Unbelievable PH attack

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Unbelievable PH attack

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 >> The War Room >> Unbelievable PH attack

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 4:52:10 AM

offenseman

Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline

I just ran turn one of a new PBEM and my 12/7 attack on PH was a complete disaster. I did not sight a single BB or CA. My air units attacked en masse and sank or damaged 20-30 ships, the largest being a CL, the smallest being several PT boats. We are not running historical start so I am at a loss to explain this one.

Has anyone seen a PH attack like this?

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

Post #: 1

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 5:04:00 AM

CapAndGown

Posts: 3206
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: offenseman

I just ran turn one of a new PBEM and my 12/7 attack on PH was a complete disaster. I did not sight a single BB or CA. My air units attacked en masse and sank or damaged 20-30 ships, the largest being a CL, the smallest being several PT boats. We are not running historical start so I am at a loss to explain this one.

Has anyone seen a PH attack like this?

Sight? Did you mean Sink? If the latter, then yes, I have seen it. I did not sink any BBs on Dec. 7 in my game against witpqs. The raid the next day, however, managed to take out three of them.

(in reply to offenseman)

Post #: 2

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 5:44:06 AM

offenseman

Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline

Nope I meant sight. They did not see them because they were not there. To test it out, I just set up a PBEM and on the Allied turn put all 8 BBs, all the CAs, several CLs, and 6-8 long range DDs in a TF and sent them due east. They got out and left before the IJN attack. I did not think that was something that needed a house rule.

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to CapAndGown)

Post #: 3

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 6:04:14 AM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

Most house rules prevent Allies from creating any new TF's the first day.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to offenseman)

Post #: 4

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 6:14:52 AM

offenseman

Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline

Hmmph. I guess I should read that section of AARs more often. lol I am going to discuss it with my opponent. He is a reasonable man and I am sure we can come up with something like a restart.

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 5

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 7:02:51 AM

akdreemer

Posts: 1028
Joined: 10/3/2004
From: Anchorage, Alaska
Status: offline

Which is why I prefer historical first turn. Never like the ability of the Japanese to redo their attacks while the Allies are frozen. I also have real concern about the KB sticking around for day two when they historically they had insufficient fuel. Unfortunately the games gives all ships in pre-game task forces full fuel bunkers. So you might also suggest as a house rule that the KB must retreat after first day.

_____________________________

(in reply to offenseman)

Post #: 6

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 8:15:38 AM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

Sight? Did you mean Sink? If the latter, then yes, I have seen it. I did not sink any BBs on Dec. 7 in my game against witpqs. The raid the next day, however, managed to take out three of them.

To be fair, they sank on the 8th before a shot was fired. They had high flooding and massive fires and could not be saved. So I would say that your initial attack got 3 BB's.

(in reply to CapAndGown)

Post #: 7

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 1:56:12 PM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: offenseman

Nope I meant sight.� They did not see them because they were not there. To test it out, I just set up a PBEM and on the Allied turn put all 8 BBs, all the CAs, several CLs, and 6-8 long range DDs in a TF and sent them due east.� They got out and left before the IJN attack.� I did not think that was something that needed a house rule.��

You wanted non-historic so that you could change all your moves..., and apparently your opponent thought that was a good idea as well. What's good for the goose...

One of the reasons I like the 12/08/41 start.

(in reply to offenseman)

Post #: 8

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 2:35:28 PM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: offenseman

I just ran turn one of a new PBEM and my 12/7 attack on PH was a complete disaster. I did not sight a single BB or CA. My air units attacked en masse and sank or damaged 20-30 ships, the largest being a CL, the smallest being several PT boats. We are not running historical start so I am at a loss to explain this one.

Has anyone seen a PH attack like this?

thought about your opponent moving them out?

_____________________________

(in reply to offenseman)

Post #: 9

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 2:53:10 PM

offenseman

Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

thought about your opponent moving them out?

No, never thought he would consider doing something that would have made Kimmel look like he had read books written on the subject after the war. Ignorance on my part.

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 10

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 3:02:18 PM

offenseman

Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

You wanted non-historic so that you could change all your moves..., and apparently your opponent thought that was a good idea as well. What's good for the goose...

One of the reasons I like the 12/08/41 start.

If IJ does not change some moves, then the Allied player knows what is going to happen and again gets benefit of the use of hindsight. You now, like smashing the Wake, Tarawa, Makin, etc invasions. Just because they were somehow gifted a crystal ball and Japan was not. Moving battleship row out is similar to using the asterisked amphib TFs that are slated to go to Malaya to capture Palembang on 12/8 or 12/9. Imagine that, sailing 130 ships past Singapore without anyone noticing just because you get a freakish movement rate.

Should I have placed a house rule in place that someone mentioned most PBEMS have? In hindsight yes. Should I have started this thread, NO.

