Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approach Scen1

 
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 >> Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approach Scen1 Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approach Scen1 - 10/2/2020 4:15:07 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
This differs for SCEN2 and mods - it is aimed at SCEN1. You have more freedom in 2 - more factories. Some mods change plane data eg. the KI100 is better-faster in mods then in "vanilla"

1. FP,PA,RC,TR

-No research at all, build Jakes and some Glens for subs, done. You can produce some Petes as I have heard they can serve as night CAP distracting bombers

-No research.Build some Mavis (not many) until Emily arrives, build some more of these, done

-No research.Build Babs for both IJN/IJA, done. Only 1 engine so very economic - IJN recon groups will withdraw a lot, do not overbuild. If in good shape change Babs to Dinah (2 engines), Dinah is of course better, but you can safe resources building only Babs.Judy is nice to have loooong range and CV capable, if in good shape build some.

-No research.Build the transport for both IJN/IJA you like the most. Use the one you have engines in stock. Do not overbuild IJN, they do not have many transport groups.Best transports do arrive late: Helen and Tabby. Emily is probably too expensive in Scen1 but I guess nice to have..do not bother with Helen in Scen1 as you also will not build the Helen bomber. We safe these engine slots!

Other plane types in seperate posts later.

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/2/2020 4:35:19 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/2/2020 4:45:45 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
2. Level bombers

2.a) 1E
No research. All 1E bombers are obsolete in contested airspace. They are usefull in China, for training and (less) for ASW. The only 1E bomber to build is Ann, as it has somewhat useful range also for search/asw. Some advocate for Sonja, for 4x the chance to hit, but only 50kg. For streamlining do not build any IF you have enough PPs to update 1E to 2E groups, Done.

2.b) 2E
No research. Helen is on paper better for the IJA, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and 12.7mm MGs in the 3rd model. So waste of resources, build Sallies en masse. Later IJA bombers not worth the effort, Done.
No research. Frances is on paper better for the IJN, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and higher speed. Build the 2nd Nell en masse, Done.





< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/2/2020 4:46:51 PM >

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 2
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/2/2020 7:09:55 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 7372
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

No research at all, build Jakes and some Glens for subs, done. You can produce some Petes as I have heard they can serve as night CAP distracting bombers


Don't forget that when it comes to FP's you'll benefit greatly by putting R&D into the Rufe. It goes directly to the A6M5 series, absolutely necessary. As for the Pete, they are very useful early on, but I build none. I find I have enough for my uses.

quote:

Dinah is of course better, but you can safe resources building only Babs.


Dinah is a much better plane, especially the III, you may actually save resources by building it over the Babs. After all you don't need that many for the few recon units the Japanese get. Leave the Babs for training and in China.

quote:

Best transports
quote:

Emily is probably too expensive in Scen1


Enily-L is by far Japans' best transport, both by is capacity and its ability to extract troop from bad situations. Build it, but again not too many as there are few unit to fill.

quote:

do not bother with Helen in Scen1 as you also will not build the Helen bomber.


I think you got this backwards. I say this were true for Scen2 not one. In Scen2 the Helen is a 'one engine' plane. In Scen1 the Tojo uses the Ha-35 and you will need these, so may as well build the Helen's as well. The last two version are a slight improvement over the Sally.

quote:

They are usefull in China, for training and (less) for ASW.


Au contraire, they are very useful early in the game as they'll operate well from small bases. After that they're mostly for training.

quote:

but in practice can not defend itself


No Japanese bomber can defend itself, therefore the point is moot.

quote:

Build the 2nd Nell en masse


I don't know about en masse, but I think the point here should be that this A/C has and excellent range and once it gets radar it should be a good ASW platform.

The above is merely MHO. YMMV. Ciao.


_____________________________

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 Alpha77)
Post #: 3
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/2/2020 7:34:24 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
The Rufe belongs to fighter research chain, I will write about this later

Yes, seems I confused 1 and 2 scens for the Helen. I am dissapointed by Helen, I use the 3rd version with highest gun value and it seems they can not even get the "defensive fire" distraction vs. early war US fighters. The B25 oth gets this message often even vs. Franks. Not to mention the head on attacks IJ planes do stupidly against the B25 with a million of forward HMGs

In general we are in agreement I read :)

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/2/2020 8:54:05 PM >

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 4
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/2/2020 8:08:37 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 7372
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

Not the mention the head on attacks IJ planes do stupidly against the B25 with a million of forward HMGs




quote:

In general we are in agreement I read :)


Yeah, pretty close. So far.

_____________________________

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 Alpha77)
Post #: 5
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/2/2020 9:16:59 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12591
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
Build the Ida as well, it costs half the HI since there is a bunch of engines already.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 6
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/2/2020 11:53:52 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3256
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

2. Level bombers

2.a) 1E
No research. All 1E bombers are obsolete in contested airspace. They are usefull in China, for training and (less) for ASW. The only 1E bomber to build is Ann, as it has somewhat useful range also for search/asw. Some advocate for Sonja, for 4x the chance to hit, but only 50kg. For streamlining do not build any IF you have enough PPs to update 1E to 2E groups, Done.

