SBD-3 production is wrong

[Nikademus]

TimTom did his homework.

[Smeulders]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

TimTom did his homework.

He certainly did and yet we'll have another one of these threads again shortly.

[chesmart]

Yep but they are fun watching the usual suspects come upwith differant arguments.Democracy in Action at its best.

[ETF]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: che200
I am not arguing in favor of  the SBD production John but in regarding other small OOB errors like the 25pounder production and some errors in the ground units which where discussed in the war room. Tweaking should be left to the Modders.

I understand. I was just trying to let you down gently ... but ...

Anything (ANYTHING), that is a matter of opinion, will not (NOT), that's .. N.. O .. T .. (a one sylable word, easily understood), be included in a future data patch unless something is "demonstrably" and "verifyably" wrong (opinion does not count), including "demonstrable" and "verifyable" primary source data (wikiporkia and 'my favorite website' won't cut it). If you truly think you have something, the folks to talk to are:

Air - timtom: a real hard a$$, you better have your poopie together for this guy; and he talks to Elf.
Nav - me or Don: Don's a sweetie, but I'm a real ba$tard, so you best have your poopie together.
Land - AndyMac: touchable, probably the nicest of us, but has the hardest job; give him a break.

Sounds fair to me!

[JohnDillworth]

TimTom did his homework.

and a great job he did making allied aircraft production so historically accurate!
Japanese aircraft production..................not so much
point is there seems to be maybe a smidgen of doubt here and since potential Japanese aircraft production is so skewed maybe the shadow of a doubt might go to the allies.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

TimTom did his homework.

and a great job he did making allied aircraft production so historically accurate!
Japanese aircraft production..................not so much

So now the argument is the Japanese produce too many aircraft ...

1. Play PDU's off...

or

2. Use the editor
2a. - Turn IJ Production off under the scenario tab (page 53 of the editor manual)
2b. - Give the Japanese there historic build rates (p 27 & 53 of the editor manual)

That way you absolutely insure that the Japanese couldn't possibly build more aircraft than history...

or

3. Use the editor
3A. On the devices tab adjust the required resources for LI and HI upwards...thus requiring more resources for industry...thus "potentially" reducing Japanese industrial output...thus reducing potential aircraft builds

or

4. Kwitcherbitchin and enjoy the game already....

[Bradley7735]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

TimTom did his homework.

and a great job he did making allied aircraft production so historically accurate!
Japanese aircraft production..................not so much

So now the argument is the Japanese produce too many aircraft ...

1. Play PDU's off...

or

2. Use the editor
2a. - Turn IJ Production off under the scenario tab (page 53 of the editor manual)
2b. - Give the Japanese there historic build rates (p 27 & 53 of the editor manual)

That way you absolutely insure that the Japanese couldn't possibly build more aircraft than history...

or

3. Use the editor
3A. On the devices tab adjust the required resources for LI and HI upwards...thus requiring more resources for industry...thus "potentially" reducing Japanese industrial output...thus reducing potential aircraft builds

or

4. Kwitcherbitchin and enjoy the game already....

I've got to agree with Treespider here.

What a lot of WITP AE players need to start understanding (Mike Scholl already does) is that "PDU on" and "IJN Production on" are about equal, individually, to having non-historic Allied torpedo dud rates. Who has ever played a PBEM that allowed the Allied player good torpedoes? I can't think of any AAR's that have them.

Who plays with PDU on and IJN Production on? I think all of the AAR's (or at least 90% of them) do.

Playing with both of those options on, gives the IJN player a huge, huge advantage over the historical war.

[JohnDillworth]

Kwitcherbitchin and enjoy the game already....

fair enough. I have voted with my dollars and my hours (at about a 100 to 1 ratio[:)]) so enjoy the game I will!

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth


and a great job he did making allied aircraft production so historically accurate!
Japanese aircraft production..................not so much

So now the argument is the Japanese produce too many aircraft ...

1. Play PDU's off...

or

2. Use the editor
2a. - Turn IJ Production off under the scenario tab (page 53 of the editor manual)
2b. - Give the Japanese there historic build rates (p 27 & 53 of the editor manual)

That way you absolutely insure that the Japanese couldn't possibly build more aircraft than history...

or

3. Use the editor
3A. On the devices tab adjust the required resources for LI and HI upwards...thus requiring more resources for industry...thus "potentially" reducing Japanese industrial output...thus reducing potential aircraft builds

or

4. Kwitcherbitchin and enjoy the game already....

I've got to agree with Treespider here.

