Japanese Production Ideas for Lemurs 4.0

[2ndACR]

These are my 1st turn production changes to Lemurs 4.0. These may not work with the stock scenario's or previous versions of Lemurs mod. You will have some supply decreases in January 42, but they level off and start to increase supply levels in Febuary 42. After Febuary 42, everything will be a personal preference. This will get you started.

Japanese Production For Lemurs 4.0


Saigon - Double Heavy Industry

Nagasaki - Change A5M4 production to A6M2 and increase to 16
Change C5M production to A6M2 and increase to 16
Double E14Y1 production
Double armament production

Sasebo - Double B7A research
Increase NIK Kyofu rd to 16
Double armament production
Double heavy industry

Kit Kyushu - Change Kawasaki engine to Nakajima and double production

Matsuyama - Increase HI to 40 that would be (35) x 5

Takamatsu - Increase Naval shipyard to 8
Increase Merchant shipyard to 4
Increase repair to 16

Hiroshima - Change Mitsubishi engine to Nakajima
Double B5N production
Change E13A1 to A6M2 and increase to 16
Double armament production

Okayama - Increase armament production to 20
Maizuru - Increase armament to 16
Osaka - Change Kawasaki engine to Nakajima and increase to 20
Double H6K4 production
Increase armament production to 16
Nagoya - Change Kawasaki to Nakajima
Increase B5N to 32 total
Change Ki-21-II to Ki-49 Donryu and increase to 26
Increase repair to 20
Kanazawa - Increase Vehicle production to 16
Double armament production
Hamamatsu - Change Nissan to Aichi
Shimuzu - Change Nissan to Aichi
Tokyo - Change Nissan to Aichi
Change Ishikawjima engine to Nakajima
Change Hitachi engine to Nakajima
Increase D3A2 production to 32
Change KI-36 production to A6M2
Gumma - Halt Ki-27 production (will switch over to Oscar 1b on 1 Jan)
Double KI49 Donryu production
Change L4M1 to L2D2 and increase to 6
Toyama - Change KI-57-II to KI49 Donryu and increase to 12
Niigata - Change Mitsubishi engine to Nakajima
Harbin - Halt Ki-27 production

Any other thoughts or ideas are welcome. That did not copy/paste very well and may be hard to read. Sorry guys.

[Ron Saueracker]

I got enough for Mike...now you are stressing him too?[:D]

[mogami]

Hi, I'm curious did Lemur leave all the aircraft factories that are set to R&D at start on map? (They should not be present in any scenario designed strictly for use by human Japanese player)

[2ndACR]

Ron,

These are ideas for the players to use for production. Not changes. YOU are trying to kill him not me. I got some of my wishes already. Except for my pet peave about the Shinano.

Mogami,

Yes, all the R&D factories are there. I do not add any or change production except for B7A research though. I understand that they should not really be there until the plane is available or that is how I understand it. Also you can use his mod to play either side. Me and Ron are playing his 3.1 BETA version. Me and Panzer are playing an earlier version than that I think. I have been tinkering, playing as the allies against the AI in his 4.0 version.

Have you looked at his mod yet? If not you should take a look at it. It is at Spooky's site or I can send it to you if you want to look it over.

[Captain Cruft]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, I'm curious did Lemur leave all the aircraft factories that are set to R&D at start on map? (They should not be present in any scenario designed strictly for use by human Japanese player)

I'm concerned. If you remove the R&D factories you are effectively reducing Japan's aircraft manufacturing capacity a LOT. About 50% at a guess. It also means that you will only be able to produce new planes (that nothing upgrades to) by cannabilising existing factories.

Is this really what the rumoured "PBEM only scenario" will be like?

[mogami]

Hi, I am playing a scenario 26 as the Allies.

The R&D factories do not belong on the map in games where Japan is human. It is for the AI. The AI will not expand Japanese production so it requires the R&D factories in order to have production of those types later on. If it reduces Japanese aircraft production for human it is only setting it to what the human player should actually have. He will increase production. If he gets the free R&D as well he is producing 2 or 3 times what Japan could have been producing.