2.b) 2E
No research. Helen is on paper better for the IJA, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and 12.7mm MGs in the 3rd model. So waste of resources, build Sallies en masse. Later IJA bombers not worth the effort, Done.
No research. Frances is on paper better for the IJN, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and higher speed. Build the 2nd Nell en masse, Done.


Disagree on both points.

2a) Worth getting a fast single engine LB for kamikaze use in the late game. Toka/Ki-115 ideally.

2b) The Frances is needed because the G3M3 Nell is slooooooooooooow.

The torpedo armed Peggy is MASSIVE for Japan, it essentially doubles your naval attack capacity once IJA pilots with NavT skills appear.

Lily dive bomber variant is needed to tide the IJA anti-shipping force over till the Peggy comes online.

Ki-74 Patsy is needed late-war for the IJA to hit exposed Allied bases.

I'm going to guess that the vast majority of your attention is focused on fighters/fighter-bombers, but those that I've listed above are what I consider essential (maybe not the single-engine kami planes, at a pinch)...

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 7
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 8:12:41 AM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

2. Level bombers

2.a) 1E
No research. All 1E bombers are obsolete in contested airspace. They are usefull in China, for training and (less) for ASW. The only 1E bomber to build is Ann, as it has somewhat useful range also for search/asw. Some advocate for Sonja, for 4x the chance to hit, but only 50kg. For streamlining do not build any IF you have enough PPs to update 1E to 2E groups, Done.

2.b) 2E
No research. Helen is on paper better for the IJA, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and 12.7mm MGs in the 3rd model. So waste of resources, build Sallies en masse. Later IJA bombers not worth the effort, Done.
No research. Frances is on paper better for the IJN, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and higher speed. Build the 2nd Nell en masse, Done.


Disagree on both points.

2a) Worth getting a fast single engine LB for kamikaze use in the late game. Toka/Ki-115 ideally.

2b) The Frances is needed because the G3M3 Nell is slooooooooooooow.

The torpedo armed Peggy is MASSIVE for Japan, it essentially doubles your naval attack capacity once IJA pilots with NavT skills appear.

Lily dive bomber variant is needed to tide the IJA anti-shipping force over till the Peggy comes online.

Ki-74 Patsy is needed late-war for the IJA to hit exposed Allied bases.

I'm going to guess that the vast majority of your attention is focused on fighters/fighter-bombers, but those that I've listed above are what I consider essential (maybe not the single-engine kami planes, at a pinch)...


While they're all cool, they're defnitely not necessary.

I've rarely built the late war 1e kami bombers. I just use naval Judy/Jill/Grace and the Army 2E (of which you'll have an excess by late war) for kamis. I'm sure the 1E can be effective but I find their range and low durability restrictive and ineffective.

Late war I convert many 2E groups to FB and use Nick/Randy to supplement CAP and for escort/kami if needed. It really adds a lot of groups (at some PP cost, but what else are you going to spend PPs on late war?).

I completely agree on the Frances. IJN mid and late war LBA naval strikes will be much more effective if you have this airframe. The Nell G3M3 are great for range but you're not getting through CAP with those.

The Peggy-T is not as much of an impact as you'd imagine. It can be effective, but not huge. They're very good kamis, though. Pilot management is extremely increased, and it takes a while to get torpedo pilots trained for IJA (since this is the only plane doing it, so you have to wait until after they arrive to begin).

The Lily with two 100kg bombs is inconsequential. Just use IJN 1E.

The Patsy can be fine but it won't. change much late. A few P-40s or Hellcat NF on Allied rear area bases deal with this threat pretty easily. It's fast and can be a decent kami as well, but use another quick airframe (Helens are fine, FB better), if you want to streamline.

The armor on the Helen if imperitive to keep more flying against Allied flak through the mid-war. They are an upgrade over the Sally, and well worth the investment to retain more of your pilots and airframes over the course of the war.

< Message edited by obvert -- 10/3/2020 8:14:47 AM >


_____________________________

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

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 8
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 9:10:27 AM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
Guys...KEEP IN MIND, this thread is not about comparing plane data. Or which plane you personally find cool and want to have it no matter what. There are a ton of threads about these topics already.


It is mainly to safe your resources for the 44 and 45 phase, if you plan only to play to 43 you can disregard my thoughts because stockpiles even in scen1 will be enough up to the end of 43 beginning of 44. Also you do not need to care about these ideas if you have lost 50% plus of your oil sources in 43 already Because it is the end anyway for ya sorry ass...

