Most streamlined IJ PLANE research/building approach Scen1

[Alpha77]

This differs for SCEN2 and mods - it is aimed at SCEN1. You have more freedom in 2 - more factories. Some mods change plane data eg. the KI100 is better-faster in mods then in "vanilla"

1. FP,PA,RC,TR

-No research at all, build Jakes and some Glens for subs, done. You can produce some Petes as I have heard they can serve as night CAP distracting bombers

-No research.Build some Mavis (not many) until Emily arrives, build some more of these, done

-No research.Build Babs for both IJN/IJA, done. Only 1 engine so very economic - IJN recon groups will withdraw a lot, do not overbuild. If in good shape change Babs to Dinah (2 engines), Dinah is of course better, but you can safe resources building only Babs.Judy is nice to have loooong range and CV capable, if in good shape build some.

-No research.Build the transport for both IJN/IJA you like the most. Use the one you have engines in stock. Do not overbuild IJN, they do not have many transport groups.Best transports do arrive late: Helen and Tabby. Emily is probably too expensive in Scen1 but I guess nice to have..do not bother with Helen in Scen1 as you also will not build the Helen bomber. We safe these engine slots!

Other plane types in seperate posts later. [:)]

[Alpha77]

2. Level bombers

2.a) 1E
No research. All 1E bombers are obsolete in contested airspace. They are usefull in China, for training and (less) for ASW. The only 1E bomber to build is Ann, as it has somewhat useful range also for search/asw. Some advocate for Sonja, for 4x the chance to hit, but only 50kg. For streamlining do not build any IF you have enough PPs to update 1E to 2E groups, Done.

2.b) 2E
No research. Helen is on paper better for the IJA, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and 12.7mm MGs in the 3rd model. So waste of resources, build Sallies en masse. Later IJA bombers not worth the effort, Done.
No research. Frances is on paper better for the IJN, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and higher speed. Build the 2nd Nell en masse, Done.

[rustysi]

No research at all, build Jakes and some Glens for subs, done. You can produce some Petes as I have heard they can serve as night CAP distracting bombers

Don't forget that when it comes to FP's you'll benefit greatly by putting R&D into the Rufe. It goes directly to the A6M5 series, absolutely necessary. As for the Pete, they are very useful early on, but I build none. I find I have enough for my uses.

Dinah is of course better, but you can safe resources building only Babs.

Dinah is a much better plane, especially the III, you may actually save resources by building it over the Babs. After all you don't need that many for the few recon units the Japanese get. Leave the Babs for training and in China.

Best transports

Emily is probably too expensive in Scen1

Enily-L is by far Japans' best transport, both by is capacity and its ability to extract troop from bad situations. Build it, but again not too many as there are few unit to fill.

do not bother with Helen in Scen1 as you also will not build the Helen bomber.

I think you got this backwards. I say this were true for Scen2 not one. In Scen2 the Helen is a 'one engine' plane. In Scen1 the Tojo uses the Ha-35 and you will need these, so may as well build the Helen's as well. The last two version are a slight improvement over the Sally.

They are usefull in China, for training and (less) for ASW.

Au contraire, they are very useful early in the game as they'll operate well from small bases. After that they're mostly for training.

but in practice can not defend itself

No Japanese bomber can defend itself, therefore the point is moot.[:D]

Build the 2nd Nell en masse

I don't know about en masse, but I think the point here should be that this A/C has and excellent range and once it gets radar it should be a good ASW platform.

The above is merely MHO. YMMV. Ciao.

[Alpha77]

The Rufe belongs to fighter research chain, I will write about this later

Yes, seems I confused 1 and 2 scens for the Helen. I am dissapointed by Helen, I use the 3rd version with highest gun value and it seems they can not even get the "defensive fire" distraction vs. early war US fighters. The B25 oth gets this message often even vs. Franks. Not to mention the head on attacks IJ planes do stupidly against the B25 with a million of forward HMGs [>:]

In general we are in agreement I read

[rustysi]

Not the mention the head on attacks IJ planes do stupidly against the B25 with a million of forward HMGs

[8|]

In general we are in agreement I read

Yeah, pretty close. So far.[:D]

[RangerJoe]

Build the Ida as well, it costs half the HI since there is a bunch of engines already.

