Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

No Pearl Habour attack

 
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 >> The War Room >> No Pearl Habour attack Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
No Pearl Habour attack - 11/27/2008 1:38:17 AM   
Major Ball

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 5/7/2004
Status: offline 		PBEM game...situation.

KB spotted 180 miles from Pearl with full CV fleet.

Airstrike from Pearl launched with 60+ Jap CAP enjoying a turkey shoot and the few DB's that get thru drop 2 bombs on the Akagi.

Pearl surrounded by Jap Subs and every ship in port without a scratch.

1st turn rule is more than 1 port attack.

Japanese player used the opportunity to slaughter the ships in Manilla harbour.

I suspect the KB isnt on a vacation cruise around Pearl and may strike turn 2.

Will not disclose position of US CV's someone may be listening.

Dont worry Baba I already plotted that move :)

What would you do?

Post #: 1
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/27/2008 1:48:54 PM   
Chris21wen

 

Posts: 6249
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Cottesmore, Rutland
Status: offline 		If the KB has not attacked on turn it's a very odd situation!  Assuming it's north of PH I'd head south at full speed, sub or no sub.  You chance of avoiding the subs is far greater than the KB.  However the KB could go anywhere but probably won't come any closer so the direction is gamble cause if you're caught at sea your chances of survival are far less than in PH.

(in reply to Major Ball)
Post #: 2
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/27/2008 3:17:43 PM   
bigbaba


Posts: 1238
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline 		hey gerry,

i wanted to blast the AF at pearl into the stone age..but for some strange reason, only 17 vals started and were unable to find the target.

-KB was close enough to strike.
-fighters were at 40% CAP..rest escort to pearl at 15k feet.
-DB/TB were at AF attack with pearl as target at 12k feet.

realy no idea what went wrong with the KB.

(in reply to Chris21wen)
Post #: 3
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/27/2008 8:47:40 PM   
Major Ball

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 5/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bigbaba

hey gerry,

i wanted to blast the AF at pearl into the stone age..but for some strange reason, only 17 vals started and were unable to find the target.

-KB was close enough to strike.
-fighters were at 40% CAP..rest escort to pearl at 15k feet.
-DB/TB were at AF attack with pearl as target at 12k feet.

realy no idea what went wrong with the KB.



Thought that may have been the case although the weather was overcast. Should be an interesting round 2!!!

I suppose if it was all predictable it wouldnt be much fun.....Must have got some ordinary luck in the rolls.

(in reply to bigbaba)
Post #: 4
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/27/2008 8:49:57 PM   
Major Ball

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 5/7/2004
Status: offline 		Well given the his attacks on Pearl airbase didnt find the target on turn 1 I think the Japs may have to do a runner or risk losing Carriers. Akagi already slowed with 2 hits.

(in reply to Chris21wen)
Post #: 5
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/27/2008 9:37:48 PM   
Japan


Posts: 754
Joined: 10/26/2007
From: Heaven on Earth (Scandinavia of course)
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Ball

1st turn rule is more than 1 port attack.

Japanese player used the opportunity to slaughter the ships in Manilla harbour.






A Question here, why should the Japanese not be able to Attack Manilla, Singapore and Pearl Harbour on Day 1 ??

Thay did historicly, and thay abseloutly do have the Capebilety to, so why should thay not be allowed to Air attack all the bases thay like on day 1 ???









_____________________________

AAR VIDEO
THE FIRST YEAR + THE SECOND YEAR
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2133035&mpage=1&key=&

(in reply to Major Ball)
Post #: 6
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 2:24:15 AM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

Thay did historicly, and thay abseloutly do have the Capebilety to, so why should thay not be allowed to Air attack all the bases thay like on day 1 ???


They did so historically?? i don't think so... they bombed Clark Field - not Manila, and not Singapore on Dec 7 (US date - Dec 8 in Manila and Singapore).

(in reply to Japan)
Post #: 7
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 2:43:45 AM   
dennishe


Posts: 1081
Joined: 9/22/2007
From: Leiden, the Netherlands
Status: offline 		But why attack PH at all? The carriers will never be there! The BBs and planes are obsolete. Sinking BBs is really tough and those that are damaged will be active between 3 to 9 months. Damage to the airfields and ports are repaired in no time. Thus I'm wondering: why PH? There must be more interesting things to do on turn one for KB. And I rather sink the BBs later on when at full sea. Perhaps it is better to let them escape from PH and intercept them at day 2 or 3 at sea...

_____________________________


(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 8
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 2:53:12 AM   
BrucePowers


Posts: 12094
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline 		You usually kill a lot of planes at Pearl Harbor. With the early US replacement rates, it takes forever to replace those aircraft.

(in reply to dennishe)
Post #: 9
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 6:36:21 AM   
Japan


Posts: 754
Joined: 10/26/2007
From: Heaven on Earth (Scandinavia of course)
Status: offline 		Well... my opinion would be this:

Japan had the capebilety to Air Attack Manilla, Singapore and Pearl Harbour at 7 December if thay wanted to,  why prevent them by some rule like the one mantioned above ??   That would be to deny them acces to a resource thay actualy had acces to if thay wanted.

As far as i understand, thay only decided to use it on Clark Field and Pearl Harbour,   evan tho im pritty sure thay attacked the Ports the following days.

Regardless, thay had the aircrafts, and thay know were the ports were,  so if thay wanted to thay could have, and IMHO should have attacked the ports on day 1.











