RE: One Weird Battle

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: One Weird Battle

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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: One Weird Battle

Page: << < prev 44 45 [46] 47 48 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 2:51:52 AM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Is this portion of our show illustrative of how this game is going now?

Well you could pull a rabbit out of your hat! ,sigh., knowing many will not get that.

Oh and its, "While I watch from the safety of the Range Rover, Jim will collect the semen sample from the bull rhinocerous"

The horn is really just a giant hair. Really. I learned that in 2nd grade. (Jim may not care.)

I hereby dub this "The Baby Thread." Really gotta have some turns soon.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to vettim89)

Post #: 1351

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 10:21:27 AM

Grollub

Posts: 6674
Joined: 10/9/2005
From: Lulea, Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

quote:

Thanks for remembering and, unfortunately due to NO SNOW this winter, we have not had a chance to work on the Mark TWO version of the Japanese Snow Fort.

The citizens of the Village of Northport are happy to report that we have your snow. It was mistakenly delivered here. We would appreciate it if you would come and pick it up. We don't know what to do with it anymore. We have taken to throwing it in the harbor but Northport is probably only a level 2 or 3 port at best so we hay be running out of room if we get the promised addtional foot tomorrow.

There was a guy here in Sweden who tried to sell, on an auction site, "brand new snow" for ~$1 per cubic meter, on the condition that the buyer came to his home to take it off the ground

He actually got one responder, who said he will buy the snow, but he could only pick it up in June ...

_____________________________

�Not mastering metaphores is like cooking pasta when the train is delayed"

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 1352

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 3:57:23 PM

Canoerebel

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

11/3/42

I included this note when I sent Brad the latest turn: Bullwinkle says my AAR is turning into the Thread. Yesterday, we had a run of posts devoted to favorite comic strips and barbecue.

Battle South of Poona: The Allied army clobbered the three retreating IJA divisions south of Poona, booting them another hex south and inflicting at least 800 squads destroyed (half infantry, half support). Three hundred Allied armor in reserve followed, but I decided not to attack tomorrow. I'd rather await arrival of the bulk of my army. The armor should all be in place to attack day after tomorrow. These three IJA divisions 5, 12 and 38) are wrecked and will be all but destroyed by the time this chase is over.

Battle of Poona: The Allies achieved 12:1 odds at Poona. The two IJA divisions (6th Guards and 54th) can't retreat because the Allies control all hexsides. The Japanese didn't take horrific losses, but they're cause is hopeless. These two divisions, less whatever Brad might have evacuated at some point, are finished.

48th Division: So at least five IJA divisions have been essentially destroyed thus far, with one more to go. 48th Division remains on the yellow road south of Bombay and west of Poona. It's too late for it to go anywhere that would offer even a long shot of success. It will be destroyed.

Goa: For some reason, the Allied bombardment TF remained in place and refused to go into Goa to bombard. They'll try again tomorrow, assuming the commander figures out that ships perform better when they move. Meanwhile, the Allied heavy bombers performed a devastating raid on the airfield, destroying about 60 aircraft (mostly Tojos) on the ground and scoring more than 200 hits on the field.

Operational Impact: The campaign has taken shape so that I now know that six IJA divisions will be destroyed in the Japanese withdrawal from western India. One other division (1st) was treated pretty rudely. The other ten or so divisions will have made it out without a problem. The Allies are advancing steadily in southern India, and I would expect the Japanese to quickly retreat from any base that the Allied army nears. Sheer distance will mean the campaign to "liberate" the southern end will take awhile, but by the end of 1942 the Allies should control all or most of the southern territory. I don't yet knwo whether Brad will make stands at Ceylon and the Calcutta area. He has time to do so, but he'd have to commit the KB to defend Ceylon. I doubt he'll do so with the war heating up in the Pacific in 1943. I doubt he'd try to hold Calcutta, either, in the face of a 3,000 or 5,000 AV army with huge numbers of aircraft committed.