What a lot of WITP AE players need to start understanding (Mike Scholl already does) is that "PDU on" and "IJN Production on" are about equal, individually, to having non-historic Allied torpedo dud rates. Who has ever played a PBEM that allowed the Allied player good torpedoes? I can't think of any AAR's that have them.

Who plays with PDU on and IJN Production on? I think all of the AAR's (or at least 90% of them) do.

Playing with both of those options on, gives the IJN player a huge, huge advantage over the historical war.

Well, I want my Japanese opponents to have the ability to be creative and have access to greater resources. It does make the game more interesting. However, the problem is the Japanese player also has a the knowledge of "exactly" what the Allied player has and can do. The inability to react to major losses is a serious handicap and the knowledge that the Allied player is short of a particular aircraft can be used against him. (I think that a smart Japanese player should target P40s and hurricanes early in the game.) After all, who does not think that if the US suffered serious aircraft losses in the Pacific that they would not have altered the flow of aircraft to another source to make good the losses. They did shift CAs and DDs to the Pacific after the large losses in the Solomons campaign. Do you think if the US were losing the campaign in the Pacific that they would be shipping all those P40s to Russia? Of course not. But then again, reducing the flow of aircraft to Russia would have come with political penalty. How could that be reflected in the game?

Oh, wait a minute, we can do that in the game. We have political points in the game. Allow the Allied player to increase the production of a particular aircraft for a month for a PP cost. Say let him double the production of P40s for one month at a cost of 300 pp. Believe me, this will not get abused because the Allies are short of PP until way into 1943. But it can help the Allies out of a tight squeeze and keep the Japanese player guessing. Can this be done without too much work?

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Can this be done without too much work?

[:D][:D][8|]....No.

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: Sredni

I find it amusing that in what is supposed to be a historic simulation the IJ is swimming in airframes while the allies end up with carriers sitting in dock for years due to airframe shortages. The IJ has more high xp pilots then they can shake a stick at and a training program to keep their pilots elite all the way to wars end, while the allies struggle to field pilots with any experience at all, and have issues trying to keep up with training.

Sure the production rates on allied airframes may be historic, but having a mutual bloodbath carrier battle where both sides wipe out eachothers airgroups, with the IJ recovering in weeks while it takes the allies half a year or more doesn't seem very historic to me lol.

I'm having fun, the games great. I guess the IJ needs a variety of advantages to make for a more even battle.

Just not very historic however.

Depends on how you play it ... In quite a number the IJAAF and IJN is on its knees a year before historic. Have a look at Ausies vs Amis .

Most Japanese players with 20/20 hind sight have the option to correct historic mistakes eg Shinano is cancelled which gives a lot of resources , factories are restarted a year earlier than historic eg kates. The US also have 20/20 hind sight and hide their carriers etc . A historic simulation is impossible with 20/20 hind sight except between AIs.

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

TimTom did his homework.

As I have discovered when doing F4F-4 research, this is a universal truth. Rule number one when looking at AE Allied airframe production numbers: TimTom is never wrong. Rule number two when looking at AE Allied airframe production numbers: is you think the production numbers are wrong, refer to rule #1

I mean that quite seriously. I thought the F4F-4 numbers were all wrong but after my research and some valuable information from some others, we pretty much agreed they were right. My guess is no matter which airframe you pick, you are going to find that the AE numbers are about dead on.

So if you are going to try to attack those numbers, be prepared to hit a brick wall. Also, in case you haven't noticed this is a bit of a sore subject for the Dev's. To be fair to them, how would you feel if you spent three years getting it right only to have daily threads posted in these forums telling you how you got it wrong.

The one problem I have is that every time anyone tries to challenge the Allied airframe numbers, they are quickly met with all the statistics that prove the AE numbers are correct but when we here that JFB's are producing 200 Ki44 a month AND accelerating CV production AND not having supply issues AND having hundreds of AK's tied up for lack of need AND not having to move resources from the SRA to Japan to sustain all this, we hear ............. crickets chirping.

The Allied production was very painstakingly researched. Kudos to the Devs. I don't begrudge them their right to get their feathers ruffled when people challenge all their hard work.

That said, the Japanese economic capacity is overstated by at least two to three fold. Why all the painstaking research on the Allied production numbers and the ludicrously overstated Japanese economy? I have accepted that AE is a Japanocentric game. Perhaps it has to be in order to get people interested in playing Japan. Just my opinion but when almost every problem the Japanese faced in WWII from an economic standpoint is removed from the game, it loses a lot of its historical feel. I know that as soon as both players plot their turn one orders that we have a departure from history, but the game should feel historical in my opinion even if the battles are being fought in different places.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Can this be done without too much work?

