Rushing the N1K1 a mistake?

[Elladan]

Wishful thinking. Have you actually checked that in game PaxMondo? Those squadrons do not have any Jack or George upgrades in the list. Nor they have A6M3 which is the only model from this series that allows such upgrade.
From what I see in WitpTracker and in game there are 4 N1K1-J and 4 A6M2 reinforcement squadrons that can use George. All come late in the war (15 Nov 43 to 13 Dec 44). Add to that 3 or 4 squadrons that can use A6M3 and that's it.
At least 10 of those squadrons (those belonging to 13th Air Flotilla) are permanently restricted but I guess it doesn't matter that much in 44/45.

[stuman]

Good info. I had forgotten about some of the restrictions and was heading to over build.

[Swenslim]

Hm, maybe developers can lit some light on this problem ? This is WAD or some patch 2 bug ?

[viberpol]

In old WITP a new frame and/or an upgrade sometimes "opened a new path"...
Take a look at the upgrade of float fighters in "Thousands Mile" scenario --> A6M2-N can upgrade into A6M5.
Let hope it works like that, because I just checked the "upgrade to" option of the Tracker, and I see even less groups able to upgrade with J2M... [&:]
But I think Tracker helps only to find the PDU OFF upgrade, PDU ON can give more choices switching between the frames.

[n01487477]

ORIGINAL: viberpol

In old WITP a new frame and/or an upgrade sometimes "opened a new path"...
Take a look at the upgrade of float fighters in "Thousands Mile" scenario --> A6M2-N can upgrade into A6M5.
Let hope it works like that, because I just checked the "upgrade to" option of the Tracker, and I see even less groups able to upgrade with J2M... [&:]
But I think Tracker helps only to find the PDU OFF upgrade, PDU ON can give more choices switching between the frames.

Sorry incorrect ... we do both (PDU off and on)and unless I programmed it incorrectly I think I got it right by examining each upgrade option as shown in the editor. Pls let me know if this is not the case.

[JuanG]

The issue is that the planes that are flagged as 'Carrier Capable' can only be used by groups that start or arrive with another 'Carrier Capable' plane type. Likewise, the squadrons that arrive with 'Non Carrier Capable' planes, can only upgrade to 'Non Carrier Capable' planes. The other type are not even shown in the update list. This confused me severely when I added some new plane types to my mod and they werent showing up until I realised this.

Not sure your logic for tracker is taking that into account, as I've never tried it, but that seems to be the things that is causing the confusion.

[viberpol]

n01487477 -- if I miss something, please advice. [&:]
But judging by the screen you attached, there is a column named "PDU Off Upgrade". I wonder if the "PDU ON Upgrade" paths are quite different. One airframe can be upgraded with many other types, not only one.
So I believe that with PDU on -- say S-701 Hikotai can not only upgrade to N1K2 but to J2M5 as well. [&:]

[n01487477]

ORIGINAL: viberpol


n01487477 -- if I miss something, please advice. [&:]
But judging by the screen you attached, there is a column named "PDU Off Upgrade". I wonder if the "PDU ON Upgrade" paths are quite different. One airframe can be upgraded with many other types, not only one.
So I believe that with PDU on -- say S-701 Hikotai can not only upgrade to N1K2 but to J2M5 as well. [&:]

You are correct, but I'm filtering just n1k1 upgrade, if I change the filter it will pick that up too. The function works by looking at an array of numbers corresponding to the upgradable plane types as found in the editor. Hence it's just finding this one at present.

[Sardaukar]

Service rating 3 makes that N1K2-J George look like a really bad idea...

[viberpol]

ORIGINAL: n01487477

ORIGINAL: viberpol

In old WITP a new frame and/or an upgrade sometimes "opened a new path"...
Take a look at the upgrade of float fighters in "Thousands Mile" scenario --> A6M2-N can upgrade into A6M5.
Let hope it works like that, because I just checked the "upgrade to" option of the Tracker, and I see even less groups able to upgrade with J2M... [&:]
But I think Tracker helps only to find the PDU OFF upgrade, PDU ON can give more choices switching between the frames.

Sorry incorrect ... we do both (PDU off and on)and unless I programmed it incorrectly I think I got it right by examining each upgrade option as shown in the editor. Pls let me know if this is not the case.

Well, your tool is great, just great, but I feel it cannot cover the complexity of upgrade.

Take Yokosuka Ku-T3 -- the first squadron on your list. From what you attached, we can see, that a ff squadron CAN be upgraded into N1K1. OK? OK.
But take a look when you change the option "Special: upgrade to" to search groups upgradable to J2M, you find only... two of them? [&:] Did I do the selection OK?

