anything here, it really is that simple.

Now, the goal of the IJ is to take the DEI (and any other producing oil centers) and hold it past historical. Every day that the IJ is holding oil beyond history, they have just increased their potential HI pool. Every day that the IJ can park a ship that historically was sailing, they have just increased their potential HI pool. The penultimate goal: hold the DEI and don't have any ships moving except oil/fuel/resource convoys. Simple.

The devs did a miraculous, amazing job of balancing the base economy. IF (big word in caps here), you steam the IJN about 16 days/month (about historical), capture only historical areas, lose DEI at approximately historical dates, and build historical ships/LCU's you end up with pretty close to historical ac built. WOW! When I did that calc I was stunned ... so many things to balance to achieve that. Andy, John, Keregulan, Bill and TEAM

Given the flexibility of the IJ economy, if you are willing to sacrifice ships and LCU's, then your only constraint early on to ac production is supply and time. You only add one ac production point per day per factory. Committing 60 factories to production, you could after 90 days be producing ~5000 ac/month. No ships, no ARM, no VEH, just ~5000 ac/month. Is this a good strategy? Well, we have 2 AAR's attempting something along these lines now. Go read the AAR's and decide for yourself if this your 'cup of tea'.


Great points Pax!

This is indeed intended as a balanced production schedule assuming also the continued production of some naval and merchant shipping, armaments and vehicles.

The flexibility of playing this side is extreme, and the enjoyment of catering the production to your strategic goals is one of the pleasures of playing it. Maybe that balances out the fact you're most likely going to eventually get your a** whooped!

_____________________________

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

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 6
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/4/2013 4:28:56 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9441
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
This is indeed intended as a balanced production schedule assuming also the continued production of some naval and merchant shipping, armaments and vehicles.

Understood and I know what you were trying to do. Also from your style of play I have pretty good ideas what you mean by "some" ... but others may not.

You should quantify the "some" to put your numbers in perspective.
NSY = 1600? 1500? 1300?
ARM = 600? 200?
VEH=72? 200?
MSY=??



_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 7
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/4/2013 5:19:48 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14046
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
This is indeed intended as a balanced production schedule assuming also the continued production of some naval and merchant shipping, armaments and vehicles.

Understood and I know what you were trying to do. Also from your style of play I have pretty good ideas what you mean by "some" ... but others may not.

You should quantify the "some" to put your numbers in perspective.
NSY = 1600? 1500? 1300?
ARM = 600? 200?
VEH=72? 200?
MSY=??




While this is somewhat based on my own games, it's not really an example of my own production so I'm not exactly sure of what the numbers for naval, armaments, vehicles and merchant would really turn out to be in relation to these. It's not intended as a guide for Japanese side players really, just a kind of balanced look at what might happen if you stick fairly close to the middle of the road for most production.

Several players could probably build exactly this list and still vary the ship production and armament/vehicle production numbers quite a lot dependent on many factors about how they want to play the campaign.

It's also meant primarily as a kind of companion to the Allied numbers posted yesterday. I was really curious to see what both sides might be doing at equivalent moments, and what kinds of airframes might be produced on each side simultaneously, and in what number, and I haven't ever come close to being able to see those things before doing this. There are so many spreadsheets, documents and lists, but I was missing a kind of month by month, year by year breakdown, so these are to help me (and possibly others) put these things into perspective.


--

< Message edited by obvert -- 7/5/2013 12:00:44 AM >


_____________________________

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

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 8
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/4/2013 5:29:06 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3055
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
To give you some numbers from a game as Japan in Dec '44 with PDU On.

IJN F - lost 9,980. 989 on map. Currently building 665/month
IJA F - lost 9,162. 1,701 on map. Currently building 489/month

My totals for all planes for the entire war so far are 38,235 lost, 5,805 on map, and building 1,819/month

Your numbers are also very dependet on if PDU is on or not. If it is Off, then factory expansion for AC is not as useful simply because it does you no good to have a lot of Zeros if tyou have no squadrons to put them in. If PDU is On, then everything past '42 is going to be off.

For example I got the Frank a in June '43 and I am producing 270/month in Dec '43. I have lost 3,050 YTD nad have 329 on map. So I have obviouly produced 3,379 from 6/43 to end of Nov/44. About 18 months of production. So about 188/month on average. While you have 170/month from Dec '43. This represents a huge gap between what you show versus what I actually did.

