Managing the Japanese Pilot Pool

[Q-Ball]

Ok, been a few threads on Jap resources, shipping, and production, but where I really need help is in PILOTS. Has anyone figured out the best way to keep your frontline squadrons filled with good pilots?

You start with a fair number of TRAINED pilots, 4000 or so overall, but I don't like to put those guys in front-line fighter units, or units for Naval Attack.

Any ideas?

For Transports, Search, Recon, and IJA Bombers.....I plan to use trained pilots. These missions are not as hazardous, and you can train "on the job" without too much trouble.

FIGHTERS are another story, as are Kate/Val/Netty pilots; you need a good training level, because their first mission just might be their last. How do you get good pilots into these units?

You start with an on-map reserve of sorts; all the units restricted to the Home Islands. The Yokosuka Kate unit is a great example; 36 high-quality pilots, good enough for KB. But how would you get them there?

Ideally, if we had 100% control, you would re-assign an individual Yokosuka pilot to KB, then backfill that Yokosuka pilot with a trained one, and have that guy set to "Train" for months. In this way, the Home Islands units can become advanced training units.

Problem is, we don't have 100% control. I haven't played around with this, but hoping someone has. How do we get at those trained pilots, ideally without disbanding the Home Islands Unit?

Some Possible Methods:

Disband Whole Unit into Depleted Unit Or, Mogami method. This still works. It is not ideal, though, because it takes a unit off the board for 120 days; after it comes back, add another 2-3 months to advance train, and you're talking a 6-month cycle. That won't make much of a dent in losses.

Disband Whole Unit into Pool This appears to work; if you disband that Yokosuka unit, for example, all the pilots will appear in the pool as "Bomber Reserve". QUESTION: Will those pilots then be drawn FIRST when you request pilots to IJN Bomber units? If so, that is very handy, but you still lose the unit for 120 days.

Disband Fragement into Depleted Unit: This was my preferred WITP method; you intentionally "break" all the planes in a fresh unit turn 1, turn 2 you fly off the planes that have repaired; that leaves behind a fragment of broken planes, that you can then disband into the depleted unit. You complete the cycle by re-filling the fresh unit you took pilots from with Trained pilots. ONLY TROUBLE: I can't get this to work in AE so far! Granted, only tried it twice,but both times the fragment disappeared, only to reappear with the parent the next turn. Has anyone gotten this to work?

The advantage of this method is that you do not have to pull a unit off the map for 120 days; that gives a huge bump to the cycle.

HELP!

[Smeulders]

Try method 3 when there is no rail link between the two bases. If that doesn't work, no land link at all. 

[Q-Ball]

ORIGINAL: Smeulders

Try method 3 when there is no rail link between the two bases. If that doesn't work, no land link at all. 

Tried it on Formosa, where there is no RR. But there is a land-link. That might work; we'll see. This would be a change from WITP. If so, that would solve the problem!

[jwilkerson]

So far, I'm using the "pure" mogami method. But that is because I don't have many depleted units (yet). Once some on map (fighter) units get to about 1/3rd strength, I'll just pull them off the line, switch them back to Nates, fill them up and start on map training that's what I did in stock - resulted in about 2-3 month training cycle. Also, I'm trying to advocate for a reduction of the 120 day penalty down to 30 days. I can't think of any reason why it would take more than 30 days to cut some orders to form a unit and pull the cadre together.

[vlcz]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
Tried it on Formosa, where there is no RR. But there is a land-link. That might work; we'll see. This would be a change from WITP. If so, that would solve the problem!

I think you are hitting "AUTOMATIC AIR UNIT TRANSFER" rule, page 169: ...
Non-Carrier aircraft in a sub-unit that has split from its parent formation will attempt to automatically transfer so as to rejoin their parent formation....

So you will need to bring back the intended target unit to the training group base , or at least to 1-leg transfer range from the "replacements", create the sub-unit, transfer and inmediate disband.

[Q-Ball]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

So far, I'm using the "pure" mogami method. But that is because I don't have many depleted units (yet). Once some on map (fighter) units get to about 1/3rd strength, I'll just pull them off the line, switch them back to Nates, fill them up and start on map training that's what I did in stock - resulted in about 2-3 month training cycle. Also, I'm trying to advocate for a reduction of the 120 day penalty down to 30 days. I can't think of any reason why it would take more than 30 days to cut some orders to form a unit and pull the cadre together.

Good post, though that is not an acceptable method for CV-based units, unless the CV is under repair anyway. For CV air, you HAVE to get good pilots into those units.

As far as the 120-day down to 30-day.....that would certainly help the cause, I am not sure if that is more realistic or less so. Certainly, pilot training difficulties should be modelled for Japan. Historically, the Japanese were able to make up losses in KB for awhile by transferring pilots from Land-Based units; supposedly, quality was still pretty high at Santa Cruz. (but that was the end).

I am finding that the number of Land Based ZERO units are very low, basically 2 large Kokutai, and a Daitai at start (with another Daitai upgradeable to Zero). That's basically it, other Claude units are stuck in Japan. It would be a hardship to pull a Kokutai off the line for 2-3 months. It would be better to use pilots from those units in Japan.

