JEcon 101 setup pre-final Doc

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
sanderz
Posts: 867
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:39 pm
Location: Devon, England

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by sanderz »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Welcome to the wonderful world of Japanese economics. [:D]

No wonder they lost the war [:D]


Re: 2. Upgrade the unit to a different type of plane - is this a cunning trick you old timers employ to try and rationalise production by cutting down the number of models researched/produced and free up factories for rushing other planes [&o]


Any info on the EDIT in my previous post or is that one for Damian as well? An example here is the K5Y1 Willow which has TBO_YTA of 3(1152) on a turn 1 Dec 7th start.
User avatar
n01487477
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:00 am

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by n01487477 »

ORIGINAL: sanderz
Therefore the TBO_YTA ia the number needed to make ALL of the due reinforcements up to full strength, and whats called 'Reinforcements' in tracker is just to reinforce exisitng untits to replace combat losses.
I don't know. Damian will have to answer that question.


Image
Attachments
1_9V1_8.jpg
1_9V1_8.jpg (360.75 KiB) Viewed 219 times
User avatar
n01487477
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:00 am

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by n01487477 »

ORIGINAL: sanderz

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Welcome to the wonderful world of Japanese economics. [:D]

No wonder they lost the war [:D]


Re: 2. Upgrade the unit to a different type of plane - is this a cunning trick you old timers employ to try and rationalise production by cutting down the number of models researched/produced and free up factories for rushing other planes [&o]


Any info on the EDIT in my previous post or is that one for Damian as well? An example here is the K5Y1 Willow which has TBO_YTA of 3(1152) on a turn 1 Dec 7th start.


Image
Attachments
willow.jpg
willow.jpg (90.07 KiB) Viewed 213 times
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 10298
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: sanderz

Re: 2. Upgrade the unit to a different type of plane - is this a cunning trick you old timers employ to try and rationalise production by cutting down the number of models researched/produced and free up factories for rushing other planes [&o]
I don't know about that, but it could be a side effect. IJ decisions had a lot of political baggage associated with them, and they did not have a well defined decision tree. I have no baggage and my decision tree is pretty well established as is most players.

Example: Sally vs Helen. IRL the Sally was produced throughout the war. Most players convert to the Helen when the armored version is available. Players believe conserving experienced pilots to be important. It took a long time for the IJA to come to the same conclusion. I'm not saving any model production here, both get produced.

Example: Rushing planes. As compared to history, most players focus on a few models to research early. Experience (hindsight) has taught them that fighters are particularly important. Historically, the IJ was trying to field a LOT of new bombers and other types (I think 89 or so models!!!). Monday morning quarterback teaches you that better fighters are critical. Bombers less so. Others even less.

In the end it doesn't matter that much though because VOLUME matters even more.
Pax
User avatar
n01487477
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:00 am

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by n01487477 »

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
Historically, the IJ was trying to field a LOT of new bombers and other types (I think 89 or so models!!!). Monday morning quarterback teaches you that better fighters are critical. Bombers less so. Others even less.

In the end it doesn't matter that much though because VOLUME matters even more.
Very true and why in the doc, I focus on fighter R&D. But 1 caveat would be 42-43 DB's and TB's which I think make a bit of difference in the mid-war period. LB is so weak in stock that I hardly ever research it unless I feel it necessary. Still for some of those that remember Nemo's Empires Ablaze for witp(not ae), LB had some teeth and I researched those [;)]
sanderz
Posts: 867
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:39 pm
Location: Devon, England

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by sanderz »

ORIGINAL: n01487477
ORIGINAL: sanderz
Therefore the TBO_YTA ia the number needed to make ALL of the due reinforcements up to full strength, and whats called 'Reinforcements' in tracker is just to reinforce exisitng untits to replace combat losses.
I don't know. Damian will have to answer that question.


Image

Still trying to get things clear in my own mind - my problem is that i can follow the math but often not the terminology used as i haven't played the game very much. So to make sure i understand things this is how i read what you have said.