< Message edited by Japan -- 11/28/2008 7:58:49 AM >

_____________________________

AAR VIDEO
THE FIRST YEAR + THE SECOND YEAR
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2133035&mpage=1&key=&

(in reply to BrucePowers)
Post #: 10
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 11:20:46 AM   
Yamato hugger

 

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline 		Well my .02 on it is he really screwed the pooch on not attacking it turn 1. And this is why I say that:

1) The US subs in Manila (except the S boats which few are in port) are subject to dud torpedoes. Their loss isnt that vital. I'm guessing he got maybe 5 or 6 of them.

2) Airbase attack at Pearl does indeed take out a whole bunch of hard to replace US aircraft (esp if you arent playing with PDUs). Now, this attack CAN be done turn 2 of course, but without benefit of the "first turn surprise" rule in effect, therefore the Jap is going to take heavy losses to his precious Navy pilots from AA fire. Not to mention that a decent allied player is going to move the critical stuff anyways so you arent even going to hit them.

3) Them old BBs may not be good for much but one thing they WILL do is flatten a Jap airfield in 1 turn. Not to mention they are worth a ton of points.

4) If you are expending bombs at Manila, then you are NOT expending them at Clark, meaning a lot of very hard to replace P-40s are going unscathed.

All in all in my opinion, a very bad move on the Japs part.

_____________________________


(in reply to Japan)
Post #: 11
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 12:31:10 PM   
Japan


Posts: 754
Joined: 10/26/2007
From: Heaven on Earth (Scandinavia of course)
Status: offline 		Yep I agree with you.

_____________________________

AAR VIDEO
THE FIRST YEAR + THE SECOND YEAR
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2133035&mpage=1&key=&

(in reply to Yamato hugger)
Post #: 12
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 12:42:59 PM   
Major Ball

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 5/7/2004
Status: offline 		Well orders are done..turn 2 awaits.

(in reply to Yamato hugger)
Post #: 13
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 1:00:39 PM   
BrucePowers


Posts: 12094
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline 		Good luck. Let us know what happens.

(in reply to Major Ball)
Post #: 14
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 1:49:00 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Japan

Well... my opinion would be this:

Japan had the capebilety to Air Attack Manilla, Singapore and Pearl Harbour at 7 December if thay wanted to, why prevent them by some rule like the one mantioned above ?? That would be to deny them acces to a resource thay actualy had acces to if thay wanted.

As far as i understand, thay only decided to use it on Clark Field and Pearl Harbour, evan tho im pritty sure thay attacked the Ports the following days.

Regardless, thay had the aircrafts, and thay know were the ports were, so if thay wanted to thay could have, and IMHO should have attacked the ports on day 1.











They could have - but they probably would not have achieved surprise (esp. with the Brits who were convinced the war was starting, having had a plane shot down the day before, and intel that said 7/8 December was going to be the start date, not to mention the PH attack had gone in several hours before and they were well aware of it)...

The game mechanics do NOT allow surprise at PH but no surprise at Singapore, so, i agree that a house rule limiting to one port attack is reasonable for the game.

In addition, from what i've read, the Japanese felt that once PH had started the war, they could not afford to attack the ports until the Allied air power had been neutralized... and this rule would support that.

< Message edited by rtrapasso -- 11/28/2008 10:41:33 PM >

(in reply to Japan)
Post #: 15
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 3:17:57 PM   
Coach Z

 

Posts: 576
Joined: 7/31/2007
From: New York
Status: offline 		Actually guys in one game I started vs the AI a long time ago (2 computer crashes ago...lol) the KB did not strike at Pearl HArbor. I had all the Kates on Port attack and all the Vals on Airfield attack, yet there was no strike!
So perhaps for whatever random factors or die rolls which caused this, also happened to the Majors opponent.



_____________________________

ZUCK

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 16
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 4:17:03 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline 		The rules I've always played by are the same as everyone else.  1 port attack on turn 1, but the allies can not move ships out of ports for that turn.  Otherwise, the allies can move out of port on turn 1 and no limits on port attacks (which won't matter, since the allies will move all the ships in striking range usually).

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Coach Z)
Post #: 17
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 4:42:59 PM   
bigbaba


Posts: 1238
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline 		KB was attacked but 70 zeros made a quick work with the attackers from pearl. in respond KB finaly started 2 naval strikes and sunk 1 american BB.

(in reply to BrucePowers)
Post #: 18
RE: No Pearl Habour attack - 11/28/2008 9:02:47 PM   
dennishe


Posts: 1081
Joined: 9/22/2007
From: Leiden, the Netherlands
Status: offline
quote:

Them old BBs may not be good for much but one thing they WILL do is flatten a Jap airfield in 1 turn. Not to mention they are worth a ton of points.


I agree that the BBs must be destroyed. I just think destroying them at PH does not bring much, because they can be raised and rebuild (this is how I interpret the 99% system damage) and are back in notime. I rather kill them at full sea. That way you can for example use KB to strike singapore and destroy the PoW and the repulse (if damaged in port they will be scuttled, otherwise they usually manage to escape) and then sail into the Java sea and destroy everything the Dutch have (ships planes and such) en cut off everything from the Philipines. After that the allies may have done attempts to reinfoce Wake and such and bring in their carriers and BBs. This will be an awesome opportunity to do the pacific fleet much more harm than KB could have done at PH. The allies have to protect the reinforcement convoys with carriers otherwise they are sitting ducks. If the allies did not do any attempt to reinforce wake or counter somewhere else, then you will be fine anyway. Your opponent is not going to hurt you in early 1942. After that all damage that you could have done at PH (damage some BBs) will be repaired anyways...


_____________________________


(in reply to bigbaba)
Post #: 19
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> The War Room >> No Pearl Habour attack Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.512