EA for AE - Planning discussion...
Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 3:20 pm
Well I'm pretty much ready to begin making EA after doing some testing and playing vs 1EyedJacks but I wanted to discuss some of the changes I'm planning on making here so that I can get feedback. Many of the changes I'm planning on making are immutable but those are most of the minor ones. Some of the more major ones ( maximum ceiling changes etc ) are open for discussion as their impacts could be major with unanticipated sequelae.
So, here's the changes:
Air:
1. Ki-264 to be introduced in mid-42. This won't quite be the Amerika Bomber as it will trade range for payload. Concept is that the Japanese got wind of this from the Germans in 1940 and paid for some jigs, research and plans.
Variants:
a) Ki-264R - Maritime reconnaissance variant with no bombs but huge range ( should be something like 90 hexes - 24 hrs x cruising speed )
b) Ki-264A - Strategic bomber.
c) G9M - naval aviation version of Ki-264 carrying multiple 18" torpedoes. I think this would fit in well with the IJN penchant for weapons systems which could fight in the final battle. Right now it looks to me like a Ki-264 would be able to carry up to 4 x 18inch torpedoes out to combat range.
d) Ki-264O - Late-war Ohka carrier. Basically an upgrade which swaps the bombload vs land targets for 2 x Ohkas and extra defensive armament.
2. Ki-44 II armed with 20mm cannon and not some 40mm POS. Also a Ki-44 III for carrier-based action as this proved so effective in EA.
3. Ki-45/102 development continuing towards a B-25J type twin-engined plane with Level 2 armour and significant forward-firing, centre-mounted armament. These planes would obviously make excellent bomber interceptors also.
4. Review of all plane ceilings with a view to reducing them all to 25,000 feet as that is equivalent to maximum combat altitude. Only exceptions might be a very small number of reconnaissance planes, jet fighters which really did use their higher ceilings and climb to great effect in combat and a few bombers which were designed to fly above enemy fighters and thus warrant being given the ability to fly at >25,000 feet.
5. Possibility of producing Fw-190A and FW-190F variants in Japan in 42 and 44 respectively.
6. A general movement towards earlier entry into service dates for planes of both sides.
7. Removal of free auto-upgrades except within plane types. E.g. A6M2 will still upgrade to A6M5 etc but no longer will the A6M8 upgrade to A7M etc.
8. Creation of a US production centre which is NOT in CONUSA but, instead, in the safe convoy lanes off-map such that the Allies can, by devoting a significant amount of production and shipping, drop enough supplies at this base that it can repair factories and increase production of planes currently in service.
In order to keep the cost of production high I intend to create a massive garrison requirement and a massive, immobile unit at this base ( an island ). This unit could have a supply requirement of 30,000 tons per month. This would mean that the Allies would have to ship 30,000 tons of supply per month in order to avoid the unit suffering disablements, dropping beneath the garrison requirement and the factories being damaged. It would also mean that if you wanted to repair 30 factories per month you'd have to ship in 60,000 tons of supply per month.
Those figures are just for example's sake. The idea is though to give the Allies a mechanism whereby they can boost plane production but ONLY if they divert a significant part of their merchant marine/supply production to that goal. It is intended to model the opportunity cost of those planes... If you build more planes you have less shipping at the front and less supplies there also.
Personally I think the "break even" point for the Allies should be a requirement to ship in 100,000 tons of supplies per month as that would require the committment of some 200,000 tons of shipping * perhaps 30 or so large xAKs * on a full-time basis. If you want to build the factories then you might need to commit an additional 10 xAKs in order to do so. As the Allied AK fleet increases I can change the TO&E of the defence force in order to scale up its requirement for supplies so that the investment required remains non-trivial ( 40 x AKs in 1944 is something the Allies would hardly notice ).
9. Early-war Allied forces will have an increased pool of replacements planes etc.
10. A total review of pilot training. Right now it looks to me as though both sides have massive numbers of barely trained pilots graduating. I think both sides might be better served by having fewer pilots graduate but having those pilots be more combat-ready. It would also help the HI-starved Japanese.
Sea:
1. IJN more focused on anti-air defence and air warfare with Yamatos converted to CVAs and a large conversion programme if the Japanese commander invests in it.
2. More standardisation of mounts and fewer "revenge weapons" onboard ships masquerading as AAA defence.
3. USN will get many more Midways and CA and CV respawning.
4. Specialised CA-AAA IJN units will be built as CVA escorts.
Land:
1. Removal of perma-restriction.
2. Soviets active from Day 1. Usage can be negotiated between players.
3. Increase in political points granted to allow smoother flow of units between theatres.
4. IJA standardises on better anti-tank guns using technology derived from the Germans and by war's end the IJA is fielding 75mm PaK 40s as well as dual role 88s. In the real war they asked for info re: PaK40s, 88s and the 105 and 128mm AAA guns the Germans had.
5. More CD units for the IJN.
6. US adopts a more Japan-centric approach as Japan's build-up has been noticed and soon after the start of the war a US parachute division, an armoured division and another Army division are available. After 1942 there's a greater ramp-up in US forces such that the US Army is significantly stronger by 1944/45.
7. Greater fortifications already built up in the Phillipines and increased training and stockpiling of supplies makes the Phillipines a tougher nut to crack. Greater fortification/development of some of the Pacific Islands and, again, stockpiling of supplies.
8. NO A bombs. The US, instead, decides to invest in more conventional weapons and gets additional army divisions, CVs etc as a result.
9. Total review of Allied squad replacement rates. These can be expected to increase significantly, particularly British, Australian and Chinese replacement rates will increase. Chinese replacement rates of >800 infantry squads per month can be expected. My view is that if the supplies etc are available then a Japan which was clearly arming itself for war would have resulted in increased troop training etc.