Strategic Impact: I can't imagine any other way that the Allies could have destroyed six IJA divisions by the end of 1942 than a massive land campaign. Accomplishing this at the risk of nearly losing India and suffering an auto-victory defeat was a gamble, but I was fortunate to win the bet. Scenario Two gives Japan four extra divisions, so the net effect is that Brad is now two short of even a Scenario One lineup. I'll take that. The extent of the victory also means that the Allies will be able to siphon off alot of units from India, to devote to the Sumatra invasion. This will include 27th Divisions, two Marine regiments, the Brits, and the Australians. The Indians, meanwhile, will have the oomph to handle Addu Atoll, Diego Garcia, and possibly even Ceylon.

(in reply to Grollub)

Post #: 1353

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 4:08:50 PM

John 3rd

Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

I am learning just how dangerous a campaign in India can be for the Japanese. Luckily I didn't stick my head TOO far into the noose...

_____________________________

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 1354

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 4:12:07 PM

Canoerebel

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

I honestly think Brad could have conquered India had he known how vulnerable it was. Of course, we were in uncharted waters, so neither of knew enough to really foresee what the possibilities and vulnerabilities truly were. But had Brad been just a bit more aggressive in closing on Karachi in May, June, or July 1942, I think I would have lost the battle and the war.

But your right, John. If Japan isn't going to conquer India, it had better not stick around too long. Brad did.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 1355

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 4:29:30 PM

Canoerebel

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

Snicker, snicker...

I just posted a friendly li'l taunt in Q-Ball's new "how to defend Russia" thread in the WitE War Room. Ordinarly I avoid anything that could remotely resemble a taunt, but in this case I'm hoping that drawing Q-Ball's ire might challenge his competitive nature and get him to pay attention to this game.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 1356

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 5:38:20 PM

veji1

Posts: 1019
Joined: 7/9/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I honestly think Brad could have conquered India had he known how vulnerable it was. Of course, we were in uncharted waters, so neither of knew enough to really foresee what the possibilities and vulnerabilities truly were. But had Brad been just a bit more aggressive in closing on Karachi in May, June, or July 1942, I think I would have lost the battle and the war.

But your right, John. If Japan isn't going to conquer India, it had better not stick around too long. Brad did.

It just goes to show that either you go to India full on, going for the Ceylon + Socotra than Karachi or the base between Bombay and Karachi to clear the whole damn place...

Or you go for the east India limited objectives campaign, to wreck a few units, get a buffer for say the first 6 months of 1943, and give you in depth defense in this area...

But you don't want to be sitting between two chairs and go halfway... If you go bold, you must retreat very fast as soon as you hit the wall, not try to stabilise the front...

_____________________________

Adieu � Dieu odieux... sign� Adam

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 1357

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 6:27:00 PM

paullus99

Posts: 1985
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: offline

For Japan, her strategic objectives are really "all or nothing." Knowing that if you don't knock the allies out with AutoVictory, you're faced with a very long war indeed - which will require defense in-depth, mutually supporting airbases & an intact KB.

So, you'd be faced with potentially going full-bore into Hawaii, Australia or India - and putting valuable assets at risk (pilots, troops & the KB) and either winning the game outright (at which point your losses were worth it) or not winning, loosing valuable assets, and putting your defenses at risk.

That's a delicate balancing act.

_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to veji1)

Post #: 1358

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 6:41:21 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: veji1

Or you go for the east India limited objectives campaign, to wreck a few units, get a buffer for say the first 6 months of 1943, and give you in depth defense in this area...

