Matrix Games Forums

Edit: Double post deleted.

ORIGINAL: Rainer79

ORIGINAL: castor troy
I´m sure my opponent will find another IJA fighter for mass production... [;)]

I'm quite sure of that as well. [;)]

BTW the Dinah fighter variant - despite its other beautiful stats - has a similarly crappy cannon as its main armament.

my bets are on the Tony at the moment, perhaps I should hover the courser over your factories, but I guess it´s too early in our game yet.

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Rainer79

ORIGINAL: castor troy
I´m sure my opponent will find another IJA fighter for mass production... [;)]

I'm quite sure of that as well. [;)]

BTW the Dinah fighter variant - despite its other beautiful stats - has a similarly crappy cannon as its main armament.

my bets are on the Tony at the moment, perhaps I should hover the courser over your factories, but I guess it´s too early in our game yet.

The Tony, however, has an absolutely horrible service rating

ORIGINAL: String

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Rainer79



I'm quite sure of that as well. [;)]

BTW the Dinah fighter variant - despite its other beautiful stats - has a similarly crappy cannon as its main armament.

my bets are on the Tony at the moment, perhaps I should hover the courser over your factories, but I guess it´s too early in our game yet.

The Tony, however, has an absolutely horrible service rating

just as the Allied ac. 2 or 3 is the norm, while I´ve seen 1 as the norm for Japanese ac so far (as has the Tojo of above´s post). The AVG fighters have a 3, the Warhawk and all other frontline fighters have 2 at the moment and the Lightning has 3. Why advanced (like the Tojo of 44) gets a better service rating (means the best it could have) is a bit beyond me as the more and more faulty material for the Japanese later on should perhaps be reflected by a worse service rating. Surely not reflected by a better service rating than Allied ac IMO. Haven´t really checked later on Allied fighters about their service rating. Perhaps Thunderbolt and Co also all have 1 but I doubt that.

Try the ki-45, it was based on the me110, which was one of the best bomber destroyers the germans had.

ORIGINAL: Rainer79

ORIGINAL: castor troy
I´m sure my opponent will find another IJA fighter for mass production... [;)]

I'm quite sure of that as well. [;)]

BTW the Dinah fighter variant - despite its other beautiful stats - has a similarly crappy cannon as its main armament.

ORIGINAL: vonTirpitz
I think the accuracy of the pilot randomly dropping 40mm shells out of the cockpit is at least 3. [:D]
Seriously though, do cannons with such low accuracy ratings do better in strafing attacks or does that value affect all accuracy whether it be air-to-air or air-to-ground(sea)?

A question for PBEM JFBs that reached that date...
How is this Tojo model doing in game terms with it's (seemingly) crappy 40mm cannons? [&:]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

... Why advanced (like the Tojo of 44) gets a better service rating (means the best it could have) is a bit beyond me as the more and more faulty material for the Japanese later on should perhaps be reflected by a worse service rating. ...

Don't overlook the fact that the IJ a/c were mechanically much simpler than most allied a/c by design intent. This also is why performance, particularly at altitude doesn't match. Things like multi-stage super, multi-stage twin chargers, variable pitch props, fuel injection, etc. were not commonly used on most of the high production models (like Tojo which only had a 2 speed super charger and fixed pitch prop). Also, IJ stuck with air cooled design to a great extent (yes there are a few exceptions and they have the SR to prove it). IJ designers had the technology on most of these items to varying degrees, but chose NOT to use it. The lack of these items GREATLY lowers the maintenance requirements. At the same time, it also impacts performance and so you see the performance delta increase through the war. Frank comes along with multi-stage super and later with H2O/Meth injection and now you have a competitive fighter. You also see the service rating increase.

I beleive the SR to be pretty well distributed.

Hm...wonder what would happen if you strafe PB´s with this baby...

They are decent in strafing attacks but thats it.

ORIGINAL: Athius
Try the ki-45, it was based on the me110, which was one of the best bomber destroyers the germans had.

