The PERFECT WAR Mod

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: oldman45

John I think there are some hard limits that you would be up against. I am not sure that Japan could add industry, they just weren't able to do that.

I see this strange argument again. Of course they were able to add industry assuming more beneficial historical premises. Their existing one wasn't delivered to them by aliens, they developed it like all industrial countries, by reinvesting results of their labor. Could it equal or approach US? No. Could it be better? Yes.

Adding a synthetic fuel factory in Anshun is a good idea. Maybe 1-2 more small aircraft facilities at Mukden. A bit of heavy and light industry here and there, but nothing drastic. More heavy industy is just a token change anyway, the existing amount cannot be fed by on-map oil. More vehicle production but not armaments (as armaments production surpasses demand already). Mild expansion of both shipyards in Port Arthur (warship construction program is not big enough to demand a new shipyard, capable of building cruisers and above, so only destroyers and smaller ships will be built there).

[oldman45]

My understanding is that Japans industry was hard pressed to provide materials for the military expansion, to add in factory production would not be possible.

[FatR]

Japan was forced to rely on local resources only by pre-war embargoes, and x20 increase in armaments production with the start of big war is delayed by two years in this mod.


Anyway, subs.

I think we should choose some variation of kaidai sub as the core of the fleet. It is quite expensive unfortunately (15+ mlns of yen in pre-war prices compared to 20-21+ of a cruiser sub and 9+ of a K6 sub), but as personnel availability is quite limited anyway, that's not the biggest problem.

Aircraft carrier subs will not exist, except for the experimental I-5. Due to the new doctrine, emphasizing individual free hunt over scouting in the interests of the surface fleet, they are not needed.

Midget subs, and large midget carriers, however, still will be built, as a part of researching ways to deliver a surprise strike to the enemy fleet in its bases. Midget subs will be a bit different, meant to be a purely sneak attack weapon, not meant to operate in open sea at all, with lesser speed. There will be a lot less of them.

As about coastal subs, after building RO-33/34 the idea is abandoned in favor of KD, due to unsuitability for the envisioned type of operations (limited endurance means increased dependency on direction from the coast and inability to maintain long patrols beyond the immediate frontline).

As about KD class, approach and relatively short-range attack in submerged position is established as the main tactics (as the typical situation is seen as a lone sub or a loosely coordinated wolfpack meeting a task force or an escorted convoy), as extended tests of submarines' performance, revealing subs' vulnerability during attempts to approach or shadow well-protected fleet elements on surface, and difficulty of reaching a decent attack position with existing characteristics when sumberged, are conducted earlier, and actually impact the submarine design. Insufficient survivability of the existing designs is also noticed, which, in the light of overall changes in the fleet doctrine and expectations of an extended war, is seen as unacceptable. All this will cause attempts to increase underwater speed, diving characteristics and maximum diving depth of KD subs. To allow that, requirements for surface speed will be loosened. Relatively high endurance and radius of action still will be seen as necessary. Range requirements for torpedoes might be loosened somewhat, allowing to keep more on board.

[John 3rd]

I concur that the additions cannot be massive but anything will help in Manchuria and Korea. The delay of the war in China would certainly have beneficial effects for the creating more infrastructure and industry.

If there is time today I will go through the map and make recommendations for this region.

[John 3rd]

Want to download DaBabes so I can see how their map differs from what I am used to. I assume we are using 'C' 029 for the starting point? Is this correct?

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Want to download DaBabes so I can see how their map differs from what I am used to. I assume we are using 'C' 029 for the starting point? Is this correct?

John, there's only two little things I did to two panels; WPEN and WPEH 09 in Luzon, and WPEN and WPEH 15 in Malaya. You can ignore WPEN and WPEH 16.

Luzon:
Pooched out the art to move Subic bay graphics into hex 78:76.
That allows for a Subic Bay port base in that hex.
Lets Clark Field change from coastal to inland.
No access from Subic to Bataan except by sea (barge transport enthusiasts, take note).
Nasty road from Subic to Clark.
Still, only way into Bataan is from Clark.

Malaya:
Pooched out the art to move Batu Pahat graphics into hex 49:82.
That allows for a Batu Pahat port base in that hex.
Changes hex 50:82 from coastal to inland and adds Kluong to the hex.
And adds trails and such to make it all work.

Borneo: (Hidden, i.e. no art)
Trail from Samarinda to the "secret" base of Samarinda-2, at Melak, at hex 63:95.

That's about it. Pretty sure there's a complete changelog (for the map editor) in the art file package. Ciao. J

[FatR]

Yes, Scen 28 version C.

Do you agree with my thoughts on subs above? If you agree, I'll write a detailed types proposal, if you agree.