Additionally, taking Calcutta and the area around offers the chance to bank substantial HI reserves for use at the end of the war, and/or to pay the crazy high HI numbers for all those Scen 2 pilots.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 1/26/2011 6:42:17 PM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to veji1)

Post #: 1359

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 6:46:18 PM

Canoerebel

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

That's something I can't gauge, because I'm just totally unfamiliar with how the Japanese economy works. Suffice to say, I'm sure Brad has derived lots of benefits from conquering so much of India.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 1360

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 7:03:38 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

I just went and read a good portion of the two AARs (really more analyses of opening moves in two of three fronts in the East), and I'd say he's REALLY into WitE. If you're a ground combat guy there's just no comparison to AE. Moving from that level of detail to AE's ground model must be torture.

Maybe he'll "come back" to this one, but how much time does a guy with a job and kids have to game?

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 1/26/2011 7:04:14 PM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 1361

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 8:20:11 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I honestly think Brad could have conquered India had he known how vulnerable it was. Of course, we were in uncharted waters, so neither of knew enough to really foresee what the possibilities and vulnerabilities truly were. But had Brad been just a bit more aggressive in closing on Karachi in May, June, or July 1942, I think I would have lost the battle and the war.

But your right, John. If Japan isn't going to conquer India, it had better not stick around too long. Brad did.

Yes, I am sure that some good Japanese players will eventually work out some decent AV plans-either in OZ or India. It can't be avoided as the knowledge base grows.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 1362

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 8:40:22 PM

Canoerebel

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

Yes, I would be scared to death from this point forward to play Scenario Two against an experienced and aggressive Japanese player. Defending India or Australia against an all-out assault is going to be very difficult. The Allied player will almost certainly have to commit his carriers, which means a pretty substantial likelihood of a major carrier defeat. It's going to be tough going for the good guys.

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 1363

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 8:51:34 PM

stuman

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
I know! I need to beat up on Japan now that I finally have Brad in a tight spot, but I know his morale is pretty low at the moment.

Well, smooshing his LCUs in India will certainly negate his claim about inactivity!

You are in a position that makes me shudder as a JFB. You must CRUSH as many of those divisions as you possibly can. No retreat, no withdrawal, no evacuation of cadres to be reformed later in the war. Kill them. All of them.

Don't worry about Brad's response to stiff losses-that's beyond your control anyways. You've got to stay true to the game as it is now. That merits crushing your opponent, regardless of how he'll take it.

Just catching up on this AAR, and encountered this technical military word I have never seen before. I will go look it up.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 1364

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 8:59:14 PM

stuman

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89

quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: paullus99

Great info there - people tend to minimize the injustices on their side, if it paints their heritage in a bad light.

Good point. None of us did what our ancestors did, good or bad. Be proud of heritage, take the good on board and learn from the bad.

Man, we are getting downright philosophical.

The important thing to agree on is that BBQ is far, far better in the South than anywhere else !

Well, BBQ is just food up North. Its a religion in the South

The Economist, of all magazines had a large article on it recently. They delicately sidestepped some of the provincial preferences espoused by the locals and objectively dealt with the subject at hand nicely.

I will ask this: can anyone beat North Carolina's hush puppies?

Well all I can say is that I have had a LOT of darn fine hush puppies all throughout the Delta ( the Delta that starts in the lobby of the Peabody Hotel and ends at the Gulf

). A lot of different styles, so I just don't know.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 1365

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 9:15:11 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Yes, I would be scared to death from this point forward to play Scenario Two against an experienced and aggressive Japanese player. Defending India or Australia against an all-out assault is going to be very difficult. The Allied player will almost certainly have to commit his carriers, which means a pretty substantial likelihood of a major carrier defeat. It's going to be tough going for the good guys.

Alright, here's a philosophical question for 'ya, CR.

Would you find your defense against AV more possible (or probable) if you were guaranteed a foreknowledge of where your Scenario 2 IJ opponent would strike? A sort of pre-declaration by the IJ to help you hedge your bets?

You could argue that Allied codebreaking picked up on the pending storm months in advance and that your early moves were a (belated) response to that call to arms.

Just a thought...

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 1366

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 9:16:14 PM

SuluSea

Posts: 2358
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline

Lots of troops getting routed, congrats on turning the tide CR.

