Gamey or no?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Gamey or no?

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Gamey or no?

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 3:58:39 AM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

I wanted to ask this question, as I am playing an old and esteemed opponent as Japan. It is 4/15/42 or thereabouts, and I had a force of roughly 3 divisions marching on Katherine, where there was a collection of about 15,000 Allied troops, consisting mostly of 2 Bdes, and the Gull/Sparrow Force, plus other troops.

I pulled most of my units up to Katherine. I sent 2 Recon Regts circling around to the South, and then they moved north back into Katherine from the road south. As a result, the only retreat path was directly east, which is where these troops retreated to.

At this point I am in a clear advantage to block the road south and probably destroy those units entirely, as they are completely in the open.

Was that gamey to send the Recon units around to block escape path? Using a fragment I think is gamey, but not sure about a Recon Regt.

There is no doubt that as Japan it's tempting to keep those divisions un-Rebuilt in order to use the Recon Regts for....well, recon.

Thoughts?

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 4:32:00 AM

wwengr

Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline

Definately not gamey. A typical Japanese recon regiment had 2 motorized infantry companies (or cavalry), 1 motorized HMG company, 1 motorized antitank company, and 2 tankette companies. The were light combat units made to travel fast. In addition to the traditional recon sneak and peak mission, the Japanese recon regiments performed screening, exploitation of the enemy's flanks and rear areas, etc.

Using cavalry units (fast light units) to develop the battle and out manuever the enemy was much older than WWII and Blitzkrieg was not a WWII German invention. You used the units as intended. The fact that the Allied player did not use a screening force to prevent your movement was simply your advantage.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 2

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 5:06:28 AM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

No way, Q-ball. Not gamey.

You're a gentlemen and a scholar for thinking of your opponent, but you cut off his egress with a reasonable force-most of those recon mechanized regiments have between 25-50 AV each, don't they? Doom on him for allowing you to do so.

Oh yeah-Banzai!

_____________________________

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 3

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 5:11:57 AM

stuman

Posts: 3907
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline

I do not think it is gamey Q-Ball.

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley

(in reply to wwengr)

Post #: 4

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 5:18:57 AM

pad152

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline

First you cut them off, then you destroy them, that's war!

(in reply to stuman)

Post #: 5

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 5:53:25 AM

ckk

Posts: 1268
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: Pensacola Beach FL
Status: offline

Gamey no War yes

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 6

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 6:13:22 AM

Cuttlefish

Posts: 2454
Joined: 1/24/2007
From: Oregon, USA
Status: offline

Gamey? I'll tell you what's gamey. Descending on an innocent Japanese trade mission at Timor and butchering all of the traders, not to mention a Shinto priest and a delegation from the Nagoya Friends of the Poor, that's gamey! Fiend!

What? Recon units to cut off retreat? Oh. I agree with the others. Perfectly okay, go for it.

_____________________________

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 7

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 7:02:11 AM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

You're too nice Q-Ball, you did a text book attack.

_____________________________

(in reply to Cuttlefish)

Post #: 8

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 7:27:23 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

Not Gamey,

Players of all FB status will have realise you need to cover their flanks and defend in depth in open terrain.

Same goes to defending a base from an amphib attack, protect your LOC/retreat and hide from NGFS by having a reserve 1 hex back.

< Message edited by JeffK -- 1/5/2010 7:28:52 AM >

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 9

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 8:53:27 AM

Mistmatz

Posts: 1399
Joined: 10/16/2005
Status: offline

Not gamey at all.

Very different from standard WitP as you can encircle enemy units much easier. Its one of WW2 trademarks that warfare relied much more on mobility and maneuverability. So AE is a major improvement regarding realism in this case.

Why do you think it might be gamey?

_____________________________

If you gained knowledge through the forum, why not putting it into the AE wiki?

http://witp-ae.wikia.com/wiki/War_in_the_Pacific:_Admiral%27s_Edition_Wiki

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 10

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 9:07:06 AM

Fishbed

Posts: 1822
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cuttlefish

Gamey? I'll tell you what's gamey. Descending on an innocent Japanese trade mission at Timor and butchering all of the traders, not to mention a Shinto priest and a delegation from the Nagoya Friends of the Poor, that's gamey! Fiend!

What? Recon units to cut off retreat? Oh. I agree with the others. Perfectly okay, go for it.

Yeah! Cuttlefish is right! Let's ban Q-Ball for gameyness.
Or he may surrender now, and be a good boy.

