Japanese Production Primer

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Numdydar
Posts: 3233
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

Japanese Production Primer

Post by Numdydar »

Hopefully this will get a few more people to try and play as Japan [:)]

Also wanted to warning everyone it is a very long and detailed document.

If anyone sees any glaring mistakes or errors, please let me know and I will update as needed.

Edit
Based on forum feedback, I have updated this to version 1-1. Enjoy [:)]
Attachments
A Japanese..mer v1-1.zip
(963.35 KiB) Downloaded 4050 times
chemkid
Posts: 1238
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:02 pm

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by chemkid »

.
User avatar
lecrop
Posts: 404
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 12:49 pm
Contact:

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by lecrop »

Nice! thank you
User avatar
Nami Koshino
Posts: 100
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:34 pm
Location: Salem, Oregon

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Nami Koshino »

Full of head-spinning goodness. Thank you! [:)]
Rice is a great snack when you're hungry and you want 2,000 of something to eat.
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 15869
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Mike Solli »

Nice document. I'm slowly working through it. I see an error on page 4.

The cost of an airframe (not including the engines) is equal to the # engines * 18. So, a single engine plane is 1*18 (+18 for the engine) = 36 HI. A 2 engine plane is 2*18 (+36 for the two engines) = 72. Your example of a 4 engine plane would cost 4*18 (+72 for 4 engines) = 144 HI.

Here's the rule from the manual, page 232:

For aircraft to be built, there must be Heavy Industry in the pool equal to 18 times the number of engines required to build each plane; when a plane is built, the appropriate number of Heavy Industry is consumed. For example, to produce a 2 engine plane, 36 Heavy Industry will be consumed, while a single engine plane consumes 18 Heavy Industry.

It is nice to see all this info in one place. Thanks!
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
Numdydar
Posts: 3233
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Numdydar »

Thnaks Mike. This is just the kind of feedback I was hoping for.

But a question, if producing AC only considers the cost of engines, why have a seperate HI cost for the airframes too? It was my understanding that to build any AC, you need 18 HI * the number of engines involved PLUS the cost of the airframe too, an additional 18 HI. Is this not true?
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 15869
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Mike Solli »

Engines and airframes are combined to build a plane. That rule mentioned above is only to produce the airframe. Thus a 2E airframe costs 2*18 = 36 HI + the cost of 2 engines, an additional 36 HI. So, building a 2E plane costs 72 HI, 36 for 2 engines and 36 for the airframe.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
Numdydar
Posts: 3233
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Numdydar »

Thanks for the explanation as I did not realize the the number of engines doubled the cost of the airframe too. So the total cost of an AC would be:

1 Engine AC - 36 HI (1 engine * 18 HI + 1 * 18 HI for the airframe)
2 Engine AC - 72 HI (2 engines * 18 HI + 2 * 18 HI for the airframe)
4 Engine AC - 144 HI (4 engines * 18 HI + 4 * 18 HI for the airframe)

This makes a lot more sense since when I was writing this I wonder why the cost of airframes were the same since more engines required larger airframes [:)] So I will add this to my change log [:)]
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24520
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Chickenboy »

Numydyar,

I read through the primer and enjoyed it very much. A good first step for JFBs. Thank you and, again, nicely done. [&o]
Image
User avatar
leehunt27@bloomberg.net
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 2:08 pm

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by leehunt27@bloomberg.net »

thank you, gonna take a read!
John 21:25
JockJimmy
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 11:08 am

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by JockJimmy »

This is so useful. I love this community where people take the time to do this.
User avatar
joey
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Johnstown, PA

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by joey »

I would love to play Japan, but the allied AI is sooooooo bad! Nevertheless, thanks! j
Numdydar
Posts: 3233
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Numdydar »

Unfortunately the AI for both sides is pretty bad. If order to have a really good game againist eithr side's AI, you need to play along historical lines as much as possible. For the people played Allied, this means do not try and defend forward at all in '41 and pretty much leave the areas in the DEI and elsewhere in place. I.E. do not reinforce or add extra AC into these areas. As a Japan player, push into China so that a land connection exists between Singapore and Shanghi and capture Sain. Then stop. Also, do not take extra units out of Manchuria or China, even by paying PP. It also helps both sides AIs to play with PDU off to minimize the impact accelerated R&D for Japan can have.

In other words, either side's AI is easy to 'break' if that is what the player wants to do. If you want a more robust Allied AI, then don't invade Pearl or other things you can do as Japan. Also by playing along more historical lines, allows you as Japan to at least have a feel for what will happen as the war goes on in the later stages :).

In my Japan game against the Allied AI (which I used as the basis of this Primer), I did not do the above and have completely overrun China [X(]. So when '43 hits I will have an AV (unless something goes horrorably wrong between now and then). I do have PDU off though. If I had wanted I could have not done that so the game would have gone longer. The Allies have made an effective landing at Normea and kicked me out. So the good news is that AI does seem capable of invading properly [:)]

So you can have an interesting game as long as you try and play as if the AI is an actual person and don't try to do things just because you know the AI can't handle it.
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9299
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Unfortunately the AI for both sides is pretty bad. If order to have a really good game againist eithr side's AI, you need to play along historical lines as much as possible. For the people played Allied, this means do not try and defend forward at all in '41 and pretty much leave the areas in the DEI and elsewhere in place. I.E. do not reinforce or add extra AC into these areas. As a Japan player, push into China so that a land connection exists between Singapore and Shanghi and capture Sain. Then stop. Also, do not take extra units out of Manchuria or China, even by paying PP. It also helps both sides AIs to play with PDU off to minimize the impact accelerated R&D for Japan can have.

