Starting Japanese and US navies?

After the first turn, the USA has only 32 ipcs in the Pacific, 42 if you include the fighter in hawaii, meanwhile Japan has 169 ipcs in the pacific, 199 if you count the 3 other land based fighters, and 189 if japan loses a fighter somewhere in the pacific first turn (japan usually loses 1 or zero fighters first turn, a destroyer, and up to 4 infantry).
People who think the USA can compete in the Pacific (with NOs), are nuts

I guess we no longer count transports as military units though do we?

Did you include transports - because Japan has 35 IPCs of transports which don’t count.

Though I agree Veqryn - it still is pushing it slightly - I’ve not been able to match the Japanese yet - though get excited when I read about others claiming to have ‘whittled them down’.

However that is done. Whenever I play my mate - she just periodically adds cruisers and destroyers - keeping pace with any ‘whittling’ I might be attempting!

:-o :lol:

Lets say America goes 100% pacific.  Assuming Japan builds 1 factory turn 1 on the mainland, Japan can build nothing but forces for the mainland for the first 3 turns.  After that, Japan only needs to spend about half of its income on navy just to stay ahead of America.  If America gets lucky, Japan will be spending 2/3rd of its income on navy.  Either way, Japan can still spend at least 15ipcs a turn on mainland forces while still crushing America’s Navy any turn that it gets within range of the sea of china/formosa/japan.
(oh, and i do include transport because without them how exactly are you supposed to threaten all those islands? a bb alone does not do much for getting ipcs, you need a transport with a guy or two in it.  but hey, even if you don’t include japans ridiculous 5 transports, they still come out to 164 ipcs. and yes ftrs do count, they sit on top of carriers and project power)

I found these figures on Wikipedia. I couldn’t find any info elsewhere about the US Pacific Fleet strength at the time - but the Japan figures tally well with those also quoted in the Oxford Companion to WWII.

IJN/US Pacific Fleet at time of Pearl Harbor Attack in December 1941:

Battleships: Japan -10…… USA - 9
Aircraft Carriers: Japan - 6 heavy and 4 light… USA - 3
Heavy cruisers Japan - 18…USA - 12
Light cruisers Japan - 20… USA - 8
Destroyers Japan - 108… USA- 50
Fleet submarines Japan - 68… 33
Midget submarines - 50… USA n/a

Additionally I found that Japan had…
90 patrol ships, gunboats, armed merchantships, and submarine chasers
6 minelayers
Itsukushima
42 minesweepers
55 auxiliaries

So it seems that Japan did have parity with the US in terms of battleships - which was wiped temporarily by the Pearl Harbour attack. She did have about 3 times as many carriers (as in the 41 set up)

The rest doesn’t work so well - as in the US has twice as many destroyers as Japan (2) in the 41 set up and the US has not cruisers to start whereas they had two thirds the number of cruiser (total=30) as destroyers (50).

Finally - we can ask how well does Japan’s round 1 sweep of the board reflect the actual damage to US fighting ability from Jan 1942 onwards:

4 battleships sunk,
4 battleships damaged including 1 run aground
2 destroyers sunk, 1 damaged
1 other ship sunk, 3 damaged
3 cruisers damaged

So we see that 80% of the Battleships were put out of action for some time. Destroyer casualties amounted to 1.5% of the available total. Cruiser casualties to 10% of those available.

Note that only (I think) 3 US ships were total write offs. So overall the amazing success of Japan in Round 1 in AA50-41 is a great exaggeration on the actual damage done. Nonetheless - it is clear that Japan did have a significant quantative and qualitative advantage in 1941. Of course over the course of the war - both of these advantages were eroded and eventually overturned.

The figures for sunk ships above refer to Pearl Harbour.

Also - I had forgotten those extra boats in the Phillipines! So the US has three times as many destroyers as Japan - instead of half as many.

One crucial aspect is the reduction of the US production in AA50 compared to reality. But if US had more (ipc) production, most players would still send most stuff to Europe, b/c thats were the money is, and AA50 is decided by who controls most important TTs from Moscow to France.
And allies secures Africa along the KGF strat more as a bonus than a designated target.