_____________________________

(in reply to Cuttlefish)

Post #: 11

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 12:37:19 PM

Riva Ridge

Posts: 116
Joined: 9/17/2006
Status: offline

Not gamey

(in reply to Fishbed)

Post #: 12

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 1:33:33 PM

wwengr

Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline

It would only be Gamey if you did it to me!

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to Riva Ridge)

Post #: 13

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 1:55:35 PM

Panther Bait

Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline

Not gamey at all. I might be biased because I did something similar with SNLF and tank regiments, but I think it is viable anyway. You're opponent could have retreated when he noticed the flanking move, but didn't.

Mike

_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to wwengr)

Post #: 14

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 2:32:01 PM

cantona2

Posts: 3749
Joined: 5/21/2007
From: Gibraltar
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I wanted to ask this question, as I am playing an old and esteemed opponent as Japan. It is 4/15/42 or thereabouts, and I had a force of roughly 3 divisions marching on Katherine, where there was a collection of about 15,000 Allied troops, consisting mostly of 2 Bdes, and the Gull/Sparrow Force, plus other troops.

I pulled most of my units up to Katherine. I sent 2 Recon Regts circling around to the South, and then they moved north back into Katherine from the road south. As a result, the only retreat path was directly east, which is where these troops retreated to.

At this point I am in a clear advantage to block the road south and probably destroy those units entirely, as they are completely in the open.

Was that gamey to send the Recon units around to block escape path? Using a fragment I think is gamey, but not sure about a Recon Regt.

There is no doubt that as Japan it's tempting to keep those divisions un-Rebuilt in order to use the Recon Regts for....well, recon.

Thoughts?

Not at all Gamey Q-Ball in my opinion.

Classic breakthrough and encirclement tactics. You can use a few panzer divisions and make a ring of steel or a few regiments to make a weaker one. In the first example it will difficult ot break out unless the encirceld force is huge or relief comes frm outside the pocket. in the second example a breakthrough by your opponent is feasble as he can attack a weak point in the pocket, concentrate and breakout

_____________________________

1966 was a great year for English Football...Eric was born

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 15

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 2:34:43 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

This is a tough one for your opponent, because he has to recognize the threat of envelopment and make the decision to stand firm or retreat to prevent encirclement. This is open terrain and your tactics were sensible and in keeping with what you would expect an army to do. It's hard to give up a base, but your opponent should have given ground.

(in reply to cantona2)

Post #: 16

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 3:30:11 PM

carnifex

Posts: 1295
Joined: 7/1/2002
From: Latitude 40� 48' 43N Longtitude 74� 7' 29W
Status: offline

If you think that's gamey wait until your pilots start slamming perfectly good airplanes into US carrier decks. If you're going to play as the Japanese, you better toughen up :)

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 17

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 3:45:20 PM

tocaff

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

Not gamey as maneuver is all important to combat. Flanking your enemy by using light, fast units is a good strategy. I suppose this means that I'm firmly with everyone else here.

_____________________________

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 carnifex)

Post #: 18

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 3:55:13 PM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

I don't think it's gamey, and I do think it is "legal", but this is one thing that I'm not sure WitP or AE handles all that well. If there are 2 divisions being encircled by a small recon rgt, they might successfully break out of the encirclement to a large extent. The pockets created by such actions (particularly by smaller forces) were notoriously leeky. Also, forces that were encircled were often inclined to fight harder before surrender if no retreat option was available. Furthermore, taking a base in AE is way too much of an all-or nothing affair and often takes much less time than it should (it either falls or it dosen't, when it probably should be more of a percentage control that goes back and fourth as the battle waxes).

All this considerd, AE handles this much better than WitP and of course you should go for it (unless you have an agreement not to do that sort of thing).

Andrew

(in reply to carnifex)

Post #: 19

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 3:57:22 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

Not gamey. In addition to what others have said, remember that he could detail stronger units to attack into and smash your blocking force. Of course, then he might not have the strength to stand up to your main force. What you did was classic Sun-Tzu.

By forcing him to retreat when he thought he was prepared to stand you might also say it was classic Bruce Lee:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to carnifex)

Post #: 20

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 4:29:01 PM

CMDRMCTOAST

Posts: 673
Joined: 5/3/2003
From: Mount Vernon wa..
Status: offline

Its only gamey when you land 11 troops from a submarine behind them just before the assualt....:)

_____________________________

The essence of military genius is to bring under
consideration all of the tendencies of the mind
and soul in combination towards the business of
war..... Karl von Clausewitz

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 21

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 4:55:28 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Not gamey. In addition to what others have said, remember that he could detail stronger units to attack into and smash your blocking force. Of course, then he might not have the strength to stand up to your main force. What you did was classic Sun-Tzu.