The Japanese player has to decide what factories to use for R&D and when to change production from 1 type to another and what to expand.

Any future scenarios designed for human players should remove the R&D and upgrade paths for airgroups.
R&D for Allies does not matter since the Allied player is unable to alter production.

[Oznoyng]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, I am playing a scenario 26 as the Allies.

The R&D factories do not belong on the map in games where Japan is human. It is for the AI. The AI will not expand Japanese production so it requires the R&D factories in order to have production of those types later on. If it reduces Japanese aircraft production for human it is only setting it to what the human player should actually have. He will increase production. If he gets the free R&D as well he is producing 2 or 3 times what Japan could have been producing.

The Japanese player has to decide what factories to use for R&D and when to change production from 1 type to another and what to expand.

Any future scenarios designed for human players should remove the R&D and upgrade paths for airgroups.
R&D for Allies does not matter since the Allied player is unable to alter production.

I think you need to keep the factories, but reduce their sizes to (1) x 0 and let the Japanese player expand from there. I would like to have a game option that turns auto-convert off.

Not 100 percent sure I understand your suggestion on upgrades. I assume your goal is to eliminate autoconversion of plants. There are two ways to specify upgrades in the editor: by aircraft and by airgroup. Auto-conversion of plants is driven off the upgrade paths in the aircraft file, not the airgroup file.

Eliminating upgrade paths causes a big problem. Unfortunately, there are upgrade paths with multiple upgrades. For instance, you go from A5M4 -> A6M2 -> A6M5 -> A6M8 -> A7M2. If you eliminate aircraft upgrade paths, then you can only specify one upgrade for a squadron. You can allow an A5M4 Daitai to go to A6M2, but once it turns into an A6M2, there is no upgrade path to turn it into an A6M5.

On the other hand, restricting the ability to control upgrade paths for an individual airgroup doesn't seem to accomplish anything. Am I missing something?

My final concern is a question of whether the resource/oil situation/expansion costs needs to be looked at. Right now, comverting factories comes at zero cost to Japan. What you are proposing would mean millions of supply expended by Japan to convert factories. Unless you feel Japan gets too much supply in the game, then the costs of factory conversion needs to come down.

[esteban]

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng


My final concern is a question of whether the resource/oil situation/expansion costs needs to be looked at. Right now, comverting factories comes at zero cost to Japan. What you are proposing would mean millions of supply expended by Japan to convert factories. Unless you feel Japan gets too much supply in the game, then the costs of factory conversion needs to come down.

Repairing damaged or "converting" factories and resource/oil centers takes a lot of supplies. From what I can see, 300-400 supplies per day for each hex where repairs are occurring, just to keep the repairs going.

I think that's excessive.

[2ndACR]

Almost forgot:

Halt construction of CV Shinano and the 3rd Yamato BB he added.

Accelerate construction of the first CV and CVL to arrive. Remember to return the construction to normal when about 7 days out for safety.

Once the first CV has arrived, I accelerate construction on the 2nd.

[Captain Cruft]

ORIGINAL: Mogami
The R&D factories do not belong on the map in games where Japan is human. It is for the AI.

Is this the official position? No blame on the testers but if this the case then it should have been clearly stated at game release time. Makes a vast difference to things ...

[mogami]

Hi, The problem is number of scenarios. We really needed (and did not realize this) a scenario for when Japan is player controlled and when Japan is AI controlled.
As it turns out the AI Japan is too weak and the player Japan is too strong. This is simply because the AI will not touch production, redeploy units between HQ, Change objectives in reaction to enemy moves (as fast as a human )
While human Japanese players do not use the historic turn 1, alter production, Launch attacks in China (where the Chinese where made weak to prevent them from overrunning the Japanese AI. Human controlled China can react to human Japanese movements and the Japanese AI has very limited intents in China but AI controlled China is helpless against human controlled Japanese.)
We need scenario designers to make files for every possbile player assignment. (3 files per scenario)
When setting up AI side you need to increase supply at certain loctions. Move units to final destinations because the AI might not do this. (Example:AI controlled Allies should have Americal Divison on map Noumea on turn 1. Just have it reduced in number of ready elements of TOE) Because the AI will never send the unit to Noumea by a safe route if it does so at all after the human Japanese player sets up airfields in South Pacific along route. (The Marine Division should just be placed in Brisbane or Sydney)

The idea is to help the AI be prepared to react to the human player with a shorter delay and when better forces. Of course we lose much of the historic element but we make the AI able to fight better.