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

2. Level bombers

2.a) 1E
No research. All 1E bombers are obsolete in contested airspace. They are usefull in China, for training and (less) for ASW. The only 1E bomber to build is Ann, as it has somewhat useful range also for search/asw. Some advocate for Sonja, for 4x the chance to hit, but only 50kg. For streamlining do not build any IF you have enough PPs to update 1E to 2E groups, Done.

2.b) 2E
No research. Helen is on paper better for the IJA, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and 12.7mm MGs in the 3rd model. So waste of resources, build Sallies en masse. Later IJA bombers not worth the effort, Done.
No research. Frances is on paper better for the IJN, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and higher speed. Build the 2nd Nell en masse, Done.

Disagree on both points.

2a) Worth getting a fast single engine LB for kamikaze use in the late game. Toka/Ki-115 ideally.

2b) The Frances is needed because the G3M3 Nell is slooooooooooooow.

The torpedo armed Peggy is MASSIVE for Japan, it essentially doubles your naval attack capacity once IJA pilots with NavT skills appear.

Lily dive bomber variant is needed to tide the IJA anti-shipping force over till the Peggy comes online.

Ki-74 Patsy is needed late-war for the IJA to hit exposed Allied bases.

I'm going to guess that the vast majority of your attention is focused on fighters/fighter-bombers, but those that I've listed above are what I consider essential (maybe not the single-engine kami planes, at a pinch)...

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

2. Level bombers

2.a) 1E
No research. All 1E bombers are obsolete in contested airspace. They are usefull in China, for training and (less) for ASW. The only 1E bomber to build is Ann, as it has somewhat useful range also for search/asw. Some advocate for Sonja, for 4x the chance to hit, but only 50kg. For streamlining do not build any IF you have enough PPs to update 1E to 2E groups, Done.

2.b) 2E
No research. Helen is on paper better for the IJA, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and 12.7mm MGs in the 3rd model. So waste of resources, build Sallies en masse. Later IJA bombers not worth the effort, Done.
No research. Frances is on paper better for the IJN, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and higher speed. Build the 2nd Nell en masse, Done.

Disagree on both points.

2a) Worth getting a fast single engine LB for kamikaze use in the late game. Toka/Ki-115 ideally.

2b) The Frances is needed because the G3M3 Nell is slooooooooooooow.

The torpedo armed Peggy is MASSIVE for Japan, it essentially doubles your naval attack capacity once IJA pilots with NavT skills appear.

Lily dive bomber variant is needed to tide the IJA anti-shipping force over till the Peggy comes online.

Ki-74 Patsy is needed late-war for the IJA to hit exposed Allied bases.

I'm going to guess that the vast majority of your attention is focused on fighters/fighter-bombers, but those that I've listed above are what I consider essential (maybe not the single-engine kami planes, at a pinch)...

While they're all cool, they're defnitely not necessary.

I've rarely built the late war 1e kami bombers. I just use naval Judy/Jill/Grace and the Army 2E (of which you'll have an excess by late war) for kamis. I'm sure the 1E can be effective but I find their range and low durability restrictive and ineffective.

Late war I convert many 2E groups to FB and use Nick/Randy to supplement CAP and for escort/kami if needed. It really adds a lot of groups (at some PP cost, but what else are you going to spend PPs on late war?).

I completely agree on the Frances. IJN mid and late war LBA naval strikes will be much more effective if you have this airframe. The Nell G3M3 are great for range but you're not getting through CAP with those.

The Peggy-T is not as much of an impact as you'd imagine. It can be effective, but not huge. They're very good kamis, though. Pilot management is extremely increased, and it takes a while to get torpedo pilots trained for IJA (since this is the only plane doing it, so you have to wait until after they arrive to begin).

The Lily with two 100kg bombs is inconsequential. Just use IJN 1E.

The Patsy can be fine but it won't. change much late. A few P-40s or Hellcat NF on Allied rear area bases deal with this threat pretty easily. It's fast and can be a decent kami as well, but use another quick airframe (Helens are fine, FB better), if you want to streamline.

The armor on the Helen if imperitive to keep more flying against Allied flak through the mid-war. They are an upgrade over the Sally, and well worth the investment to retain more of your pilots and airframes over the course of the war.

[Alpha77]

Guys...KEEP IN MIND, this thread is not about comparing plane data. Or which plane you personally find cool and want to have it no matter what. There are a ton of threads about these topics already.


It is mainly to safe your resources for the 44 and 45 phase, if you plan only to play to 43 you can disregard my thoughts because stockpiles even in scen1 will be enough up to the end of 43 beginning of 44. Also you do not need to care about these ideas if you have lost 50% plus of your oil sources in 43 already [:D] Because it is the end anyway for ya sorry ass...