While your efforts are interesting, there are just too many variables with Japan for this to be of any real use.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 9
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/4/2013 5:43:02 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14046
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

To give you some numbers from a game as Japan in Dec '44 with PDU On.

IJN F - lost 9,980. 989 on map. Currently building 665/month
IJA F - lost 9,162. 1,701 on map. Currently building 489/month

My totals for all planes for the entire war so far are 38,235 lost, 5,805 on map, and building 1,819/month

Your numbers are also very dependet on if PDU is on or not. If it is Off, then factory expansion for AC is not as useful simply because it does you no good to have a lot of Zeros if tyou have no squadrons to put them in. If PDU is On, then everything past '42 is going to be off.

For example I got the Frank a in June '43 and I am producing 270/month in Dec '43. I have lost 3,050 YTD nad have 329 on map. So I have obviouly produced 3,379 from 6/43 to end of Nov/44. About 18 months of production. So about 188/month on average. While you have 170/month from Dec '43. This represents a huge gap between what you show versus what I actually did.

While your efforts are interesting, there are just too many variables with Japan for this to be of any real use.


It doesn't have to be of use for everyone. Use it if you want to.

The opening stipulates this is simply an example for PDU-ON and Scen 1.

I'm actually doing quite different things in my production of various models as well in both of my games. Most of the acceleration listed is quite conservative, and as stated the production is all over the map in terms of types of airframes. Sometimes I just like to see a big picture. Not 'the' big picture, but 'a' big picture. It helps me, and if it helps someone else, great.


_____________________________

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

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 10
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/7/2013 5:00:16 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9131
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
I like it. I'm going to have to come back through this later, as my PBEM is Scen 1.

My only note is that, if PDU is on, why are both George and Jack being produced? I know this comes up from time to time, but they're so similar!

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 11
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/7/2013 10:14:00 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14046
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I like it. I'm going to have to come back through this later, as my PBEM is Scen 1.

My only note is that, if PDU is on, why are both George and Jack being produced? I know this comes up from time to time, but they're so similar!


In this document it's more of a guide to show what is possible, rather than what is the usual course players take. Many players optimize their production and only produce one fighter for each service.

In my game with JockMeister I also tried a lot of planes out just to see what they would do, even though I think it would be better in future to slim the number of types i make. The Jack and George are two I would always produce though. I think the Jack is better against fighters due to it's climb, but it also has the J2M3 (with it's 2 service rating) coming out earlier than the second version of the George, the N1K2.

The George might be slightly better against bombers with it's massive armament in the first version. I just like using both, and it can help when the production of one is overtaxed as well. The Jack has even become my default LBA escort plane, and can do a lot more than anything from the A6M line.

< Message edited by obvert -- 7/9/2013 7:08:17 PM >


_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 12
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/8/2013 3:44:24 AM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3055
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
Yes I build both as well for the same reasons.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 13
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 7/8/2013 4:41:39 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9131
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
It's probably a case of wishing I could eliminate the Jack, because yeah - in my AI game as well as my PBEM I plan to build the J2M3, almost entirely because of the earlier SR2.

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 14
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/23/2019 11:33:08 PM   
jdsrae


Posts: 1631
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: The Land Downunder
Status: offline
I know I'm a bit late to this particular party but I still appreciate the data and found it very useful for benchmarking purposes.
I just checked my F + FB production plan against this and in comparison to both historical numbers and the example above it looks feasible.

Dates : 41+42 / 1943 / 1944 / 1945 / 1946 (Jan-May)
Historical : ~3000 / 7147 / 13811 / 5474 (production interfered with by B-29)
Example above: 4325 / 7820 / 13315 / 20415
My plan : 4788 / 9084 / 14193 / 22124 / 10393 (in 5 months, assuming for now no interference by B-29)

In context of other manufacturing I am using 1400 Naval SY, 780 Merchant SY, 220 Vehicles and 380 Armament factories.
I've forecast the HI point use and the HI pool should initially grow up to about 700k but then drops back to nearly 0 in late 1945.
At that point I will be closing down shipyards and bringing mothballed Armament factories back on line to use HI in their place.
All assuming no interference from B-29s.

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no CrackSabbath): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 15
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/24/2019 12:50:18 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 4152
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
- Let's see Paul Allen's card...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iixytdJqZg

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 16
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/24/2019 5:05:26 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7339
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline
Now wait just a darn minute here.