But then of course if a player loads this scenario and runs the Allies against AI Japanese he will have even more of an advantage then normal.

When we were testing the scenarios we (the testers) never sought to solve the problems the Japanese faced by increasing production to levels that competed with Allies. We just left the R&D alone and did not expand the other factories. (very limited expansion did occur of course) The end result would have been Japanese production reached historic levels at historic times.
However if Japanese players convert even the smaller R&D factories to producing current models while they expand the existing factories they have Japanese production at 1944 levels in 1942.
At first glance it appears the Japanese can produce several times their actual output because players are eyeing the R&D factories. Also many players spend their supply expanding arms and vehicle factories early in game. This is not a major concern because this carries a cost. (there will be a supply shortage)
Japanese players will be a lot better off when they learn not to place too much hope in Japanese production. You only need enough to fill out airgroups and keep some in pool.
Building 500 A6M2 per month does not in the end do anything usefull because you only have so many groups and so many pilots. Just build what you need. (3 or 4 Daitai worth per month is more then enough and that is only 108 ac per month)

[Captain Cruft]

I appreciate that there are good reasons for AI and PBEM scenarios to be different. What I am asking is if the developers' official position is that PBEM players should only use scenarios that have the R&D factories completely removed?

Of course that question will not be answered ... So, do the proposals include substituting extra zero capacity factories for the R&D ones? It's not so much the capacity as having lots of separate factories that matters.

BTW it does seem strange to include R&D in the manual when human players "shouldn't" be using it.

[kaiser73]

What i don't understand is why you say Japan has advantages in PBEM. yes, prolly japan has more research factrories than historically had, and, if you convert to producing, you can get in theory and higher production rate.

However, as you know better than me, constrains to japanese air production aren't the factories but the engine factories (you can order 500 zero/month, but you will never keep up with the engines needed) and the pilots.

So, regardless of Japanese air factories, you can't build more than X number of ac/month, unless you say that engine factories are more than historic ones too.

So, by eliminating the research factories in PBEM game you aren't limiting Japanese production of aircrafts. you are just reducing flexibility for the japanese player (which i think adds some changes to games..otherwise why giving production to japan if you put so many constrains that at the end most of Japan players do the same thing?)

I mean (correct me if i am wrong), if i as japanese player wonna get a '44 production in '42 i have to (as the game is now):
1) Convert Research factories in production ones (which costs me supplies and time and reduced size)
2) Increase like hell engine factories (expecially nakajima)

So i have to spend to get more production, regardless of how many research factories i have. and this only in '42...in '43 i will be limited by resources and oil, and all those factories become useless anyway.

By eliminating the research factories, the only difference would be that,i have also to lose more time if i want to change production cause the changed factory (that is a producing one and not a reserach one) would be to be repaired. but is this fair then? on turn 1 why not letting the Japan player setting *the first turn only* each factory what to produce ?

I honestly see the research factories for japanese player more a possible risk than an advantage. if you exploit them, you end up with having more ac than needed or flied by shitty pilots. you spend resources to get increase the rate (cause you must rise the engine factories too) and all this to see in '43 that you won't be able to buiold more anyway cause your resources and oil are limited.

the only advantage with current system is that Japan player has some flexibility to varies production on turn 1.
so at least, please, keep research factories to size 1 at least or give japan player on turn 1 poccibility to convert factories at no cost and instant repair so you can set some production plans. after all, turn one doesn't simulate all the effort done before?

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

ORIGINAL: Mogami
The R&D factories do not belong on the map in games where Japan is human. It is for the AI.

Is this the official position? No blame on the testers but if this the case then it should have been clearly stated at game release time. Makes a vast difference to things ...

