Growing up...

[jeffk3510]

GJ...Pax is also an expert in this field too

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

ok, let's start with the basics.... I'd like to play scen2, but i don't like the R&D at all (experiencing Shidens 1,5 years in advance is too much for me!)...but do you think playing with R&D off unbalances the game in s-favour of Japan? I mean...playing an "all-in-all" game...till the very bitter end

Can I suggest playing DaBabes B using Scenario 30?? I'm playing it as Allies vs Olorin (Nick). It's the same thing as Scenario 2 stock, but it was moved over to the DBB mod system. Yes, it is using extended map which doesn't change much and has all the benefits that come with DBB changes. I would suggest that you play with "Realistic R&D ON" as you would be unable to move airframe factories back and forth between production and R&D efforts. Once a R&D factory goes over to production, you cannot change it back.

Like Canoerebel (Dan) stated, John 3rd was able to play Japan successfully. He failed to mention that I took over his economy in his prior epic game vs CR in early 43 when he had almost run it into the ground back in the old WITP days. I got Tracker up and running with Damian looking over my shoulder when needed. I can probably do the same for you. [:D]

But this scenario 30 it has those stacking limits you mentioned before? Because i'm not that conviced...
Gotta understand which are all the changes made by DBB....

But is the whole R&D necessary? as far as i understood it, even if you don't research any future plane, you are gonna get it anyway when the official date arrives...is that true?

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

GJ...Pax is also an expert in this field too

Yup, i know, Pax and PzB... but i don't wanna bother the whole forum spreading PMs around the web [:D]...any help will be really appreciated anyway!!!

It's a whole new game playing japan...[X(]

[n01487477]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

ok, let's start with the basics.... I'd like to play scen2, but i don't like the R&D at all (experiencing Shidens 1,5 years in advance is too much for me!)...but do you think playing with R&D off unbalances the game in s-favour of Japan? I mean...playing an "all-in-all" game...till the very bitter end

Can I suggest playing DaBabes B using Scenario 30?? I'm playing it as Allies vs Olorin (Nick). It's the same thing as Scenario 2 stock, but it was moved over to the DBB mod system. Yes, it is using extended map which doesn't change much and has all the benefits that come with DBB changes. I would suggest that you play with "Realistic R&D ON" as you would be unable to move airframe factories back and forth between production and R&D efforts. Once a R&D factory goes over to production, you cannot change it back.

Like Canoerebel (Dan) stated, John 3rd was able to play Japan successfully. He failed to mention that I took over his economy in his prior epic game vs CR in early 43 when he had almost run it into the ground back in the old WITP days. I got Tracker up and running with Damian looking over my shoulder when needed. I can probably do the same for you. [:D]

But this scenario 30 it has those stacking limits you mentioned before? Because i'm not that conviced...
Gotta understand which are all the changes made by DBB....

But is the whole R&D necessary? as far as i understood it, even if you don't research any future plane, you are gonna get it anyway when the official date arrives...is that true?

GJ -
I see you're reading my econ doc - I know it is not that 2nd language friendly but if you have any Q's I welcome you to contact me. At least I may be able to change to doc to be more readable / user friendly. Actually, the economic side is pretty easy once you've set it up correctly. And in Scen 1 & 2 - it's pretty forgiving.

As for R&D - you are correct you don't need to do any to get the plane on its historical date.

In the mod I'm developing I've done a few things to minimize the huge increased that can be gained by those in the know.

1. Increased the time of availability to fighters/TB/DB. 42 = + 1 mth, 43 = +2 mths etc
2. Rework the upgrades to only one jump. M3 -> M3a or within the same series. This includes LB/DB/TB.
3. Reduce the number of R&D plants available.
4. Change the cost of late war engines (>1000/repair) and have them starting unrepaired.
5. Rework the engines.

All of this can be done through the editor, or if you want just don't touch the R&D...

Cheers

[ny59giants]

But this scenario 30 it has those stacking limits you mentioned before? Because i'm not that conviced...
Gotta understand which are all the changes made by DBB....

Go into the Mod Section and read some of the thread on DBB and the changes they made. Yes, the stacking limits will change the way you play the game. Without them, you to can overrun China with a few super-stacks worth of troops. Later, the Allies will do the same thing to you. Over-running China is too easy without them. It has to be a game you want more or less realism with. I'm not going to try to convince you one way or another.

