Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

ORIGINAL: Aurorus

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Totally disagree.

We play a lot differently. No prob.

I'm enjoying reading your AAR. Hope you are able to go the distance.

Good Luck.

I hope so too. I have two games going ATM, and both of my opponents are capable and committed to the game, so I have high hopes. These have certainly been the toughest games that I have played so far.

You have two games going ATM? What's your password?

By the way, Automated Teller Machines were invented by Edward Teller to destroy the planet, just in case we failed to do it on purpose.

I still would like someone to show me the wild success they have had using the Oscar in a naval bombing role (not kamikaze role).

PDU Off: greatest weakness, are never referred to, but the absolute inability to field any late war dedicated kamikazes, the inferior night fighters you are forced to fly. Other than those two, for the most part, there is no real difference if Japan plays their cards right. You get ample Frank and Sam squadrons. Jacks are exceptionally light, but you eventually get a fair bit of George and Tojo and Ki100. You can field Grace, Judy, Jill in good numbers. You get more than enough Ki94II squadrons.

You are not forced to research all the planes, and indeed should focus heavily on select lines on Frank, Sam, Zero, and Oscar lines primarily to insure early arrival of Frank and Sam in good numbers. Done properly, I will posit that it might even benefit Japan more than the Allies if night bombing isn't a major focus of your game.

However, it does force your r&d plan...and plane build plans and thus takes somewhat away from exploring other avenues of the plane game.

ORIGINAL: Chris H

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: Chris H

Not to it's important just it's not necessary to do it from the start.

Why? Every day delay is a day you will not have them. As the IJ, you want them ASAP, not eventually. I'm not following you here ... [&:]

I'm a little sceptical about how quickly factories repair which is at the heart of this, approx. 63% as stated by InfiniteMonkey. I'm currently testing this in game, well as much as I can from one game anyway. If the 63% is correct then I should see the existing Frank factory fully repaired around June 43.

When I started my current game I change three more Frank factories from the start but planned to expand all a year before they were due, Apr 43. Having read the article it was impossible to do much about it so I decided to stagger instead, one I did at that point, Aug 42, the next will be Dec 42 and the final one Apr 43. Not a specifically accurate experiment but it will satisfy my curiosity.

But that's not the real reason I will not do it from the start. For me there are other intermediate a/c and engine expansions more important not to mention other supply requirements for your precious supply before the Frank. I will in future consider doing so if my test gives me any indication that the 63% is correct but supply will still be the critical factor so any expansion would not occur for 3-4 months.

I have been flying the Frank A in June of 1943.

ORIGINAL: Aurorus

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


First, I only reference stock scenario 1. There are so many mods, they are what they are. DBB is a mod. Put together by Henderson team members, but still a mod.

Never said you don't need interim A6M. I stated almost ALL IJN FIGHTER will upgrade to A7M. Unlike any other late model. Many IJA upgrade to Frank, but far from all. Only a few groups upgrade to your other air models. You like flying A6M until '45, that's ok. I hate it. And 5x30 Sam will not get you 10/44 unless you are shot with luck. That's 11 months pull in, you will be lucky with a 5x30 plan after A6M8 to have 2 factories repaired and generating RnD pts by 10/44 with that plan. Arrival date will be more like 4/45 ... without engine bonus.

Putting 8 factories on Oscar (production + RnD) and 8 on A6M (production and RnD). Then big on A7M. You should see A7M mid '44 (+15 months pull in). Getting A7M before mid-year in '44, particularly in a PDU OFF game makes a difference. I've gotten it earlier than that, but it is luck. Just remember, the statistics in this case are a one sided curve. It matters ...

Because it is PDU-OFF you need to assign a factory each to a lot of other models: George, Nick, Tojo, Tony, et al. But just one. Easy to size a single factory correctly, just needs to be planned for, and most of those models come later ... plenty of time.

My overall belief is that getting a new model 1 or 2 months early is a very minor benefit, player tactics and skill will easily be more important. Getting a key fighter model a year early can make a difference on par with player tactics. It won't cancel out poor or sloppy play, but it will both mitigate marginal play and enhance those good days into great days. IJ only needs a few really great days to clip the allied wings.