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to mike scholl 1)

Post #: 11

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 4:11:07 PM

mike scholl 1

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: offenseman

If IJ does not change some moves, then the Allied player knows what is going to happen and again gets benefit of the use of hindsight. You now, like smashing the Wake, Tarawa, Makin, etc invasions. Just because they were somehow gifted a crystal ball and Japan was not. Moving battleship row out is similar to using the asterisked amphib TFs that are slated to go to Malaya to capture Palembang on 12/8 or 12/9. Imagine that, sailing 130 ships past Singapore without anyone noticing just because you get a freakish movement rate.

Should I have placed a house rule in place that someone mentioned most PBEMS have? In hindsight yes. Should I have started this thread, NO.

I agree..., but people have tried it (and tried to justify it). And the

was meant to indicate you were being teased, not "taken to task".

But I still prefer the 12/08/41 start. You can change destinations and timing on the first turn to deal with the problems you mention (leaving an Allied opponant who tries to make use of "hindsight" floating uselessly in the wrong locations). But it's about the only way to ensure that the "suprise" and other bonuses are legitimate---the opening moves are all historical, so the opening move "bennies" are all justified. Anything else is subject to controversy...

(in reply to offenseman)

Post #: 12

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 5:36:58 PM

offenseman

Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline

No I really shouldn't have started this thread. I was so flabbergasted to have had no BBs sighted that I never stopped to think that he might have moved them out! lol After I started this, it dawned on me that was what happened. I should be taken to task for that if nothing else. ;)

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to mike scholl 1)

Post #: 13

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 6:09:24 PM

seydlitz_slith

Posts: 2036
Joined: 6/16/2002
From: Danville, IL
Status: offline

Well, if he is at sea you should track him down and sink him. You have a lot of Subs around Pearl at start. If they did not sight the ships then you know which way they did not go. With no air cover and your faster task forces you can track them down and sink them. At sea they will stay sunk.

(in reply to offenseman)

Post #: 14

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 6:13:13 PM

Q-Ball

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: seydlitz

Well, if he is at sea you should track him down and sink him. You have a lot of Subs around Pearl at start. If they did not sight the ships then you know which way they did not go. With no air cover and your faster task forces you can track them down and sink them. At sea they will stay sunk.

That's a good point, and unless you changed the start position (which he was probably counting on), chances are they headed Southeast. Split KB into 2 or 3 parts to cover more ground, and get them.

Even in the absence of House Rule, that's super-gamey. I would ask for a re-do.

_____________________________

(in reply to seydlitz_slith)

Post #: 15

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/20/2010 6:27:35 PM

offenseman

Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline

As expected we are going to restart with a house rule of no new TFs for Allies. I am also not going to attack PH more than once.

Seydlitz, I did think of tracking him down and actually ran some turns to test it and it was real shaky at best if I could catch him. Both moving at full speed, I have less than a ten knot advantage and at least 320 miles to make up. I am 4 hexes west of PH an done hex south. My subs on that side were largely transiting toward the WC (as you do have done it

) so they make for a nice picket line already. Even so, KB is pretty far away and has to go around Hawaii before it can pursue. I reckoned that if he went for SF or LA at full speed for several days, I'd never catch him. It did cross my mind though to sink them in deep water. :)

Q-Ball- yeah thats what I thought too. Thanks

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 16

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/29/2010 6:44:08 PM

RevRick

Posts: 2617
Joined: 9/16/2000
From: Thomasville, GA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: offenseman

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

thought about your opponent moving them out?

No, never thought he would consider doing something that would have made Kimmel look like he had read books written on the subject after the war. Ignorance on my part.

To be fair, if Kimmel had really thought about the war warning he had received, and remembered King's raid on Pearl Harbor on a Sunday Morning as part of a fleet exercise some years earlier - the IJN could have received a much warmer welcome then they did.
And, it could have been worse. What if Uncle Franklin had put King in command at CincPac and Kimmel in CincLant. King was not the same person Kimmel was, and would have had another outlook on war preparations. The signs were all there, they were abysmally ignored. Besides, Kimmel's idea of what to do when war came was to assemble the fleet and raid Kwajalein. That's where they might be headed. Idiotic in 20/20 hindsight, but that was the plan, man.

_____________________________

"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.� ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(in reply to offenseman)

Post #: 17

RE: Unbelievable PH attack - 6/29/2010 7:21:29 PM

Nikademus

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

Which is why I prefer historical first turn. Never like the ability of the Japanese to redo their attacks while the Allies are frozen. I also have real concern about the KB sticking around for day two when they historically they had insufficient fuel. Unfortunately the games gives all ships in pre-game task forces full fuel bunkers. So you might also suggest as a house rule that the KB must retreat after first day.

I've never minded it. In fact as Allies i've yet to do anything first turn while allowing Player 1 to modify certain aspects if desired (within reason of course......my opponents and i always discuss house rules and other such things before starting). Given the Allied advantages in future material and resources, its no biggie for me. It takes a brave person to play Japan in AE. Its also administratively tougher to play Player 1 in the initial months because he/she's on the offensive. Player two can get away with a more relaxed approach while on the defensive. I can spend the first few turns getting rid of all those annoying 2-plane HQ units on the West Coast and PH for example.

_____________________________

(in reply to akdreemer)

Post #: 18