But is the whole R&D necessary? as far as i understood it, even if you don't research any future plane, you are gonna get it anyway when the official date arrives...is that true?

Yes, most of the late war planes that you don't want to see 1 1/2 years early will not come in before their actual due date unless you do some R&D. Most have a factory of size 2, which means you need to make an effort get them to produce. You have airframes that most players of Japan don't produce and most of us decide to change those factories over to more useful airframes. The best R&D size factory is a size 30 and you need to spend supply to get them to that size.

[GreyJoy]

Ok so R&D seems to be a MUST, no matter what. Probably i'll work around some HRs in order to get rid of those nonesense advancing japanese fighters.
 
Damian, your guide is simply perfect! Very clear and user friendly. Thanks a lot for the effort!
 
NY59, i understand your points. Above all these stacking limits prevent the allies to steamroll in Burma (i've seen what Andy managed to do against pzB![X(])... will think about it!
 
Do the AA changes are interesting? Worth?
 
What about HRs...what would you suggest? My main concerns are about the air war as usual...i'd like to avoid what me and Rader experienced in late war scenarios....the game simply cannot handle them properly (imho obviously). I'm thinking about limiting the number of planes that can operate from a base to 50*AFsize...so the max will be 500 (which is already a lot!)....
 
What about the 4Es? No naval attack? I've seen that somebody has recently proposed no 4Es on ground attack mode....what do u think?
 
And about the mnvr altitude band limit?
 
Sorry...i realize i'm being a finger up in the ***[:D]

[ny59giants]

Do the AA changes are interesting? Worth?

Yes, but I don't know the details. I have two games just started (RA and DBB Scenario 30), so I can go only by what I have read and seen in my games.

What about HRs...what would you suggest? My main concerns are about the air war as usual...i'd like to avoid what me and Rader experienced in late war scenarios....the game simply cannot handle them properly (imho obviously). I'm thinking about limiting the number of planes that can operate from a base to 50*AFsize...so the max will be 500 (which is already a lot!)....

I think it should be 50 engines per AF size. So a level 9 can have 112 4e bombers max. There should be a penalty after that that, IMO. Maybe a few specialized Air HQs for the Allied B-29 fleet. A code change would have to be a limit on number of airframes involved in combat over a single base per day. DBB reduced the number of Aviation Support overall.

What about the 4Es? No naval attack? I've seen that somebody has recently proposed no 4Es on ground attack mode....what do u think?

I play with no 4e bombers below 10k, no naval attacks (except by USN PB4Ys), and no ground attacks. I read AARs with players using 4e bombers in mainly ground attack missions on a daily basis.

And about the mnvr altitude band limit?

Some players use the second best mnrv band. I'm doing this...
Fighter Altitude Rules: Combat altitude from:
Dec 1941- May 1942 20,000
June 1942-Dec 1942 25,000
1943 30,000
1944--45 Whatever

PITA (Pain In The A**) [:D][:D] We all can be this.

[Cribtop]

Wow, Pax, I didn't know you had an Econ doc. Thanks for your contribution to the community! [&o]. Where can I get a copy?

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Do the AA changes are interesting? Worth?

Yes, but I don't know the details. I have two games just started (RA and DBB Scenario 30), so I can go only by what I have read and seen in my games.

What about HRs...what would you suggest? My main concerns are about the air war as usual...i'd like to avoid what me and Rader experienced in late war scenarios....the game simply cannot handle them properly (imho obviously). I'm thinking about limiting the number of planes that can operate from a base to 50*AFsize...so the max will be 500 (which is already a lot!)....

I think it should be 50 engines per AF size. So a level 9 can have 112 4e bombers max. There should be a penalty after that that, IMO. Maybe a few specialized Air HQs for the Allied B-29 fleet. A code change would have to be a limit on number of airframes involved in combat over a single base per day. DBB reduced the number of Aviation Support overall.

What about the 4Es? No naval attack? I've seen that somebody has recently proposed no 4Es on ground attack mode....what do u think?

I play with no 4e bombers below 10k, no naval attacks (except by USN PB4Ys), and no ground attacks. I read AARs with players using 4e bombers in mainly ground attack missions on a daily basis.

And about the mnvr altitude band limit?

Some players use the second best mnrv band. I'm doing this...
Fighter Altitude Rules: Combat altitude from:
Dec 1941- May 1942 20,000
June 1942-Dec 1942 25,000
1943 30,000
1944--45 Whatever

PITA (Pain In The A**) [:D][:D] We all can be this.

