Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

I have found a new game, hopefully it will go the distance.


So I am sure I will be looking for help, mostly in the production area. I do have tracker up and running
so that will help. But there are decisions I have not have to make concering ships construction and aircraft,
etc. I am sure I will drown in the details, but I will persevere.

Post #1

Sorry BB, this is just too painful.

I quit. Good Luck, I'll be reading and not posting.

ORIGINAL: Korvar

The 'Post #52' link has some flow charts which will be helpful for airframe research planning. The third link contains discussion involving the use of the Tracker application. I didn't read in depth yet as I'm still working my way through the production primer document.



Bill,

Are you using Tracker for this game/scenario? If not, it appears to be highly recommended for industry management.


Edit: I re-read post #1 and answered my own question [:D]

So why did you post it?

And then you don't correct the tracker statement, after you bothered to edit the post?
(Way past painful, with laughter)

I gotta go...

Puttin on the Ritz

Sorry, I don't know how to delete posts.

This link is more up-to-date than my old AAR as a discussion for Japanese air prod. plans

Japanese Air Production Plans

I see two reasons to setup research factories:
1. For the obvious purpose of getting that model quicker, mainly fighters. You need to split IJA to IJN. I think it’s a good idea to also pick a main early/mid/late war model fighter for each to build your air defence forces around.
2. To setup a single size 30 factory, usually for the non-fighter types that you want to build. You will want one factory building something of each non-fighter type (except maybe LB)

As everything you click on burns supply, I do both. Mainly #1, but the benefit of #2 is that when the model becomes available to build it doesn’t cost any more supply or time to change a production factory to start building that aircraft. You also get that particular model TR, MB etc a month or two quicker, woohoo!

ORIGINAL: BillBrown
We are using andymacs updated scenario 2 and the Tojo line uses Nakajima Ha-35 engines.
I have been doing the actual turn so far, not the production. Tomorrow I will really start in on the production.
So far I have looked and I have 70 R&D factories. I probably will be heavily investing in fighter R&D. I am thinking
8 x 6 size 30 R&D factories for fighters. I am not sure which ones, but I am looking at A6, A7, NiK, and J8W1 for the Navy.
Then for the Army I am looking at Ki-43, ki-44, Frank, and Ki-83. Not sure if that is enough, but it is a start. It still
leaves me with 22 more R&D factories for other things.

Comments on that?

There is no indication in the thread if you have PDU On or Off. R&D heavily depends on that. It also depends a lot on the dates of arrival and update chains in the particular scenario. I advise you to plot those for the fighters in your scenario (earlier I've written how to do it in the game) and only then think about the R&D setup

There are always loads of discussions about optimal R&D, and loads of different opinions. Some recent ones here. I remember more useful threads but forum search is wacky today
Japanese Air Production Plans?: tm.asp?m=4313954
"Japan Airframe and Engine Planner" spreadsheet: tm.asp?m=3200810

I am so sorry, PDU is ON

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

We are using andymacs updated scenario 2 and the Tojo line uses Nakajima Ha-35 engines.
I have been doing the actual turn so far, not the production. Tomorrow I will really start in on the production.
So far I have looked and I have 70 R&D factories. I probably will be heavily investing in fighter R&D. I am thinking
8 x 6 size 30 R&D factories for fighters. I am not sure which ones, but I am looking at A6, A7, NiK, and J8W1 for the Navy.
Then for the Army I am looking at Ki-43, ki-44, Frank, and Ki-83. Not sure if that is enough, but it is a start. It still
leaves me with 22 more R&D factories for other things.

Comments on that?

Sounds good.

I suggest going for the Ki-43 or Ki-44, not both. Both airframes are solid early to mid game airframes that really fall off after mid 1943. I'd cut one out and put the freed up factories into the Frank.

The Zero tree also falls off a cliff big time. IMO it's worth pushing R&D for the first model with armour (IIRC the A6M5c model) and then putting everything onto the Sam.

Other airframes to consider:

Ki-45 - Good fighter-bomber for 1942 to 1943
Ki-102a - solid 2E IJA fighter with good 4E capability.
Ki-100 - Rock-steady IJA fighter that's easy to keep flying. Arrives in 1945 but can be activated much earlier with R&D chaining.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

An Alternate Title for this AAR: Gents, Here are Many Reasons Not to Play as the Japanese Side

This made my day!

