Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: koniu

From where You have 40miles delta between speeds part. Is that experience or You have that from one of devs[:)].

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: koniu

From where You have 40miles delta between speeds part. Is that experience or You have that from one of devs[:)].

I remember that from a discussion about the ACM couple years back. Pretty sure it was one of the devs. It also shows up though in game testing.

Look what happens when the Corsair shows upearly '43 at 430. We've all been on one side or the other looking at the same combat reports. It ain't the armament creating the difference nor the manouver. It's all speed. 430 .vs. Zero at 336. Tojo struggles as well.

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: koniu


We can compare Ki-83 and Shinden only for statistic. But one is army and second navy fighter so for game economy, discussion like that is pointless

I don't consider it pointless. Allow me to elaborate a bit on my thoughts why.

As the war moves into '45, I tend to ignore the whole IJA/IJN thing. Everything is moving back to the HI for defense and there isn't much fleet left so everything is LBA.

Having said that, I'm looking for specific fighters to perform specific roles. To me, there are 3 roles that need to be filled:
1. A2A Fighter
2. A2A 4E
3. NF

A2A Fighter
Meaning, what am I going to send toe2toe up against the Stangs and Bolts? I don't beleive in ablative fighters, so that's out for me. There are only a few choices here as you need to be within 40 of the Stang which is at 487 to avoid the heavy delta speed penalty. That means 448 min, and that means: Shinden, Karyu, or Shusei. Shinden is generally my choice, but I sometimes go for Karyu. Having chosen Shinden, it means I'm putting the other two roles on the IJA side because I need a LOT of these fighters and fighter groups.

A2A 4E and NF
These have to be at least 20 faster than the B-29 (364), looking for +385. What you can't catch, you can't hit. And the more armament, the better. Again, this is a short list: Ki-83, Ki-84b*. Armament between these two is a wash. Ki-83 is faster ... 46 faster which is a lot. It is also exactly 2x the cost as it is a 2E. I consider this a coin-flip. Personally, I don't think it matters that much. I prefer the Frank, but I readily accept that the 83 is a fine choice.

So, in the end, all of my IJN fighter groups will be Shinden, all of my IJA groups will be Franks. Tiered CAP. With production focused, I can build lots. I also have my production spread out so it is hard to take down. If I did my 42/43/44 builds right, I have lots of potential kami's in my pools. I think I can keep the allies off the shores of the HI. Keeping thrm out of Korea will be harder. [:'(]

These are all SR3 fighters. Oh well, they are fighting over their bases and the allies have to fly from far out. And by mid 43 every base in the HI is maxxed out, right? SR3 is not an issue unless I let my Base Forces and Air HQ's get caught out on the frontier leaving me naked at home. In which case, SR3 is really not my biggest problem, is it? [;)]


* you could include Karyu and Shusei again in this if you wish, but both are SR5 and you need to think that through carefully before you commit to either one.

Anyway, just my thoughts.

ORIGINAL: jzardos

Is there any reason not to skip the Ki-43-IIa and just stay with the Ki-43-Ic as a pure fighter and try hard for the IIb? The IIa has more range and better cruise speed, however it's maneuver is only 39 and the Ic has 46 at the 10k-15k range. I suppose the IIa still has a 39 from 16-20k while the Ic is only a 37. Also, the IIa does have a range +1 better than the Ic.

What do others think and do with the period between the Ic and the IIa?

Thanks

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: jzardos

Is there any reason not to skip the Ki-43-IIa and just stay with the Ki-43-Ic as a pure fighter and try hard for the IIb? The IIa has more range and better cruise speed, however it's maneuver is only 39 and the Ic has 46 at the 10k-15k range. I suppose the IIa still has a 39 from 16-20k while the Ic is only a 37. Also, the IIa does have a range +1 better than the Ic.

What do others think and do with the period between the Ic and the IIa?

Thanks

The Oscar Ic is a nice dogfighter, but a poor frontline fighter against the Allies armored aircraft. It is woefully undergunned. Tojo IIa is better (also with SR=1), but the replacement of two small rifle caliber MGs with two heavy MGs in the IIc really makes a substantial difference.