TBA.YTA

Looking at TBA.YTA - lets assume there is only one group of airplane reinforcement i.e. due to arrive at a date in the future (a delayed group) e.g.

A group is due to arrive in the future with 2 planes but its max size is 27, therefore TBA.YTA = 25(27).

However if a second group of the same plane type arrives on a carrier then these planes are counted as freebies. So if its a full group of 36 then the combined TBA.YTA would be 25(63).

So from this we know we need to build 25 planes to fill our groups, though will need more to cover combat and ops losses.

We also know that in total we will have 63 planes of which we don't need to build 38. I'm not sure why we need these numbers though, other than the overall total of 63 is perhaps a guide to how many planes we might want to build to cover combat losses?

One other question on this - is it just carrier planes that are freebies?


REINFORCEMENTS

In your example above you have figures of 7(29).
The 7 means that from all the plane units on the map i have suffered 7 losses so i need 7 builds to cover replacements.

However i am still confused as to what the (29) refers to. What is the "Total group need" of 29 and what is the "Reserve" of 22? Where do these figures come from?

K5Y1 Willow

I think you are saying that there are 1149 freebies?

many thanks


User avatar
n01487477
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:00 am

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by n01487477 »

ORIGINAL: sanderz


Still trying to get things clear in my own mind - my problem is that i can follow the math but often not the terminology used as i haven't played the game very much. So to make sure i understand things this is how i read what you have said.

TBA.YTA

Looking at TBA.YTA - lets assume there is only one group of airplane reinforcement i.e. due to arrive at a date in the future (a delayed group) e.g.

A group is due to arrive in the future with 2 planes but its max size is 27, therefore TBA.YTA = 25(27).
That's correct.
However if a second group of the same plane type arrives on a carrier then these planes are counted as freebies. So if its a full group of 36 then the combined TBA.YTA would be 25(63).
Nope pretty sure I only count land based planes in the TBO.YTA (will confirm when home).
So from this we know we need to build 25 planes to fill our groups, though will need more to cover combat and ops losses.
True.
We also know that in total we will have 63 planes of which we don't need to build 38. I'm not sure why we need these numbers though, other than the overall total of 63 is perhaps a guide to how many planes we might want to build to cover combat losses?
I provide it because it is a guide; you can calculate freebies, helps with upgrade info, and late war for kamikaze etc.
One other question on this - is it just carrier planes that are freebies?
Mostly, but many land based groups come full too or mostly full

REINFORCEMENTS

In your example above you have figures of 7(29).
The 7 means that from all the plane units on the map i have suffered 7 losses so i need 7 builds to cover replacements.

However i am still confused as to what the (29) refers to. What is the "Total group need" of 29 and what is the "Reserve" of 22? Where do these figures come from?
GroupNeed = No of planes to make them all max planes. Reserve = total of all groups reserve planes. So, if you took all the reserves away, then added them to the groups that needed them, there would still be 7 needed to make them max.

** maybe I need to change this, but the info is a guide and the grp specifics are below.

K5Y1 Willow

I think you are saying that there are 1149 freebies?

many thanks
Yes -
No Probs.
sanderz
Posts: 867
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:39 pm
Location: Devon, England

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by sanderz »

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


I don't know about that, but it could be a side effect. IJ decisions had a lot of political baggage associated with them, and they did not have a well defined decision tree. I have no baggage and my decision tree is pretty well established as is most players.

Example: Sally vs Helen. IRL the Sally was produced throughout the war. Most players convert to the Helen when the armored version is available. Players believe conserving experienced pilots to be important. It took a long time for the IJA to come to the same conclusion. I'm not saving any model production here, both get produced.

Example: Rushing planes. As compared to history, most players focus on a few models to research early. Experience (hindsight) has taught them that fighters are particularly important. Historically, the IJ was trying to field a LOT of new bombers and other types (I think 89 or so models!!!). Monday morning quarterback teaches you that better fighters are critical. Bombers less so. Others even less.