I did some small tests and IMHO, the best Allied heavy bombers killer is Shinden/George with it's 4 cannons. I think what an JFB need is the best gun value mixed with good accuracy. [:D]

Just tested with the Hundred Miles scenario comparing Tojos and Georges against unescorted Liberators, and the latter achieve 15-20 kills while the lighter Tojos get only about 2-5 kills with 10-12 damaged enemy planes. Georges get the outright kills. [X(]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: castor troy

... Why advanced (like the Tojo of 44) gets a better service rating (means the best it could have) is a bit beyond me as the more and more faulty material for the Japanese later on should perhaps be reflected by a worse service rating. ...

Don't overlook the fact that the IJ a/c were mechanically much simpler than most allied a/c by design intent. This also is why performance, particularly at altitude doesn't match. Things like multi-stage super, multi-stage twin chargers, variable pitch props, fuel injection, etc. were not commonly used on most of the high production models (like Tojo which only had a 2 speed super charger and fixed pitch prop). Also, IJ stuck with air cooled design to a great extent (yes there are a few exceptions and they have the SR to prove it). IJ designers had the technology on most of these items to varying degrees, but chose NOT to use it. The lack of these items GREATLY lowers the maintenance requirements. At the same time, it also impacts performance and so you see the performance delta increase through the war. Frank comes along with multi-stage super and later with H2O/Meth injection and now you have a competitive fighter. You also see the service rating increase.

I beleive the SR to be pretty well distributed.

This really meant nothing as the Japanese-especially shore based forward units were critically short of trained mechanics and spare parts. Simplicity or not, it was not uncommon for 50% or more of the aircraft at a forward base to be out of service due to mechanical problems or lack of spare parts.

The Americans for all of the complexity of their aircraft, were not usually short of mechanics and parts. This is what "trumped' the Japanese and kept more Allied aircraft in the air. Service ratings are the coolest part of the air war in our game, but the end result is that the Japanese player holds a tremendous advantage as he can return aircraft to service much quicker than the Allied player-already suffering from a shortage of planes and an unrealistic flood of japanese fighters and pilots. This is in fact, the exact reverse of the real situation where the Allies held a decided edge in keeping planes in operation.

Some have argued here that the Allies come out better due to more support in game, but I have yet to see that. I will admit the Japanese seem to have more operational losses in my game.

As for the Frank, on paper it was a tremendous aircraft and a beautiful design. In practice, production flaws and shortage of critical material made it very dangerous to fly it at the edge of the envelope as it could just simply break apart. It was not a war winning fighter. To be fair, if Japan were winning the war and not getting pounded into a fourth world scap heap, it is very probable that the frank would have been better made. [:D]

ORIGINAL: viberpol

ORIGINAL: vonTirpitz
I think the accuracy of the pilot randomly dropping 40mm shells out of the cockpit is at least 3. [:D]
Seriously though, do cannons with such low accuracy ratings do better in strafing attacks or does that value affect all accuracy whether it be air-to-air or air-to-ground(sea)?

A question for PBEM JFBs that reached that date...
How is this Tojo model doing in game terms with it's (seemingly) crappy 40mm cannons? [&:]

Unimpressive.

ORIGINAL: crsutton




This really meant nothing as the Japanese-especially shore based forward units were critically short of trained mechanics and spare parts.

Just focusing on one part of your reply ...

this is under player control and is modeled separately in the game. Bases short of av support and/or supplies will not keep a/c in service. The a/c themselves are, as you state, much simpler to maintain and therefore do in fact deserve a shorter service rating.

Having played as Japan through to 45, the only two army fighters you should be aiming to build in large numbers are the Tojo IIc and the Frank. The Tojo is a good all round performer and should be your front line fighter, the Frank is better but the service rating of 3 means it cannot remain serviceable at a base under constant attack. Forget all the Tony versions, they are a joke in AE.

The Navy George and Jack are good performers but very few sqds can be upgraded to them so dont build too many, and again the service rating of 3 does not lean to using them on the front line very often.