[Xargun]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

So far, I'm using the "pure" mogami method. But that is because I don't have many depleted units (yet). Once some on map (fighter) units get to about 1/3rd strength, I'll just pull them off the line, switch them back to Nates, fill them up and start on map training that's what I did in stock - resulted in about 2-3 month training cycle. Also, I'm trying to advocate for a reduction of the 120 day penalty down to 30 days. I can't think of any reason why it would take more than 30 days to cut some orders to form a unit and pull the cadre together.

I can see both ways for the 120 day and the 30 day. How about some sort of PP cost to bring the group back early ? That way you are exercising your Political power to get a unit back earlier then normal.

Xargun

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

So far, I'm using the "pure" mogami method. But that is because I don't have many depleted units (yet). Once some on map (fighter) units get to about 1/3rd strength, I'll just pull them off the line, switch them back to Nates, fill them up and start on map training that's what I did in stock - resulted in about 2-3 month training cycle. Also, I'm trying to advocate for a reduction of the 120 day penalty down to 30 days. I can't think of any reason why it would take more than 30 days to cut some orders to form a unit and pull the cadre together.

Good post, though that is not an acceptable method for CV-based units, unless the CV is under repair anyway. For CV air, you HAVE to get good pilots into those units.

As far as the 120-day down to 30-day.....that would certainly help the cause, I am not sure if that is more realistic or less so. Certainly, pilot training difficulties should be modelled for Japan. Historically, the Japanese were able to make up losses in KB for awhile by transferring pilots from Land-Based units; supposedly, quality was still pretty high at Santa Cruz. (but that was the end).

I am finding that the number of Land Based ZERO units are very low, basically 2 large Kokutai, and a Daitai at start (with another Daitai upgradeable to Zero). That's basically it, other Claude units are stuck in Japan. It would be a hardship to pull a Kokutai off the line for 2-3 months. It would be better to use pilots from those units in Japan.

For carriers, what I would do in stock, is send the carrier units ashore for training, then send the carrier to sea with "carrier capable" air units aboard, while the "indigenous" air units were training. Once the indigenous units were trained I would return the carrier to the training port and swap out the air units.

I see no reason not to try this in AE.

I think you can break down the larger air units and make smaller ones, so if you want smaller ones, that should be an option.

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
As far as the 120-day down to 30-day.....that would certainly help the cause, I am not sure if that is more realistic or less so. Certainly, pilot training difficulties should be modelled for Japan.

I don't see how the 120 day delay has anything to do with pilot training difficulties. I think forming a unit is an administrative task. Like right now I have 2200+ "trained" IJA pilots sitting around in Japan doing nothing. If I disband a 12 plane unit into a 36 plane unit to bring the 36 plane unit back up to strength, now I have this "12 plane unit" off the map. I could cut an order reforming that unit. I could grab a field grade flight officer, cut an order making him the unit CO and cut orders for 16 pilots to be assigned to this unit. Cancel their leaves and have them on post in 48 hours. I've also got 99 Nates in the pool, so I can assign them some planes and they can start training immediately. Since they finished their first year of training already long ago, but did not have anything to do, I can understand why they were at the Geisha house, but now we cut some orders to send them to a base and assigned them some planes so it is time to get to work and start some training! Then these pilots with skills in the 20-35 range can start building up their skills!!! [:D] So I think 30 days is way too long, 48 hours would be more realistic, but I'll settle for 30 days, at least it is less than 120 days. [:)]

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
As far as the 120-day down to 30-day.....that would certainly help the cause, I am not sure if that is more realistic or less so. Certainly, pilot training difficulties should be modelled for Japan.

I don't see how the 120 day delay has anything to do with pilot training difficulties. I think forming a unit is an administrative task. Like right now I have 2200+ "trained" IJA pilots sitting around in Japan doing nothing. If I disband a 12 plane unit into a 36 plane unit to bring the 36 plane unit back up to strength, now I have this "12 plane unit" off the map. I could cut an order reforming that unit. I could grab a field grade flight officer, cut an order making him the unit CO and cut orders for 16 pilots to be assigned to this unit. Cancel their leaves and have them on post in 48 hours. I've also got 99 Nates in the pool, so I can assign them some planes and they can start training immediately. Since they finished their first year of training already long ago, but did not have anything to do, I can understand why they were at the Geisha house, but now we cut some orders to send them to a base and assigned them some planes so it is time to get to work and start some training! Then these pilots with skills in the 20-35 range can start building up their skills!!! [:D] So I think 30 days is way too long, 48 hours would be more realistic, but I'll settle for 30 days, at least it is less than 120 days. [:)]

If you've ever played Totaler Krieg, they use a delay box system for returning major units to play. In part, it models redeployment delays and switches of strategic focus. It models how efficiently a GHQ can replan, redirect, refocus, and resupply a major force. It also represents the amount of damage a unit has taken when it gets burnt out and disbands. Think of it that way.

