
Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
Progress in China


- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (349.92 KiB) Viewed 1053 times
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
It was a good day...


- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (401.08 KiB) Viewed 1053 times
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
Really good news here on this front...


- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (253.53 KiB) Viewed 1053 times
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
Japan's goofy jump to the A6M8... should have 9 factories size 22 on it. Working hard on getting the engine bonus.


- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (53.69 KiB) Viewed 1053 times
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Japan's goofy jump to the A6M8... should have 9 factories size 22 on it. Working hard on getting the engine bonus.
![]()
Why 22 factories each? Isn't 30 the conventional wisdom to get a point a day?
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Japan's goofy jump to the A6M8... should have 9 factories size 22 on it. Working hard on getting the engine bonus.
![]()
Why 22 factories each? Isn't 30 the conventional wisdom to get a point a day?
Yes it is but in that scenario, the Rufe comes in on 1 January, 1942.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.
I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!
“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
; Julia Child

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!
“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”

RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
Why 22 factories each? Isn't 30 the conventional wisdom to get a point a day?
Yes, but in this AndyMac updated/modded scenario 2 the Rufe starts production Jan 42...and 22 was all I could get before the clock ran out...given the amount of time I wanted to micromanage this.
5% already advanced...[;)]
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
Progress in the Solomon Sea...normally I leave this area for last...


- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (472.68 KiB) Viewed 1053 times
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
Why 22 factories each? Isn't 30 the conventional wisdom to get a point a day?
Yes, but in this AndyMac updated/modded scenario 2 the Rufe starts production Jan 42...and 22 was all I could get before the clock ran out...given the amount of time I wanted to micromanage this.
5% already advanced...[;)]
OK, that makes sense! You only had 22 days to get those factories in place before Jan 1. 22 is better than 0, you'll have those planes in the first quarter of 1943, if my rough math is right
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
Quick look at A6M8 and the George. I have come to a working hypothesis that although the M8 is a horrible plane, for 1943 it might be the most important plane Japan has to research because it is the best CV capable fighter.
I have successfully used the 5c thru the whole game...and look forward to using the m8. Although the end of 42 might be painful...
We will find out in this game.[;)]

I have successfully used the 5c thru the whole game...and look forward to using the m8. Although the end of 42 might be painful...
We will find out in this game.[;)]

- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (84.97 KiB) Viewed 1053 times
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
You are probably correct, but it is still a LOUSY plane to fight F4U or F6F with.ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Quick look at A6M8 and the George. I have come to a working hypothesis that although the M8 is a horrible plane, for 1943 it might be the most important plane Japan has to research because it is the best CV capable fighter.
I have successfully used the 5c thru the whole game...and look forward to using the m8. Although the end of 42 might be painful...
We will find out in this game.[;)]
[:@][:@][:@]
Pax
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Quick look at A6M8 and the George. I have come to a working hypothesis that although the M8 is a horrible plane, for 1943 it might be the most important plane Japan has to research because it is the best CV capable fighter.
![]()
Just noticed the N1K1J in this screenshot has a max speed of 363; I am playing DDB-C, and it has a max speed of 393. What is the "correct" speed? Seems like that would make a big difference in performance.
IRL, I think 393 is closer to correct
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
So, JWE went through and made a number of adjustments that got implemented into DBB, but not stock.
As to which is "correct", you can find all kinds of numbers, the issue is being able understand the basis under which they were taken.
Here's the point that I rest on: JWE knew how the model worked, thus he also knew what type of number was needed to balance out things. I trust JWE did it right. So, in my mod, I use his numbers as my baseline. And yes, George was one of the few planes that had significant changes made to it. As good as a choice as George is in stock, in DBB it is even BETTER.
As to which is "correct", you can find all kinds of numbers, the issue is being able understand the basis under which they were taken.
Here's the point that I rest on: JWE knew how the model worked, thus he also knew what type of number was needed to balance out things. I trust JWE did it right. So, in my mod, I use his numbers as my baseline. And yes, George was one of the few planes that had significant changes made to it. As good as a choice as George is in stock, in DBB it is even BETTER.
Pax
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
So, JWE went through and made a number of adjustments that got implemented into DBB, but not stock.
As to which is "correct", you can find all kinds of numbers, the issue is being able understand the basis under which they were taken.
Here's the point that I rest on: JWE knew how the model worked, thus he also knew what type of number was needed to balance out things. I trust JWE did it right. So, in my mod, I use his numbers as my baseline. And yes, George was one of the few planes that had significant changes made to it. As good as a choice as George is in stock, in DBB it is even BETTER.
The really important point to remember is that JWE revised all the aircraft using the same standard. This was to maintain the relative relationships. He was always very adamant, and quite rightly so in my opinion, that one never cherry picked any single iten/device for reappraisal, either all were reappraised using the same standards, or none were. So any JFB who gets excited at seeing George at nearly 400mph should temper their joy by looking at the revised Allied plane data.
Alfred
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
Although I don't recall the reference at the moment, I remember reading a US fighter pilot's comment about the George being very good, an aircraft they definitely respected.
Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
Jan 2, 1942
A disappointing turn...nothing bad, just I had planned on crossing Singers today and lo and behold I screwed up the coordination, and now it will probably take two more days. Worse, no damage put on the runways there so forts might have gone up a tick. And this throws off the timing of reinforcements to Ceylon.
China looks incredibly bad for the Allies, flanked a strongpoint at Yuanku SE of Sian, and moving on Sian with very strong forces. Ankang road seems deserted...
The Chinese forces around Ichang are still in the mountains, and they are some of the best Chinese forces in the game.
Not really concerned too much about Chinese raiders...they are looking at cutting the rail line at Sinyang. Flying Tigers are in Ceylon so IJAAF bombers are having a field day.

A disappointing turn...nothing bad, just I had planned on crossing Singers today and lo and behold I screwed up the coordination, and now it will probably take two more days. Worse, no damage put on the runways there so forts might have gone up a tick. And this throws off the timing of reinforcements to Ceylon.
China looks incredibly bad for the Allies, flanked a strongpoint at Yuanku SE of Sian, and moving on Sian with very strong forces. Ankang road seems deserted...
The Chinese forces around Ichang are still in the mountains, and they are some of the best Chinese forces in the game.
Not really concerned too much about Chinese raiders...they are looking at cutting the rail line at Sinyang. Flying Tigers are in Ceylon so IJAAF bombers are having a field day.

- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (485.72 KiB) Viewed 1055 times
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
Ceylon


- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (211.05 KiB) Viewed 1055 times
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
Jan 3, 1942
More China victories on the approach to Sian...
Invasion Ceylon ongoing
Shock across the river at Singers set for the next turn I think....

More China victories on the approach to Sian...
Invasion Ceylon ongoing
Shock across the river at Singers set for the next turn I think....

- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (353.73 KiB) Viewed 1055 times
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
Shock attacking across into Singers today...I wasn't perfect on forts, but it should be more than 1-2. Hoping for 1.
Not all the troops are combined...we shall see. Probably pretty bloody.
Should grab a base on Ceylon, have to be careful as there are 50 flying tigers on Ceylon.
Strong progress in China continuing.
Not all the troops are combined...we shall see. Probably pretty bloody.
Should grab a base on Ceylon, have to be careful as there are 50 flying tigers on Ceylon.
Strong progress in China continuing.
RE: Ooops, I did it again (Lowpe (J) vs ?(A)
Jan 3, 1942
Allies use the Flying Tigers and some Blenheims to slow the attack on Koggla. Not worth the risk.
Our Singers attack is going in behind schedule...and the Allies have built up forts to an impressive level. [X(]

Allies use the Flying Tigers and some Blenheims to slow the attack on Koggla. Not worth the risk.
Our Singers attack is going in behind schedule...and the Allies have built up forts to an impressive level. [X(]

- Attachments
-
- a.jpg (314.66 KiB) Viewed 1055 times