@mind messing, but even disregarding what is said above, I do not like much the planes you named for severall reasons. I already said, the Helen is nice to have in Scen1 - but Sally drops the same amount of bombs. I do not understand at all the Frances thing, only speed could be an argument for it. Range/load/defense is not even better than later Betty. Also no fan of torp bomber for the army, but I am a newbie in PBM (only 1 completed and 1 ongoing but slooow), so more experienced people may deem it neccesary. You can have many navy torp planes if you do it right and depending of your house rules. The Lily is laughable also as DB (if only 1E perhaps ok).

As for kamis, there is not a single kami plane here, because throwing away a plane plus pilot is not economic at all and morally wrong (perhaps in end phase facism/marxism)

But I gladly await links to AAR sections or your own combat reports vs. a capable Allied player, where Frances, Peggy T or Lily DB made a big impact like you suggest. I do not mean smashing a bunch of hapless transports which the Lily for sure can do. Cause I have read many AARs I find them entertaining with some good writers around, but one can also learn. I do not remember instances where above planes did some marvels..but that eg. Frances got shot down like Betty while the Allies landed happyly in the Phillipines, the IJ player said, he might have a chance cause he has updated to the Frances.. yeah for some freighters hit, from which the Allies have literally thousands.


< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/3/2020 10:16:43 AM >

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 9
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 10:01:27 AM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
3. Torpedo bombers (only IJN - no IJA torp bombers as for the economic guideline)

Some research aiming for the 2nd Jill model,1st Jill using non standard engine. You can build both Kates in masses and as much engines you have. 1st Kate uses older engine. 2nd Kate is a reliable plane delivering a torp or 2x250kg to a decent range. Not good speed or surviveability..but which torp bomber really is?
There is even a "rumour" that older torp bombers hit better perhaps cause they are slower so can aim better. Even Jean / Swordfish are good enough to sink CVs or BBs you only need to train the pilots good and get ém through.

When 2nd Jill is ready switch some research to Grace, however it is also no wonder plane (just like Frances). Yes fast and good range. But it will take some effort to get it early enough to make an impact at all. So not ideal from resources/industrial standpoint. Or you can aim for 3rd Jill, but only improvement is 1 HMG and a radar (activates late), worth it ? Another idea would be zero research in Jill, going 100% for Grace. Risky but worth a try.



< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/3/2020 10:30:37 AM >

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 10
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 3:16:38 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3256
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

2. Level bombers

2.a) 1E
No research. All 1E bombers are obsolete in contested airspace. They are usefull in China, for training and (less) for ASW. The only 1E bomber to build is Ann, as it has somewhat useful range also for search/asw. Some advocate for Sonja, for 4x the chance to hit, but only 50kg. For streamlining do not build any IF you have enough PPs to update 1E to 2E groups, Done.

2.b) 2E
No research. Helen is on paper better for the IJA, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and 12.7mm MGs in the 3rd model. So waste of resources, build Sallies en masse. Later IJA bombers not worth the effort, Done.
No research. Frances is on paper better for the IJN, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and higher speed. Build the 2nd Nell en masse, Done.


Disagree on both points.

2a) Worth getting a fast single engine LB for kamikaze use in the late game. Toka/Ki-115 ideally.

2b) The Frances is needed because the G3M3 Nell is slooooooooooooow.

The torpedo armed Peggy is MASSIVE for Japan, it essentially doubles your naval attack capacity once IJA pilots with NavT skills appear.

Lily dive bomber variant is needed to tide the IJA anti-shipping force over till the Peggy comes online.

Ki-74 Patsy is needed late-war for the IJA to hit exposed Allied bases.

I'm going to guess that the vast majority of your attention is focused on fighters/fighter-bombers, but those that I've listed above are what I consider essential (maybe not the single-engine kami planes, at a pinch)...


While they're all cool, they're defnitely not necessary.

I've rarely built the late war 1e kami bombers. I just use naval Judy/Jill/Grace and the Army 2E (of which you'll have an excess by late war) for kamis. I'm sure the 1E can be effective but I find their range and low durability restrictive and ineffective.


I can be swayed here, but the Judy/Jill/Grace are all airframes that would be ideal for conventional attacks. The Army 2E's to a lesser extent (esp. if you've the Patsy...)

With that in mind, having lots of fast, expendable 1Es is helpful in leveraging the masses of training squadrons Japan gets late game and leave the better planes in the pools to give some depth to conventional attacks.

quote:

The Peggy-T is not as much of an impact as you'd imagine. It can be effective, but not huge. They're very good kamis, though. Pilot management is extremely increased, and it takes a while to get torpedo pilots trained for IJA (since this is the only plane doing it, so you have to wait until after they arrive to begin).



Strongly disagree here. The Peggy T gives a big impact, simply because it gives the IJA an effective anti-shipping platform when it starts to struggle for a role in 1943 onwards in the face of strong Allied flak and meagre bombloads (when they get past CAP). The absence of IJA NavT pilots is an issue, but one that's easy enough to overcome with bit of R&D and shock therapy in training. Plus by 1944 if you've not enough trained IJA GrdB pilots then you're doing something wrong.

quote:

The Lily with two 100kg bombs is inconsequential. Just use IJN 1E.