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: herwin
If you've ever played Totaler Krieg, they use a delay box system for returning major units to play. In part, it models redeployment delays and switches of strategic focus. It models how efficiently a GHQ can replan, redirect, refocus, and resupply a major force. It also represents the amount of damage a unit has taken when it gets burnt out and disbands. Think of it that way.

I don't really need to "think of it" in some abstract wargame kind of way. I've been in the US Army, I've been a part of units which have been disbanded and other units which have been reformed. It can happen in an afternoon. It is a matter of cutting orders, maybe walking across the street. Maybe traveling to another post.

In my game example I'm talking about forming a new unit with the old name. There is no "damage" involved. Just cutting orders and assembling the guys in reserve or on furlough in the home islands into a new unit at a base in the home islands with some aircraft also in the pool. This is forming a new unit with the "flag" (name) of a disbanded unit.

[Jonathan Pollard]

In a similar vein I think that eliminated ground units should be given the option to respawn if there is enough manpower available in the replacement pool.  That's what happened to the Marine regiment that was destroyed in the Philippines, a new one with the same name was raised.  I think that it even should be possible to raise new non-historical units from your replacement pool if your losses are so low that you have men and equipment piling up there.  This should especially be true for the Japanese, because for the Allies it might be assumed that unused replacements get sent to the European theater.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: herwin
If you've ever played Totaler Krieg, they use a delay box system for returning major units to play. In part, it models redeployment delays and switches of strategic focus. It models how efficiently a GHQ can replan, redirect, refocus, and resupply a major force. It also represents the amount of damage a unit has taken when it gets burnt out and disbands. Think of it that way.

I don't really need to "think of it" in some abstract wargame kind of way. I've been in the US Army, I've been a part of units which have been disbanded and other units which have been reformed. It can happen in an afternoon. It is a matter of cutting orders, maybe walking across the street. Maybe traveling to another post.

In my game example I'm talking about forming a new unit with the old name. There is no "damage" involved. Just cutting orders and assembling the guys in reserve or on furlough in the home islands into a new unit at a base in the home islands with some aircraft also in the pool. This is forming a new unit with the "flag" (name) of a disbanded unit.

My concern is not the capability, but the delay. You can cut orders for a new unit in an afternoon, but it takes a lot longer for it to reach the point of being capable of operations. When you withdraw a unit, it returns to Japan, America, or wherever the home is; everyone gets home leave; and then it comes back on line. When you disband a unit, you send a cadre back home; everyone gets home leave; and then the cadre is filled out, trained, and it comes on line. That took a while, especially in the Japanese Army and Navy where the operational unit was also the OTU.

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: herwin


My concern is not the capability, but the delay. You can cut orders for a new unit in an afternoon, but it takes a lot longer for it to reach the point of being capable of operations. When you withdraw a unit, it returns to Japan, America, or wherever the home is; everyone gets home leave; and then it comes back on line. When you disband a unit, you send a cadre back home; everyone gets home leave; and then the cadre is filled out, trained, and it comes on line. That took a while, especially in the Japanese Army and Navy where the operational unit was also the OTU.

I'm not sure I consider a unit that has just been reformed on the map full of EXP 20 and 30 pilots to be "capable of operations". I think it is "ready to start training". I also don't think a new unit needs to be formed from cadre of the old unit. New units can be formed from other "cadre" who are already in the home islands. This is what we call "reflagging".

[DaveP]

Because of the level of detail in AE, I agree with Mr. Wilkerson. In most other wargames, an "air unit" represents the logistical elements and ground crews as well as planes and pilots. But AE strips out those functions and assigns them to other units (such as BF). Thus, in AE, an "air unit" really represents just about only the planes and pilots -- something relatively easily reassembled.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: DaveP

Because of the level of detail in AE, I agree with Mr. Wilkerson. In most other wargames, an "air unit" represents the logistical elements and ground crews as well as planes and pilots. But AE strips out those functions and assigns them to other units (such as BF). Thus, in AE, an "air unit" really represents just about only the planes and pilots -- something relatively easily reassembled.

But not something easily trained.

[goodboyladdie]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: DaveP

Because of the level of detail in AE, I agree with Mr. Wilkerson. In most other wargames, an "air unit" represents the logistical elements and ground crews as well as planes and pilots. But AE strips out those functions and assigns them to other units (such as BF). Thus, in AE, an "air unit" really represents just about only the planes and pilots -- something relatively easily reassembled.

But not something easily trained.

But as Joe said above, when they return after 120 days with 20 and 30 exp pilots they still require training.

[Historiker]

Is there a way to send trained pilots into other groups without loosing the group for several months?

No, right?

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Is there a way to send trained pilots into other groups without loosing the group for several months?

No, right?

No, right?

Isnt it possible to make all planes damaged wait for one to repair put it on a carrier and then disband the original ( with all the pilots) . I thought the fragment becomes the unit at that point. Cant try it atm.

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Is there a way to send trained pilots into other groups without loosing the group for several months?

No, right?

It seems that it is possible if you use one of these work arounds where you purposely create fragments and then disband them. But rather than institutionalizing this behavior, I would rather advocate for a reduction of the group reform time, and then maybe prevent the fragment work around thingy. I doubt the fragment thingy is an intention of the design.