@mind messing, but even disregarding what is said above, I do not like much the planes you named for severall reasons. I already said, the Helen is nice to have in Scen1 - but Sally drops the same amount of bombs. I do not understand at all the Frances thing, only speed could be an argument for it. Range/load/defense is not even better than later Betty. Also no fan of torp bomber for the army, but I am a newbie in PBM (only 1 completed and 1 ongoing but slooow), so more experienced people may deem it neccesary. You can have many navy torp planes if you do it right and depending of your house rules. The Lily is laughable also as DB (if only 1E perhaps ok).

As for kamis, there is not a single kami plane here, because throwing away a plane plus pilot is not economic at all and morally wrong (perhaps in end phase facism/marxism[X(])

But I gladly await links to AAR sections or your own combat reports vs. a capable Allied player, where Frances, Peggy T or Lily DB made a big impact like you suggest. I do not mean smashing a bunch of hapless transports which the Lily for sure can do.[:)] Cause I have read many AARs I find them entertaining with some good writers around, but one can also learn. I do not remember instances where above planes did some marvels..but that eg. Frances got shot down like Betty while the Allies landed happyly in the Phillipines, the IJ player said, he might have a chance cause he has updated to the Frances.. yeah for some freighters hit, from which the Allies have literally thousands.

[Alpha77]

3. Torpedo bombers (only IJN - no IJA torp bombers as for the economic guideline)

Some research aiming for the 2nd Jill model,1st Jill using non standard engine. You can build both Kates in masses and as much engines you have. 1st Kate uses older engine. 2nd Kate is a reliable plane delivering a torp or 2x250kg to a decent range. Not good speed or surviveability..but which torp bomber really is?
There is even a "rumour" that older torp bombers hit better perhaps cause they are slower so can aim better. Even Jean / Swordfish are good enough to sink CVs or BBs you only need to train the pilots good and get ém through.

When 2nd Jill is ready switch some research to Grace, however it is also no wonder plane (just like Frances). Yes fast and good range. But it will take some effort to get it early enough to make an impact at all. So not ideal from resources/industrial standpoint. Or you can aim for 3rd Jill, but only improvement is 1 HMG and a radar (activates late), worth it ? Another idea would be zero research in Jill, going 100% for Grace. Risky but worth a try.

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

2. Level bombers

2.a) 1E
No research. All 1E bombers are obsolete in contested airspace. They are usefull in China, for training and (less) for ASW. The only 1E bomber to build is Ann, as it has somewhat useful range also for search/asw. Some advocate for Sonja, for 4x the chance to hit, but only 50kg. For streamlining do not build any IF you have enough PPs to update 1E to 2E groups, Done.

2.b) 2E
No research. Helen is on paper better for the IJA, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and 12.7mm MGs in the 3rd model. So waste of resources, build Sallies en masse. Later IJA bombers not worth the effort, Done.
No research. Frances is on paper better for the IJN, but in practice can not defend itself even with armor and higher speed. Build the 2nd Nell en masse, Done.

Disagree on both points.

2a) Worth getting a fast single engine LB for kamikaze use in the late game. Toka/Ki-115 ideally.

2b) The Frances is needed because the G3M3 Nell is slooooooooooooow.

The torpedo armed Peggy is MASSIVE for Japan, it essentially doubles your naval attack capacity once IJA pilots with NavT skills appear.

Lily dive bomber variant is needed to tide the IJA anti-shipping force over till the Peggy comes online.

Ki-74 Patsy is needed late-war for the IJA to hit exposed Allied bases.

I'm going to guess that the vast majority of your attention is focused on fighters/fighter-bombers, but those that I've listed above are what I consider essential (maybe not the single-engine kami planes, at a pinch)...

While they're all cool, they're defnitely not necessary.

I've rarely built the late war 1e kami bombers. I just use naval Judy/Jill/Grace and the Army 2E (of which you'll have an excess by late war) for kamis. I'm sure the 1E can be effective but I find their range and low durability restrictive and ineffective.

I can be swayed here, but the Judy/Jill/Grace are all airframes that would be ideal for conventional attacks. The Army 2E's to a lesser extent (esp. if you've the Patsy...)

With that in mind, having lots of fast, expendable 1Es is helpful in leveraging the masses of training squadrons Japan gets late game and leave the better planes in the pools to give some depth to conventional attacks.