You do not really need 8 factories on the Oscar, in my opinion. The object is simply to advance Oscar enough to convert squadrons out of Oscar to Tojo, Tony, and especially Frank. Many squadrons convert to Frank directly from the IIa or IIb, so the IIIa is not completely essential and the IV is completely optional. I have 4 on Oscar in my two games currently (though these are DBB where the upgrade paths differ slightly from stock and are more favorable to the IJA). I am beginning to think that 4 may be enough in stock as well.

The point of Tony and Tojo R&D is to advance the later models, because there are 5 or 6 Oscar squadrons that convert to later model Tonies and Tojos without first converting to the early model Tonies and Tojos. If you do no Tony or Tojo R&D, these squadrons will be stuck on Oscar until 1944. Since you want your Tony and Tojo production to scale with the number of available squadrons, it makes more sense to put 2-4 factories on each, using the extra factories for R&D, and converting these to production as more Tony and Tojo squadrons become available. You also get many more months advancement for your 3rd generation fighters this way than if you put these factories on Frank or a late-war dream plane. It is simply more efficient in every way.

Converting an additional 3-4 A6 factories to Sam in 1944 can, by my estimation, bump up Sam to late 1944, on average. The supply use is not really excessive, since 4-5 factories on Sam will only produce 120-150 planes, and the IJN will certainly want many more than this when the plane is available.

I have come to the conclusion that Sam is arguably the most important plane to accelerate, followed somewhat by the Frank A and R. No matter the status of PDU on or off.

In PDU off, the Sam is easy. I got the A6M8 around Dec of 1943 (maybe Nov). I was on pace to get Sam June of 1944. There is a window there in 2nd and 3rd Quarter 1944 to engage the Allies in a CV clash on favorable terms if you have Sam. It is a small window, and you need to force it open.

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
...There is a window there in 2nd and 3rd Quarter 1944 to engage the Allies in a CV clash on favorable terms if you have Sam. It is a small window, and you need to force it open.

+1

And the allies are generally going to seek the combat at that time with their Essex ... it is a high stakes gamble, but what else is new for the IJ? [&o]

Aurorus,

Ah, I did not understand you; it is not the Ki44/61 you don't like it is the ability to increase production.

Wouldn't that be just as bad in PDU off? 240 Oscars a month is also bad for the allies as numbers count more than they should in this game. 240 Oscars a month would also be cheaper for Japan as 8x30 is probably how you would do the Tojo, this would probably be 8 very small factories and thus complete rebuilds for a horrendous amount of supply.
I am being fairly cautious with my building in my game vs Wargmr, and I still feel like my supplies in Japan are dropping too fast. I think 240 production Ki44s would tax the Japanese economy to death and they are still poorer armed and armoured than P39s and P40s.

I re-did the Ki44 & Ki61 in my mod as they are fubared in base, but even so I will not swarm Wargmr with them but he will see more than normal. I was going to add the Ki44 III to my mod as I have no idea why it is not there but I would need to do a bit of testing and checking to make sure I had everything right and Wargmr wanted to get the game going quick.

I argued back in the day that factories should take two days per one point increase in production, but that never made it in.

ORIGINAL: Aurorus

The problem, Infinitemonkey, is the armament of the Oscar (and eventually its speed, the same problem with the Zero). The machinegun is not sufficient to down high durability U.S. fighters to say nothing of 4-Es. The Zero, with its cannons, can shoot down the enemy. Japan must try to maintain air superiority through 1942 and be competitive in 1943. This cannot be done with Oscar because Oscar does not deplete the allied fighter or bomber force pool. This is why Tony and Tojo are essential "bridges" to the Frank. Tony is excellent against 4-Es, and Tojo will get kills in air-to-air combat.

In my opinion, the Zero 3 and Zero 3a are not very important, since the Zero's primary role is as a CV fighter. Higher altitude manueverability is not critical to the Zero. The Zero remains useful because of its cannons and low-medium altitude manueverability. The A6 series is not fully obsolete until Corsairs appear over allied CVs.

Comparing the Oscar to the Tony or Tojo is an apples to oranges comparison.