On that note, submarine tenders. Fleet will have the following:

1)Old depot ship Komahashi (not in the game, as far, as I'm aware).
2)Jingei and Chogei. 140mm turrets removed to be fit on destroyer leaders CL, initially replaced with old 76mm AA guns, during the war with standard 120mm twins - with development of airsearch the threat of surface raiders is minimized, and they are no longer supposed to act begind enemy lines.
3)Oi and Kiso reconstructed in place of building Taigei.
4)Still not enough, considering the much increased focus on operating subs from forward bases. I propose taking some money saved by eliminating production of coastal subs in the three years before the war and building 4-6 less ambitious sub tenders (displacement of 10-11 000 tons, engine of 10 000 hps or less, simplified outlines, resembling a merchant hull, pure-AA armament) and maybe a pair of repair ships on the same hull, to support this doctrine. Alt_naval had the right idea using the same hull for various large auxilaries and landing craft docks as well, but it picked the hull so expensive, that the only really sensible use for it was "conversion into light carrier". But IJN needs auxilaries (and landing ships) too.

[John 3rd]

Done. All good with what you describe. Really concur with point #4.

Thanks JWE for the details regarding your work.

[FatR]

Some strange things I've noticed while tinkering with destroyers: American DDs in the game have their standard displacement as commonly found on the net, 5mm armor on guns mounted in enclosed turrets and speed that they probably only ever had in initial designs. Japanese DDs have dispacements around numbers of full displacement stated by Jentschura (with some deviations), open mounts and turrets equally have zero armor and speed is closer to actual top speed in combat conditions. Did not check in depth if that covers other ship classes.

I'm not sure what to do with that when deriving ships from existing projects in the mod (displacement and turret armor don't really impact gameplay much and are easy to fix, but speed seems to be extremely important in combat). These stats are not using the same standard, but, on the other hand, Japanese surface combatants have the large experience advantage built in the game balance, and I'm not sure if it disappears later in the war (I haven't got far enough as Allies to see if late-war ships arrive with EXP over 50-55, will be grateful if anyone can tell me if they are).

[FatR]

Also, what art we needs so far (thanks in advance to anyone who would be kind enough to contribute).

Battleships:

Owari class - available thanks to Terminus.
Kaga class - available thanks to Juan.
Fuso/Ise classes - we need an art after the first reconstruction. Superstructure is similar to how it appears in the game, but two funnels - for reference on the older funnel shape see:
http://navypedia.org/ships/japan/jap_bb_ise.htm
http://navypedia.org/ships/japan/jap_bb_fuso.htm

Cruisers:

Niitaka class - see again for reference:

Modernized Sendai class - simply replace two forward guns with an enclosed turret, same shape as on Jingei AS (because these are in fact same turrets).

5500-tons rebuilds as training cruisers - available since RA, thanks to Terminus.


That was the easy part. I'm afraid I'll need to master drawing programs at least well enough to make discernible representations of what should be where for many of the less glamorous but important ship classes.

[Terminus]

How many of the new turrets on that modernized Sendai? What's the layout again?

[JuanG]

ORIGINAL: FatR

Also, what art we needs so far (thanks in advance to anyone who would be kind enough to contribute).

Battleships:

Owari class - available thanks to Terminus.
Kaga class - available thanks to Juan.
Fuso/Ise classes - we need an art after the first reconstruction. Superstructure is similar to how it appears in the game, but two funnels - for reference on the older funnel shape see:
http://navypedia.org/ships/japan/jap_bb_ise.htm
http://navypedia.org/ships/japan/jap_bb_fuso.htm

Cruisers:

Niitaka class - see again for reference:

Modernized Sendai class - simply replace two forward guns with an enclosed turret, same shape as on Jingei AS (because these are in fact same turrets).

5500-tons rebuilds as training cruisers - available since RA, thanks to Terminus.


That was the easy part. I'm afraid I'll need to master drawing programs at least well enough to make discernible representations of what should be where for many of the less glamorous but important ship classes.

The Niitaka is close enough to my Tsurugi class from AltWNT CV Variant to use that as a base. Just add larger aircraft facilities aft and you should be pretty good.




Ill see what I can come up with over the weekend.

[John 3rd]

NICE!

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

How many of the new turrets on that modernized Sendai? What's the layout again?

As Sendai, but with a turret instead of two single guns on the bow. There will be a couple more extras, but nothing big enough to show on the picture.

As a side note, the last upgrade of Sendai in Scen 28 has two groups of 25mm singles facing front (16 and 17). This might be a "typo".

[Terminus]

Find attached modernised Sendai art.

[John 3rd]

Thanks Term.

[FatR]

Sorry for my absence from the thread, I'm busy, and too tired to think... I did all the drudgework for battleships, though. If you want, John, I can send the file to you, so you can look at it.

[John 3rd]

Keep the file for the moment so we have no confusion with things.

We've got all sorts of ideas flowing along in the other Thread right now. Pretty interesting stuff.

It looks to me like we're pretty well settled for the Fleet. I assume you'll be thinking of changes along the line of what we discussed in the RA Thread for Army-Navy aircraft as well as changing of the planes themselves?

[FatR]

Argh, Allies are stealing our mod[:)].

Seriously, though, I didn't have time to follow both threads closely. I hope on the next week I'll be free enough to read it through and start shooting down the outlandish ideas[:)].

As about aviation, I have in mind two variants: the modest version is the engine alternative, which doesn't really introduce much past what we've already established in RA, and the best-case version is based on far closer Army-Navy cooperation in aircraft production. I'll post them once I write up the rest of the proposals for the fleet.

[oldman45]

I will concede some of the idea's might be over the top[;)]