Lokka justified the huge discrepancy between victory point levels in competitive and Ironman AI games by stating that stock competitive games don't give the Japanese player 90k planes to be destroyed by the Allies.

Your opening post tally of over 74k Fighters alone in a stock game completely undermines his point.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 17
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/24/2019 6:58:36 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Now wait just a darn minute here.

Lokka justified the huge discrepancy between victory point levels in competitive and Ironman AI games by stating that stock competitive games don't give the Japanese player 90k planes to be destroyed by the Allies.

Your opening post tally of over 74k Fighters alone in a stock game completely undermines his point.


The AI isn't adverse to losses, humans are.

The AI also scripts missions with...dubious chances of success. Humans know better.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 18
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/25/2019 3:53:58 AM   
Insano

 

Posts: 217
Joined: 7/23/2009
From: Joplin, Missouri
Status: offline
Interesting thread from Obvert from 2013. I wonder how he would update this with today's knowledge gained over the last 6 years?

Things that pop out to me from reading it through - these seem to be JFB trends from the last 2-3 years:

A6M2 Zero production way too high - 60 to 90 seems to be the sweet spot. The lower you can stand it the better for later.
Early Oscar production too high - 90 seems about right to me.
Night Fighters, night fighters, night fighters - missing 30 Nick-d as this is the first army night fighter.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 19
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/25/2019 5:48:44 AM   
jdsrae


Posts: 1631
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: The Land Downunder
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Insano
A6M2 Zero production way too high - 60 to 90 seems to be the sweet spot. The lower you can stand it the better for later.
Early Oscar production too high - 90 seems about right to me.


Depends on how quickly you want to upgrade the Nate and Claude groups, and the losses you forecast for your Oscar and Zero groups that need to be replaced.
This is largely driven by how much you plan on using the Zero and Oscar groups until Tojos can arrive in numbers, which won't be until Q3 1942.
Personally I feel that 110 Oscar / 110 Zero would be the minimum in the first few months of the war, especially against an aggressive allied player. Read Obvert's AAR vs Lowpe!
110 may be ok for Zero but I feel it would be risky low for Oscars.

The monthly and annual production numbers from the original post are what I found most useful to give me something to benchmark against.
My pre-war plan works out similar to the example, and would see a total of just under 99k aircraft produced with PDU ON, consisting of 73k single engine, 24k twin (more FB than standard) and 1282 4E (all Mavis/Emily variants).
Here's my forecast aircraft and engine production chart which I feel would be the maximum feasible HI spend on both while also supporting reasonable Naval and Merchant ship building plus Armaments/Vehicle production to kit out LCUs.
This would be my maximum aircraft build. If the war situation allows I will adjust aircraft and associated engine production down and redirect the "saved" HI to producing more Armaments.
But this is the first time I've felt like I at least have a plan that I can adjust rather than just crossing my fingers and hoping I'm doing something feasible.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no CrackSabbath): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to Insano)
Post #: 20
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/27/2019 6:20:05 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 6454
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

A6M2 Zero production way too high - 60 to 90 seems to be the sweet spot. The lower you can stand it the better for later.
Early Oscar production too high - 90 seems about right to me.


I like these numbers, especially for the A6M2. However when the M5,5b,5c arrive I think that 120/month would be better. As always it depends upon the game tempo.

quote:

Personally I feel that 110 Oscar / 110 Zero would be the minimum in the first few months of the war, especially against an aggressive allied player.


Not out of the question, but again it depends on the particular game.

quote:

1282 4E (all Mavis/Emily variants)


Not 100% sure, but that sounds rather high to me. Maybe half, but again it depends on the game.

quote:

But this is the first time I've felt like I at least have a plan that I can adjust rather than just crossing my fingers and hoping I'm doing something feasible.


That's a well known feeling.

One of the main reasons I'm still playing my current AI game. Again I know I'll have to make adjustments in a PBEM.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 21
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/28/2019 1:40:17 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14452
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I like it. I'm going to have to come back through this later, as my PBEM is Scen 1.

My only note is that, if PDU is on, why are both George and Jack being produced? I know this comes up from time to time, but they're so similar!


