My approach is winning carrier battles. Jack and George are very nice planes and I will certainly build them but since they aren't carrier capable I'll likely use them for CAP over important airbases only. ... Anyways, if you have a disadvantage in aircraft quality, the only way to overcome that is with numbers, and the IJN simply cannot play that game as long as they have carriers to man.
Carriers. Yes. Why does it seem that all the JFBs have forgotten about the carriers? As Japan, you can only win the game if you win the carrier war in the first 18 months (or if the allies refuse to fight and Sir Robin all the way to San Francisco).
My feeling is that "preservation" or "conservation" of attack airplanes and pilots, lies first and foremost on their pilots defensive capabilities; I think that this specialty is meant to simulate gunners and crew's skills in fending off attackers; I hadn't tested it yet, but if true, that should result in less losses when intercepted; also, defensiveness may play a role (together with flyght experience) in avoiding flak and maybe, who knows, also in the probabilties for an air formation to slip off from troubles unintercepted or to avoid interception (not tested);
I really don't know if defensiveness plays any in a pure air to air fight between fighters only; intuitively, it may affect the ability for the chased fighter to avoid being hit, if this not exclusively determined by air to air skill only; I can only say that this value tend to increases with fights, or even as consequence of CAP only missions (at a modest rate), so maybe this is a clue;
I've found, until know, that the best training type to improve this trait is Ground Bombing, with which the crews improve that skill quite fast, relatively; I have the impression, not yet confirmed, that naval bombing for example increases this value at a sensibly lower rate;
for me personally, when the crews reach 50 (better 55 or more) in defensiveness, so only then they are ready to pass on training on other skills, or to the field if they are already good enuogh in them;
second best and must specialty/trait for bomber/attacker crews is of course general air experience, good and very important for everything; for fighters/patrols, this can be best achieved assigning them to CAP missions, by which they accrue really fast experience and air to air skills;
I found that other training missions do yes affect also experience, but not as much and definitely not at the same ratio, but for attackers/bombers you don't have room for many choices; it MAY be that search training yields better fly experience progresses, but I'm not sure of this and not tested; naval attack training misson is also good in this, as well as ground bombing theefore if the pilot has already acquired enough defensiveness skills with one on these two training courese alternatively, he should step to next training course with a good defensiveness trait already;
Once my airframe pools are riper, I find resizing aboard carriers and tenders vital, crucial and more than that to create sizeble units to train pilots and make pools; I can't imagine what Japan could possibly achieve without the possibility to resize and enlarge some of its units;
2 engines bombers units cannot unfortunately be resized, but in any case their production cost is so high that usually Jplayer would not either have airframes to reequip them; we are not in America!
Lacking a PBY Catalina in its arsenal, and being anyhow industrially limited, for the vital search and ASW duties Japan relies mainly on the Jakes, that for a single engine airplane is just fenomenal and remarkable, apart from lack of heavier ordenance;
The army bombers you mentioned are very good for asw tasks, apart from somehow limited range, but this comes with the cost:that you cannot use them offensively on ground (for example in China); plus, I feel uneasy in excessively devolving to the army navy duties, at least at the beginning of the war...;
Thanks for your effort and input. First off let me put a bug in your ear. Jakes can be used to train in Sweep! When they're not being used for search they can turn out Zero pilots. As for the defensive skill thing, I've heard it said that training at low altitude advances that needle the quickest. For fighter pilots, if you train in strafe at 100 feet that def number will rise faster. Just don't use them for strafe, in most cases your casualties will be unsustainable. The number 50 is pretty much minimum for active front-line pilots but 60 is more like it. If a pilot reaches 70 in a training only program he cannot improve except in action.
About the range issue in ASW, the most important places to do that (I'm talking Japanese only, the Allied thing is a different kettle of fish) are choke points that don't require much range. The strait between Formosa and Luzon, the Tsushima strait and the strait betwixt Honshu and Hokkaido need intensive ASW. Also bomb load. Ann and Mary each can deliver a 250k package on a surfaced sub. That's fatal. In the soon to not be DEI those ranges are not adequate and you should use the Lily there. Otherwise Sally or Helen. I'm not a big fan of using them as aerial artillery except in special circumstances so don't much mind using a few squadrons for ASW. If you don't have enough trained pilots, don't worry, the best way to train is on the job when it comes to that and search.