The Peggy-T is not as much of an impact as you'd imagine. It can be effective, but not huge. They're very good kamis, though. Pilot management is extremely increased, and it takes a while to get torpedo pilots trained for IJA (since this is the only plane doing it, so you have to wait until after they arrive to begin).

Strongly disagree here. The Peggy T gives a big impact, simply because it gives the IJA an effective anti-shipping platform when it starts to struggle for a role in 1943 onwards in the face of strong Allied flak and meagre bombloads (when they get past CAP). The absence of IJA NavT pilots is an issue, but one that's easy enough to overcome with bit of R&D and shock therapy in training. Plus by 1944 if you've not enough trained IJA GrdB pilots then you're doing something wrong.

The Lily with two 100kg bombs is inconsequential. Just use IJN 1E.

Disagree again here, it's a dive bomber, it's IJA and there's never enough IJN 1E's to go around come the late war.

The Patsy can be fine but it won't. change much late. A few P-40s or Hellcat NF on Allied rear area bases deal with this threat pretty easily. It's fast and can be a decent kami as well, but use another quick airframe (Helens are fine, FB better), if you want to streamline.

The Patsy's range means that it will be more than a few P-40's (which will actually struggle to catch it) or Hellcats needed for rear-area CAP. Lots of bases can be reached with a 36 hex range. Granted the bombload is a bit meh, but if you're using it as a long-range kami that matters less (which IMO is what you should be using it for mostly).

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Guys...KEEP IN MIND, this thread is not about comparing plane data. Or which plane you personally find cool and want to have it no matter what. There are a ton of threads about these topics already.


It is mainly to safe your resources for the 44 and 45 phase, if you plan only to play to 43 you can disregard my thoughts because stockpiles even in scen1 will be enough up to the end of 43 beginning of 44. Also you do not need to care about these ideas if you have lost 50% plus of your oil sources in 43 already [:D] Because it is the end anyway for ya sorry ass...

Some thoughts on the premise of this exercise is that it's somewhat flawed - aircraft production in itself only uses HI (18 x #engines in plane), as does engine production (18 x engine).

HI tends to not be a limiting factor for Japan, but supply is. Seeing as supply is needed for factory expansions and repairs (regardless of the streamlining process), what exactly are the savings to be made?

Seems to me you'd be saving marginally in the early phase of the war to then suffer severely in the mid-war phase (and still pay the same costs if you're R&D'ing for the late-war airframes)...?

I am happy to confess that I'm somewhat biased given my love of building big pools of everything (because pools can't be bombed).

@mind messing, but even disregarding what is said above, I do not like much the planes you named for severall reasons. I already said, the Helen is nice to have in Scen1 - but Sally drops the same amount of bombs. I do not understand at all the Frances thing, only speed could be an argument for it. Range/load/defense is not even better than later Betty. Also no fan of torp bomber for the army, but I am a newbie in PBM (only 1 completed and 1 ongoing but slooow), so more experienced people may deem it neccesary. You can have many navy torp planes if you do it right and depending of your house rules. The Lily is laughable also as DB (if only 1E perhaps ok).

The Sally/Helen debate can be settled in that you want to keep your pilots alive to build their EXP. Sally doesn't have armour, and therefore will get your pilots killed more.

For the Frances, the speed differential between the G3M3 and the P1Y1 Frances is nearly 100km/h, which against late-war Allied CAP will be the difference between all your aircraft being shot down and some making it through CAP.

See above for why you need a IJA torpedo armed aircraft, but in short you need it to leverage the entire IJA level-bomber training programme to pump out trained pilots for the Gotterdammerung of late-war air combat (and to slam torps into loaded Allied amphibious forces for VP piñatas).

The Lily doesn't get much love because it's a bit of a niche airframe and 100kg bombs don't excite people in the same way as the 250kg, 500kg or 800kg smashers. However, as with the Peggy T, it lets you leverage the IJA training programme to give lots of depth to your anti-shipping forces.

As for kamis, there is not a single kami plane here, because throwing away a plane plus pilot is not economic at all and morally wrong (perhaps in end phase facism/marxism)

Well, I think your view may change once you reach 1945. In that context, it's easy to assemble large numbers of aircraft with average pilots to bulk out your conventional strikes against large Allied carrier task forces. The advantage is that the pilot can be much easier replaced thanks to the curtailed training needed for effective kami operations.

As for the morality, I don't think that was programmed into the game.