As Japan, you need to fulfill 3 roles with fighters:

CAP (interceptor) - The ideal aircraft maximizes speed and gun power while exhibiting good climb, armor, durability and Service Rating. The idea is simple, they have to be able to climb to engage and destroy sweeps and bombers while exhibiting survive ability and sustainability. You will not see me assigning CAP roles to fighter groups flying Oscars. This is where I send my Tojo's, Tony's, etc. as well as my best pilots.

Escort- The single greatest attribute for the aircraft used for this purpose is RANGE. Un-escorted Japanese bombers, regardless of model, will not survive long against allied CAP. Any strike that occurs outside the range of the fighter's ability to escort are dead meat. In this role ANY fighter is better than NO fighter. The fighter's role is to be ablative armor for the bombers. Your goal is not to shoot down CAP, it is to occupy the CAP long enough to allow the bombers to make an attack run and drop their bombs/torpedos on the target. The 12/14 range of the Oscar IIb and IIIa gives up 1 hex to the A6M3a's 12/15 extended range, but gains speed (22 mph in IIIa) and armor (both IIa and IIIb). This is where I use my Oscar's and where they are best suited of all Japanese planes for much of the war. Note here that I am not saying they are good - I am saying they are the best escorts you get for a long time as Japan.

CV escort/CAP The fighters used for this role have a couple characteristics that are non-negotiable. 1) They must be Carrier Capable (so pretty much has to be IJN A6M/A7M in Scen 1), and 2) They must have a range with Drop tanks of at least 8 (max attack distance in game for carrier strikes). After those two requirements are met, I look the best combo of a variety of attributes with a preference for speed, gun power, armor, durability, and maneuver in that order.

ORIGINAL: InfiniteMonkey


Comparing the Oscar to the Tony or Tojo is an apples to oranges comparison.

As Japan, you need to fulfill 3 roles with fighters:

CAP (interceptor) - The ideal aircraft maximizes speed and gun power while exhibiting good climb, armor, durability and Service Rating. The idea is simple, they have to be able to climb to engage and destroy sweeps and bombers while exhibiting survive ability and sustainability. You will not see me assigning CAP roles to fighter groups flying Oscars. This is where I send my Tojo's, Tony's, etc. as well as my best pilots.

Escort- The single greatest attribute for the aircraft used for this purpose is RANGE. Un-escorted Japanese bombers, regardless of model, will not survive long against allied CAP. Any strike that occurs outside the range of the fighter's ability to escort are dead meat. In this role ANY fighter is better than NO fighter. The fighter's role is to be ablative armor for the bombers. Your goal is not to shoot down CAP, it is to occupy the CAP long enough to allow the bombers to make an attack run and drop their bombs/torpedos on the target. The 12/14 range of the Oscar IIb and IIIa gives up 1 hex to the A6M3a's 12/15 extended range, but gains speed (22 mph in IIIa) and armor (both IIa and IIIb). This is where I use my Oscar's and where they are best suited of all Japanese planes for much of the war. Note here that I am not saying they are good - I am saying they are the best escorts you get for a long time as Japan.

CV escort/CAP The fighters used for this role have a couple characteristics that are non-negotiable. 1) They must be Carrier Capable (so pretty much has to be IJN A6M/A7M in Scen 1), and 2) They must have a range with Drop tanks of at least 8 (max attack distance in game for carrier strikes). After those two requirements are met, I look the best combo of a variety of attributes with a preference for speed, gun power, armor, durability, and maneuver in that order.

I think that comparing Oscar to Zero is apples to oranges because the Zero is a carrier fighter that serves as both a CAP fighter and as an escort. There are other factors to consider such as altitude. Naval air battles are somewhat restricted in altitude and often occur at lower altitudes than LBA battles.

As for using air in support of ground operations, the issue is not so simple as you present. With or without escorts, any type of bombing will be very costly in a theater where you are at a significant disadvantage in numbers. If you cannot achieve a numbers advantage, you will soon be unable to fly any offensive missions: with or without escorts, because all of your planes will have been destroyed. Flying into heavy CAP will get your escorts destroyed, and you will not be able to do this often. In order to bomb a target, you must sweep that target, which means that you are not limited by the range of your escorts. Rather, you are limited by the range of your sweeping fighters.