Disagree again here, it's a dive bomber, it's IJA and there's never enough IJN 1E's to go around come the late war.

quote:

The Patsy can be fine but it won't. change much late. A few P-40s or Hellcat NF on Allied rear area bases deal with this threat pretty easily. It's fast and can be a decent kami as well, but use another quick airframe (Helens are fine, FB better), if you want to streamline.


The Patsy's range means that it will be more than a few P-40's (which will actually struggle to catch it) or Hellcats needed for rear-area CAP. Lots of bases can be reached with a 36 hex range. Granted the bombload is a bit meh, but if you're using it as a long-range kami that matters less (which IMO is what you should be using it for mostly).


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Guys...KEEP IN MIND, this thread is not about comparing plane data. Or which plane you personally find cool and want to have it no matter what. There are a ton of threads about these topics already.


It is mainly to safe your resources for the 44 and 45 phase, if you plan only to play to 43 you can disregard my thoughts because stockpiles even in scen1 will be enough up to the end of 43 beginning of 44. Also you do not need to care about these ideas if you have lost 50% plus of your oil sources in 43 already Because it is the end anyway for ya sorry ass...



Some thoughts on the premise of this exercise is that it's somewhat flawed - aircraft production in itself only uses HI (18 x #engines in plane), as does engine production (18 x engine).

HI tends to not be a limiting factor for Japan, but supply is. Seeing as supply is needed for factory expansions and repairs (regardless of the streamlining process), what exactly are the savings to be made?

Seems to me you'd be saving marginally in the early phase of the war to then suffer severely in the mid-war phase (and still pay the same costs if you're R&D'ing for the late-war airframes)...?

I am happy to confess that I'm somewhat biased given my love of building big pools of everything (because pools can't be bombed).

quote:

@mind messing, but even disregarding what is said above, I do not like much the planes you named for severall reasons. I already said, the Helen is nice to have in Scen1 - but Sally drops the same amount of bombs. I do not understand at all the Frances thing, only speed could be an argument for it. Range/load/defense is not even better than later Betty. Also no fan of torp bomber for the army, but I am a newbie in PBM (only 1 completed and 1 ongoing but slooow), so more experienced people may deem it neccesary. You can have many navy torp planes if you do it right and depending of your house rules. The Lily is laughable also as DB (if only 1E perhaps ok).


The Sally/Helen debate can be settled in that you want to keep your pilots alive to build their EXP. Sally doesn't have armour, and therefore will get your pilots killed more.

For the Frances, the speed differential between the G3M3 and the P1Y1 Frances is nearly 100km/h, which against late-war Allied CAP will be the difference between all your aircraft being shot down and some making it through CAP.

See above for why you need a IJA torpedo armed aircraft, but in short you need it to leverage the entire IJA level-bomber training programme to pump out trained pilots for the Gotterdammerung of late-war air combat (and to slam torps into loaded Allied amphibious forces for VP piñatas).

The Lily doesn't get much love because it's a bit of a niche airframe and 100kg bombs don't excite people in the same way as the 250kg, 500kg or 800kg smashers. However, as with the Peggy T, it lets you leverage the IJA training programme to give lots of depth to your anti-shipping forces.


quote:

As for kamis, there is not a single kami plane here, because throwing away a plane plus pilot is not economic at all and morally wrong (perhaps in end phase facism/marxism)


Well, I think your view may change once you reach 1945. In that context, it's easy to assemble large numbers of aircraft with average pilots to bulk out your conventional strikes against large Allied carrier task forces. The advantage is that the pilot can be much easier replaced thanks to the curtailed training needed for effective kami operations.

As for the morality, I don't think that was programmed into the game.

quote:

But I gladly await links to AAR sections or your own combat reports vs. a capable Allied player, where Frances, Peggy T or Lily DB made a big impact like you suggest. I do not mean smashing a bunch of hapless transports which the Lily for sure can do. Cause I have read many AARs I find them entertaining with some good writers around, but one can also learn. I do not remember instances where above planes did some marvels..but that eg. Frances got shot down like Betty while the Allies landed happyly in the Phillipines, the IJ player said, he might have a chance cause he has updated to the Frances.. yeah for some freighters hit, from which the Allies have literally thousands.


Some stuff from trawling through my old AAR

Lily and Frances attacking amphib TF
Another example of Lily's attacking an opposed amphib invasion

I'm sure there was also an engagement where I mauled some CVE's with a couple of Lily squadrons, but I can't find the combat report for that, so will have a look as that's probably the ideal target for them.

As a more general comment, you seem to be quite disparaging of sinking merchantmen. While sinking freighters might not be the most exciting of military achievements, playing Japan is all about exacting a toll on the Allies wherever possible. Lots of aircraft can sink freighters, but how many aircraft can do despite Allied flak and CAP? That's a better question to be asking.