Pearl Harbor happened on 7 December 1941
Battle of Wake Island happened on 7-23 December 1941
The Japanese Invasion of the  Philippines Islands happened from December 8, 1941 to May 8, 1942
Doolittle Raid happened on 18 April 1942
Battle of the Coral Sea happened on May 4–8, 1942
Battle of Midway happened on 4-6 June 1942
Battle of Leyte Gulf happened on 23–26 October 1944
Aleutian Islands Campaign happened from 1942 to 1943
USA Island Campaigns happened from 1943 to 1945
Japan Surrenders on August 15th 1945

Your numbers on the Aircraft carriers are inaccurate.
At the outset right before Pearl Harbor, America had 8 Fleet Carriers (1 in atlantic) and 11+ Escort Carriers (some in atl), and by Axis high water mark in 1942 (before midway?), had 6 Fleet Carriers (1 in Atlantic) 21+ Escort Carriers (some in atl) and 23+ more Fleet Carriers under construction.

America had Pacific Carriers:
Escort Carriers:
Long Island Class: 2 total built, both before pearl harbor
Bogue Class: 45 total built, of the 11 built for the american navy in the pacific 1 was built before pearl harbor, and 8 built before midway, several more in the atlantic under american flags, the rest were lend-lease HMS vessels
Sangamon Class: 4 total built, all before pearl harbor
Charger Class: 4 total built, all for atlantic, all before pearl harbor
Casablanca Class: all 50 total launched between Nov 1942 and July 1944
Commencement Bay Class: all 19 total launched between 1943 and 1945
(very very few of our escort class carriers were sunk by japanese, close to zero if not zero. a few were sunk by german u-boats in the atlantic, and many served in both theaters)

Light Carriers:
USS Independence (CVL22) (launched 22 August 1942, sunk in 1951 nuclear test)
USS Princeton (CVL23) (launched 18 October 1942, sunk 24 October 1944 at the Battle of Leyte Gulf)
USS Belleau Wood (CVL24) (launched 6 December 1942, scrapped 1960)
USS Cowpens (CV25) (launched 17 January 1943, scrapped 1960)
USS Monterey (CVL26) (launched 28 February 1943, scrapped 1956)
USS Cabot (CVL28) (launched 4 April 1943, scrapped 1972)
USS Langley (CVL27) (launched 22 May 1943, scrapped 1947)
USS Bataan (CVL29) (launched 1 August 1943, scrapped 1961)
USS San Jacinto (CVL30) (launched 26 September 1943, scrapped 1947)

Heavy / Fleet Carriers:
USS Langley (CV1) (launched 1912, converted 1922, sunk 27th February 1942 near Java)
USS Lexington (CV2) (launched 1925, sunk 8th May 1942 at the Battle of the Coral Sea)
USS Seratoga (CV3) (launched 1925, scrapped 25th July 1946 in a nuclear test)
USS Yorktown (CV5) (launched 1936, sunk 7 June 1942 at the Battle of Midway)
USS Enterprise (CV6) (launched 1936, scrapped on 1947)
USS Hornet (CV8) (launched 1940, sunk 13 January 1943 west of the Solomon Islands)
USS Essex (CV9) (launched 31 July 1942, scrapped 1973)
USS Lexington (CV16) (launched 23 September 1942, struck from record 1991)
USS Bunker Hill (CV17) (launched 7 December 1942, scrapped 1966)
USS Yorktown (CV10) (launched 21 January 1943, struck from record 1973)
USS Intrepid (CV11) (launched 26 April 1943, struck from record 1982)
USS Wasp (CV18) (launched 17 August 1943, scrapped 1973)
USS Hornet (CV12) (launched 30 August 1943, struck from record 1989)
USS Franklin (CV13) (launched 14 October 1943, scrapped 1964)
USS Hancock (CV19) (launched 24 January 1944, scapped 1976)
USS Ticonderoga (CV14) (launched 7 February 1944, scrapped 1973)
USS Shangri-La (CV38) (launched 24 February 1944, scrapped 1988)
USS Bennington (CV20) (launched 28 February 1944, scrapped 1994)
USS Bon Homme Richard (CV31) (launched 29 April 1944, scrapped 1992)
USS Randolph (CV15) (launched 28 June 1944, scrapped 1975)
USS Antietam (CV36) (launched 20 August 1944, scrapped 1974)
USS Lake Champlain (CV39) (launched 2 November 1944, scrapped 1966)
USS Boxer (CV21) (launched 14 December 1944, scrapped 1971)
USS Kearsarge (CV33) (launched 5 May 1945, scrapped 1974)
USS Tarawa (CV40) (launched 12 May 1945, scrapped 1967)
USS Princeton (CV37) (launched 8 July 1945, scrapped 1971)
USS Leyte (CV32) (launched 23 August 1945, scrapped 1970)
USS Oriskany (CV34) (launched 13 October 1945, scrapped 1989)