Oscar is a very poor sweeping fighter. It is slow, has two machine guns, depends upon manueverability for survival, does not climb very well (especially compared to Tojo), and has a very low effective ceiling (because it depends on manueverability for survival). The two machine guns can be effective against slower allied aircraft, but the Oscar lacks the speed to sustain bursts at close range, which you can see in the air-to-air replay. What happens is that Oscar damages planes, but gets destroyed in return. The inevitable result is that the Japan loses air superiority in theaters where only Oscar is present, and offensive air operations become impossible at any range.

Tojo is fast, has 4 machine guns, and a much higher effective operational ceiling. It can bring its guns to bear and get kills. (It is also a very good, even excellent, CAP fighter.)

ORIGINAL: Aurorus

I think that comparing Oscar to Zero is apples to oranges because the Zero is a carrier fighter that serves as both a CAP fighter and as an escort. There are other factors to consider such as altitude. Naval air battles are somewhat restricted in altitude and often occur at lower altitudes than LBA battles.

As for using air in support of ground operations, the issue is not so simple as you present. With or without escorts, any type of bombing will be very costly in a theater where you are at a significant disadvantage in numbers. If you cannot achieve a numbers advantage, you will soon be unable to fly any offensive missions: with or without escorts, because all of your planes will have been destroyed. Flying into heavy CAP will get your escorts destroyed, and you will not be able to do this often. In order to bomb a target, you must sweep that target, which means that you are not limited by the range of your escorts. Rather, you are limited by the range of your sweeping fighters.

Oscar is a very poor sweeping fighter. It is slow, has two machine guns, depends upon manueverability for survival, does not climb very well (especially compared to Tojo), and has a very low effective ceiling (because it depends on manueverability for survival). The two machine guns can be effective against slower allied aircraft, but the Oscar lacks the speed to sustain bursts at close range, which you can see in the air-to-air replay. What happens is that Oscar damages planes, but gets destroyed in return. The inevitable result is that the Japan loses air superiority in theaters where only Oscar is present, and offensive air operations become impossible at any range.

Tojo is fast, has 4 machine guns, and a much higher effective operational ceiling. It can bring its guns to bear and get kills. (It is also a very good, even excellent, CAP fighter.)

Sorry, too many inaccuracies here. I have to speak up. I refrained earlier ...

The first Tojo gets 2x7.7 CL, 2x12.7 F. The Oscar has 2x12.7 CL until the IV model. These are equivalent armaments. 2x12.7F = 1x12.7 CL literally. The accuracy for CL is doubled. Comparing 2x7.7 CL and 1x12.7 CL, roughly the same, many players will give the edge to the 12.7 but most would agree it is a close thing.

Next range. The first Tojo will sweep at 5 hexes, for DOUBLE your supply you get 6 hex. Oscar is also 5, but for double your supply usage you get 10 hexes. If you plan to sweep at extended range, you will learn the penalty for that quickly.

All the other factors are mitigated by how you setup your missions (altitude, leaders, etc.). If you don't agree, I suggest you go read Herb's last long AAR, he is an acknowledged expert in Air Combat and he detailed his mission prep routine thoroughly. His results are spread throughout 3 of the best written AAR's on the forum. Except for DUR. That is the real difference between the two. Oscar 22 DUR means armor is almost moot; for the pilot to survive, the aircraft has to make it home, Oscar doesn't do that well (it tends to disintegrate [;)]. Tojo 28 DUR gets the AC home more often, you lose the AC (crash on landing), but save the pilot. In the early war, losing a pilot is a big deal.

After about 3/42 though, unless the SOV are activated (Lowpe!), you should never, ever be short of fighter pilots. If you are, you need to work on your pilot training program(s). What this means is that pilot losses are also almost moot for the IJ by the time the Tojo is available.

If you practice good mechanics for your air missions, you should see very little difference between Oscar and Tojo in sweep effectiveness with two caveats:
- slightly higher AC losses and noticeably higher pilot losses due to DUR for the Oscar
- far greater flexibility in terms of basing and a higher tempo of operations for the Oscar.

While the IJ has initiative, IJ has little problem making up AC and pilot losses and can always achieve positive force ratios (much like the allies from '44 on) when she wants. Initiative is crucial in combat and this reality is accurately modeled in this game. The 2nd caveat should be of greater import than the first for IJ players until they cede the initiative, and that should be as late in the game as possible. This means, you should be using Oscar primarily with Tojo being your preferred CAP fighter.

