Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish)

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

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

User avatar
geofflambert
Posts: 14887
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:18 pm
Location: St. Louis

RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish)

Post by geofflambert »

ORIGINAL: castor troy



not sure what you are actually doing with your bombers but your flak losses just look horrible. Actually a more realistic number but for a "game" number it is looking really horrible to me for the date.

Total numbers lost, well, also looking realistic but in game terms quite heavy to me. 60% of your losses would be the max to accept for me at this stage of the game.


Most of that's from Singapore. He put a lot of flak there before I started bombing, then I got desperate because he also added engineers there and was fixing damage faster than I was delivering it, so I started running the bombers in at 5k instead of 10k. I stopped bombing there altogether some time back, with the exception of naval attack.

User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish)

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

ORIGINAL: castor troy



not sure what you are actually doing with your bombers but your flak losses just look horrible. Actually a more realistic number but for a "game" number it is looking really horrible to me for the date.

Total numbers lost, well, also looking realistic but in game terms quite heavy to me. 60% of your losses would be the max to accept for me at this stage of the game.


Most of that's from Singapore. He put a lot of flak there before I started bombing, then I got desperate because he also added engineers there and was fixing damage faster than I was delivering it, so I started running the bombers in at 5k instead of 10k. I stopped bombing there altogether some time back, with the exception of naval attack.


You got to be quite stubborn or careless if you lose a usual year's bomber production to flak of one base.
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9303
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish)

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

ORIGINAL: castor troy



not sure what you are actually doing with your bombers but your flak losses just look horrible. Actually a more realistic number but for a "game" number it is looking really horrible to me for the date.

Total numbers lost, well, also looking realistic but in game terms quite heavy to me. 60% of your losses would be the max to accept for me at this stage of the game.


Most of that's from Singapore. He put a lot of flak there before I started bombing, then I got desperate because he also added engineers there and was fixing damage faster than I was delivering it, so I started running the bombers in at 5k instead of 10k. I stopped bombing there altogether some time back, with the exception of naval attack.


You got to be quite stubborn or careless if you lose a usual year's bomber production to flak of one base.

To be fair, it may be the most tactically important base for Japan to take in initial expansion.
User avatar
wyrmmy
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 7:35 am

RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish)

Post by wyrmmy »

Which he has yet to take, rerouting a lot of troops to Thailand to stop the incursion by SEA command. There was a window in Feb - March he could have taken it easily, now he lacks the troops to do so.
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish)

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: geofflambert





Most of that's from Singapore. He put a lot of flak there before I started bombing, then I got desperate because he also added engineers there and was fixing damage faster than I was delivering it, so I started running the bombers in at 5k instead of 10k. I stopped bombing there altogether some time back, with the exception of naval attack.


You got to be quite stubborn or careless if you lose a usual year's bomber production to flak of one base.

To be fair, it may be the most tactically important base for Japan to take in initial expansion.


and that makes losing several hundred bombers worth it? Serious? Different people, different oppinions. I found and still find losing nearly 1000 bombers in one year war horrible, let alone losing most of them
over Singapore. That's clearly an example when I say the commander did something seriously wrong. There's nothing justifying the loss of so many bombers early on, that's just crazy to me.

My ongoing PBEM sees KB attacking Manila, is near Malaya three days later, the IJ lands at Mersing, Malay is cut in two, Northern pocket with 25000 men falls on the first attack for literally no loss, shock attack
into Singapore takes the base on first attempt. Total losses: 1 ship, 2 dozen aircraft, 50 squads of inf and support and some guns, all done in the first week of January with not much the Allied can do about as
there is nothing to be made out of thin air and stuff doesn't magically teleport around other than the IJN's magic task forces of turn one. Now this may be an ideal example but the OP's example must be the worst
then because I have never heard about losing hundreds and hundreds of bombers to flak over Singapore which makes asking about the IJ economy the wrong question, first to ask would be to avoid losses like this,
because with losses like this no economy can correspond.

How can one keep attacking at the wrong altitude after losing a couple of dozen bombers to flak just to keep on attacking the same way again and again to probably lose more than 1000 bombers doing so because
if there are nearly 1000 flak losses, then there are hundreds more that resulted in ops losses. Can only repeat me, horrible.
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish)

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: castor troy
ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: castor troy




You got to be quite stubborn or careless if you lose a usual year's bomber production to flak of one base.

To be fair, it may be the most tactically important base for Japan to take in initial expansion.


and that makes losing several hundred bombers worth it? Serious? Different people, different oppinions. I found and still find losing nearly 1000 bombers in one year war horrible, let alone losing most of them
over Singapore. That's clearly an example when I say the commander did something seriously wrong. There's nothing justifying the loss of so many bombers early on, that's just crazy to me.

My ongoing PBEM sees KB attacking Manila, is near Malaya three days later, the IJ lands at Mersing, Malay is cut in two, Northern pocket with 25000 men falls on the first attack for literally no loss, shock attack
into Singapore takes the base on first attempt. Total losses: 1 ship, 2 dozen aircraft, 50 squads of inf and support and some guns, all done in the first week of January with not much the Allied can do about as
there is nothing to be made out of thin air and stuff doesn't magically teleport around other than the IJN's magic task forces of turn one. Now this may be an ideal example but the OP's example must be the worst
then because I have never heard about losing hundreds and hundreds of bombers to flak over Singapore which makes asking about the IJ economy the wrong question, first to ask would be to avoid losses like this,
because with losses like this no economy can correspond.

How can one keep attacking at the wrong altitude after losing a couple of dozen bombers to flak just to keep on attacking the same way again and again to probably lose more than 1000 bombers doing so because
if there are nearly 1000 flak losses, then there are hundreds more that resulted in ops losses. Can only repeat me, horrible.
He's a new guy - he wasn't saying it was a great series of maneuver, just explaining what happened. I think he understands more now! [8D]
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9303
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish)

Post by Lokasenna »

I think attacking Singers from lower than 15k is a mistake every newly-minted Japanese player has to make at least once.

Definitely not worth several hundred bombers (I'd have to look back at how much it cost me in this past game, but I'd say probably less than 50), I was just expressing that it's understandable why our Gorn would set his bombers more aggressively in an attempt to "break" Singers.
User avatar
geofflambert
Posts: 14887
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:18 pm
Location: St. Louis

RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish)

Post by geofflambert »

Gorns are never wrong.

User avatar
offenseman
Posts: 768
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:05 pm
Location: Sheridan Wyoming, USA

RE: Japanese economy (wyrmm look if you wish)

Post by offenseman »

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Gorns are never wrong.

You have a great attitude regarding the game in general. [&o]
Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”