ORIGINAL: geofflambert
If you don't have enough trained pilots, don't worry, the best way to train is on the job when it comes to that and search.
Respectfully....ah, who the **** am I kidding? I disrespectfully disagree. And if you don't like it, you can shove it where the sun don't shine.
[;)]
I find that it's more worthwhile to train ASW and search in a training program *first* and then field the pilots. Pilots with ASW skills substantially below 70 will be worthless in this capacity and will take much longer to train to that level if they are tasked with performing those duties instead of 100% training.
Same goes with search, but to a lesser degree. They are capable of pulling their weight in a naval search context when their skills are >55 or so. With a good training program, this only takes 1-2 months. It probably takes more than double that to get the ASW skills up there.
Yes, with ASW you have to search, you have to co-ordinate with surface ASW and you have to be able to hit the target. I guess my point is, when the game begins the Japanese player will find that about half his squadrons of whatever type are understaffed. I believe in fully staffing them even if I have to use recruits who are in the 30s in most every category. Not on carriers though. Put them on a Mavis crew. By the time you bother to come back and check them out the recruits will be a lot better.
My Lily superdedicated ASW group ( patrolling the Formosa straits) took some 3-4 month to achieve 60 % average ASW skills, on the job only; not so bad;
I still find unsustainble to mass deploy army groups or squadrons in naval duties; moreover though in the war, army units super experts and trained for naval duties are pure gold, so better to have them started early; meanwhile we have to rely mainly on jacks, on the other outdated floatplanes and on the few Nells and Mavis you can spare to this task;
as Slow Large Target has palced it in the opening of his AAR, even some 60 kg bombs can bother and do bad to a submarine; in addition, I think that pure detection from the air for example in choke and straits waters, in conjuction with ASW surface forces by themselves or as direct escort, can be much beneficial against subs; as in RL btw;
So, turn 1. Staffing. As the Japanese player you will come across many squadrons that don't even have as many pilots as planes (including reserves). In my doctrine a squadron be it active or training should always be fully staffed. You're not going to be able to achieve that right away because there's not that many cookies in the cookie jar. One thing really irritates me. The default option when adding crew to squadrons is not to draw from a particular pool but to draw "ANY". I wish they'd get rid of that option. I've mistakenly done that and the mindless AI may rob other squadrons that need them far more. First thing you do, even if you're not drawing any additional crew is set that to "recruits". The other options are "reserves" and "TRACOM". I never use TRACOM so there's never anyone there. Never trust the AI to do anything for you and I mean NEVER.
One thing about bringing recruits into a squadron. Many Naval squadrons can be divided into three. Consider making one of those thirds active and the other two training. If you are going to do that, divide the squadron first. Then you can put the vets from the two training thirds into reserve and draw recruits to fill them out. Another thing. I generally disapprove of flying commanders. I suggest letting them attrite away and replace them with desk jockeys, or just remove them to the reserve. If they get killed in combat the AI that I told you never to trust will replace them with the wrong guy.
I do it the hard way; if the Group is first line operative and in need for pilot replacement, I hit (after having shifted the required pilot experience to 50-60%, or to manual selection only) the "choose vetern" options and browse;
I write down what are the "Flying school", in Japan or anywhere else, and if the general reserve pool does not suffice to the needs, look for appropriate pilots in the school formations - if there are left;
of course, "school-training formations should have "recruits" as their default selection baisin, as you wrote;
I mainly said that because if you make the mistake of not manually choosing your crews it's less damaging if the mistake is "recruits". That's a problem you can fix later. Unless it is a training squadron, I always handpick the replacements.