Once you get Frank, you have a multi-role fighter that is now the best in both roles for the IJA. This is why the emphasis on Frank. Getting Frank in late '43 is a BIG deal, although not as big as getting Sam in mid '44.)

ORIGINAL: Aurorus
If Japan exploits Tojo and Tony production it creates an unbalanced game that will not be enjoyable for many allied players, and enjoyment is the entire point of the game.

It is not the role of the Japanese player to enhance the enjoyment of the game for the Allied player [:'(]. It is his role to provide a challenge to the Allied player - and to aim to enhance or at least prolong his own enjoyment of the game. The Allied player just needs patience and avoid making big mistakes, then he will be able to enjoy his victory no matter how many Tojos and Tonies Japan builds.

PDU off does slow the game down a bit (ops tempo tends to be too overall) by forcing both sides to use less effective airframes at the front for longer periods than a PDU on games. The Allies only have a limited number of groups flying good planes and Japan can counter only with an even more limited number of groups flying good planes. Forces caution and hard choices for deployments.

However, it is too restrictive for my taste at times. I don't like the "dead ends" it forces for many air groups. Why oblige the player to continue with a group dead-ended with Zeros M3a or M5 for example although he might have ample Zero M5c models available to upgrade? I can live with preventing a switch from the Zero line to Jack of George, but at least I would like to be able to follow through the path of a model line. Same for Tony Ia to Ic for one Tony group and Tony Ib to Id for the other - heck, there are only two groups allowed to fly the Tony in 1943, no need to restrict and complicate things further.

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo




The first Tojo gets 2x7.7 CL, 2x12.7 F. The Oscar has 2x12.7 CL until the IV model. These are equivalent armaments. 2x12.7F = 1x12.7 CL literally. The accuracy for CL is doubled. Comparing 2x7.7 CL and 1x12.7 CL, roughly the same, many players will give the edge to the 12.7 but most would agree it is a close thing.

Next range. The first Tojo will sweep at 5 hexes, for DOUBLE your supply you get 6 hex. Oscar is also 5, but for double your supply usage you get 10 hexes. If you plan to sweep at extended range, you will learn the penalty for that quickly.

All the other factors are mitigated by how you setup your missions (altitude, leaders, etc.). If you don't agree, I suggest you go read Herb's last long AAR, he is an acknowledged expert in Air Combat and he detailed his mission prep routine thoroughly. His results are spread throughout 3 of the best written AAR's on the forum. Except for DUR. That is the real difference between the two. Oscar 22 DUR means armor is almost moot; for the pilot to survive, the aircraft has to make it home, Oscar doesn't do that well (it tends to disintegrate [;)]. Tojo 28 DUR gets the AC home more often, you lose the AC (crash on landing), but save the pilot. In the early war, losing a pilot is a big deal.

After about 3/42 though, unless the SOV are activated (Lowpe!), you should never, ever be short of fighter pilots. If you are, you need to work on your pilot training program(s). What this means is that pilot losses are also almost moot for the IJ by the time the Tojo is available.

If you practice good mechanics for your air missions, you should see very little difference between Oscar and Tojo in sweep effectiveness with two caveats:
- slightly higher AC losses and noticeably higher pilot losses due to DUR for the Oscar
- far greater flexibility in terms of basing and a higher tempo of operations for the Oscar.

While the IJ has initiative, IJ has little problem making up AC and pilot losses and can always achieve positive force ratios (much like the allies from '44 on) when she wants. Initiative is crucial in combat and this reality is accurately modeled in this game. The 2nd caveat should be of greater import than the first for IJ players until they cede the initiative, and that should be as late in the game as possible. This means, you should be using Oscar primarily with Tojo being your preferred CAP fighter.

I do not want to go too far into details, because I do not like to reveal all of the various tactics that I employ in the air war. I do hint at some things that I do and make mention from time to time, but one has to "read between the lines" at times to see what I am doing.