Atlantic Carriers:
Heavy / Fleet Carriers Carriers:
USS Ranger (CV4) (launched 1933, scrapped 28th January 1947)

Carriers that served in the Atlantic then served in the Pacific:
Heavy / Fleet Carriers:
USS Wasp (CV7) (launched 1939, sunk 15 September 1942 off the Solomon Islands)

(total number of American Heavy Fleet Carriers operational 1 year after the war ended: over 39  :-o)

Japanese:
Heavy / Fleet Carriers:
Kaga (launched 17 November 1921, sunk 4 June 1942 at the Battle of Midway)
Akagi (launched 22 April 1925, sunk 4 June 1942 at the Battle of Midway)
Soryu (launched 23 December 1935, sunk 4 June 1942 at the Battle of Midway)
Hiryu (launched 16 November 1937, sunk 5 June 1942 at the Battle of Midway)
Shokaku (launched 1 June 1 1939, sunk 19 June 1944)
Hiyo (launched 24 June 1941, sunk 21 June 1944 at the Battle of the Philipine Sea)
Junyo (launched 26 June 1941, dismantled 1947)
Taiho (launched 7 April 1943, sunk 19 June 1944 at the Battle of the Philippine Sea)
Unryu (launched 25 September 1943, sunk December 19, 1944)
Amagi (launched 15 October 1943, sunk in port on 27 July 1945)
Katsuragi (launched 15 October 1943, dismantled 1946)
Shinano (launched 5 October 1944, sunk 29 November 1944)

Light / Escort Carriers:
Hosho (launched 13 November 1921, dismantled 1947)
Ryujo (launched 2 April 1931, sunk 24 August 1942 at the Battle of the Eastern Solomons)
Ryuho (launched 16 November 1933, destroyed 19 March 1945)
Shoho (launched 1 June 1935, sunk 7 May 1942)
Chitose (launched 29 November 1936, sunk 25 October 1944 at Battle of Leyte Gulf)
Chiyoda (launched 29 November 1936, sunk sunk 25 October 1944)
Kaiyo (launched 9 December 1938, dismantled 1946)
Chuyo (launched 20 May 1939, sunk 4 December 1943)
Unyo (launched 31 Oct 1939, sunk 17 September 1944)
Zuikaku (launched 27 November 1939, sunk 25 October 1944 at the Battle of Leyte Gulf)
Zuiho (launched 27 Dec 1940, sunk 25 October 1944 at the Battle of Leyte Gulf)
Shinyo (launched 15 November 1943, sunk 17 November 1944)
Taiyo (launched 19 June 1944, sunk 18 Aug 1944)

Some of these japanese carriers may be in the wrong catagory, as many of them were converted from other ships.  I know that there were six, not seven, fleet carriers at the time of pearl harbor, and that many of japan’s later fleet carriers never were truly operational or were sunk by american submarines before they saw combat.  When you look above and see a japanese carrier sunk without me mentioning what btl it was in, 95% chance it was an american submarine.

@Veqryn:

Your numbers on the Aircraft carriers are inaccurate.
At the outset right before Pearl Harbor, America had 8 Fleet Carriers (1 in atlantic) and 11+ Escort Carriers (some in atl), and by Axis high water mark in 1942 (before midway?), had 6 Fleet Carriers (1 in Atlantic) 21+ Escort Carriers (some in atl) and 23+ more Fleet Carriers under construction.