Well, that's the gist for now. I have a turn in the inbox so I'm going to take care of that now.
So, here's the changes:
Air:
1. Ki-264 to be introduced in mid-42. This won't quite be the Amerika Bomber as it will trade range for payload. Concept is that the Japanese got wind of this from the Germans in 1940 and paid for some jigs, research and plans.
Variants:
a) Ki-264R - Maritime reconnaissance variant with no bombs but huge range ( should be something like 90 hexes - 24 hrs x cruising speed )
b) Ki-264A - Strategic bomber.
c) G9M - naval aviation version of Ki-264 carrying multiple 18" torpedoes. I think this would fit in well with the IJN penchant for weapons systems which could fight in the final battle. Right now it looks to me like a Ki-264 would be able to carry up to 4 x 18inch torpedoes out to combat range.
d) Ki-264O - Late-war Ohka carrier. Basically an upgrade which swaps the bombload vs land targets for 2 x Ohkas and extra defensive armament.
2. Ki-44 II armed with 20mm cannon and not some 40mm POS. Also a Ki-44 III for carrier-based action as this proved so effective in EA.
3. Ki-45/102 development continuing towards a B-25J type twin-engined plane with Level 2 armour and significant forward-firing, centre-mounted armament. These planes would obviously make excellent bomber interceptors also.
4. Review of all plane ceilings with a view to reducing them all to 25,000 feet as that is equivalent to maximum combat altitude. Only exceptions might be a very small number of reconnaissance planes, jet fighters which really did use their higher ceilings and climb to great effect in combat and a few bombers which were designed to fly above enemy fighters and thus warrant being given the ability to fly at >25,000 feet.
5. Possibility of producing Fw-190A and FW-190F variants in Japan in 42 and 44 respectively.
6. A general movement towards earlier entry into service dates for planes of both sides.
7. Removal of free auto-upgrades except within plane types. E.g. A6M2 will still upgrade to A6M5 etc but no longer will the A6M8 upgrade to A7M etc.
8. Creation of a US production centre which is NOT in CONUSA but, instead, in the safe convoy lanes off-map such that the Allies can, by devoting a significant amount of production and shipping, drop enough supplies at this base that it can repair factories and increase production of planes currently in service.
In order to keep the cost of production high I intend to create a massive garrison requirement and a massive, immobile unit at this base ( an island ). This unit could have a supply requirement of 30,000 tons per month. This would mean that the Allies would have to ship 30,000 tons of supply per month in order to avoid the unit suffering disablements, dropping beneath the garrison requirement and the factories being damaged. It would also mean that if you wanted to repair 30 factories per month you'd have to ship in 60,000 tons of supply per month.
Those figures are just for example's sake. The idea is though to give the Allies a mechanism whereby they can boost plane production but ONLY if they divert a significant part of their merchant marine/supply production to that goal. It is intended to model the opportunity cost of those planes... If you build more planes you have less shipping at the front and less supplies there also.
Personally I think the "break even" point for the Allies should be a requirement to ship in 100,000 tons of supplies per month as that would require the committment of some 200,000 tons of shipping * perhaps 30 or so large xAKs * on a full-time basis. If you want to build the factories then you might need to commit an additional 10 xAKs in order to do so. As the Allied AK fleet increases I can change the TO&E of the defence force in order to scale up its requirement for supplies so that the investment required remains non-trivial ( 40 x AKs in 1944 is something the Allies would hardly notice ).
9. Early-war Allied forces will have an increased pool of replacements planes etc.
10. A total review of pilot training. Right now it looks to me as though both sides have massive numbers of barely trained pilots graduating. I think both sides might be better served by having fewer pilots graduate but having those pilots be more combat-ready. It would also help the HI-starved Japanese.
Sea:
1. IJN more focused on anti-air defence and air warfare with Yamatos converted to CVAs and a large conversion programme if the Japanese commander invests in it.
2. More standardisation of mounts and fewer "revenge weapons" onboard ships masquerading as AAA defence.
3. USN will get many more Midways and CA and CV respawning.
4. Specialised CA-AAA IJN units will be built as CVA escorts.
Land:
1. Removal of perma-restriction.
2. Soviets active from Day 1. Usage can be negotiated between players.
3. Increase in political points granted to allow smoother flow of units between theatres.
4. IJA standardises on better anti-tank guns using technology derived from the Germans and by war's end the IJA is fielding 75mm PaK 40s as well as dual role 88s. In the real war they asked for info re: PaK40s, 88s and the 105 and 128mm AAA guns the Germans had.
5. More CD units for the IJN.
6. US adopts a more Japan-centric approach as Japan's build-up has been noticed and soon after the start of the war a US parachute division, an armoured division and another Army division are available. After 1942 there's a greater ramp-up in US forces such that the US Army is significantly stronger by 1944/45.
7. Greater fortifications already built up in the Phillipines and increased training and stockpiling of supplies makes the Phillipines a tougher nut to crack. Greater fortification/development of some of the Pacific Islands and, again, stockpiling of supplies.
8. NO A bombs. The US, instead, decides to invest in more conventional weapons and gets additional army divisions, CVs etc as a result.
9. Total review of Allied squad replacement rates. These can be expected to increase significantly, particularly British, Australian and Chinese replacement rates will increase. Chinese replacement rates of >800 infantry squads per month can be expected. My view is that if the supplies etc are available then a Japan which was clearly arming itself for war would have resulted in increased troop training etc.
Well, that's the gist for now. I have a turn in the inbox so I'm going to take care of that now.