I think that you are basing much of your judgment on your experience playing against the AI. Remember that playing a human player is very different. For example, you can sweep the AI at the max altitude of a manuever band and come in above it almost every time. So you can sweep the AI with Oscars at 15K, and your Oscars will perform well, because the dive makes up for their lack of speed, and they are within their effective manuever band. If you try this against a human player more than once or twice, he will adjust his CAP to 18 or 19K. Then, many of your Oscars will climb out of the 15K manuever band to engage only to be dived on and shot to ribbons. If this happens against Hurricanes, for example, the Oscars will be absolutely obliterated; I mean like 15 to 1 in kills. I know this to be true, because it has happened to me.

Now, try the same experiment with Tojos. They will climb, meet the CAP, and fight on even terms or better against Hurricanes, P-40Es, and so forth. This is just one example. There are many others. The point is that Oscars in dogfights that occur above 15K often get destroyed. Tojos have a great deal more flexibility with their altitude settings. They are not cannon fodder above 15K, and they perform well low too, because of their good climb and sufficient manueverability.

When I played the AI, I always thought that the Oscar was a pretty good plane. I now realize that it is not.

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

ORIGINAL: Aurorus
If Japan exploits Tojo and Tony production it creates an unbalanced game that will not be enjoyable for many allied players, and enjoyment is the entire point of the game.

However, it is too restrictive for my taste at times. I don't like the "dead ends" it forces for many air groups. Why oblige the player to continue with a group dead-ended with Zeros M3a or M5 for example although he might have ample Zero M5c models available to upgrade? I can live with preventing a switch from the Zero line to Jack of George, but at least I would like to be able to follow through the path of a model line. Same for Tony Ia to Ic for one Tony group and Tony Ib to Id for the other - heck, there are only two groups allowed to fly the Tony in 1943, no need to restrict and complicate things further.

Exactly my point LST [:)]

But as I said, it is definitely worth playing PDU Off for one CG so players can make up their own minds about it. I have already made my call on it [:D]

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

PDU off does slow the game down a bit (ops tempo tends to be too overall) by forcing both sides to use less effective airframes at the front for longer periods than a PDU on games. The Allies only have a limited number of groups flying good planes and Japan can counter only with an even more limited number of groups flying good planes. Forces caution and hard choices for deployments.

However, it is too restrictive for my taste at times. I don't like the "dead ends" it forces for many air groups. Why oblige the player to continue with a group dead-ended with Zeros M3a or M5 for example although he might have ample Zero M5c models available to upgrade? I can live with preventing a switch from the Zero line to Jack of George, but at least I would like to be able to follow through the path of a model line. Same for Tony Ia to Ic for one Tony group and Tony Ib to Id for the other - heck, there are only two groups allowed to fly the Tony in 1943, no need to restrict and complicate things further.

It is certainly not perfect, especially for many of the hypothetical trees for late models. DBB is worse, especially because it does not allow for upgrading LBA IJN to the Sam. I understand why many players prefer PDU:On. For players with significant experience, however, I do think that veteran Japanese players should refrain from "skipping steps" in research in PDU:on. Substituting the first models of Tony and Tojo for the Oscar IIa in itself is not completely "game-breaking," but deploying 1945 airframes, like the Ki-100, in 1943 can be.

Skipping steps in R&D and PDU:on, along with scenario 2, provide options for Japanese players with less experience to give veteran allied players a good game. So, there are no "hard and fast" rules or a best way to play.

I would have to be off my meds to have 5 rufe r&d factories repaired to 30.

The reason for doing this is that in the A/C flow-chart once the Rufe is researched you can then go right to the A6M5 IIRC with a 30 point R&D factory. This is as per the dev's.

ORIGINAL: Aurorus

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

PDU off does slow the game down a bit (ops tempo tends to be too overall) by forcing both sides to use less effective airframes at the front for longer periods than a PDU on games. The Allies only have a limited number of groups flying good planes and Japan can counter only with an even more limited number of groups flying good planes. Forces caution and hard choices for deployments.

However, it is too restrictive for my taste at times. I don't like the "dead ends" it forces for many air groups. Why oblige the player to continue with a group dead-ended with Zeros M3a or M5 for example although he might have ample Zero M5c models available to upgrade? I can live with preventing a switch from the Zero line to Jack of George, but at least I would like to be able to follow through the path of a model line. Same for Tony Ia to Ic for one Tony group and Tony Ib to Id for the other - heck, there are only two groups allowed to fly the Tony in 1943, no need to restrict and complicate things further.