In the end it doesn't matter that much though because VOLUME matters even more.

Thanks Pax, interesting info. Will work on this when i start my first game.


User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 10298
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: sanderz

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

In the end it doesn't matter that much though because VOLUME matters even more.

Thanks Pax, interesting info. Will work on this when i start my first game.


Read Lobaron's excellent thread on Air Combat. Numbers in air combat play a HUGE factor. If you can get 2:1 on a sweep or higher, it hardly matters what your planes are. Pilot quality is also critical, both skill and exp.
Pax
sanderz
Posts: 867
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:39 pm
Location: Devon, England

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by sanderz »

n01487477

I have had a go looking into where tracker gets it numbers to try and test my understanding. However there is one bit, TBO.YTA, that i can't figure out (assuming i extracted the correct data from the game). See pic below.



Image
Attachments
test.jpg
test.jpg (84.38 KiB) Viewed 215 times
User avatar
n01487477
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:00 am

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by n01487477 »

ORIGINAL: sanderz
n01487477

I have had a go looking into where tracker gets it numbers to try and test my understanding. However there is one bit, TBO.YTA, that i can't figure out (assuming i extracted the correct data from the game). See pic below.
Time to start calling me Damian by now ;-)

Nice chart by the way!

Just look at the 40th Ku T-2.
max size - (total+active+damaged+res) = -2
Max size = 6

Cheers
User avatar
n01487477
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:00 am

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by n01487477 »

ORIGINAL: n01487477
ORIGINAL: sanderz
n01487477

I have had a go looking into where tracker gets it numbers to try and test my understanding. However there is one bit, TBO.YTA, that i can't figure out (assuming i extracted the correct data from the game). See pic below.
Time to start calling me Damian by now ;-)

Nice chart by the way!

Just look at the 40th Ku T-2.
max size - (total+active+damaged+res) = -2
Max size = 6

Cheers
[edit]shoho is a CV grp - I don't count them in TBO.

sanderz
Posts: 867
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:39 pm
Location: Devon, England

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by sanderz »

ORIGINAL: n01487477
ORIGINAL: n01487477
ORIGINAL: sanderz
n01487477

I have had a go looking into where tracker gets it numbers to try and test my understanding. However there is one bit, TBO.YTA, that i can't figure out (assuming i extracted the correct data from the game). See pic below.
Time to start calling me Damian by now ;-)

Nice chart by the way!

Just look at the 40th Ku T-2.
max size - (total+active+damaged+res) = -2
Max size = 6

Cheers
[edit]shoho is a CV grp - I don't count them in TBO.


Hi Damian

I had figured where the tracker figures came from, didn't realise about CV groups not being included.

So to sum up the various points you have made about TBO.YTA over several posts the noob friendly definition seems to be something like: [:D]

Code: Select all

TBO.YTA
    The first figure is the future build you need to make in order to fill out delayed
    airgroups (i.e. future reinforcement airgroups) to their full size once they arrive,
    i.e. by letting the new unit take replacements.
 
    The figure in brackets represents the future maximum airgroup size of all delayed 
    airgroups.  i.e. total number of aircraft if all units were at full strength
 
    HOWEVER neither figure includes:
      * upgrades (e.g. if you upgrade another model to the one in question)
      * airgroups that you may upgrade after arrival (e.g. if an airgroup arrives of 
        size 2 with a maximum size of 9 that would be 7 less you would have to build
      * airgroups that arrive on a CV

Its a slow process but i think i'm gradually getting there [:)]

Many thanks


User avatar
n01487477
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:00 am

RE: Japan Econ 101 setup Draft Doc

Post by n01487477 »

ORIGINAL: sanderz
Hi Damian

I had figured where the tracker figures came from, didn't realise about CV groups not being included.

So to sum up the various points you have made about TBO.YTA over several posts the noob friendly definition seems to be something like: [:D]

Code: Select all

TBO.YTA
    The first figure is the future build you need to make in order to fill out delayed
    airgroups (i.e. future reinforcement airgroups) to their full size once they arrive,
    i.e. by letting the new unit take replacements.
 
