Looking for relatively new allied player

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Looking for relatively new allied player

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Opponents wanted >> Looking for relatively new allied player

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Looking for relatively new allied player - 10/15/2012 7:01:19 PM

tankboy

Posts: 56
Joined: 6/2/2005
Status: offline

Looking for an allied player that sees getting beat up for a year as a great opportunity to learn the game. We can talk scenario start date/conditions if you are interested. Some proposed house rules:

Japanese garrison - Japan must maintain two divisions in the PI, one division in Malaya/Singapore and one division and one BDE in the DEI after they fall. These garrision requirements prevent the Japanese from loading up their whole army and heading to India.

No movement of Dutch ground or air units out of DEI until fall of Batavia or Sporjaba (sp?). Dutch units cannot change their higher HQ until then.

Allied 4 engine bombers stay above 10K on naval attack.

No Allied bombers below 1K before 1 JAN 43. Exception is bombers with torpedoes as default upload (Beauforts, etc.).

No Japanese naval forces of any kind E. of Singapore until it falls.

No Japanese naval forces, except subs, E. of Rangoon until it falls.

Japanese sub doctrine off.

Both sides no more than four vessels/ASW TF.

No Allied strategic Bombing in Areas which Japan conquer AFTER December 41 and no Japanese strategic Bombing in China.

If you are interested let me know and we can move the conversation to email.

Post #: 1

RE: Looking for relatively new allied player - 10/16/2012 12:54:47 PM

tocaff

Posts: 4781
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: USA now in Brasil
Status: offline

Why the limit on Dutch movement assuming that other spots will be attacked before those 2 bases fall?

No limit on PT TFs?

_____________________________

Todd

I never thought that doing an AAR would be so time consuming and difficult.
www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2080768

(in reply to tankboy)

Post #: 2

RE: Looking for relatively new allied player - 10/16/2012 6:07:50 PM

tankboy

Posts: 56
Joined: 6/2/2005
Status: offline

I find that is it relatively easy to evacuate a lot of Dutch airfield engineer units and give the Allies a bump on aircraft capacity in Oz that is nowhere near historical. Pinning the Dutch in place is politically historical and does not give the Allies an unusual advantage. I have pulled numerous Dutch units out of the DEI and manned every rear airfield in Oz which allowed the Australian units to go to the front. I was able to convert and rebuild units all over Oz with ease.

Ref. PT TFs. I know this is a concern but have never experienced it. In all my games the Japanese solve a PT TF problem by putting Zeroes on a naval attack mission with low altitude. They chew up any PT TF within 11 hexes and the problem is solved. What do you think?

Any additional HR's you would add or subtract?

(in reply to tocaff)

Post #: 3

RE: Looking for relatively new allied player - 10/16/2012 6:18:36 PM

tocaff

Posts: 4781
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: USA now in Brasil
Status: offline

I would allow the movement of the Dutch within their own command area. PPs are a tough thing for the Allied player early on and the amount of units that could be flown out of the PIs or via ship from the DEA is not a major concern.

I'd limit the PTs to a max of 6 per TF as it's historical save for a couple of times during the war.

How about Allied 4E bombers with a minimum altitude of between 10-15K ft on naval attack, B-29s never and PB4Ys exempt from this restriction.

You also might consider the requirement of paying PPs to move units from Manchuria to anywhere else, etc.

< Message edited by tocaff -- 10/16/2012 6:20:20 PM >

_____________________________

Todd

I never thought that doing an AAR would be so time consuming and difficult.
www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2080768

(in reply to tankboy)

Post #: 4

RE: Looking for relatively new allied player - 10/18/2012 9:44:21 PM

BPRE

Posts: 624
Joined: 10/16/2000
From: Stockholm,Sweden
Status: offline

I would definitely want a HR about using PPs to move units from both Manchuria and China out of their areas.The garrisons you require are very small compared to what's available in those areas. A lot of the Manchurian forces are of course locked if you don't want to activate the Russians but in case you manage to conquer most of China you could march an army across to India.

/BPRE

(in reply to tocaff)

Post #: 5

RE: Looking for relatively new allied player - 10/19/2012 8:40:11 PM

tankboy

Posts: 56
Joined: 6/2/2005
Status: offline

Ground forces are so expensive for PP that I don't see this as a problem. A good player can make the Chinese very tough for the Japanese so I don't see many Japanese from the China garrison making it to India or anywhere else very early. Perhaps in '43 the Japanese can start pulling them out to strengthen their perimeter.

(in reply to BPRE)

Post #: 6

RE: Looking for relatively new allied player - 10/20/2012 12:06:00 PM

BPRE

Posts: 624
Joined: 10/16/2000
From: Stockholm,Sweden
Status: offline

As I understand it you can march them out from China to India/Indochina without paying PPs just like you can march from Manchuria to China. I haven't tried it myself so I might be wrong.
In any case a HR like that won't hurt because if it isn't possible it makes no difference and if it is possible it makes a lot of difference.

/BPRE

(in reply to tankboy)

Post #: 7

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Opponents wanted >> Looking for relatively new allied player

Page: [1]