< Message edited by mind_messing -- 10/3/2020 3:21:46 PM >

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 11
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 3:43:00 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2721
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
WRT all this streamlined stuff. I don't see much point in trying to outline IJ plane management in an intermediate-simple way. When you are a beginner, you should just start with the simple "research your fighters and use chains to your advantage". When you progress, you are perfectly capable of reading what's been covered extensively on the forum about pros and cons of all the flying zoo Japan has, and about tastes and strategy of different players. And form your own opinion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
The Lily with two 100kg bombs is inconsequential. Just use IJN 1E.

The Patsy can be fine but it won't. change much late. A few P-40s or Hellcat NF on Allied rear area bases deal with this threat pretty easily. It's fast and can be a decent kami as well, but use another quick airframe (Helens are fine, FB better), if you want to streamline.

Oy, I'm sure Lowpe would disagree with you on the first one ) There is not enough IJN to put in everywhere where you can expect enemy transports inside a 9-11 hex range. Also only Grace has comparable coverage as a DB, and it arrives late.

WRT second one, just recall that the number of bases to cover against is roughly proportional to range squared. That's a lot of effort spent.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 12
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 5:46:49 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

WRT all this streamlined stuff. I don't see much point in trying to outline IJ plane management in an intermediate-simple way. When you are a beginner, you should just start with the simple "research your fighters and use chains to your advantage". When you progress, you are perfectly capable of reading what's been covered extensively on the forum about pros and cons of all the flying zoo Japan has, and about tastes and strategy of different players. And form your own opinion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
The Lily with two 100kg bombs is inconsequential. Just use IJN 1E.

The Patsy can be fine but it won't. change much late. A few P-40s or Hellcat NF on Allied rear area bases deal with this threat pretty easily. It's fast and can be a decent kami as well, but use another quick airframe (Helens are fine, FB better), if you want to streamline.

Oy, I'm sure Lowpe would disagree with you on the first one ) There is not enough IJN to put in everywhere where you can expect enemy transports inside a 9-11 hex range. Also only Grace has comparable coverage as a DB, and it arrives late.

WRT second one, just recall that the number of bases to cover against is roughly proportional to range squared. That's a lot of effort spent.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
Disagree again here, it's a dive bomber, it's IJA and there's never enough IJN 1E's to go around come the late war.


Having played both sides late I agree and concede the Lily can be useful, and of course any good player can make use of any good airframe. I am an advocate of using virtually anything if you feel it'll be effective in a certain circumstance and will be more effecient than changing production. But, it's a 2E plane. I'd rather have 2x 1E at a base than half as many Lilys.

I personally cross train the plentiful and very experienced IJAAF pilots for low level naval bombing from day one. So I end up with plentiful kami pilots, EXP 70 piltos with 80 ground and 70+ low naval. These guys flying IJAAF 2E or 1E mid-war can hit shipping with bigger bombs than the Lily. So that has worked for me. I find having enough airfield capacity and air support at a specific point the limiting factor to hit Allied invasions or naval movements mid-war, not whether I've got enough IJN planes.

Generally the Allies aren't doing multiple big ops simultaneously, and unless you have level 9 fields everywhere (which certainly isn't a a good way to save on supply for the late war) it's better to use 1E against naval forces. The standard 2E Helens (or Peggy-T) can then add to whatever is happening close in from bases farther away, and have slightly better range than the Lily. The Peggy is best, and although I fend them not as effective as I'd like for torpedo attacks, as low level naval strike planes (kami or not) they're excellent.

I build (and advocate building) a lot of different airframes, but this is a thread about limiting production, so my comments followed that line of thinking.

< Message edited by obvert -- 10/3/2020 5:59:12 PM >


_____________________________

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

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 13
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 6:03:33 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12591
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
Some people like the Lily DB to use against the Fletcher class and other DDs wandering around the Japanese rear areas.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 14
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 6:12:41 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Some people like the Lily DB to use against the Fletcher class and other DDs wandering around the Japanese rear areas.


Good idea, Fletcher (and Gearing etc.) are very durable, how many 100kg will it take to sink or damage them enough? In mid 43 already there is a lot of 20/40 mm on these ships, if Lily can get through that would be cool. Can I request combat reports of this?

Also another question: Do dive bombers attack PT-boats I mean with a dive not at 100ft. I had 2 or 3 times these PTs in range but DBs would not fly (I know could be other issues, wanna make sure DB fly vs. these. I had only some success with Nick on 100ft vs. PTs aka pest and cholera)


< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/3/2020 6:15:21 PM >

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 15
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 6:15:13 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Guys...KEEP IN MIND, this thread is not about comparing plane data. Or which plane you personally find cool and want to have it no matter what. There are a ton of threads about these topics already.


