Matrix Games Forums

[font="Verdana"]Luzon[/font]
______________________________________________________________________________
Here is the situation. I still chuckle a bit when I remember Erik being upset I had stacked Portland Roads to the roof. Yet he was quick to do the same thing at Rabaul, Rangoon, Bangkok and Manila [:)]

Not blaming mind you. Just a humorous observation! [:)]

The presence of Clark/Manila forces me to send troops in the manner I do. Small trickle. He can likely penetrate any LRCAP I throw up using heavy escort from Manila. So the only thing to do is to do it in a trickle for now. I must make it so costly for little gain Erik just gives up.

[font="Verdana"]Air losses[/font]
______________________________________________________________________________

[font="Verdana"]Allied Fighter pools[/font]
______________________________________________________________________________

Can you remind us which scenario this is?

Roger

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

The only thing allies can hope to achieve is local air superiority. A lot of the decent Japanese aircraft have high service rating so as you know the only thing you can do is sweep, sweep, bomb and keep the local airbase closed. LRCAP is not harmless but it is less effective and vulnerable..

It's the only thing you can do. Allied air strategy? "concentration of force"...

Next time I play a scenario 2 game I'm going consider asking for modified allied production rates or PDU off..

Problem is I can´t really afford more sweeping. Took only a week of sweeping at Eriks LRCAP in Thailand to gut the USAAF. The Japanese air force on the other hand was completely unphased by the losses. Erik probably lost somewhere around 800-1200 fighters in that time. Yet there were never even a sign of wavering.

I share you sentiment on PDU OFF. Or somehow limiting the number of Japanese pilots.

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3

Can you remind us which scenario this is?

Roger

Hi Roger,

This is SCEN 1. So the allied players playing SCEN 2 have it 3 times worse then I have. Only hope for them is that the Japanese player crash the economy.

I agree ops losses for transports are terrible. I can understand if they were all flying the hump but not all of mine are. I kinda agree that the ac numbers are a downer. Maybe we should start a thread and have guys from both sides hash out some ac numbers for the allies.

I still like Nemo's old idea of putting additional Allied Factories on the map that could be expanded (as long as you could get the supplies to them) to somewhat offset the disparity in production flexibility.

I do like that idea also paullus

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

I agree ops losses for transports are terrible. I can understand if they were all flying the hump but not all of mine are. I kinda agree that the ac numbers are a downer. Maybe we should start a thread and have guys from both sides hash out some ac numbers for the allies.

+1. Its not the plane as in the C-47 its the mission. I pay particular attention to plane and pilot fatigue, plus exp lvl of teh pilots. Still with that in mind and keeping them low/high exp. i take lot higher ops loses doing a tranport mission than a bombing mission the same distance. All things given i dont get much flak on transport missions between 2 friendly bases as i do on bombing mission and still its the same.

Rasmus

The problem with that idea is that the allies have unlimited supply. I´m not kidding when I say unlimited. I have 99,3 million supply on map. If I could increase airplane production using supply...Even if the cost was 100.000 supply per point I could expand it to almost a thousand airplanes per month. If I did that to the P47 line...I would sweep away any Japanese opposition in a couple of days.

The problem here is that Japanese flexibility unbalance things in unintended ways. You don´t fix that by adding flexibility to the other side. Things would become even more hopeless to balance. You need to either take away the Japanese flexibility by playing with PDU OFF or do something to limit the impact of playing with PDU ON.

I might sound like a broken record by I´m absolutely convinced that the best and easiest way to do this is to limit the availability of japanese pilots. You have to throw something in the mix that does away with Japans ability to completely disregard losses. That is what upsets not only balance but also gameplay.

Personally I´m still convinced BOTH players will have a more fun experience playing with PDU OFF. It would do away with a lot of the silly things we see in the game right now. The easiest way to do away with all the crazy things I see in the air war right now is to play it in the way it was intended.