This whole thing of AI vs human players was never really addressed in the manual or pre-release literature at all. It strikes as a bit odd that AI play is so drastically altered from standard human play. Or did they simply not predict very well how most humans would choose to play? In most wargames, the AI is coded to play pretty close to what the developers feel is the way a relatively experienced majority of humans would choose to play the game. It seems here they either purposely dumbed the AI down to play only a very rigidly historical game regardless of the fact that humans would choose to play very unhistorically, or they just did not predict that most humans would choose to play Japan in most aggressive, over-reaching style possible within the rules.

And maybe most humans are choosing that style of play because most of us have not progressed very far in the game so far in our PBEM games. If we are to believe Frag's posts about the costs of overreaching by the Japanese player, all these AAR's in PBEM games are going to begin to show Allied advances in 1943 that are accelerated over history as these Japanese advances in 1942 are. After that, players might not choose to be so aggressive as the Japanese player....

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

I appreciate that there are good reasons for AI and PBEM scenarios to be different. What I am asking is if the developers' official position is that PBEM players should only use scenarios that have the R&D factories completely removed?

Of course that question will not be answered ... So, do the proposals include substituting extra zero capacity factories for the R&D ones? It's not so much the capacity as having lots of separate factories that matters.

BTW it does seem strange to include R&D in the manual when human players "shouldn't" be using it.

This is where I get lost in the "intent" thing. We have Mog telling us now that R&D shouldn't even be in the game at all for human players, yet nowhere did I ever read of this in the manual or pre-release literature on the game. I think a lot of purchasers bought the game with the notion that Japanese R&D was one of the really BIG selling points of the whole thing. The ability to produce a lot more of a lot better a/c than they did historically is half the fun for many. We are now being told that feature a lot of players think is coolest thing about the whole game, is one they should not be using at all if they are playing Japan as a human????

Sorry, but I just don't get it?

[Captain Cruft]

Is it possible that the game was designed around the AI rather than the reverse? At least partially anyway. Was primary testing not done with Computer vs Computer games?

Personally I don't really mind either way. I am just seeking clarity as to what the rumoured "PBEM Campaign" scenario will be like ...

[mogami]

Hi, I think the AI was set up to more closely follow the actual progress of Pacific War and not to invent new plans. All the reinforcements and ship arrivals are historic.

The Japanese player can still do R&D he just has to use one of the real factories. As pointed out he can build more airframes then engines. (although I don't see an engine problem myself because there is a lot of room for expansion here)

Really folks there should not be any problem with Japanese aircraft production. Since you cannot create new groups you only have to provide the for the ones you are given.
It is very simple to count how many engines of what type you need and expand to meet the demand. You don't need to expand airframe production all that much to maintain your airgroups. No matter how you slice it when combat loss exceeds xxx per month your airforces is going to decline because of pilot skill not aircraft numbers.

I think when hyper Japanese meets hyper Allied this favors the Japanese. Simply because he has the greater force ratio early on.

I think the way to play the Allied side is to simply do it like historical. First you are afraid for US West Coast. So you provide for the defnese here. When that is secure you fear for Hawaii. Over flow from West Coast moves to Hawaii. When that is secure you fear for Midway and other islands. If they are already gone you move to the next base still under your control. But each time you look to provide for defense of another base you have already completly insured the safety of all the bases behind it.
At some point in time two events are going to take place.

First the Japanese will bounce off one of your bases and second you will run out of bases under your control that require further defensive resources.

When the Japanese can no longer win local battles with ease the Japanese player will have 2 choices.
1. Switch to defense
2. Mass for Attack at single point.

Once you have prepared defense of all bases the excess and future arrival units will be used to stop the mass Japanese attack or conduct offensive operations against the Japanese defense. There will be a period with no (or very limited) contact between opposing forces as each side races to complete preparations.
If the Japanese have suffered a serious reverse when they bounced off your prepared defense then you will have a better understanding of which likely course the Japanese will take and where you need to shift forces to exploit the situation.