In other words, either side's AI is easy to 'break' if that is what the player wants to do. If you want a more robust Allied AI, then don't invade Pearl or other things you can do as Japan. Also by playing along more historical lines, allows you as Japan to at least have a feel for what will happen as the war goes on in the later stages :).

In my Japan game against the Allied AI (which I used as the basis of this Primer), I did not do the above and have completely overrun China [X(]. So when '43 hits I will have an AV (unless something goes horrorably wrong between now and then). I do have PDU off though. If I had wanted I could have not done that so the game would have gone longer. The Allies have made an effective landing at Normea and kicked me out. So the good news is that AI does seem capable of invading properly [:)]

So you can have an interesting game as long as you try and play as if the AI is an actual person and don't try to do things just because you know the AI can't handle it.

Somebody said in a thread the other day/week that you can still continue playing even if autovictory is reached, "to see how it turns out" so to speak... I am working to verify this in my AI game, but I waited too long to conquer China and there's 15k AV sitting in Chungking [X(] - after I destroyed 6k on the road there! Even by nearly emptying Manchuria I don't have the AV to combat this yet.

I'm reading through this and it's good basic info. If you can insert links in your PDF, perhaps some "Further Reading" links to forum threads/discussions that go into more detail on nuances and trade-offs? Like why Tojo is the answer rather than Tony, etc. Not strictly production-related, but production is symbiotic with your combat strategy so it's relevant.
Numdydar
Posts: 3233
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Numdydar »

Thanks for the thoughts. The document is already at 35 pages adding what you suggest could easily double that [X(]. Once you start discussing trade offs and what ifs, any documents tends to grow much larger. Since to have the trade offs make sense, you should try and highlight why and what happens if you do A instead of B (and visa versa).

So I agree that the Tojo is better than the Tony in most cases. To convey the reasoning for that the document should be detailed out properly with the pros and cons described so the reader can decide if the Tojo is really better versus you or I just saying so (or just looking at the data in the Editor).

I would love to read something like that too, but it will not be me that does it [:)]. It took me about 40 hours to get this one written up and in what I consider a 'polished' state. I guess I have written too many documnets so that I cannot put anything out there that does not look and feel professional. Even if it is just for a game lol.

So for those that wish the WitP manual was more detailed and explained things better, this is why it is not. It is very easy to just throw something togeather for personal/friend use (you should see some of my production spreadsheets for Japan lol. Ugly, ugly ugly lol). Quite another when the material represents your business to everyone.
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9299
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Thanks for the thoughts. The document is already at 35 pages adding what you suggest could easily double that [X(]. Once you start discussing trade offs and what ifs, any documents tends to grow much larger. Since to have the trade offs make sense, you should try and highlight why and what happens if you do A instead of B (and visa versa).

So I agree that the Tojo is better than the Tony in most cases. To convey the reasoning for that the document should be detailed out properly with the pros and cons described so the reader can decide if the Tojo is really better versus you or I just saying so (or just looking at the data in the Editor).

I would love to read something like that too, but it will not be me that does it [:)]. It took me about 40 hours to get this one written up and in what I consider a 'polished' state. I guess I have written too many documnets so that I cannot put anything out there that does not look and feel professional. Even if it is just for a game lol.

So for those that wish the WitP manual was more detailed and explained things better, this is why it is not. It is very easy to just throw something togeather for personal/friend use (you should see some of my production spreadsheets for Japan lol. Ugly, ugly ugly lol). Quite another when the material represents your business to everyone.

I don't see why just linking to forum posts wouldn't work, but I don't blame you for not wanting to find the threads ;). I don't want to do it either!
Numdydar
Posts: 3233
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Numdydar »

The other issue with the forum links is as the game continually evolves, the links may end up having faulty information. So the topic discussed may no longer revelent to the current game functionality.

A parts of my document were actually put togeather from various threads from the forum. I did not specify the exact topic since only part of the thread was useful for what I was looking to use. Besides if anyone really wants to dig deeper into Japanese production, they just search themselves for the areas of interest to them [:)]
Numdydar
Posts: 3233
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Numdydar »

Bumped due to updating the document. I hope this is ok [:)]
Numdydar
Posts: 3233
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by Numdydar »

I hope no one minds I am bumping this again as I like having this on the first page [:)]. Otherwise new players will have a harder time finding it. If anyone strongly objects to my doing this, please let me know and I will let attrition take its course [:)]
desicat
Posts: 542
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 8:10 pm

RE: Japanese Production Primer

Post by desicat »

I read your document, great job - thank you. I find it interesting that Japanese R&D begins the game damaged and you recommend adjusting it via the editor prior to beginning a game.

I wonder why this is? Seems that an Official Scenario should be created that begins the game with the R&D repaired like you suggest.

Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”