PITA....yes, i forgot it...but a finger...a thumb...would probably make the same effect [:D]

Anyway, like very much that HR you use for combat altitudes NY!

Today i will study deeply the variations of the DBB scenarios....especially for what concerns AA and stacking limits... You made me think a lot with your suggestions, thanks!

I'm probably going for an R&D ON option, but with an HR that limits the possible advance of R&D planes at no more than 4or 5 months.

I've only played so far with a 2days turn....would you suggest to shift back to a 1day turn pace? Isn't that funnier?

Japanese economy is getting cleared to me every hour....the basis at least....i understood the concept of hubs and the use of convoys...now the difficult part is the A/C production decisions....i probably read everything in the forum abou this subject but still it seems very foggy....everybody thinks different and i have no experience at all that helps me decide which aircraft to produce....is the Lily worth? Some says yes, other don't....i even read somebody who still uses and produces the Sonia!

One last question.... I searched in the mod forum but wasn't able to find a thread about the DBB extended map changes....and the DBB site is pretty cryptic about that too....would somebody be so kind to post a link where to find some deep infos about it?

Still thanks a lot guys! It's a pleasure to be here[&o]

[obvert]

Another way to learn the japanese economy is to read the first few months of several IJ AARs. Everyone usually spells out what they're doing and gives info on which planes are being researched, etc.

About R n D, as Japan, you can control it. Choose Realistic RnD ON, and then you don't need any HR, just only move things forward as much as you like. Even to get early planes forward a month there is a significant investment in RnD. If you don't care about getting them early, don't invest as much research.

For the planes that arrive in 43 onward, you can pick and choose which you value and want to move forward. With a normal Japanese economy, you won't be able to push more than one ahead more than 6 months anyway. It requires a big investment of supply and HI. So anyone who does do that takes a hit elsewhere, unless they happen to own China AND India while doing it. That is most likely how rader was able to push some planes so far. More resources.

You'll hate it at first, but love it as you go. It's very fun to chose what ships to build, how to allocate your resources and RnD, and setting up the process of getting it all back to the HI. You'll also like starting out on the attack. It is like a tightrope walk and you have to constantly adjust to keep your balance.

[GreyJoy]

Thanks Obvert!
 
Yeah, i'm reading every single jap AAR i find!...very time consuming but very usefull!!
 
I still don't get the R&D On/OFF, realistis or unrealistic...there's something that puzzles my mind....but i'll work it out!

[Prydwen]

Realistic r&d on means you cannot change factories that are producing research over to production of actual aircraft that are available (or go from production of available aircraft to r&d.)

Realistic r&d off means you can convert any aircraft factory to any other aircraft factory whether or not it's a plane under research or in production.

Joe

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Thank you guys.
These stacking limits seem really interesting...but also very problematic cause the whole strategy we've learnt under the old maps must be changed completely!

So in a rough terrain you basically simply has to put 50k friendly troops in an hex to practically blockade any further enemy advance? cause i see it very difficult to dislodge a stiff enemy division if you are forced to always play a 1to1 game...am i right?

Which creates a game of maneuver with many smaller stacks instead of telephone poles.

And what about the AA differencies? What the DBB has changed?

AA is more potent.

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: ItsAMadhouse

Realistic r&d on means you cannot change factories that are producing research over to production of actual aircraft that are available (or go from production of available aircraft to r&d.)

Realistic r&d off means you can convert any aircraft factory to any other aircraft factory whether or not it's a plane under research or in production.

Joe

Oh, ok thanks joe. So it's a must to go for r&d on!

Clear now!

Thanks again

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Thank you guys.
These stacking limits seem really interesting...but also very problematic cause the whole strategy we've learnt under the old maps must be changed completely!

So in a rough terrain you basically simply has to put 50k friendly troops in an hex to practically blockade any further enemy advance? cause i see it very difficult to dislodge a stiff enemy division if you are forced to always play a 1to1 game...am i right?

Which creates a game of maneuver with many smaller stacks instead of telephone poles.

And what about the AA differencies? What the DBB has changed?

AA is more potent.

Thanks! I'm really tempted....studied the new map a bit and looks great!

Is the extended map with stacking limits usable also with stock scenarios? I mean: i'm i forced to use DBB scenarios if i wannahave the stacking limits?