Maybe it's just me but I'd rather have a Maryland crab cake than hush puppies, although I may not have tasted any very good ones yet.

_____________________________

"There�s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.� ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to stuman)

Post #: 1367

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 9:22:15 PM

Canoerebel

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

Oh yes, CB, that would be of immense help. Not only becuase it would help you prepare the target, but also because you could kind of ingore the non-target.

From a philosophic standpoint, would you take such a game as the IJ player, Chickenboy? How about the rest of you IJ players? (I'd be loathe to as an IJ player, but, boy, am I a chicken....)

Despite my misgiving about Scenario Two, though, I think I might be willing to take the Allies in a straight Scenario Two against a very good IJ player one more time, just to see if I could stave off auto-victory knowing what I know now. I'm not sure I could, but several days ago I found myself mulling over various defenses.

I think Q-Ball and many of you other regulars would have a better than 50/50 shot at auto victory - perhaps as high as 80/20 - if I were the Allied player. I think a more aggressive Allied player might stand a much better chance of avoiding AV. The one thing I would absolutely detest is the fact that the Allied player would almost certainly benefit from committing his carriers even if he lost the batlte in a big way (since even a lopsided victory is likely to be at less than the 4:1 ratio the Japanese player needs).

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 1368

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 9:50:57 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Oh yes, CB, that would be of immense help. Not only becuase it would help you prepare the target, but also because you could kind of ingore the non-target.

From a philosophic standpoint, would you take such a game as the IJ player, Chickenboy? How about the rest of you IJ players? (I'd be loathe to as an IJ player, but, boy, am I a chicken....)

Despite my misgiving about Scenario Two, though, I think I might be willing to take the Allies in a straight Scenario Two against a very good IJ player one more time, just to see if I could stave off auto-victory knowing what I know now. I'm not sure I could, but several days ago I found myself mulling over various defenses.

I think Q-Ball and many of you other regulars would have a better than 50/50 shot at auto victory - perhaps as high as 80/20 - if I were the Allied player. I think a more aggressive Allied player might stand a much better chance of avoiding AV. The one thing I would absolutely detest is the fact that the Allied player would almost certainly benefit from committing his carriers even if he lost the batlte in a big way (since even a lopsided victory is likely to be at less than the 4:1 ratio the Japanese player needs).

Hi Dan,

While I'd be honored to be your opponent in a scratch game of Scenario 2 WiTP:AE (thank you for the philosophical suggestion), I must demur. Due to the exigencies of real life, and the fact that I'm embroiled in two other PBEMs now, I cannot commit now. I believe there are several 'regular' IJ players that are regular contributors here that would be better placed to assume these heady responsibilities. A certain half-frozen rubber-nosed swamp donkey springs to mind.

Consider this though...auto victory by a good IJ player in Scenario 2 isn't a given. Even without a slight delay in his approach and an uncharacteristic attention deficit disorder, it's still not a given that he would have 'auto-vicced' you in India.

Q-ball has postulated that auto-victory in Australia is a much more possible, maybe even probable outcome (compared to India). I agree. Such an all out effort is more likely to draw in American naval units in a defensive role, including carriers to prevent the fall of SE Australia.

So...you now have a pretty good defensive roadmap in your next Scenario 2 game. I say 80% chance the IJ directs full auto-vic efforts towards Australia, 20% IJ players still taking the (Indian) road less travelled.

As an aside, I am really looking forward to 1943-1944 as the IJ. I feel that Kamikazes have been underappreciated by the vast majority of IJ players out there and their capabilities only fleetingly addressed. The early IJ war is, oddly, less interesting for me than the defensive struggle of the later war. So I probably wouldn't take a game that I was pretty sure wouldn't be seen all the way through by both players or lose interest after auto-victory was off the table.

