ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Let me toss out a thought here.
We've been predicating a chunk of our thinking on the strains of Japanese manpower with additional warships being produced and the issues that causes with creating experienced crews. We've already established Yamamoto's control over the Fleet in changing its course as of 1939.
Could we take those two threads and bring a streamlining of mid-war production into play? Examples might range from tossing out some of the useless I-Boats and Ro-Class in favor of a standard--already proven design--sub to limited retooling of the smaller vessels needed for escort duty. The effect of this might be fewer ship--less manpower--but more consistent design and vision.
Just a thought...
You want more streamlining?
1)As about surface ships, strive to build one type of 1-st class destroyer, one type of 2-nd class destroyer/destroyer escort and, later, one type of large escort. So:
- Cancel Yugumos ordered in early 1943 (Asashimo, Hayashimo, Akishimo, Kiyoshimo). Add 4 more Akizukis instead.
- Cancel Ukuru-class escorts. These were constructed concurrently with C/D class escorts, demanded almost twice as much man-hours, slightly bigger crew, and weren't particularly superior. Instead of 33 these ships, concentrate on C/D escorts and Matsu-class destroyers. Thankfully we can now play with these ships without crushing Allied sub fleet even harder... I don't if extra destroyers can be squeezed out of available shipyards, though. If replaced purely with escorts, about 40-42 C/D class ships can be made of the same materials, and this will leave workforce to spare.
- Also, can it be possible to replace Type 1 LSI/APDs that arrive in 1944-45 with APDs based on the design of Matsu/Tachibana class? I can try to extrapolate their possible stats, if you wish, but they obviously will be smaller, possibly too small to haul midgets/amphibious tanks/barges, like Type 1 ships did. On the other hand, this unification of design might allow to either build more of them, or to save on materials/workforce.
2)Subs... weeeeell, it's very hard to think of anything plausible there. In RL Japanese sub fleet was fairly effective in the realities of the war's beginning, but failed to rise to the challenge as the war progressed, and it's hard to imagine how it could have managed to do so, taking into account overall technologic inferiority and economic constraints. Sure, command mistakes, primarily misuse of modern submarines as transports, contributed, but above all they were simply outclassed and unable to pull the same tricks American subs did. It's hard to imagine any changes that logically flow from pre-war concepts solutions and can seriously improve situation. Concentrating on building about two types of subs (+ one type of SSTs and midgets each) is an obvious recipe, but what types to pick? B/C types boats have good stats (in-game, but in RL they performed decently as well) but way too big and expensive for mass production. KD boats are closest to the optimal size for a mass-production oceanic boat, but have surprisingly limited range and armament for their size. Larger RO boats theoretically decent characteristics, but abysmal war records, although lack of experienced crews for newly launched boats might have contributed to that (there seems to be a distinct pattern of Japanese subs either being easily destroyed on the first contact with the enemy, without doing anything, or surviving several missions and being taken down only with considerable effort, and/or after launching attacks on heavily protected task forces).
In the game subs are additionally penaltized by being too expensive. They cost 2-4 times as much as DDs. Too much for a weapon that's likely going to be one-shot. On the other hand, their state as ships you cancel to save Naval build points makes me want to see some ideas for improvement here. But I'm at loss for ideas of my own, to be honest. John, can you try to outline how and when the sub doctrine can be changed with Yamamoto in control? So far I can only tell than in game stats terms it's best to build only C2 and KD7 types (hopefully developing KD8 with increased range later in the war) + SH type transports (best cargo to build cost ratio by far) and midgets... I'm not sure if "fast" type ST subs are worthwhile successors to KD boats, as they have only 4 torpedo tubes instead of six. I suppose sub's maneuver speed influences its ability to avoid depthcharge attacks?