It is mainly to safe your resources for the 44 and 45 phase, if you plan only to play to 43 you can disregard my thoughts because stockpiles even in scen1 will be enough up to the end of 43 beginning of 44. Also you do not need to care about these ideas if you have lost 50% plus of your oil sources in 43 already Because it is the end anyway for ya sorry ass...



If this is about saving resources you need to go into what you're trying to save. How do your plane choices impact that and what do you hope to achieve as Japan strategically through the mid-war to prepare for the endgame?

Your comments below seem slightly against the grain. You want to save for the endgame but not use kamis? Hmmm. Ok.

You "don't understand the Frances thing?" Have a look at speed and range and arrival date. Speed is the most important factor for any strike plane (assuming adequate payload). Next most important is durability/armor.


quote:


@mind messing, but even disregarding what is said above, I do not like much the planes you named for severall reasons. I already said, the Helen is nice to have in Scen1 - but Sally drops the same amount of bombs. I do not understand at all the Frances thing, only speed could be an argument for it. Range/load/defense is not even better than later Betty. Also no fan of torp bomber for the army, but I am a newbie in PBM (only 1 completed and 1 ongoing but slooow), so more experienced people may deem it neccesary. You can have many navy torp planes if you do it right and depending of your house rules. The Lily is laughable also as DB (if only 1E perhaps ok).

As for kamis, there is not a single kami plane here, because throwing away a plane plus pilot is not economic at all and morally wrong (perhaps in end phase facism/marxism)

But I gladly await links to AAR sections or your own combat reports vs. a capable Allied player, where Frances, Peggy T or Lily DB made a big impact like you suggest. I do not mean smashing a bunch of hapless transports which the Lily for sure can do. Cause I have read many AARs I find them entertaining with some good writers around, but one can also learn. I do not remember instances where above planes did some marvels..but that eg. Frances got shot down like Betty while the Allies landed happyly in the Phillipines, the IJ player said, he might have a chance cause he has updated to the Frances.. yeah for some freighters hit, from which the Allies have literally thousands.



Yeah, I think AARs aren't going to help you.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 16
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 6:22:05 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
Saving supply, factory slots and HI, which also puts less strain on fuel/oil..

I do not like Kamikazes, so do not plan to use them (reasons already given). I know they can get some hits, I have played Allies to mid 44 on the receiving end, they sank 2-3 CVEs and 20+ transports (vs. AI). How many were shot down however, is another butchers bill.

I also would not use "manpower bombing", even if morality is not part of the game. I am a bit crazy you know.

@mind messing plus obvert: Thanks for the links and detailed thoughts on the topic.

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/3/2020 6:39:13 PM >

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 17
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 6:42:06 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12591
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
Manpower bombing really should be the only way to destroy LI, after all, that is where the LI was.

How many 100kg bombs to sink a DD? How many 5 inch shells? The US 5/38 fired a shell that was 54 pounds while a 100 kilogram bomb is about 220 pounds. One 100 pound bomb sank a Japanese DD at Wake Island, dropped from a Wildcat by Hammerin' Hank Talmadge, MOH.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 18
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 7:05:53 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
Yes such single quite small hits can sink a DD, with much luck, bad damage control or catastrophic explosion (all built in the game), so Lily DB perhaps has worth.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 19
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/3/2020 7:08:10 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12591
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
Especially if the enemy ship is in your rear area!

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 20
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/4/2020 12:25:39 AM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3256
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

WRT all this streamlined stuff. I don't see much point in trying to outline IJ plane management in an intermediate-simple way. When you are a beginner, you should just start with the simple "research your fighters and use chains to your advantage". When you progress, you are perfectly capable of reading what's been covered extensively on the forum about pros and cons of all the flying zoo Japan has, and about tastes and strategy of different players. And form your own opinion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
The Lily with two 100kg bombs is inconsequential. Just use IJN 1E.

The Patsy can be fine but it won't. change much late. A few P-40s or Hellcat NF on Allied rear area bases deal with this threat pretty easily. It's fast and can be a decent kami as well, but use another quick airframe (Helens are fine, FB better), if you want to streamline.

Oy, I'm sure Lowpe would disagree with you on the first one ) There is not enough IJN to put in everywhere where you can expect enemy transports inside a 9-11 hex range. Also only Grace has comparable coverage as a DB, and it arrives late.

WRT second one, just recall that the number of bases to cover against is roughly proportional to range squared. That's a lot of effort spent.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
Disagree again here, it's a dive bomber, it's IJA and there's never enough IJN 1E's to go around come the late war.


Having played both sides late I agree and concede the Lily can be useful, and of course any good player can make use of any good airframe. I am an advocate of using virtually anything if you feel it'll be effective in a certain circumstance and will be more effecient than changing production. But, it's a 2E plane. I'd rather have 2x 1E at a base than half as many Lilys.