< Message edited by Chickenboy -- 1/26/2011 9:52:54 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 1369

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 10:07:32 PM

Canoerebel

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

Actually, I wasn't proposing a match as I can only handle one at a time. I was just wondering how you'd feel if you played IJ and had to announce your target ahead of time.

I agree that Oz is even more vulnerable than India in many ways. I've posted at length about this, though those posts are now lost amidst the morass devoted to Bullwinkle's women, barbecue, comic strips, and the Civil War.

With respect to India, if an IJ player were in the position that Q-Ball was in around May 1, I think a conquest of India would be a lock. But getting to that position wouldn't be guaranteed, especially if the Allied player put up a game fight.

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 1370

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 10:12:11 PM

Canoerebel

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
I just went and read a good portion of the two AARs (really more analyses of opening moves in two of three fronts in the East), and I'd say he's REALLY into WitE. If you're a ground combat guy there's just no comparison to AE. Moving from that level of detail to AE's ground model must be torture.

Maybe he'll "come back" to this one, but how much time does a guy with a job and kids have to game?

You nailed it, Bullwinkle. It's pretty funny getting Brad's emails these days. Every third or fourth time he writes, "I admit WitE is taking up a little bit of my time..." Riiiiiiiight.

_____________________________

"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper�s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 1371

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 10:49:26 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Actually, I wasn't proposing a match as I can only handle one at a time. I was just wondering how you'd feel if you played IJ and had to announce your target ahead of time.

Ah. So.

Well, if I was game for a 'let's test this out to see what can happen' sort of game, I might try it. For a 'we'll play 'till the bitter end' contest, that would be a significant 'give' to the opponent-such an early OPSEC loss.

However, in exchange for the balance of other goodies in scenario 2, it's an interesting discussion to have.

"If you are trying for an auto victory as IJ, I'll let you have the generous OOB in scenario 2, provided that you tell me which continent your major autovictory effort will be based on." The IJ player could either agree (and tell), not agree (and opt for scenario 1) or not agree and not try for auto-victory through 1942 land-rush tactics.

Since I'm (to misquote a certain ungulate poster) generally no hail Mary auto-viccer you could see where this would go...

< Message edited by Chickenboy -- 1/26/2011 10:53:56 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 1372

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 11:14:47 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paullus99

For Japan, her strategic objectives are really "all or nothing." Knowing that if you don't knock the allies out with AutoVictory, you're faced with a very long war indeed - which will require defense in-depth, mutually supporting airbases & an intact KB.

So, you'd be faced with potentially going full-bore into Hawaii, Australia or India - and putting valuable assets at risk (pilots, troops & the KB) and either winning the game outright (at which point your losses were worth it) or not winning, loosing valuable assets, and putting your defenses at risk.

That's a delicate balancing act.

Yes, but I really want to see the long campaign and play it out. It would be hollow for me to play as the Allies and have the game end in 1943 due to auto victory. I understand that as the game is, it is probably the only way to an actual "win" for the Japanese player but though does not appeal to me. The pursuit of AV can lead to some intense play but really skews the game. I think real solution is to find a way for the Japanese player to win by playing a good long campaign.

I don't think I need worry about AV in a normal game but if I agree to a scen #2

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to paullus99)

Post #: 1373

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 11:33:09 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Actually, I wasn't proposing a match as I can only handle one at a time. I was just wondering how you'd feel if you played IJ and had to announce your target ahead of time.

I agree that Oz is even more vulnerable than India in many ways. I've posted at length about this, though those posts are now lost amidst the morass devoted to Bullwinkle's women, barbecue, comic strips, and the Civil War.

With respect to India, if an IJ player were in the position that Q-Ball was in around May 1, I think a conquest of India would be a lock. But getting to that position wouldn't be guaranteed, especially if the Allied player put up a game fight.

The women are a long time ago. Only one now. But BBQ lives forever!!