[:D][:D][8|]....No.

Oh well..... took a stab at it anyways..

[Bradley7735]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Can this be done without too much work?

[:D][:D][8|]....No.

Oh well..... took a stab at it anyways..

The idea has merit. But, it would take a dev a bit of time to implement and test. I doubt we'll see the feature. Good idea, though.

[herwin]

The Japanese hitting Pearl Harbor increased the American commitment to fighting Japan by about 20%. If you play my variant rules, PDA on, IJA production on, historical torpedoes, and Japan hits Manila instead of Pearl, you're probably about 20% up on both sides, so it comes out in the wash, and you get as close to the historical balance as is feasible in the game.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: vettim89

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

TimTom did his homework.

As I have discovered when doing F4F-4 research, this is a universal truth. Rule number one when looking at AE Allied airframe production numbers: TimTom is never wrong. Rule number two when looking at AE Allied airframe production numbers: is you think the production numbers are wrong, refer to rule #1

I mean that quite seriously. I thought the F4F-4 numbers were all wrong but after my research and some valuable information from some others, we pretty much agreed they were right. My guess is no matter which airframe you pick, you are going to find that the AE numbers are about dead on.

So if you are going to try to attack those numbers, be prepared to hit a brick wall. Also, in case you haven't noticed this is a bit of a sore subject for the Dev's. To be fair to them, how would you feel if you spent three years getting it right only to have daily threads posted in these forums telling you how you got it wrong.

The one problem I have is that every time anyone tries to challenge the Allied airframe numbers, they are quickly met with all the statistics that prove the AE numbers are correct but when we here that JFB's are producing 200 Ki44 a month AND accelerating CV production AND not having supply issues AND having hundreds of AK's tied up for lack of need AND not having to move resources from the SRA to Japan to sustain all this, we hear ............. crickets chirping.

The Allied production was very painstakingly researched. Kudos to the Devs. I don't begrudge them their right to get their feathers ruffled when people challenge all their hard work.

That said, the Japanese economic capacity is overstated by at least two to three fold. Why all the painstaking research on the Allied production numbers and the ludicrously overstated Japanese economy? I have accepted that AE is a Japanocentric game. Perhaps it has to be in order to get people interested in playing Japan. Just my opinion but when almost every problem the Japanese faced in WWII from an economic standpoint is removed from the game, it loses a lot of its historical feel. I know that as soon as both players plot their turn one orders that we have a departure from history, but the game should feel historical in my opinion even if the battles are being fought in different places.

If you refer to a few posts above you will see what you need to do to "correct" the Japanese economy...good luck finding a PBeM opponent. I researched the economy for Japan...and the resources requirements to be transported to the HI are still shy by around 3-5 million points per year...if you want to know the tonnage of rice imported from Indo-China just ask...that being said the resource transportation requirements are about 7 times higher now when compared to WitP....so if you want to increase those requirements have it...however due to the nature of the economic model the entire system may just collapse if you go to far.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: Rob Brennan UK

Can someone please change the record , heard it all before [8|]

Sorry. Couldn´t resist. Play with speakers maxed out please.... [:D]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytm4XaRUuiE

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: treespider


If you refer to a few posts above you will see what you need to do to "correct" the Japanese economy...good luck finding a PBeM opponent. I researched the economy for Japan...and the resources requirements to be transported to the HI are still shy by around 3-5 million points per year...if you want to know the tonnage of rice imported from Indo-China just ask...that being said the resource transportation requirements are about 7 times higher now when compared to WitP....so if you want to increase those requirements have it...however due to the nature of the economic model the entire system may just collapse if you go to far.

I agree that most JFB would not be interested in playing a scenario where there was such a heavy burden to keep the economy running. I guess it would make the game not very much fun for JFB if it would take so much effort to keep the economy running.

It sounds like you have done some research yourself as to what really was necessary. The dichotomy to me is interesting. Allied airframe production HAS to be as accurate as possible or else some heresy has been committed. Yet, Japanese production/economy can been out of kilter by several orders of magnitude and its necessary to make the game work. Hmmmm

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: vettim89

ORIGINAL: treespider


If you refer to a few posts above you will see what you need to do to "correct" the Japanese economy...good luck finding a PBeM opponent. I researched the economy for Japan...and the resources requirements to be transported to the HI are still shy by around 3-5 million points per year...if you want to know the tonnage of rice imported from Indo-China just ask...that being said the resource transportation requirements are about 7 times higher now when compared to WitP....so if you want to increase those requirements have it...however due to the nature of the economic model the entire system may just collapse if you go to far.