It is certainly not perfect, especially for many of the hypothetical trees for late models. DBB is worse, especially because it does not allow for upgrading LBA IJN to the Sam. I understand why many players prefer PDU:On. For players with significant experience, however, I do think that veteran Japanese players should refrain from "skipping steps" in research in PDU:on. Substituting the first models of Tony and Tojo for the Oscar IIa in itself is not completely "game-breaking," but deploying 1945 airframes, like the Ki-100, in 1943 can be.

Skipping steps in R&D and PDU:on, along with scenario 2, provide options for Japanese players with less experience to give veteran allied players a good game. So, there are no "hard and fast" rules or a best way to play.

Since you brought up Scenario 2 [:)]

I consider myself an experienced Japanese player and I would never play a PBEM Scenario 1. Even against a newbie Allied player.

While both sides have the advantage of hindsight, this favors the Allied player far more than Japan. At least that is my experience playing as Japan. Since I know what will happen as Japan, I see no reason to play a Scenario 1 game since I know the outcome will likely be much worse than historical. At least with Scenario 2, I get to maintain parity a little longer before the hammer starts to fall. Which extends my enjoyment of the game a little longer. The Allies will still win of course. It may even take the game into '45 like my last PBEM game did. But I do not want to spend 3-4 years of my life playing a PBEM full CG game and lose in '44 which can easily happen with good Allied players. But other people may want a different experience which is fine.

The Allied player can make some pretty major mistakes and still come out smelling like a rose. The same cannot be said of Japan.

Of course there is a major downside for Japan if the war gets into late '44+. And that is the amount of supplies taken for the pilot pool. Since Japan gets a huge boost in pilot numbers in Scenario 2, this pool gets even bigger as the war progresses. Since there is no way to turn this off, it can become a major supply drain when Japan need supplies the most. So Scenario 2 is not all honey and roses [:)]

Just outlining my thoughts about my PBEM experiences as Japan.

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

ORIGINAL: Aurorus

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

PDU off does slow the game down a bit (ops tempo tends to be too overall) by forcing both sides to use less effective airframes at the front for longer periods than a PDU on games. The Allies only have a limited number of groups flying good planes and Japan can counter only with an even more limited number of groups flying good planes. Forces caution and hard choices for deployments.

However, it is too restrictive for my taste at times. I don't like the "dead ends" it forces for many air groups. Why oblige the player to continue with a group dead-ended with Zeros M3a or M5 for example although he might have ample Zero M5c models available to upgrade? I can live with preventing a switch from the Zero line to Jack of George, but at least I would like to be able to follow through the path of a model line. Same for Tony Ia to Ic for one Tony group and Tony Ib to Id for the other - heck, there are only two groups allowed to fly the Tony in 1943, no need to restrict and complicate things further.

It is certainly not perfect, especially for many of the hypothetical trees for late models. DBB is worse, especially because it does not allow for upgrading LBA IJN to the Sam. I understand why many players prefer PDU:On. For players with significant experience, however, I do think that veteran Japanese players should refrain from "skipping steps" in research in PDU:on. Substituting the first models of Tony and Tojo for the Oscar IIa in itself is not completely "game-breaking," but deploying 1945 airframes, like the Ki-100, in 1943 can be.

Skipping steps in R&D and PDU:on, along with scenario 2, provide options for Japanese players with less experience to give veteran allied players a good game. So, there are no "hard and fast" rules or a best way to play.

Since you brought up Scenario 2 [:)]

I consider myself an experienced Japanese player and I would never play a PBEM Scenario 1. Even against a newbie Allied player.

While both sides have the advantage of hindsight, this favors the Allied player far more than Japan. At least that is my experience playing as Japan. Since I know what will happen as Japan, I see no reason to play a Scenario 1 game since I know the outcome will likely be much worse than historical. At least with Scenario 2, I get to maintain parity a little longer before the hammer starts to fall. Which extends my enjoyment of the game a little longer. The Allies will still win of course. It may even take the game into '45 like my last PBEM game did. But I do not want to spend 3-4 years of my life playing a PBEM full CG game and lose in '44 which can easily happen with good Allied players. But other people may want a different experience which is fine.