The IIb, with its incredibly inaccurate cannon, is actually a step back from the IIa in terms of armament. Most players hurry through the Tojo IIb in pursuit of the far better IIc.

So, scenario 2: I have the Ic at the onset. With R&D, I will get the Tojo IIa in either May or June latest. Until then, the Ic can, with A6M support, hold the line.

ORIGINAL: Puhis

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: jzardos

Is there any reason not to skip the Ki-43-IIa and just stay with the Ki-43-Ic as a pure fighter and try hard for the IIb? The IIa has more range and better cruise speed, however it's maneuver is only 39 and the Ic has 46 at the 10k-15k range. I suppose the IIa still has a 39 from 16-20k while the Ic is only a 37. Also, the IIa does have a range +1 better than the Ic.

What do others think and do with the period between the Ic and the IIa?

Thanks

The Oscar Ic is a nice dogfighter, but a poor frontline fighter against the Allies armored aircraft. It is woefully undergunned. Tojo IIa is better (also with SR=1), but the replacement of two small rifle caliber MGs with two heavy MGs in the IIc really makes a substantial difference.

The IIb, with its incredibly inaccurate cannon, is actually a step back from the IIa in terms of armament. Most players hurry through the Tojo IIb in pursuit of the far better IIc.

So, scenario 2: I have the Ic at the onset. With R&D, I will get the Tojo IIa in either May or June latest. Until then, the Ic can, with A6M support, hold the line.

I disagree here. Tojo IIb have actually better armament, because it does have center line 12,7 mm MG. So the accuracy of main gun is much better than IIa. Secondary gun of both models is crap, so it's the 12,7 mm that matters.

But he was asking about Oscar models, not Tojos. I'd say japanese player must replace Oscar Ic as soon as possible. And Oscar IIa is much plane than Ic, and arrives 7 months earlier than Oscar IIb.

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
Karyu is tough with SR5, but if you can field 400 of them the allied sweeps will have a really, really bad day. However, it is a unique R&D along with a unique engine. Takes a lot of investment. And of course, there are tactics to deal with it. There are no silver bullets.

Shinden SR3 isn't that bad for me. I can easily deal with it in the HI by cycling groups. At 466, only the Stang is faster, but they have (hopefully) had a long flight already so I am facing slightly fatigued pilots and a/c. Shinden and Karyu have the best armament in game for the IJ. 4 CL cannon. You can only wish they were 4x20mm instead of the 2x20mm and 2x30mm. Still a good punch.

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

So let me get this straight ... people think the Tojos are better than the Oscars? That is what I should be researching/producing in 43 onward? Up till now have focused on the Oscar and have the Oscar IIa in full production and want to get to the armored version.

ORIGINAL: obvert

I found the Allied night fighter P-70 Havocs to do well disrupting and even killing a few incoming strike planes. There was usually the radar message in the combat report. Although nothing like late war strike size and of course IJ planes not having any defensive capability, I'm not sure the same would be true for the IJ night fighters in the Home Islands in 44-45.

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: crsutton

ORIGINAL: jzardos

What are the better night fighters that Japan can make in 42? 43? 44-45?

Thanks

You do not need any night fighters as they really do not work. Putting any old fighter up at night works just as well. You will not shoot anything down but the mere presence of any fighters at night will greatly lessen the impact of the bombing attack. Night fighters are total chrome.

An arguable position to hold before the last big official path But with the increased importance now given to having airborne radar to locate the enemy (planes and terrestrial targets) at night, perhaps no longer such a definitive position to hold.

Alfred

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

Thanks for the great advice, I will not slack on my research/production on the Tojos anymore. What should be be producing as airframes to best combat the allies HB threat to my production cities in 44-45?

Sounds like there's a trade off between the maintenance/AB capacity of the 2E Japanese fighters vs the 1E counterparts?

Seems like the consensus is the Franks?