By forcing him to retreat when he thought he was prepared to stand you might also say it was classic Bruce Lee:

Enter the Dragon.

classic.

_____________________________

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 22

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 5:09:15 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

Enter the Dragon.

classic.

Saw it a couple of weeks ago. Good every time.

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 23

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 5:25:51 PM

Oldguard1970

Posts: 578
Joined: 7/19/2006
From: Hiawassee, GA
Status: offline

Of course it's gamey! It's rather like what those pesky colonists did when they hid behind trees and walls to fire at those nice straight lines of Redcoats.

You are supposed to pile everyone into a hex and slug it out like a real man.

_____________________________

"Rangers Lead the Way!"

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 24

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 6:18:48 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CMDRMCTOAST

Its only gamey when you land 11 troops from a submarine behind them just before the assualt....:)

That I agree is gamey. Same with a Para fragment. I think using fragments for this type of purpose is gamey.

I think I'm OK though because I used 2 whole Regts, about 100 AV. That's a real unit.

_____________________________

(in reply to CMDRMCTOAST)

Post #: 25

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 7:25:06 PM

frank1970

Posts: 1678
Joined: 9/1/2000
From: Bayern
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishbed

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cuttlefish

Gamey? I'll tell you what's gamey. Descending on an innocent Japanese trade mission at Timor and butchering all of the traders, not to mention a Shinto priest and a delegation from the Nagoya Friends of the Poor, that's gamey! Fiend!

What? Recon units to cut off retreat? Oh. I agree with the others. Perfectly okay, go for it.

Yeah! Cuttlefish is right! Let's ban Q-Ball for gameyness.
Or he may surrender now, and be a good boy.

Hm, are you the esteemed oponent?

_____________________________

If you like what I said love me,if you dislike what I say ignore me!

"Extra Bavaria non est vita! Et sic est vita non est ita!"

(in reply to Fishbed)

Post #: 26

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 8:25:51 PM

Cuttlefish

Posts: 2454
Joined: 1/24/2007
From: Oregon, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cuttlefish

Gamey? I'll tell you what's gamey. Descending on an innocent Japanese trade mission at Timor and butchering all of the traders, not to mention a Shinto priest and a delegation from the Nagoya Friends of the Poor, that's gamey! Fiend!

What? Recon units to cut off retreat? Oh. I agree with the others. Perfectly okay, go for it.

Hm, are you the esteemed oponent?

No, I'm the other opponent, the hapless one.

(in reply to frank1970)

Post #: 27

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 10:00:32 PM

Hemajor

Posts: 18
Joined: 3/16/2004
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Well, I have to reply to this, because I'm the Allied part of the game.
I have never complained about using recce units as intended and blocking the retreat route. But the retreat hexes were not blocked. The units went INTO the "combat hex" and left the two hexes empty. By entering the hex I felt they used (or rather mis-used) the new hex side control feature to control the retreat direction.
Just my opinion.

Erik

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 28

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 10:11:57 PM

rader

Posts: 1238
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

Oh! So the encircling units could actually attack after they had changed hexside control from the rear. Effectively, they could encircle and fight at the same time... This could be rationalized as they are attackig from that side of the pocket after the ring was formed. However, that definitely sounds much more gamey than I thought at first (the units staying behind preventing retreat). Wow, that's a tough one. I mean I suppose that's what the designers intended, but I never though about the implications of this!

Andrew

(in reply to Hemajor)

Post #: 29

RE: Gamey or no? - 1/5/2010 10:26:56 PM

Smeulders

Posts: 1879
Joined: 8/9/2009
Status: offline

I still think it's legit, but it is a bit more on the edge then sitting in the next hex over. It still has the same effect on leading the retreat direction, but it makes it impossible to launch an attack specifically on the blocking troops. So on the one hand, they are 40 miles away from the main force in the rear of the enemy with all the benefits of that situation, but on the other the main force is apparently close enough to lend support in case the blocking force gets attacked.

If I had been in the same situation, with a relief force a hex away, I'd not be pleased. In that case my relief force would probably have broken open the encirclement. However, if it were only the troops in the encircled hex, I don't see why my opponent wouldn't be allowed to do an attack from multiple sides if the opportunity presented itself. (You could always have detached part of your stack to the hex where you wanted to retreat to to safeguard the retreat route.) It's a bit of a tricky situation though.

(in reply to rader)

Post #: 30