I personally cross train the plentiful and very experienced IJAAF pilots for low level naval bombing from day one. So I end up with plentiful kami pilots, EXP 70 piltos with 80 ground and 70+ low naval. These guys flying IJAAF 2E or 1E mid-war can hit shipping with bigger bombs than the Lily. So that has worked for me. I find having enough airfield capacity and air support at a specific point the limiting factor to hit Allied invasions or naval movements mid-war, not whether I've got enough IJN planes.

Generally the Allies aren't doing multiple big ops simultaneously, and unless you have level 9 fields everywhere (which certainly isn't a a good way to save on supply for the late war) it's better to use 1E against naval forces. The standard 2E Helens (or Peggy-T) can then add to whatever is happening close in from bases farther away, and have slightly better range than the Lily. The Peggy is best, and although I fend them not as effective as I'd like for torpedo attacks, as low level naval strike planes (kami or not) they're excellent.

I build (and advocate building) a lot of different airframes, but this is a thread about limiting production, so my comments followed that line of thinking.


Now there's a variation that hadn't occurred to me. I've been training LowN for kami pilots for the late war, but not for the frontline squadrons. Makes sense, will steal that. Only reservation from me would be the tactical ramifications of having a large portion of your air force forced to operate at 6000ft or less against Allied shipping...

I still like the accuracy bonus from the dive bombers, however.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Saving supply, factory slots and HI, which also puts less strain on fuel/oil..

I do not like Kamikazes, so do not plan to use them (reasons already given). I know they can get some hits, I have played Allies to mid 44 on the receiving end, they sank 2-3 CVEs and 20+ transports (vs. AI). How many were shot down however, is another butchers bill.

I also would not use "manpower bombing", even if morality is not part of the game. I am a bit crazy you know.

@mind messing plus obvert: Thanks for the links and detailed thoughts on the topic.


So, how exactly will streamlining help? It strikes me that if you're going for a restrained industry strategy in the first year that you need to expand at some point, and the supply cost still gets paid regardless (to expand R&D factories/convert and repair existing factories to new models).

Any supply savings would be marginal and not worth the tactical handicap IMO (but happy to be proved wrong if someone wants to crunch the numbers)

As for kamis, if you've not played Japan in 1945, you may not be aware of the multitude of squadrons that arrive flying biplanes and other trainer aircraft that have no function other than to facilitate training and kamikaze strikes. If you've planned properly, there won't be a need for them to be training, so it just remains to leverage them for kamikaze missions...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Some people like the Lily DB to use against the Fletcher class and other DDs wandering around the Japanese rear areas.


Good idea, Fletcher (and Gearing etc.) are very durable, how many 100kg will it take to sink or damage them enough? In mid 43 already there is a lot of 20/40 mm on these ships, if Lily can get through that would be cool. Can I request combat reports of this?

Also another question: Do dive bombers attack PT-boats I mean with a dive not at 100ft. I had 2 or 3 times these PTs in range but DBs would not fly (I know could be other issues, wanna make sure DB fly vs. these. I had only some success with Nick on 100ft vs. PTs aka pest and cholera)




I've used Lily's to take out Fletchers.

The 100kg bombs are much maligned, but they do fine against anything that's not a BB or some of the newer Allied cruisers, though I think the bombs do bounce against the armoured Brit CV's.

< Message edited by mind_messing -- 10/4/2020 12:28:22 AM >

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 21
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/4/2020 1:06:32 AM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2439
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline
I like this: “...loaded Allied amphibious forces for VP piñatas...”

_____________________________

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 mind_messing)
Post #: 22
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/4/2020 7:21:27 AM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
I personally cross train the plentiful and very experienced IJAAF pilots for low level naval bombing from day one. So I end up with plentiful kami pilots, EXP 70 pilots with 80 ground and 70+ low naval. These guys flying IJAAF 2E or 1E mid-war can hit shipping with bigger bombs than the Lily. So that has worked for me. I find having enough airfield capacity and air support at a specific point the limiting factor to hit Allied invasions or naval movements mid-war, not whether I've got enough IJN planes.



Now there's a variation that hadn't occurred to me. I've been training LowN for kami pilots for the late war, but not for the frontline squadrons. Makes sense, will steal that. Only reservation from me would be the tactical ramifications of having a large portion of your air force forced to operate at 6000ft or less against Allied shipping...

I still like the accuracy bonus from the dive bombers, however.



While the DB do get a bonus I'd love to test sometime low naval at 1k vs DB diving in and dropping from 4k to 1k. The DB are still subject to low level Allied AA, and they're less durable than the bigger 2E like (also with armour).

I got the low level stuff from rader when I first started playing.

On ASW duty the IJAAF 2E go 50% ASW, train 30% low naval and rest 20%. It takes some months but they're usually not doing as much after the initial expansion.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 23
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/4/2020 7:29:12 AM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Saving supply, factory slots and HI, which also puts less strain on fuel/oil..

I do not like Kamikazes, so do not plan to use them (reasons already given). I know they can get some hits, I have played Allies to mid 44 on the receiving end, they sank 2-3 CVEs and 20+ transports (vs. AI). How many were shot down however, is another butchers bill.