But I gladly await links to AAR sections or your own combat reports vs. a capable Allied player, where Frances, Peggy T or Lily DB made a big impact like you suggest. I do not mean smashing a bunch of hapless transports which the Lily for sure can do. Cause I have read many AARs I find them entertaining with some good writers around, but one can also learn. I do not remember instances where above planes did some marvels..but that eg. Frances got shot down like Betty while the Allies landed happyly in the Phillipines, the IJ player said, he might have a chance cause he has updated to the Frances.. yeah for some freighters hit, from which the Allies have literally thousands.

Some stuff from trawling through my old AAR

Lily and Frances attacking amphib TF
Another example of Lily's attacking an opposed amphib invasion

I'm sure there was also an engagement where I mauled some CVE's with a couple of Lily squadrons, but I can't find the combat report for that, so will have a look as that's probably the ideal target for them.

As a more general comment, you seem to be quite disparaging of sinking merchantmen. While sinking freighters might not be the most exciting of military achievements, playing Japan is all about exacting a toll on the Allies wherever possible. Lots of aircraft can sink freighters, but how many aircraft can do despite Allied flak and CAP? That's a better question to be asking.

[GetAssista]

WRT all this streamlined stuff. I don't see much point in trying to outline IJ plane management in an intermediate-simple way. When you are a beginner, you should just start with the simple "research your fighters and use chains to your advantage". When you progress, you are perfectly capable of reading what's been covered extensively on the forum about pros and cons of all the flying zoo Japan has, and about tastes and strategy of different players. And form your own opinion.

ORIGINAL: obvert
The Lily with two 100kg bombs is inconsequential. Just use IJN 1E.

The Patsy can be fine but it won't. change much late. A few P-40s or Hellcat NF on Allied rear area bases deal with this threat pretty easily. It's fast and can be a decent kami as well, but use another quick airframe (Helens are fine, FB better), if you want to streamline.

Oy, I'm sure Lowpe would disagree with you on the first one ) There is not enough IJN to put in everywhere where you can expect enemy transports inside a 9-11 hex range. Also only Grace has comparable coverage as a DB, and it arrives late.

WRT second one, just recall that the number of bases to cover against is roughly proportional to range squared. That's a lot of effort spent.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

WRT all this streamlined stuff. I don't see much point in trying to outline IJ plane management in an intermediate-simple way. When you are a beginner, you should just start with the simple "research your fighters and use chains to your advantage". When you progress, you are perfectly capable of reading what's been covered extensively on the forum about pros and cons of all the flying zoo Japan has, and about tastes and strategy of different players. And form your own opinion.

ORIGINAL: obvert
The Lily with two 100kg bombs is inconsequential. Just use IJN 1E.

The Patsy can be fine but it won't. change much late. A few P-40s or Hellcat NF on Allied rear area bases deal with this threat pretty easily. It's fast and can be a decent kami as well, but use another quick airframe (Helens are fine, FB better), if you want to streamline.

Oy, I'm sure Lowpe would disagree with you on the first one ) There is not enough IJN to put in everywhere where you can expect enemy transports inside a 9-11 hex range. Also only Grace has comparable coverage as a DB, and it arrives late.

WRT second one, just recall that the number of bases to cover against is roughly proportional to range squared. That's a lot of effort spent.

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
Disagree again here, it's a dive bomber, it's IJA and there's never enough IJN 1E's to go around come the late war.

Having played both sides late I agree and concede the Lily can be useful, and of course any good player can make use of any good airframe. I am an advocate of using virtually anything if you feel it'll be effective in a certain circumstance and will be more effecient than changing production. But, it's a 2E plane. I'd rather have 2x 1E at a base than half as many Lilys.

I personally cross train the plentiful and very experienced IJAAF pilots for low level naval bombing from day one. So I end up with plentiful kami pilots, EXP 70 piltos with 80 ground and 70+ low naval. These guys flying IJAAF 2E or 1E mid-war can hit shipping with bigger bombs than the Lily. So that has worked for me. I find having enough airfield capacity and air support at a specific point the limiting factor to hit Allied invasions or naval movements mid-war, not whether I've got enough IJN planes.

Generally the Allies aren't doing multiple big ops simultaneously, and unless you have level 9 fields everywhere (which certainly isn't a a good way to save on supply for the late war) it's better to use 1E against naval forces. The standard 2E Helens (or Peggy-T) can then add to whatever is happening close in from bases farther away, and have slightly better range than the Lily. The Peggy is best, and although I fend them not as effective as I'd like for torpedo attacks, as low level naval strike planes (kami or not) they're excellent.