I agree that most JFB would not be interested in playing a scenario where there was such a heavy burden to keep the economy running. I guess it would make the game not very much fun for JFB if it would take so much effort to keep the economy running.

It sounds like you have done some research yourself as to what really was necessary.

I was part of the group who helped on the project...and am the one who did the research that got the production numbers changed from what you see in WitP.

The dichotomy to me is interesting. Allied airframe production HAS to be as accurate as possible or else some heresy has been committed. Yet, Japanese production/economy can been out of kilter by several orders of magnitude and its necessary to make the game work. Hmmmm

No...thats not the issue...the issue is people like yourself who run around like chicklen little saying that Allied airframe production has been nerfed...when it hasn't...

So then you change the argument saying the Japanese can produce too much....and the game is broke....the game ain't broke...and the production capabilites of the Japanese are a far cry more realistic in AE when compared to WitP....(and that is what we were judged by) .....but if you disgaree with the numbers as presented and you want to make it more "realistic/historic/accurate" ...I've shown you the little yellow brick road....have fun on that journey....thanks for fining me a new candidate for the green button.

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: vettim89

ORIGINAL: treespider


If you refer to a few posts above you will see what you need to do to "correct" the Japanese economy...good luck finding a PBeM opponent. I researched the economy for Japan...and the resources requirements to be transported to the HI are still shy by around 3-5 million points per year...if you want to know the tonnage of rice imported from Indo-China just ask...that being said the resource transportation requirements are about 7 times higher now when compared to WitP....so if you want to increase those requirements have it...however due to the nature of the economic model the entire system may just collapse if you go to far.

I agree that most JFB would not be interested in playing a scenario where there was such a heavy burden to keep the economy running. I guess it would make the game not very much fun for JFB if it would take so much effort to keep the economy running.

It sounds like you have done some research yourself as to what really was necessary.

I was part of the group who helped on the project...and am the one who did the research that got the production numbers changed from what you see in WitP.

The dichotomy to me is interesting. Allied airframe production HAS to be as accurate as possible or else some heresy has been committed. Yet, Japanese production/economy can been out of kilter by several orders of magnitude and its necessary to make the game work. Hmmmm

No...thats not the issue...the issue is people like yourself who run around like chicklen little saying that Allied airframe production has been nerfed...when it hasn't...

So then you change the argument saying the Japanese can produce too much....and the game is broke....the game ain't broke...and the production capabilites of the Japanese are a far cry more realistic in AE when compared to WitP....(and that is what we were judged by) .....but if you disgaree with the numbers as presented and you want to make it more "realistic/historic/accurate" ...I've shown you the little yellow brick road....have fun on that journey....thanks for fining me a new candidate for the green button.

First I did not mean to offend and am sorry if I did so. Second you did not read closely where I said that I 100% agree that Allied airframe numbers are correct. I fully and 100% acknowledge that the Allied production numbers no matter how limiting they are, are accurate. You will not find me argueing against the numbers the AE team has determined are correct.

So the argument has been made that Allied airframe numbers are wrong/nerfed. That has been brought up by several people and each time it has been pretty well disproven. The well researched materials that have been brought forward have pretty much dispelled the myth that the Allied production numbers are spot on. In some cases they may actually be overly generous.

My point was this: those that defend the Allied numbers do so in the name of historical purity. There is a strong interest by many that the game represent as close to the historical realities that were present in RL as can be possible. An amazing amount of work was done to update the OOB of so many units to try to get it right. In short, AE was made to be a truly historical game bordering on a simulation.

But ..... that realism model breaks down when it comes to the Japanese Economy. I have read the Japanese Economy threads. When I read statements like: "I don't even need the LI or the resources to run them", "I have no problem running the economy with just the resources from Manchuko/China as long as I have the fuel from the SRA", and "I will have all the late war IJN CV's by mid '44 at the latest", it rings as wrong to me in the context of "EVERYTHING IS AS CLOSE TO THE HISTORICAL NUMBERS AS POSSIBLE". That is what I meant by a dichotomy.

I understand that manipulating the Japanese Economy and making better decisions on how to allocate the scarce resources available is part of the challenge/allure to the game for JFB's. From what I have read, there doesn't seem to be much scarcity to the resources. I have no problem with the Japanese player making alternative choices but they should be hard choices. It just doesn't seem that way from what I hear.

Again, sorry if I offended you Treespider because I do appreciate your opinions and input a lot. I am sorry if I get green buttoned but that is your choice