Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

Gamey - that Russian CD fort would be blasting away at the first sight of the Japanese.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

Though I would jump in here with a couple of comments because I'm the Japanese player.

I thought for context, I should paste in my "thinking out loud email" (see below). Note that the original plan was to land on the CD guns at the same time as running past them to simulate a surpise landing/forcing of the river.

***Important: After some testing, I have determined that the CD guns will not fire at any passing ships, even if the Soviets are fully activated in a previous turn. This is probably not WAD, as I imagine that the river mouth was supposed to be designated as a strait (but was not for whatever reason).***


////

I think there are several issues at play here.

1. Is it gamey to sail far up the Amur without triggering a Russian activation?

Probably is, I'll give you that. I can't imagine a fleet sailing up there not triggering some kind of reaction.

2. Is it gamey to be able to sail past without the CD guns firing during a surprise attack?

Maybe, maybe not - this is far less clear to me. It depends on how much authority the local commanders had, and even if they had it, whether they used it. I'll give you that the Russians and Japanese were probably on alert. However, remember that the Russians at the start of Barbarossa had explicit orders not to fire back even if fired upon, lest they provide a pretext for war. The Russians were in no mood to get embroiled in a war with Japan anytime from June 22, 1941 to early 1945, and may have taken extreme steps to avoid it. There are tons of examples in history of fleets sailing past defenses or escaping because the defenders were unprepared to stop them. For example, the Goeben was allowed to escape by its British pursuers because the DOw had not come into play. I honestly don't know if this is gamey or not.

3.) Is it reasonable that a landing party of sufficient AV could supress the CD guns for a fleet to go past?

Again, I could see this either way. This kind of thing has certainly happened in history both ways.

4.) Should it be illegal to perform an action that is not dissallowed by the actual game rules or by house rules?

I'm not really sure how I feel about gaminess, but I guess I could sumarize my thoughts by saying that I generally believe that the game does have some limitations, and it is in the realm of house rules to prevent or limit gaminess. Some kind of HR on this moving upriver issue is probably a good idea (but I wasn't even aware of the possibility of this at the start of the game). If there are loopholes, the rules should change to close them - or in the case of WITP, this often means that house rules should be agreed upon (either ahead of time or when we discover a particular failing of the system). Now, I don't think this necessarily gives the players carte blanche to do anything that the system allows. In fact, I considered port striking San Diego on Dec 7 to bag the Saratoga, asked the forum about it, and decided it was too gamey. But I felt that even mentioning anything on the subject of Russia would very much let the cat out of the bag. In this case it does mean from my perspective that you are asking for a house rule. I guess it depends on how much of a game vs. simulation you consider it. I don't mind a little gaminess that is allowed by the rules provided it dosen't bother either player. But this apparently dosen't fall into that category.

I'm not really proposing anything specific here, just thinking out loud. The main concern I have is that whatever we decide may impact how I feel about the whole Russian adventure, which has been occupying my planning for pretty much the whole game. If I have to make big changes on what's allowed at this point, it might bring the whole structure down. I'll have to think some more about it. For starters, I have no idea what the CD guns would do to a fleet sailing past. But I will say that the whole attack on Russia is based on the navigability of the Amur and being able to land at Komsomolsk sooner rather than later. Without that, I never would have considered attacking Russia in the first place.


///

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jzanes

I'm the allies and it's May 1942. For the last few weeks, I've suspected my PBEM opponent plans to attack Russia. On the latest turn, I spotted a japanese TF sailing up the river towards Komsomolsk. The soviets are still not active. There is a soviet base with a CD fort at Nikolaevsk guarding the mouth of the river. My opponent confirms that his intention is to land at Komsomolsk on D-day as part of his surprise attack.

My opponent and I are bouncing emails back and forth regarding whether this is gamey or not. This discussion is very cordial and I'm sure we'll work it out without too much bloodshed. But anyways, What do you think? Gamey or ok and why?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

If the river is the border and his ships are okay for the river size then it is not gamey. Unless there was some sort of river demilitarization agreement between both countries. It is bit silly because ships are highly vulnerable in rivers.

quote:

river doesnt look like much of a border with soviet bases on both sides.....

quote:

far too far North to be the border.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

To me the truly amazing thing here is that a number of players can delude themselves and rationalize reasons that this WOULD NOT be "Gamey to the Max".   If a Russian force sailed past Yokahama and began the war with a landing on the Emperor's Palace Lawn, the JFB's would go ballistic...., but as long as it's the Japanese side doing something irrational, someone will find a way to "justify" it (at least in their own minds). 

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

To me the truly amazing thing here is that a number of players can delude themselves and rationalize reasons that this WOULD NOT be "Gamey to the Max".   If a Russian force sailed past Yokahama and began the war with a landing on the Emperor's Palace Lawn, the JFB's would go ballistic...., but as long as it's the Japanese side doing something irrational, someone will find a way to "justify" it (at least in their own minds). 

I never said it wasn't gamey. I said sailing up the river WAS gamey, but I think you could go either way on sailing past the guns on surprise while still causing activation, and that just because something is gamey does not necessarily mean it should be an illegal move. It should be discussed and possibly house ruled against.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

I don't interpret the word "gamey" to mean something that is against the rules of the game and therefore necessarily illegal. For WITP, I rather see it as something that is ahistorical or strange but allowed by the game. This is the same thing as having a Japanese TF make a magic first turn move to invade India on turn 1, or CV hunting because you know their setup location. We discussed these and dissallowed them because they are quite gamey (and rightly so). We have now implemented a house rule requiring that the Russians be activated before moving up the river. I fail to see the problem.