George has a much higher max altitude and you can use it as a sniper sitting up there. I still build some Jacks anyway.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 22
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/28/2019 1:57:10 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14452
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
I think the main issue with AC production is air crew production. Are you going to have the properly trained crews available to fly the planes you build? No matter what you do you're going to end up with a lot of surplus outmoded AC, some of whom might make adequate kamikaze AC. With the IJN the constraints can be severe. You might be able to build the planes and man them, but will you let them fight or hold them back? It's good to build Jacks and Georges because you want to give your IJN fighter pilots the best chance to survive and Zeros are obsolete by then, except they are the only thing you can use on carriers. Better to send IJA in with Oscars than risk IJN in Zeros.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 23
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/28/2019 2:49:48 AM   
jdsrae


Posts: 1631
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: The Land Downunder
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I think the main issue with AC production is air crew production. Are you going to have the properly trained crews available to fly the planes you build?



I agree, pilot quality is critical. It’s still on my to do list to broadly forecast a pilot training curve especially for fighters.
The IJ pilot monthly recruiting rates increase in Jan 1943 with the increase in HI points to go with it, but then fighter pilots still need what up to 6 months of on map training?
There’s no point just building aircraft if they can’t be flown or have to be flown in combat by rookies as they would just be providing target practice to the allies.
If I don’t think I can produce enough quality pilots I’ll dial back aircraft production a bit and spend the HI on Armaments instead.

One factor that helps Japan mid-late war when on the defensive is that pilot survival rates go up when fighting over friendly territory.
So having some sort of ratio of more planes than pilots wouldn’t be a bad thing. Probably a few to 1, not heaps to 1.

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no CrackSabbath): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 24
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/30/2019 1:44:56 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14046
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I like it. I'm going to have to come back through this later, as my PBEM is Scen 1.

My only note is that, if PDU is on, why are both George and Jack being produced? I know this comes up from time to time, but they're so similar!


George has a much higher max altitude and you can use it as a sniper sitting up there. I still build some Jacks anyway.


The Jack has great climb, and I like it. I've always made them, and they have a place for me, but I'm seeing that I use the George much more often late. The N1K5 grows on me more every day. The Jack has more limitations, especially in the speed/maneuvre/altitude comparison.



_____________________________

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

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 25
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/30/2019 4:50:17 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9131
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Now wait just a darn minute here.

Lokka justified the huge discrepancy between victory point levels in competitive and Ironman AI games by stating that stock competitive games don't give the Japanese player 90k planes to be destroyed by the Allies.

Your opening post tally of over 74k Fighters alone in a stock game completely undermines his point.


The AI isn't adverse to losses, humans are.

The AI also scripts missions with...dubious chances of success. Humans know better.



Yeah, it's this. Also, the word is averse in this case .

Also, I think this might be assuming the resources (HI, supply for factory repairs, etc.) to build 74K planes, which comes at a cost.

MM might've built 74K planes in our game; I'm not sure. In my Scen 2 game, which is in the end of January 1945, I've lost 30K-ish planes and that level of losses begins to tell. I can't imagine somehow losing 90K planes. The war would have had to go very poorly in the air, while going well enough on the ground that I somehow had the resources to build (and place into units) that many planes.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 26
RE: JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 - 4/30/2019 5:05:41 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 2909
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Now wait just a darn minute here.

Lokka justified the huge discrepancy between victory point levels in competitive and Ironman AI games by stating that stock competitive games don't give the Japanese player 90k planes to be destroyed by the Allies.

Your opening post tally of over 74k Fighters alone in a stock game completely undermines his point.


The AI isn't adverse to losses, humans are.

The AI also scripts missions with...dubious chances of success. Humans know better.



Yeah, it's this. Also, the word is averse in this case .

Also, I think this might be assuming the resources (HI, supply for factory repairs, etc.) to build 74K planes, which comes at a cost.

MM might've built 74K planes in our game; I'm not sure. In my Scen 2 game, which is in the end of January 1945, I've lost 30K-ish planes and that level of losses begins to tell. I can't imagine somehow losing 90K planes. The war would have had to go very poorly in the air, while going well enough on the ground that I somehow had the resources to build (and place into units) that many planes.


Bad day when the colonials are correcting spelling :)

I'll need to pull the info from our '45 game to figure out just how much I built. Had plenty on-map, and plenty more in the pools even at the bitter end.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 27
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> JAPANESE FIGHTERS - The (Possible?) Numbers: 41-45 Page: [1]
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

0.189