I am surprised that no one has made the connection of my tread title and a porn flick. [8D]

Everyone must be clean living people. [;)]

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

I am surprised that no one has made the connection of my tread title and a porn flick. [8D]

Everyone must be clean living people. [;)]

It doesn't have the alliteration of 'Debbie Does Dallas'. Perhaps 'Bill Brings Banzai'? [&o]

ORIGINAL: Zorch

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

I am surprised that no one has made the connection of my tread title and a porn flick. [8D]

Everyone must be clean living people. [;)]

It doesn't have the alliteration of 'Debbie Does Dallas'. Perhaps 'Bill Brings Banzai'? [&o]

"Bill brings Banzai" Nice....GP

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

I am surprised that no one has made the connection of my tread title and a porn flick. [8D]

Everyone must be clean living people. [;)]

Got it. [:D]

Good Luck will be following with high interest.

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

I am surprised that no one has made the connection of my tread title and a porn flick. [8D]

Everyone must be clean living people. [;)]

Yes, we understood - you are proactively explaining all your f***-ups.

Thread title change.

So a question here, how many Frank R&D factories are recomended? I thought about 6 size 30( there is one that starts at 55 ). Should I have more?

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

We are using andymacs updated scenario 2 and the Tojo line uses Nakajima Ha-35 engines.
I have been doing the actual turn so far, not the production. Tomorrow I will really start in on the production.
So far I have looked and I have 70 R&D factories. I probably will be heavily investing in fighter R&D. I am thinking
8 x 6 size 30 R&D factories for fighters. I am not sure which ones, but I am looking at A6, A7, NiK, and J8W1 for the Navy.
Then for the Army I am looking at Ki-43, ki-44, Frank, and Ki-83. Not sure if that is enough, but it is a start. It still
leaves me with 22 more R&D factories for other things.

Comments on that?

Sounds good.

I suggest going for the Ki-43 or Ki-44, not both. Both airframes are solid early to mid game airframes that really fall off after mid 1943. I'd cut one out and put the freed up factories into the Frank.

The Zero tree also falls off a cliff big time. IMO it's worth pushing R&D for the first model with armour (IIRC the A6M5c model) and then putting everything onto the Sam.

Other airframes to consider:

Ki-45 - Good fighter-bomber for 1942 to 1943
Ki-102a - solid 2E IJA fighter with good 4E capability.
Ki-100 - Rock-steady IJA fighter that's easy to keep flying. Arrives in 1945 but can be activated much earlier with R&D chaining.

10 R&D Factories on Frank A; 10 R&D Factories on Sam. These are the two most important planes Japan gets.

For early game expansion you want the A6M3a, Oscar IIa and Tojo A.

Look at Night Fighters.

For bombers look at Judy, Jill, Grace. Everything else doesn't really matter with the exception of perhaps Peggy T and the Lilly dive bomber.

End game fighter: Scen 2 so pick one for each service: Shinden? Ki94 or Ki83? Start with 3-5 factories and enhance as other r&d concludes.

Nick is incredibly useful and you can switch almost all light bomber squadrons to it for a PP price.

Dedicated Kamikazes look interesting but probably only marginally useful.

Thank you Lowpe, that is very useful information. I will now pull the blanket over my head and cogitate. [:)]

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

Thread title change.

Equally good! [:D]

ORIGINAL: Korvar

Bill,

I'm working through the updated production primer; hopefully I'll be able to somewhat intelligently comment on 'nuts and bolts' stuff soon. That said, two warnings / words of wisdom that are stressed in the primer:

1. Before touching any production values, always save your game. There's no way to undo changes, and a screw-up means restarting the turn (unless you decide to live with the screw-up).

2. Use the industry screen to make ALL changes - DO NOT use the icons on the base screen. Apparently the base screen will double values. Note - this may have been corrected in a more recent beta update than when this guide was written, so YMMV. Someone with more knowledge of the situation will probably chime in to set the record straight.

Hear hear! [&o]

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

Thread title change.

So a question here, how many Frank R&D factories are recomended? I thought about 6 size 30( there is one that starts at 55 ). Should I have more?

Bill: With non-historical R&D capabilities, you can really accelerate some mid-late model airframes. Maybe even moreso than you are comfortable. For example, would you feel 'comfortable' from a realism perspective bringing late 1944-early 1945 airframes into early 1943 or would such a leapfrog in technology rub you the wrong way? Would you feel comfortable using the 'exploits' of the research tree to accomplish such things or do you have a bent to consider?

If you're an 'anything goes' sort of guy, this does have a bearing on your research commitments and numbers of research factories to use on these airframe and engine paths. But we need to know how you feel philosophically about this moving forward before recommending anything hard and fast.