Done with the air squadrons, except the carrier borne ones. Submarines. At this point I have to go ahead and let you in on the main variable on my first turn. I'm not going to strike at Pearl Harbor. I think Steve and the other veterans are expecting that. Nonetheless please don't go blabbing anything. That means most of my subs around Pearl are not properly positioned. I'll leave a few hoping to catch Enterprise or Lexington returning to port. The mini-subs I won't worry about, they're dead ducks and never accomplish anything anyway. Having your subs hanging around major enemy bases like PH, LA, SF and Puget Sound is very hazardous even early in the war. I'll disperse them.
First I will give assignments to the subs that carry float planes. From two previous PBEMs where I was playing Axis, I kept a detailed log on ship sightings. I'm not referring to tactical deployments of warships but rather info instructive of supply lines and the like. I keep record of sightings made by submarines, float planes based on submarines and land based search planes. I write down the date, the reported composition, the hex location and the reported heading. I also note radio intercepts that seem relevant. The purpose of that is to fix the sea lanes the enemy tends to use.
So I begin with the float plane carrying subs. Right off the bat I have some general advice. These subs begin carrying one float plane and one air crew. They are initially set to spend 25% of their time doing naval search. Whenever you're able or have to return to base fill out the air crews. Only having one crew per aircraft leads to insufficient time searching and crew fatigue. Fix that even if you have to use recruits.
Also, subs generally start the game with half of them having crappy commanders. Fix that as soon as you can. If you leave them in there you're risking the boat and you likely won't get any good results. The one PP you spend is totally worth it.
Anyway, position the FP subs well dispersed from each other along likely shipping lanes. Give them a triangular patrol zone, don't make it too large. Because these subs will already have a destination order, you will not be able to assign patrol zones, the button will be greyed out. The way to undo that is lie, order the sub to return to base and the patrol zone button will become active. You can intersperse between them subs that do not carry FPs who may benefit from sightings and be able to respond. Remember to keep the FP subs position plus the FP search range outside of enemy base patrol zones. You will lose that FP pretty quick and that's a huge bummer.
I don't give a flip about the game scoring stuff. I know if I'm winning or not. Big hint here. I'm playing the Japanese. [:(]
Some say Hitler's biggest mistake was invading the Soviet Union. I tend to be in that camp. The Japanese scored an automatic total and complete defeat by attacking the US on Dec. 7. Why play the game, you might ask? My objective is to give my opponent the hardest time he's ever experienced. There is under no circumstances a possibility of a Japanese victory. The US is more than ten times their strength, they're just relatively unprepared. The US will not give up under any circumstances. There should not be an auto-victory score, maybe a totally embarassed you score.
More on that. Really the biggest mistake Japan made was invading China. Manchuria paid off, China didn't and couldn't. The Japanese committed three quarters of a million troops there and what did they get for that? Zip. Zero. Nada. Think what they might have done if they had those troops to use elsewhere.
Let me take a little time here to discuss what the other side should be doing. I don't think this is controversial for experienced players. The Brits are short on all sorts of stuff. Engineers first and foremost. They need any kind of construction engineers they can get. Airfield engineers and naval engineers. I'd say about two each of those last plus 1 each of air HQs and naval HQs, sent to the Indian Ocean theatre. I'd be reluctant about sending any combat engineers and flat out wouldn't send any armour. The Brits have all sorts of armoured stuff and a lot of it is pretty good and certainly equal to anything the (squeak, squeak, squeak) Japanese have. I would send a few infantry divisions, but just Army. Keep all the Marines for the Pacific. I would send some Army air, P-40s and P-39s say, maybe P-38s. You need to blunt the Japanese attempts to establish air superiority, and the Brits simply cannot absorb the casualties to do that. Take all the British aircraft off of their carriers and use them as trainers. Once they have carriers that will not have to be withdrawn put US squadrons on them, Wildcats, Avengers and Dauntlesses, Navy preferably. Do all of these things at the first viable opportunities.
Most of the US troops in the way of engineers and infantry will just be sitting on their hands given the nature of the island hopping campaign. Commit some to the IO (Burma actually). Be careful what you send in the way of air units but definitely send some and be thinking about air superiority (that means fighters first and foremost). I don't mean send your best, but the US resources are almost bottomless and the UK cannot replace significant losses. Anything you send will be a blessing.
