Page 2 of 2

RE: The J7W1

Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 5:43 pm
by Icedawg
ORIGINAL: TheLoneGunman

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Well, this is very useful information, SuluSea. Thanks again for running the tests to stoke this discussion. It's nice to have some realistic expectations for late war production aircraft.

Here's some lessons I've taken home:

Must have:

1. Tojo IIc

Very nice to have, but not irreplaceable:

1. Frank a-r
2. Ki-100
3. J7W1 Shinden

Plus or minus worthwhile:

1. Tony d model

Insufficient data:

1. Ki-83
2. Ki-201

Anyone disagree?

Well when you compare the Ki-61 with the Ki-84, the Ki-84 is overall a better aircraft since it can still take down bombers, but is much deadlier against Allied fighters. The only boon to the Ki-61 is that it is available much earlier and it's R&D carries over to the Ki-100.
I think personally, I'd invest most of my R&D into the Ki-84 to get it as quickly as possible, additional R&D would be diverted to the Ki-44 in order to get the IIc model developed ASAP. In the meantime, Ki-43s would serve primarily as bomber escort, but would be utilized for CAP and sweeps in emergencies and as a stop gap. Early model Ki-44s would do most of the CAP and sweep duties while the IIc is being researched.

Once the Ki-44 IIc is online, the R&D facilities that were previously dedicated to its development can be diverted to the Ki-83 or the Ki-201 since by this time they will be much closer to their actual development date and that will promote faster R&D rebuilding. The Ki-44 IIc takes over the role of the earlier model Tojos. Meanwhile the Ki-43s progress historically with no acceleration as they are not deemed to be critical. Newer models of the Ki-43 replace older ones in the role of bomber escort.

Once the Ki-84 is ready, it's gloves off time. The Frank should begin to phase out the Tojo as the Japanese Army Airforce's primary dogfighter, handling most if not all of the sweeps while the Ki-44 gets relegated to soley to CAP/Intercept duty. As Ki-84 numbers increase, it should also be able to handle the CAP/Interceptor role in a pinch.

Once all models of the Ki-84 have been researched, the R&D gets diverted to the Ki-201, since I'm assuming that the Ki-83 should be finished or nearly finished by that point.
If you focus on these few fighters, what else do you really need?

To me, the goal is to maximize the results from your R&D, and the best way to do that is to take advantage first of airframes that allow for a nice upgrade path, so that you can retain the fully built R&D facilities. Once those airframes are fully developed, then you can shift over to your late-model "dead end" research projects, and you'll be closer to their historical date so you'll see your R&D factories rebuild much faster than if you had tried to get them from Turn 1.

What do you guys think?

Couple quick questions:

1) What's the appeal of the Ki-100? If anything, isn't it a bit inferior to the Ki-44IIc? Since this Tojo model appears earlier in the war and it is the superior aircraft, why bother with the Ki-100?

2) Doesn't the Ki-201's service rating pretty much make it all but useless? Why bother building a plane that's only going to be able to get into the air a couple of times per week?

I'm probably missing some key insight into one or both of these planes as many very experienced players speak highly of them. But, just going by the stats, they don't seem to be worth producing to me. What am I missing?

RE: The J7W1

Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 12:57 pm
by Shark7
ORIGINAL: obvert
ORIGINAL: Shark7

It is an interceptor, not a dog-fighter. This plane shouldn't be dog-fighting, but rather attacking bombers with high speed 'slash and dash' attacks.

Again, I think it is important to have a mix of planes that are better at different things. You need manueverable fighters to deal with escorts, and fast, heavily armed (like the Shinden) to deal with bombers.

This all sounds along the lines I would think would be correct. But we don't really know unless tests are done. GJ, Nemo, Pax Mondo, or PzB can tell us their experiences, which are probably the best out there without actual tests, but GJ also has unbelievably strong pilots in many cases, which might skew results.

The questions is not whether this plane should be fighting other fighters, but what happens when it does? It will have to deal with them. You (obviously) can't set fighters to only intercept bombers. If you have the ideal mix of planes, what if your bomber killers all get wiped out by fighters before the bombers get there?

Isolated plane tests are a good beginning, but fighter v fighter, and mixes adding bombers with escort v fighters, or sweeps + bombers with escorts v a mix of fighters is really going to get closer to real in-game situations.

LoneGunman

Looking over the late-war aircraft, I don't even think I'd bother putting R&D into the Ki-83. It's available only a few months sooner than the Ki-201 (although its range is awesome!).

Even though the Ki-83 has great range, I don't see it as a dogfighter, but as a plane whose sole purpose is to shoot down B-29s, something I think the Ki-201 could do just as well if not better, and the Ki-201 could hold its own with just about any enemy fighter at the time.

I'm also averse to dedicating too much effort to twin engine fighters, if producing both the Ki-83 AND the Ki-201 that's two seperate twin engine fighters you'd need to be producing. I'd rather rely on the single-engine Ki-84 in the meantime and benefit from its R&D carryover for accelerating newer models.
From all I've heard in GJ's game with rader and Jzanes game, also against rader, the Ki-83 is good all around against fighters or bombers. But without testing or using it ourselves, it'll be tough to really know. How we see things by the stats might work sometimes, but might not give a completely clear picture until tests are done.

PS - Some of the GJ tests might change thinking about effective CAP as well. Still interested in why this plane had fewer losses than others. Is it the speed? Or something else?

I have the feeling this is where the game simply can't imitate history well. You'd send the cap in waves, just like the attackers would be in waves. Unfortunately, the game more or less assumes they are all there at once.

Take a look at the air battles over Europe. Even with dedicated Allied escorts, the Luftwaffe still managed to get its bomber killers like the Me-110 in to get at the bombers. In this game, the bomber busters would have to get through the escort no matter what, while in real life, the escort might be tied up dealing with smaller fighters.

RE: The J7W1

Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 1:34 pm
by SuluSea
Icedawg, you raise some good points regarding the Ki-100 v the Ki-44-IIc,

On the surface it looks like the Ki-100 would fare a little better against bombers and there's always the ability to convert to kamikaze if needed but the Ki-44-IIc looks like the better all around airframe when needed to take on both bombers and fighters.

I've been busy with setting up a first turn this week but this might be a good idea for a test at two different heights next week or so  to see how the weapons (also noting any climb rate difference) perform against heavy bombers. What do you all think?


Image


RE: The J7W1

Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 2:01 pm
by TheLoneGunman_MatrixForum
Yeah, after looking that over I wouldn't waste my time with the Ki-100 when the Ki-44 IIc is nearly as good if not better. Besides, the Frank will be available by that time as well.

RE: The J7W1

Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 2:49 pm
by crsutton
It is a toss up. Range is important and the Tony has greater range. Both are slow for late war but the Tojo has a great climb rate which I think might help with the bounce. The tony has good bomb load. So, a mix might not be bad. I compare them both to the Allied P40 and later the hellcat. A little obsolete eventually but useful at all times.

RE: The J7W1

Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:58 pm
by Elladan
Against bombers I would expect them to do about equally, perhaps with little better performance by Ki-100 due to the cannon. What would be really interesting and what would be a true seller for one of them is how they fare against sweeps and escorted bomber raids.