I won´t play with PDU ON again. Sadly most Japanese players (I know of only one exception) believe that they HAVE TO play with PDU ON to achieve something. I think they are wrong and they have only grown used to having unlimited planes and pilots. I´m absolutely certain a skilled Japanese player can achieve the same results without just throwing numbers into the grinder to overwhelm allied plane pools.

Does the initial experience of Japanese pilots decrease as the war goes on? I mean, towards the end, the Japanese were putting pilots in the air that barely had more than a few hours of flying time....so, say in mid-1944, if the Japanese player has sustained massive losses, the new pilots in the pool start off with experience of like 20 or 30, for example? Perhaps decreasing as low as 10 in some cases, for really massive losses over and over again?

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I share you sentiment on PDU OFF. Or somehow limiting the number of Japanese pilots.

Or not agreeing to HRs which neuter Allied models that really could do that.

Just sayin'.

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

I agree ops losses for transports are terrible. I can understand if they were all flying the hump but not all of mine are. I kinda agree that the ac numbers are a downer. Maybe we should start a thread and have guys from both sides hash out some ac numbers for the allies.

To be fair I see very bad ops losses for Mavis models too.

My transports flying the Hump are always on a minimum of 50% Rest so the airframe fatigue can be addressed. Not a perfect solution, but it helps.

ORIGINAL: paullus99

Does the initial experience of Japanese pilots decrease as the war goes on? I mean, towards the end, the Japanese were putting pilots in the air that barely had more than a few hours of flying time....so, say in mid-1944, if the Japanese player has sustained massive losses, the new pilots in the pool start off with experience of like 20 or 30, for example? Perhaps decreasing as low as 10 in some cases, for really massive losses over and over again?

Real war pilots only had a few hours because of av gas shortages. Not an issue in the game. When flying is based on LI supply and the training gains appear to be non-linear such that level 20 pilots can get into the high 40s in a couple of weeks, I don't think nerfing experience is going to work.

I think one must either play with PDU off, cripple HI production early (hit the Oil), or play a non-air-focused game and accept higher ground casualties.

ORIGINAL: paullus99

Does the initial experience of Japanese pilots decrease as the war goes on? I mean, towards the end, the Japanese were putting pilots in the air that barely had more than a few hours of flying time....so, say in mid-1944, if the Japanese player has sustained massive losses, the new pilots in the pool start off with experience of like 20 or 30, for example? Perhaps decreasing as low as 10 in some cases, for really massive losses over and over again?

That was my hope. But I have seen no lessening in Japanese capabilities. I´m still hovering around the same ratios I did in 43. That being said I have no clue how it really looks on the Japanese side. Erik could be balancing on the verge or collapse when it comes to pilots. But I don´t think so.

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Or not agreeing to HRs which neuter Allied models that really could do that.

Just sayin'.

Not sure what you mean by this?

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Or not agreeing to HRs which neuter Allied models that really could do that.

Just sayin'.

Not sure what you mean by this?

Don't agree to maneuver band HRs that don't let the P-47 and the Mustang do their designed thing. In my game I've eaten hundreds of Oscar sweeps at 39,000 feet with my P-40s moving like pigs at 20,000. You better believe when I get those two models they're running high and fast.

P47s are at 42k. This HR has been a big help for me in 43 and 44. So it doesnt explain the result. I would be worse off without it.

I think there is an opportunity to look at the big picture. maybe an IJFB can chime in but given the level of IJ fighter production and losses about how much HI would the IJ typically have saved? Joc should have the world cut off and the IJ should be using the HI reserves at this point? I would assume that the IJ economy is about to have its day of reckoning ?

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

P47s are at 42k. This HR has been a big help for me in 43 and 44. So it doesnt explain the result. I would be worse off without it.

Clearly then I don't understand your HR. 42k is the max altitude for the P-47. How is that the second-best MV band? The last modifier is at "greater than 32k feet."