The Allied player can make some pretty major mistakes and still come out smelling like a rose. The same cannot be said of Japan.

Of course there is a major downside for Japan if the war gets into late '44+. And that is the amount of supplies taken for the pilot pool. Since Japan gets a huge boost in pilot numbers in Scenario 2, this pool gets even bigger as the war progresses. Since there is no way to turn this off, it can become a major supply drain when Japan need supplies the most. So Scenario 2 is not all honey and roses [:)]

Just outlining my thoughts about my PBEM experiences as Japan.

+1

It would be nice if the pilot pool got dampened just a bit for IJ ... she simply cannot easily support those pilot numbers.

PS: I think you meant HI drain, not supply drain on the pilots ...

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
All the other factors are mitigated by how you setup your missions (altitude, leaders, etc.). If you don't agree, I suggest you go read Herb's last long AAR, he is an acknowledged expert in Air Combat and he detailed his mission prep routine thoroughly. His results are spread throughout 3 of the best written AAR's on the forum.

Those sound like good reads. Can you point out the links to those AAR's?

ORIGINAL: Aurorus

I do not want to go too far into details, because I do not like to reveal all of the various tactics that I employ in the air war. I do hint at some things that I do and make mention from time to time, but one has to "read between the lines" at times to see what I am doing.

I think that you are basing much of your judgment on your experience playing against the AI. Remember that playing a human player is very different. For example, you can sweep the AI at the max altitude of a manuever band and come in above it almost every time. So you can sweep the AI with Oscars at 15K, and your Oscars will perform well, because the dive makes up for their lack of speed, and they are within their effective manuever band. If you try this against a human player more than once or twice, he will adjust his CAP to 18 or 19K. Then, many of your Oscars will climb out of the 15K manuever band to engage only to be dived on and shot to ribbons. If this happens against Hurricanes, for example, the Oscars will be absolutely obliterated; I mean like 15 to 1 in kills. I know this to be true, because it has happened to me.

Now, try the same experiment with Tojos. They will climb, meet the CAP, and fight on even terms or better against Hurricanes, P-40Es, and so forth. This is just one example. There are many others. The point is that Oscars in dogfights that occur above 15K often get destroyed. Tojos have a great deal more flexibility with their altitude settings. They are not cannon fodder above 15K, and they perform well low too, because of their good climb and sufficient manueverability.

When I played the AI, I always thought that the Oscar was a pretty good plane. I now realize that it is not.

I think you are overstating the Oscar altitude issues and understating the Tojo range issue. My opinion. Go ahead an attribute it AI if it makes you feel better.

I have NOT stated Oscar is a good aircraft nor do I think it is good. It is a piece of crap. But it is the best crap that IJ gets until Frank for offensive operations. If Tojo had range 10, then Tojo would clearly be better ... range 8 tough call. But 5/6? You become too predictable and a good player will make you pay for it OR you will have to cede initiative early and a good player will make you pay for it.

If you are unable to use Oscar in sweeps effectively, then I can suggest a number of readings for you to help your tactics:

Start with LoBarons guide, good place to start.
Then, Herb's AAR. his proficiency is simply stunning. seriously. You have to also read his opponents to see the combat summary's to appreciate how good his "air game" really is. Herb rarely includes combat reports directly in his AAR's, they are build into the story instead.
Then greyjoy's (against rader)
Then obverts (I think it was the second previous that had a long multi-page discussion on it. lotta discussion on layers and other portions of the tactics)
finish with Lowpe's current one. There have been some tips and reference to prior works as well.

ORIGINAL: Aurorus

For players with significant experience, however, I do think that veteran Japanese players should refrain from "skipping steps" in research in PDU:on.

I agree with one caveat. Never skip. As I said before it's akin to allowing HBs to bomb at 100ft or any of the other house rules that many apply.

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Then, Herb's AAR. his proficiency is simply stunning. seriously. You have to also read his opponents to see the combat summary's to appreciate how good his "air game" really is. Herb rarely includes combat reports directly in his AAR's, they are build into the story instead.

Could provide a link as I cannot find one?