I also would not use "manpower bombing", even if morality is not part of the game. I am a bit crazy you know.

@mind messing plus obvert: Thanks for the links and detailed thoughts on the topic.


Since you haven't played the late war you may not be aware you'll be using kamis whether you want to or not. Pilots are hard-codeed to crash their plane into ships AND bombers if damaged once kamis are active (and occasionally before IIRC).

Sending DB/TB against Allied shipping late is almost a kami mission many times anyway with the amount of flak they'll encounter. In my Allied game a group of Judys just tried to hit a TF of two CA and 6 DD, and they lost 10 of 25 planes for no hits.

Manpower is just area bombing. It's what causes fires. You won't need it as much as Japan anyway.

All of your comments make me think you may not be playing the VP system as designed either, in which case you can do what you want but the late war will seem somewhat pointless and hard going. It's very difficult to go through the last years and you'll need some reason to suffer every turn. It's not easy to do and still put up a good fight. The VP system allows losses to seem like victories sometimes.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 24
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/4/2020 9:46:11 AM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12591
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
Try Kates at low level with bombs compared to dive bombers. Even mildly trained Kate pilots at 1,000 feet will do nice work, much better than mildly trained Vals or even good Val pilots. Save the torpedoes and wreck a lot of cargo vessels plus naval vessels up to and including American CVs early.

Float Jakes work nicely as well with four 50 kg bombs. They can train as Low Naval, use them that way but then they are ready for Kamikaze actions.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 25
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/4/2020 10:20:01 AM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2721
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
Sending DB/TB against Allied shipping late is almost a kami mission many times anyway with the amount of flak they'll encounter. In my Allied game a group of Judys just tried to hit a TF of two CA and 6 DD, and they lost 10 of 25 planes for no hits.

You are talking about combat shipping. But there are always ample opportunities late war to hit transports if you have range. Allies have so much they usually don't bother with watertight convoy routing. This is where Lily and TBs are useful, the former more so because torpedoes are in short supply.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 26
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/4/2020 3:42:53 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

But I gladly await links to AAR sections or your own combat reports vs. a capable Allied player, where Frances, Peggy T or Lily DB made a big impact like you suggest. I do not mean smashing a bunch of hapless transports which the Lily for sure can do. Cause I have read many AARs I find them entertaining with some good writers around, but one can also learn. I do not remember instances where above planes did some marvels..but that eg. Frances got shot down like Betty while the Allies landed happyly in the Phillipines, the IJ player said, he might have a chance cause he has updated to the Frances.. yeah for some freighters hit, from which the Allies have literally thousands.



Yeah, I think AARs aren't going to help you.

-----------------------
Tons of examples of Lilly DB doing good work. Their 100kg SAP is the equivalent of a better placed 6" shell from an American Cruiser.
---------------------

Do a little searching, you will find them savaging everything below a battleship. From Mid 1943
Morning Air attack on TF, near Shortlands at 110,132

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 74 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 21 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-IIb Oscar x 17
Ki-48-IIb Lily x 22

Allied aircraft
P-39D Airacobra x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-48-IIb Lily: 14 damaged
Ki-48-IIb Lily: 2 destroyed by flak

No Allied losses

Allied Ships
CA Canberra
CA Cornwall, Bomb hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Lardner
CL Leander

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x Ki-48-IIb Lily releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 2 x 100 kg SAP Bomb
8 x Ki-48-IIb Lily releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 2 x 100 kg SAP Bomb
9 x Ki-48-IIb Lily releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 2 x 100 kg SAP Bomb

Of course if you are looking to streamline your plane production then you probably don't want her.



< Message edited by Lowpe -- 10/4/2020 3:48:16 PM >

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 27
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/4/2020 5:44:27 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 1966
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
Yes, I have reviewed the airgroup reinforcements of Japan, but I have not planned what to do with these strange groups in 45 doing it when the time comes

Yes, I know Japanese pilots may crash themselves, that is hard coded so we must live with it

Yes, I do not care about VP´s at all..

May write down the other categories of planes, later.. when more time again

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 10/4/2020 5:54:26 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 28
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/8/2020 6:25:02 PM   
RADM.Yamaguchi


Posts: 763
Joined: 6/30/2019
Status: offline
Is there any reason to research anything other than:

A6M2 RUFE - A6M5C/8
KI44 TOJO - KI44C
B6N1 JILL - B6N2/A
D4Y1 JUDY - D4Y3/4
N1K1 GEOR - N1K2/5
KI84 FRNK - KI84/C
A7M2 SAM - A7M2/3

It appears to me that unless you invest numerous factories to research the return is nil?

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 29
RE: Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approac... - 10/8/2020 6:27:35 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12591
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
KI-83 as well, not to mention night fighters and the Peggy T

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to RADM.Yamaguchi)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approach Scen1 Page: [1] 2   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

0.498