I build (and advocate building) a lot of different airframes, but this is a thread about limiting production, so my comments followed that line of thinking.

[RangerJoe]

Some people like the Lily DB to use against the Fletcher class and other DDs wandering around the Japanese rear areas.

[Alpha77]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Some people like the Lily DB to use against the Fletcher class and other DDs wandering around the Japanese rear areas.

Good idea, Fletcher (and Gearing etc.) are very durable, how many 100kg will it take to sink or damage them enough? In mid 43 already there is a lot of 20/40 mm on these ships, if Lily can get through that would be cool. Can I request combat reports of this?

Also another question: Do dive bombers attack PT-boats I mean with a dive not at 100ft. I had 2 or 3 times these PTs in range but DBs would not fly (I know could be other issues, wanna make sure DB fly vs. these. I had only some success with Nick on 100ft vs. PTs aka pest and cholera)

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Guys...KEEP IN MIND, this thread is not about comparing plane data. Or which plane you personally find cool and want to have it no matter what. There are a ton of threads about these topics already.


It is mainly to safe your resources for the 44 and 45 phase, if you plan only to play to 43 you can disregard my thoughts because stockpiles even in scen1 will be enough up to the end of 43 beginning of 44. Also you do not need to care about these ideas if you have lost 50% plus of your oil sources in 43 already [:D] Because it is the end anyway for ya sorry ass...

If this is about saving resources you need to go into what you're trying to save. How do your plane choices impact that and what do you hope to achieve as Japan strategically through the mid-war to prepare for the endgame?

Your comments below seem slightly against the grain. You want to save for the endgame but not use kamis? Hmmm. Ok.

You "don't understand the Frances thing?" Have a look at speed and range and arrival date. Speed is the most important factor for any strike plane (assuming adequate payload). Next most important is durability/armor.

@mind messing, but even disregarding what is said above, I do not like much the planes you named for severall reasons. I already said, the Helen is nice to have in Scen1 - but Sally drops the same amount of bombs. I do not understand at all the Frances thing, only speed could be an argument for it. Range/load/defense is not even better than later Betty. Also no fan of torp bomber for the army, but I am a newbie in PBM (only 1 completed and 1 ongoing but slooow), so more experienced people may deem it neccesary. You can have many navy torp planes if you do it right and depending of your house rules. The Lily is laughable also as DB (if only 1E perhaps ok).

As for kamis, there is not a single kami plane here, because throwing away a plane plus pilot is not economic at all and morally wrong (perhaps in end phase facism/marxism[X(])

But I gladly await links to AAR sections or your own combat reports vs. a capable Allied player, where Frances, Peggy T or Lily DB made a big impact like you suggest. I do not mean smashing a bunch of hapless transports which the Lily for sure can do.[:)] Cause I have read many AARs I find them entertaining with some good writers around, but one can also learn. I do not remember instances where above planes did some marvels..but that eg. Frances got shot down like Betty while the Allies landed happyly in the Phillipines, the IJ player said, he might have a chance cause he has updated to the Frances.. yeah for some freighters hit, from which the Allies have literally thousands.

Yeah, I think AARs aren't going to help you.

[Alpha77]

Saving supply, factory slots and HI, which also puts less strain on fuel/oil..

I do not like Kamikazes, so do not plan to use them (reasons already given). I know they can get some hits, I have played Allies to mid 44 on the receiving end, they sank 2-3 CVEs and 20+ transports (vs. AI). How many were shot down however, is another butchers bill.

I also would not use "manpower bombing", even if morality is not part of the game. I am a bit crazy you know.

@mind messing plus obvert: Thanks for the links and detailed thoughts on the topic.

[RangerJoe]

Manpower bombing really should be the only way to destroy LI, after all, that is where the LI was.

How many 100kg bombs to sink a DD? How many 5 inch shells? The US 5/38 fired a shell that was 54 pounds while a 100 kilogram bomb is about 220 pounds. One 100 pound bomb sank a Japanese DD at Wake Island, dropped from a Wildcat by Hammerin' Hank Talmadge, MOH.

[Alpha77]

Yes such single quite small hits can sink a DD, with much luck, bad damage control or catastrophic explosion (all built in the game), so Lily DB perhaps has worth.

[RangerJoe]

Especially if the enemy ship is in your rear area! [:D]