Thx again

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy



Thanks! I'm really tempted....studied the new map a bit and looks great!

Is the extended map with stacking limits usable also with stock scenarios? I mean: i'm i forced to use DBB scenarios if i wannahave the stacking limits?

Thx again

I believe the map of the Philippines is slightly altered in DBB, which would be different than stock.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Thank you guys.
These stacking limits seem really interesting...but also very problematic cause the whole strategy we've learnt under the old maps must be changed completely!

So in a rough terrain you basically simply has to put 50k friendly troops in an hex to practically blockade any further enemy advance? cause i see it very difficult to dislodge a stiff enemy division if you are forced to always play a 1to1 game...am i right?

Which creates a game of maneuver with many smaller stacks instead of telephone poles.

And what about the AA differencies? What the DBB has changed?

AA is more potent.

Thanks! I'm really tempted....studied the new map a bit and looks great!

Is the extended map with stacking limits usable also with stock scenarios? I mean: i'm i forced to use DBB scenarios if i wannahave the stacking limits?

Thx again

You can use stacking limits and the bigger map with stock scenarios. ny59giants can provide all info.

[witpqs]

GJ,

Real men use stacking limits and play Babes. [:D]

Seriously, stacking limits are great and all of the changes in Babes are for the better. There are so many its hard to even summarize in a few sentences.

And, the Babes device type changes have been applied to the stock scenarios (I think someone mentioned above how to find those), so you can get those too if you like. I prefer full blown Babes with the reduced cargo load (28-C) with stacking limits and the extended map. Some folks have put together variants on that one as well if you like. I think one is called "RA" and it might be closer to scenario 2 or maybe call it a re-done scenario 2. Others would know more about it than I.

Good luck! [8D]

[crsutton]

Ask a good Japanese player to "mentor" you for the first few months. That is. once in a while you can send them a turn file and ask them to review your economy for you and offer suggestions. I suspect that by mid 42 you will be fully up to speed and can then manage on your own.

Never played Japan in WITP or AE but this is what I would do. Not because I don't have confidence in my own ability but getting off to the right start is critical for the Japanese player whereas an Allied player can learn and adjust as he plays out the first year. If the Allied player can keep his carriers intact then he is never out of the game but if the Japanese player screws up early on, the game is over..

I hope to try Japan once my current campaign is over.

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

GJ,

Real men use stacking limits and play Babes. [:D]

Seriously, stacking limits are great and all of the changes in Babes are for the better. There are so many its hard to even summarize in a few sentences.

And, the Babes device type changes have been applied to the stock scenarios (I think someone mentioned above how to find those), so you can get those too if you like. I prefer full blown Babes with the reduced cargo load (28-C) with stacking limits and the extended map. Some folks have put together variants on that one as well if you like. I think one is called "RA" and it might be closer to scenario 2 or maybe call it a re-done scenario 2. Others would know more about it than I.

Good luck! [8D]

Thanks mate! I'm really tempted...i wanna call myself a "real man" you know [8D]...but the effects of all those changes you mentioned remain so "foggy" and blured in my mind that i really feel that's too much to handle for my first jap game... however i've looked deeply around the forum and, so far, i've leanrt that (correct me if i'm wrong please):

1- ASW routines have been rewritten... i don't understand what the effects will be (a part from the nerfing of the ridicoulus ASW abilities of the dreaded E class!)
2- AA has been powered. Which means a lot more japanese bombers will go exploding, even without massing 20 AA units in a single hex (as i've done at Karachi against Rader). Probably it will also mean a lot more 4Es damaged on their attacking trips.
3- Many more ship classes to puzzle and confuse the little minds of the unexperienced japanese hairy-lover player [:'(]
4- Stacking limits (now i perfectly understood what that means): no steamrolling anywhere.
5- Halved the aviation support available alla round the map
6- units are broken down (especially the base units) into several more sub-units (more micro-managing)

Is that all?

Overall i gotta say that i really love these changes! every single one of them is for sure a leap forward towards a better game.
My real concern is that i feel that all these changes may be too much for my first japanese game...
Unconsciously my goal with this game was to follow the footsteps of my master (Rader), even if not bringing the game to those excesses (sp!?) (say the crazy R&D stuff, the 3000 A/C battles, etc etc).... but DBB seems (to my unexperienced view) to foce you to remain on a more historical course of events (no India invasion so to say)

Am i that wrong?