Matrix Games Forums

Speaking as an AFB reading this, you guys probably would need more Betties and less Zeroes than in WITP.

Fighter vs fighter combat is considerably less bloody than it was, but the Betty really is a flying zippo now.  50 a month?  You need more than that.  A lot more.

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

Speaking as an AFB reading this, you guys probably would need more Betties and less Zeroes than in WITP.

Fighter vs fighter combat is considerably less bloody than it was, but the Betty really is a flying zippo now.  50 a month?  You need more than that.  A lot more.

I am inclined to agree.

Been thinking about ship class and best use over the weekend.  Then I realized how many bases with resources and/or oil have small ports in the SRA.  Those small xAKs/TKs are going to be needed to get the goods from many of the bases.  Those tiny ports can't handle much tonnage or large ships.  I haven't crunched numbers (and I forgot to list the port sized in the important bases in the SRA ([:@])) so I have to wait until tonight.  Those little ships are going to be important though.

Yep, and it's gonna take at least a size 6 port to make a decent hub.

I think maximum tonnage docked is:
 
size 1: 6,000
size 2: 12,000
size 3: 24,000
size 4: 48,000
size 5: 60,000
size 6: 84,000
 
since all ports can be built up to 3 at least (at a cost), and I don´t think there is a single resource base that cannot be built up to size 4 ports, I don´t think the need for small freighters is all that urgent. As long as a base has port size 1, you can use a mid-size (3,000-5,000 ton) freighter plus an escort or two.
 
I agree, though,that there aren´t many candidates for hubs. There are, however, a few well-developed ports in the DEI, with repair shipyards, some industry of their own, etc. Since it is more efficient to let local industry convert what they can, and ship only the rest to the Home Islands, I think these bases make natural hubs. These bases are, IIRC, Singapore, Batavia, Soerabaja, Manila and Hong Kong.
 
On the home islands, I think it´s best not to use Osaka as a destination, but instead leave its loading capacity for outbound deliveries. Depending on where the traffic comes from, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Tokyo make fairly good destination ports.

Depends on the procedure.
If you simply combine the small TFs to one big and send it home, the hub can be anywhere. Only if you tend to unload, you need a big harbour.

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Depends on the procedure.
If you simply combine the small TFs to one big and send it home, the hub can be anywhere. Only if you tend to unload, you need a big harbour.

I tend to offload at a hub and send the convoy back to get another load from the same base. Then the hub creates a large convoy to haul the stuff to another hub or final destination.

It was a no-brainer to unload under WITP. I'm re-thinking that under AE. Still leaning toward unloading for fuel efficiency purposes.

ORIGINAL: stuman

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

Speaking as an AFB reading this, you guys probably would need more Betties and less Zeroes than in WITP.

Fighter vs fighter combat is considerably less bloody than it was, but the Betty really is a flying zippo now.  50 a month?  You need more than that.  A lot more.

I am inclined to agree.

Well... Zeroes are much needed, as not enough Zeroes also means the zippos are lighted all over the place. But I agree that 50 is not enough. I did not consider that number enough in stock either. The numbers I am currently toying with are:

G4M1 factory: current, 25; increase to 50.
G3M2 factory: current, 22; increase to 44 OR change to G4M1 (becomes 15) and increase to 30... or 60.

110 G4M1 a month might be too much, but 80 sounds a lot more reasonable than 50 at this point.

Just random thoughts... still have to run them through a game or two to see if they hold up.

ORIGINAL: Mynok


It was a no-brainer to unload under WITP. I'm re-thinking that under AE. Still leaning toward unloading for fuel efficiency purposes.

Personally, I think it would be easier to keep the small TFs intact to move back and for forth between the base and hub, rather than have to recreate it each time I have to drain the base.

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

ORIGINAL: Mynok


It was a no-brainer to unload under WITP. I'm re-thinking that under AE. Still leaning toward unloading for fuel efficiency purposes.

Personally, I think it would be easier to keep the small TFs intact to move back and for forth between the base and hub, rather than have to recreate it each time I have to drain the base.

Precisely. It also means you can use shorter-ranged ships around the hubs, and save longer-ranged ones for moving stuff to the Home Islands.

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

ORIGINAL: Mynok


It was a no-brainer to unload under WITP. I'm re-thinking that under AE. Still leaning toward unloading for fuel efficiency purposes.

Personally, I think it would be easier to keep the small TFs intact to move back and for forth between the base and hub, rather than have to recreate it each time I have to drain the base.

Yep, that's the 'unload' model. As opposed to gathering the small ones into a big task force to go to the home islands with no unloading.

Ok guys let me see if I follow this correctly.

1. Use small freighters and tankers at the bottom of the chain to load the goods.
2 Send these to a central hub unload TF and deadhead it back for another load. Or reload with fuel and supplies if necessary
3 Create a TF with longer legged and larger capacity ships to head to the home islands or a closer hub to the islands
4 Unload those in the HI reload with fuel and or supply to send out to the forward areas.

Is this how I'm reading what you guys are saying?

ORIGINAL: grraven2004

Ok guys let me see if I follow this correctly.

1. Use small freighters and tankers at the bottom of the chain to load the goods.
2 Send these to a central hub unload TF and deadhead it back for another load. Or reload with fuel and supplies if necessary
3 Create a TF with longer legged and larger capacity ships to head to the home islands or a closer hub to the islands
4 Unload those in the HI reload with fuel and or supply to send out to the forward areas.

Is this how I'm reading what you guys are saying?

Basically, that's how I see it and plan to do it. The size of the TF (tonnage and capacity) will be based on the port size and the output at that base.

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

Speaking as an AFB reading this, you guys probably would need more Betties and less Zeroes than in WITP.

Fighter vs fighter combat is considerably less bloody than it was, but the Betty really is a flying zippo now.  50 a month?  You need more than that.  A lot more.

In Vanilla I make 150 a month...and that is by the middle of 1942. The land based Val/Kate units will be invulable as well most likely.

Japanese Air Production information ... to doodle on ...

http://sites.google.com/site/n01487477/Home

--Damian--

Thank you Damian, very usefull!

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Thank you Damian, very usefull!

Indeed, many thanks!!!

Japanese production i feel like a kid in a toy shop(with 2 cents) i am afraid to buy any thing in case it is to expensive.

Tiger!  

I cannot get the WitP Staff program to run on my machine - I think its an OS issue which I will be fixing this weekend, but can someone post or link a list of all resources, oil, etc... in the game ? I believe you can export this into an excel spreadsheet. I am using the Grand Campaign. There are far too many bases to do this manually. Many thanks.

Xargun