That’s a lot of info there! Where was it sourced?

I must say though that for the US carrier figures I’m here quoting more than three sources (one wiki), but also Eagle Against the Sun (Spector, 1985) and The Oxford Companion to WWII (articles ‘Pearl Harbour’ & ‘Pacific War’) and web info.

I think it is undeniable that the Japanese had a naval advantage in 1941 - that was one of the important considerations, the US was planning to expand their navy massively leaving Japan in the shade with or without war.

It is also important to remeber that a lot of the carriers were built on the hulls of older broad beam vessels like oilers. For instance - the Sangamon Class were oilers built before pearl harbour but converted to carriers afterwards (operational ‘late 1942’).

Another aspect to note is that many of the Bogue carriers (including Atlantic ones) were laid down in Spring/Summer 1941,  (prior to Pearl) but then launched Spring 1942 (after Pearl) and many only commissioned into service by Autumn 1942. I know next to nothing about naval engineering (correction: I know NOTHING about naval engineering!) but it doesn’t surprise me that uphostering, arming, crewing and dispatching an aircraft carrier is a lenghty process - even when under pressure.

Because of this - I’m pretty sure that Japan confidently was facing just the 3 carriers in 1941. It is mistakenly assumed that had her surprise attack been discovered Japan’s carriers would have turned back. However, according to Spector who used Japanese navy archived material their orders were to destroy the Pearl Harbour based battleships and carriers even if they had to fight their way in (the task force had a hefty escort group consisting of 2 battleships, 2 heavy cruisers, 1 light cruiser, 9 destroyers, and 23 fleet submarines). Would they really have been that confident had the Americans been fielding 10+ aircraft carriers?

As far as I can ascertain there were 3 carriers in the Pacific on 7th December 1941:
The USS Lexington was transporting planes to Midway.
The USS Saratoga was in harbour at San Diego.
The USS Enterprise was returning to Pearl after delivering aircraft to Wake Island.

The USS Hornet (famed for the Doolittle raid) was in Norfolk, Virginia on the Atlantic seaboard.
Similarly ships like the Yorktown and Wasp were only sent to the pacific to plug holes in carrier fleet (Yorktown straight away, Wasp after Midway).

References:
List of pre WWII US aircraft carriers
http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/us_prewa.htm#cv1
Location of Hornet outside Pacific Theatre in 1941
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Hornet_(CV-8)
Sangamon class - the oiler/carrier issue
http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/us_esc3.htm#sang-cl
Bogue class - the laid down/launched/commissioned date issue
http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/us_esc1.htm#cve9
USS Wasp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Wasp_(CV-7)
http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/w3/wasp-viii.htm

Books for general figures
The Oxford Companion to World War II, General Editor: I. C. B. Dear; Consultant Editor: M. R. D. Foot (1995).
Eagle Against the Sun: The American War against Japan, Ronald Spector (1985).

Websites:
World Aircraft Carrier Lists: http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/
Dictionary of American Fighting Naval Ships: http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/index.html

Sourced mainly from wikipedia, though I double checked all of it on another historical database site.
America did indeed have 8 fleet carriers in total before pearl harbor, though the USS ranger would remain in the Atlantic throughout the war, and the USS langley was a converted vessel (still large enough in size and airplane capacity though to count as fleet carrier).  I can not comment right not on the exact locations of each, but I would tentatively agree that only 3 of fleet carriers that were in the pacific were not at port at the time, and therefore a threat to japan.  I would also add that America’s escort carriers, 11+ at the time, were all converted and were all pretty worthless.  However, the pilots who cut their teeth on those would become famous later.