Against hyper Japanese the Allied player needs to be a rock. Moving units forward where the Japanese player destroys them only prolongs his period of superiority. Many of the Allied AAR against AI would fail againt a hyper Japanese human. (all these movements of troops to Canton and Rabaul and strong defense of Rangoon and in general moving into areas where Japan can have a massive edge in air power in just a few turns)
The Allied player needs to defend from the rear forward. If the Japanese take a base so what? at long as he did not also destroy Allied material in the process it does not matter.
The war is not going to follow anything close to historic path as far as locations and timing. (Thats the one thing the Japanese player will avoid at all cost)
Don't feed the beast by rushing forward. The Japanese advance is like an avalance. It will go just so far before it exhausts all it's engery. While It will sweep away everything in it's path it loses much of it's effect if it just encounters open empty space.

Allied players have 3 missions.

1. Avoid 4-1 VP ratio
2. Be ready in Mid/late 1943 to open super offensive directed at securing B-29 airfields in range of Japan.
3. Bushwhack the Japanese when he over extends. And all Japanese think of occuping territory will over extend. They cannot avoid this. The Pacific is too large for Japan to occupy unless they also destroy all the enemy units in the process. But the trap for the Allied player is those Japanese who are not interested in aquiring bases but who target the enemy material. Don't provide them with targets.

[ZOOMIE1980]

I'm really kind of curious what the user community reaction is going to be once the bulk of players playing the main campaign scenarios get into 1943 and start to find out their over-aggressive Japanese play early on, has put them in a really bad way, supply-wise, at the worst possible time. If we all believe what we are being told, I can see Allied players being just as over-aggressive as Japanese players and an accelerated re-conquest as well. All that massive R&D overplay won't matter at all once the supply runs out and the bombing starts.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Almost forgot:

Halt construction of CV Shinano and the 3rd Yamato BB he added.

The Shinano IS the 3rd Yamato Class BB!

[mogami]

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

I'm really kind of curious what the user community reaction is going to be once the bulk of players playing the main campaign scenarios get into 1943 and start to find out their over-aggressive Japanese play early on, has put them in a really bad way, supply-wise, at the worst possible time. If we all believe what we are being told, I can see Allied players being just as over-aggressive as Japanese players and an accelerated re-conquest as well. All that massive R&D overplay won't matter at all once the supply runs out and the bombing starts.

Hi, I am interested in seeing 1943 as well. What are the Japanese who rush to grab Lunga and Noumea going to do when the USN comes through Kwajalean or Entiwetok making those bases useless supply drains.

Or the Allied player avoids them and reduces Rabaul to rubble and builds Wewak into a springboard towards the empty Philippine Islands.

Bases are only important for 2 reasons.

1. The promote your future operations.
2. They prevent/inhibit enemy operations.

Just because a base was vital in the actual war does not mean it will be important in WITP.
Iwo Jima can support a size 6 airfield. That is large enough for B-17. What would be the impact of 200 B-17 there in 1943? (supposing a Japanese player had stranded his LCU at faraway bases and the IJN was too weak to support any invasion to retake the island)

Each game is going to follow it's own path. Ships will be lost in one that survive in another. If the Japanese lose 4 or 5 CV in 1942 the Allied player will be on the offensive months before Allied players that have lost their CV while the Japanese retain theirs.

One thing Japanese players should never forget. While it is easy to get your units to bases early in the game when there is no allied air power in the area it is another matter to get them out once the Allies have moved into place. It is always a question of who can do the most harm. If a Japanese base is really set up to inflict damage on the Allied player (or the other way around) The Allied player will attack the supports not the base. In order to be an effective base all the supporting bases in the chain have to be maintained.

If you close one avenue of approach you force the enemy into finding a new route. Japan has to close all the routes or the forces employed closing one will go to waste.

I think there are several types of players. Japanese players who aim to out last the Allied player and still be around when the turns run out. And Japanese players who intend on conquering the entire map. Both can defeat the AI but only 1 has a chance in PBEM/hotseat against an Allied player who knows how to fight a defense and covert to offensive at the proper time. The Allied player can be aggressive in WITP he just has to do it correctly. He can make 1943 a lot easier by inflicting damage on the Japanese in 1942.

And I think your right about another issue. I don't think any Japanese have yet gotten themselves into a supply shortage. One where a major force is lost because of reduced effectivness from lack of supply. This will happen. (I hope not to me)