    The figure in brackets represents the future maximum airgroup size of all delayed 
    airgroups.  i.e. total number of aircraft if all units were at full strength
 
    HOWEVER neither figure includes:
      * upgrades (e.g. if you upgrade another model to the one in question)
      * airgroups that you may upgrade after arrival (e.g. if an airgroup arrives of 
        size 2 with a maximum size of 9 that would be 7 less you would have to build
      * airgroups that arrive on a CV

Its a slow process but i think i'm gradually getting there [:)]

Many thanks
Seems right, 1.9 will have the column for upgrades and a Rec build ... which will help even more I hope - but more learning to come [;)]
pharmy
Posts: 271
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 2:51 pm
Location: Bangkok/Budapest

R&D advance airframe(w engine) and plus engines?

Post by pharmy »

Do engines advance separately from airframes? I understand that 1 R&D advance needs 1 R&D engine of the right type.

In RA3 for example both the Judy and its engine the Aichi 60 appear at 42/10 with no research allocated. But lets say for example I want to advance both by a month.
Would that mean I need 100 R&D airframes plus 100 Aichi engines AND an additional 100 Aichi engines for the engine to move forward at the same rate as the airframe?

Another example (and more important in this case) is the Nakajima Ha-45. Lets say I want to move the george from 43/5 to 43/3. That would mean that I would have to move the engine forward from 43/9 to 43/3. Would that mean I have to build enough Ha45 engines to get 200 engines just for the george advancement, plus X amount of engines to match R&D airframes for Franks,Frances,Peggys and 600 PLUS Ha-45 on top of those requirements?

If this is the way it works, then I would probably also need even more then the above numbers of extra engines, as die rolls mean not every 100 will produce a 1 month advance
User avatar
n01487477
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:00 am

RE: R&D advance airframe(w engine) and plus engines?

Post by n01487477 »

ORIGINAL: icepharmy

Do engines advance separately from airframes? I understand that 1 R&D advance needs 1 R&D engine of the right type.
Separately, and that's right
In RA3 for example both the Judy and its engine the Aichi 60 appear at 42/10 with no research allocated. But lets say for example I want to advance both by a month.
Would that mean I need 100 R&D airframes plus 100 Aichi engines AND an additional 100 Aichi engines for the engine to move forward at the same rate as the airframe?
You need 100 points, not 100 engine factories (or airframes) to advance. I don't know about RA3, but I would say that R&D for engines and airframes seem to work at the same rate;So say you are getting 30(0) = 30 points/mth frames, you'll need the same for engines 30(0).
*1* Individual airframe factories are pretty much limited to 30 points per month. [Edit] Both frames and engines are inefficient over 30 R&D
Another example (and more important in this case) is the Nakajima Ha-45. Lets say I want to move the george from 43/5 to 43/3. That would mean that I would have to move the engine forward from 43/9 to 43/3. Would that mean I have to build enough Ha45 engines to get 200 engines just for the george advancement, plus X amount of engines to match R&D airframes for Franks,Frances,Peggys and 600 PLUS Ha-45 on top of those requirements?

If this is the way it works, then I would probably also need even more then the above numbers of extra engines, as die rolls mean not every 100 will produce a 1 month advance
Once again you are confusing factories with points. Points are accumulative, factories are per month. You just need to work on the same rate of advance.

So say you get all the George factories repaired by 11/42, giving you 4 months to produce 200 points for the 2 months advance. You'd need 200/4 = 50 points/mth = 30(0) + 20(0)

Whereas the engine factory can be 50(0) IIRC see *1* above. I will double check this with a test later to ease my mind.
[edit]Tested and I was incorrect, you'd need a 30(0) and a 20(0) engine factories too.
Cheers
pharmy
Posts: 271
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 2:51 pm
Location: Bangkok/Budapest

RE: R&D advance airframe(w engine) and plus engines?