As far as what I think of the AA50 setup, I think it does a decent job with the ships of Japan and America’s Pacific (atlantic is major nerfed).  America probably deserves a couple more ships to be historically accurate, but whatever, they had to balance the game after all.  However, Japan should not have 9 fighters to America’s 2 Pacific fighters, because this is one area where America really shined.  During the Battle of the Leyte gulf, Japan had so few fighters left that it used its entire carrier force as a decoy, hoping that its battleships would do the hitting.  They had fewer aircraft during that battle than America had of ships, while America easily had aircraft numbering in the thousands.  I would also add that while Japan “sank” the capital ships at pearl harbor, most of them were repaired very quickly and went on to serve in the pacific.  America’s industrial might is nonexistant in AA.  Lastly, America needs more submarines in positions compromising to Japan’s initial setup.  If you look at the list, and also at lists of battleships and heavy cruisers, you will find that American submarines were incredibly deadly in the pacific.  They sunk tons of Japanese shipping, sunks many carriers, battleships, cruisers, everything else, as well as resupplying the our men on islands.  I am in general rather unhappy about the lack of any strategic depth in the pacific in AA.

America did not shine at the beginning of the war as far as carrier aviation. Our primary carrier fighter at the time was basically a bi-plane with the top wing removed (F4F). Also the Japanese pilots were far better trained. The last was a crippling factor to Japanese naval aviation as when those highly trained aviators were lost at Midway they were irreplaceable due to Japan’s pilot training program.

The gruman F4F wildcat had an overall kill-to-loss ratio of near 7 to 1 versus Japaneses fighters troughout the war  ( And I’m not reffering to the hellcat F6F which was completely rendering japaneses fighters planes obsolete ).

I’d say it was a very dangerous bi-plane…

That thing was maybe slow but it was so much armored and sturdy that less than 200 were lost in battle.

For training, I am not sure either. The flying Tigers were actually based on the USS Ranger in the Atlantic before flying to China after PH, using mostly P-40 sporting the famous shark mouths paint job. They had a kill Ratio of near 10 for 1 so yea, it’s a bit sad China don’t get to use them in A&A50 since they did inflicted a very heavy toll on the Japanese.

Here is a nice order of battle page for 7Dec41.

http://www.orbat.com/site/ww2/drleo/600_pto/41-12-07_pacific.htm

The “Thatch Weave” and the Wildcats ability to absorb damage contributed to its Kill/Loss ratio. Other than durability it was definitely inferior to the Zero.

As far as the P-40s I think it gets an undeserved bad rap. The P-40 was designed as a ground attack aircraft NOT a fighter. It was available when we needed it and capable enough to hold its own, unlike our other AAF planes in the PTO at the start of the war such as P-400s and F2As. A side note also on the Flying Tigers. Several years ago I was doing a 3d model of the P-40 for a flight sim and had some one send me some scanned documents from his father that worked at the Curtis factory at the time. The 100 P40s for the AVG had the engines Blueprinted and Balanced and I think slightly higher compression pistons. I don’t think I kept those documents and really wished I had as they were quite interesting. Also another tidbit on the P-40 was the Japanese had an operational squadron for a short time that was using captured P-40s.

The idea of the US in the Pacific is not so much to “compete” as it is to sap Japan’s power.  They have to keep their fleets closer together, they have to refrain from sending fighters deep in country, and they have to eventually put more boats in the water and thus have less cash.

As for historical accuracy, other people probably know better than I.  Even though I have a minor in History, it’s more focused on American Political/geographical history as well as ancient history.  I’ve pretty well avoided WWII except in US History class (which was a Survey of American history, nothing in depth.)

I think the ironic thing, atleast in my experience, is that subs are more useful for japan than the US, because the US has to take the battle to you.

Nah, I still find destroyers and cruisers to be of better utility.  Honestly, I only purchase submarines if I am desperate for some fodder before being annihilated by the enemy or if I am already dominant but the enemy has a significant fleet to sink, so I want some sneak attacks to hit with my fleet in two rounds.

In the former case, it’s to inflict punishment for sinking my fleet.

In the latter case, it’s most likely a purchase of 10+ submarines because I am a goddess on the board and have an insane amount of cash anyway. (Therefore I can buy 10 submarines and the ground units I want.)

Reason I like buying subs for my japan is cheep fodder.  Usually if US goes pacific i’m stalling to hold on to my money islands just long enough to crush russia, not to actually fight the US.  Because of that, cost is everything to me.

If I wanted an actual show down i’ll focus on fighters (as my 3 carriers can typically allow 12 to attack if based properly) and bombers with a sprinkling of DDs.