If yes.. this is not true.
Even the same Yokosuka Ku T-3 CAN be upgraded into J2M!
See, I made a simple test.

Change the group delay to be immediately available, change the delay of J2M, and N1K1, A6Ms and add some planes to the pool. Then upgrade the Yokosuka Ku-T3 group into A6M3a, THEN A6M5, THEN N1K1... now new path opens and you can upgrade the plane into J2M even though at the begining you seem not to have such an upgrade possible -- as can be seen from the screen from Tracker selection I attach.
I think this is because of the option "08 - Upgrade 9, 09 - Upgrade 10" etc. in the editor whatever it means.
As I said before, sometimes, some upgrade can open a new path. But it looks as if some groups will never be able to upgrade into Georges or Jacks... as JuanG noted maybe this has sth do to with "Carrier capable" trait?

[n01487477]

Viberpol,
you are completely correct and I will have to do some more testing to see if I can perfect the complexities.

Thanks for the heads up [8D]

[stuman]

Lol, this is one of threads that after reading, I realize that I know less now than I originally thought that I did [:)]

Ignorance is bliss, and also dangerous.

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

George is an IJN plane primarily designed for Japanese carriers.  Whilst I accept there were very few cases of it operating from a flight deck in 44-45 that doesn't hide the fact that it was intended as such, and if you can't assign it to carrier capable squadrons then it does seem to be a bit of a fault.
Having said that, even when the George was available,  the IJN kept on soldering on with the tried & trusted Zero right thorugh to the end of '44,  even now the design was hopelessly obsolete and the George was clearly better, faster and heavier armoured.  Obviously they just didn't want to abandon the formula that had brought them so much success in '41/'42...

Shiden had one big drawback compared to Zero: not being available in significant numbers. Reliability problems of N1K1-J, and IIRC, competing for the limited supply of engines with Ki-84 did not help. To be honest, considering that N1K wasn't meant for carriers, Navy would have done better by borrowing some common sense somewhere, ordering Ki-84s under a new designation for themselves, and keeping N1K only if the choice is between getting Shidens from Kawanishi and not getting any fighters within a reasonable timeframe.

[xj900uk]

KI-84?  Wasn't that the Frank? Supposed to be better than the George, but again very limited in numbers and deployment (possibly due to lack of engines)

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

KI-84?  Wasn't that the Frank? Supposed to be better than the George, but again very limited in numbers and deployment (possibly due to lack of engines)

with nearly 3400 Franks built I wouldn´t call it "limited in numbers" though.

[xj900uk]

I've read a few books saying that the Frank was probably the best of the Japanese fighters to see service (excepting the Reppu/Sam), but it's deployment outside the Home Islands was not very large.  Have a feeling that a lot were built but not used much operationally, due to lack of fuel or trained pilots (and those that were around preferred to solder on with the obsolete Zero)
Was the Frank origianlly designed for carrier work?  I don't think it was ever deployed on one but I think it was originally intended to go on a flat-top...

[Xxzard]

No, I don't believe the Frank was ever intended to go on carriers. If you look at its lines, its rather similar to the oscar-tojo series, which are assuredly land based fighters.

Armament on ki-84 was good, and it was decently maneuverable, so it has to be the best plane the Japanese had in any numbers.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Xxzard

No, I don't believe the Frank was ever intended to go on carriers. If you look at its lines, its rather similar to the oscar-tojo series, which are assuredly land based fighters.

Armament on ki-84 was good, and it was decently maneuverable, so it has to be the best plane the Japanese had in any numbers.

The Ki-84 Hayate (Frank) was an army fighter (hence the resemblance to the Oscar), it was never designed for carrier use at all, the IJN had no interest in it. You have to keep in mind that the separation of the IJA and IJN was probably worse than it was in the US...no cooperation at all, even with equipment.

[PaxMondo]

I think someone mentioned above that the George was intended for carriers.  I've never found any mention of that in my reading.  Can anyone confirm with a source?  Thanks.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Shark7
... You have to keep in mind that the separation of the IJA and IJN was probably worse than it was in the US...no cooperation at all, even with equipment.

IMO, I doubt you could overstate this. For example, the IJA had a really pretty good 20mm cannon (H-105? i beleive), but the IJN persevered with theirs, even though not as good. They could have combined their design resources and gotten new designs out faster in the war, but failed to do so. So instead of new designs in early '43 when they might have made a difference, they came out in late '44 when it was already decided.

Course, as you point out, the USAAF/USN was really not much better.