Post by pharmy »

So say you get all the George factories repaired by 11/42, giving you 4 months to produce 200 points for the 2 months advance. You'd need 200/4 = 50 points/mth = 30(0) + 20(0)

Whereas the engine factory can be 50(0) IIRC see *1* above. I will double check this with a test later to ease my mind.
[edit]Tested and I was incorrect, you'd need a 30(0) and a 20(0) engine factories too.
Cheers
Whereas the engine factory can be 50(0) IIRC see *1* above. I will double check this with a test later to ease my mind.
[edit]Tested and I was incorrect, you'd need a 30(0) and a 20(0) engine factories too.
Cheers


Ah thanks for the exhaustive answer and even testing it [&o] . Just one simple clarification: Since R&D engine factories repair 1 point per turn regardless of how far the date is, and produce engines/points even when not fully repaired(like regular airframe factories), then until your R&D airframe factories are fully repaired, the engines produced in your already working engine factories will all go into the advancement date cumulative for the engine only. To get 1 point towards airframe advancement you need 1 engine/1 airframe produced in the same turn.

User avatar
n01487477
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:00 am

RE: R&D advance airframe(w engine) and plus engines?

Post by n01487477 »

ORIGINAL: icepharmy

So say you get all the George factories repaired by 11/42, giving you 4 months to produce 200 points for the 2 months advance. You'd need 200/4 = 50 points/mth = 30(0) + 20(0)

Whereas the engine factory can be 50(0) IIRC see *1* above. I will double check this with a test later to ease my mind.
[edit]Tested and I was incorrect, you'd need a 30(0) and a 20(0) engine factories too.
Cheers
Whereas the engine factory can be 50(0) IIRC see *1* above. I will double check this with a test later to ease my mind.
[edit]Tested and I was incorrect, you'd need a 30(0) and a 20(0) engine factories too.
Cheers


Ah thanks for the exhaustive answer and even testing it [&o] . Just one simple clarification: Since R&D engine factories repair 1 point per turn regardless of how far the date is,
True
and produce engines/points even when not fully repaired(like regular airframe factories)
False
, then until your R&D airframe factories are fully repaired, the engines produced in your already working engine factories will all go into the advancement date cumulative for the engine only.
Huh? Sorry I don't get it...
To get 1 point towards airframe advancement you need 1 engine/1 airframe produced in the same turn.
R&D is not linked between the two, they are separate entities.
sanderz
Posts: 867
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:39 pm
Location: Devon, England

RE: R&D advance airframe(w engine) and plus engines?

Post by sanderz »

Hi

In the document there is a section on Air Production with some suggestions as to what to turn off or increase.  Trying to get my head around whats best to do (PDU on).

For the A6M5 Zero you change it to the A6M3 Zero which is fair enough as with the other factory you have 2 x 30 R&D.  Is the thinking here that you will just change the factories over to the new models on their standard arrival dates and that it is more important to have the A6M3 early than the A6M5?

I see the A6M5c has armour (though at the expense of other stats) - does this armour make this plane a lot better than the standad A6M5.  If not i can see why that would be another reason not to rush the A6M5.

Also - is it worth rushing the Sen Baku (which is the upgrade to the A6M2) as it upgrades to the A6M5b and i'm assuming there will be a large number of the old A6M2 still around? 


thanks


pharmy
Posts: 271
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 2:51 pm
Location: Bangkok/Budapest

RE: R&D advance airframe(w engine) and plus engines?

Post by pharmy »

ORIGINAL: n01487477

ORIGINAL: icepharmy

Huh? Sorry I don't get it...
To get 1 point towards airframe advancement you need 1 engine/1 airframe produced in the same turn.
R&D is not linked between the two, they are separate entities.

Sorry, used to play a lot of Bombing the Reich, where an A/C or R&D A/C only got produced/ researched when 1 each of assembly/engine/parts was produced . The word airframe made me think assembly, when I should just think aircraft.
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”