I'm not sure about Oz. I've read the various analyses on it (don't recall which were in whcih AAR, but it doesn't matter much longer, probably), and I think Oz has its own set of pros and cons. One big pro is the two-axis approach offered by CT--Perth, as well as a more classic Allied response path acrosss the Pac. The transport networks are pretty different, and the auto-reinforcement/LOD mechanics/locations as well.

The biggest thing to wrap one's head around--and I confess I have to constantly stop and re-think which shoes I'm in when discussing this--is the utility of an Allied naval response. The Japanese clearly DON'T want one, for 1:4 VP reasons, and the Allies clearly SHOULD want one for the same reason. Except the Allies ALSO want to win it, so they have toys for 43-46. Threading that needle, in either Oz or India, is the key if the Japanese player really goes for it, which Q-Ball did not.

A question for the gallery though--if Ceylon is powerfuly attacked, is that enough for the Allied player to assume Oz is off the table? Which target(s) in Oz should convince an Allied defender that India is off the table? Can the Japanese in Scenario 2 take eastern India/Calcutta and have enough to also take Oz?

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 1/26/2011 11:41:51 PM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 1374

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 11:36:47 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I believe there are several 'regular' IJ players that are regular contributors here that would be better placed to assume these heady responsibilities. A certain half-frozen rubber-nosed swamp donkey springs to mind.

Humph!! ASSUMING you mean moi with this moniker (and I'll have you know that my furnace works well, thankyouverymuch) I have to point out that I've never played the Japanese side. I plan to in my next AI game, but right now I'd be a babe in the woods.

I will say that if I did understand the Japanese, CR would get a strange game from me. I'm pretty random, and he isn't. I also am such a bad player that feints wouldn't work on me; I'd never notice the attempt.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 1375

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/26/2011 11:40:05 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Yes, but I really want to see the long campaign and play it out. It would be hollow for me to play as the Allies and have the game end in 1943 due to auto victory. I understand that as the game is, it is probably the only way to an actual "win" for the Japanese player but though does not appeal to me. The pursuit of AV can lead to some intense play but really skews the game. I think real solution is to find a way for the Japanese player to win by playing a good long campaign.

I think the key as the game ages and the forum gets smarter about possibilities is to really refine the pre-game dance. It's necessary to find a Japanese opponent who may try AV, but if he fails will not bail. Hard, but do-able I think. It just hasn't been a necessary thing until recently.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 1/26/2011 11:43:01 PM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 1376

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/27/2011 12:11:44 AM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

Since I'm in July '42 as Japan using scenario two and I have followed this PBEM game and both AARs, I have also had my thoughts about going for Australia vs India. With the shipping channel being so close to Karachi, you have trouble stopping the flow of troops to India. To do so means being more aggressive in your landings(between Bombay and Karachi) to try to isolate it and stem the flow of units. Brad did a good job, but wasn't quite aggressive enough to get the job done. His lesson will be passed on to someone else who may try to achieve it in another game.

I have thought about Australia as an alternative as it would be easier to isolate from receiving reinforcements. However, once the extra reinforcements are triggered and brought to India, how many units would be needed in Burma to keep those troops from surging through the jungle to get back to Rangoon by the end of '42?? I think you would have to seriously consider a quick invasion on both flanks of Sydney to isolate it and keep troops in. No landing at Cairns and a steady push down the coast along with a landing at Geraldton on the west coast will get it done. Dan has already that done to help by John and it didn't work.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 1377

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/27/2011 3:48:05 AM

AcePylut

Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline

Read my AAR Spilling Blood, and Panzer was in position by March 15th to sweep down the coast. He said he didn't have the troops to do it though. Draw a line from Brisbane, to alice Springs, to Perth... that's what I held. I didn't have a lot of available AV, or wouldn't have if the sea line from CT-Perth was interdicted.

_____________________________

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 1378

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/27/2011 5:29:31 AM

Canoerebel

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

quote:

Bullwinkle58
A question for the gallery though--if Ceylon is powerfuly attacked, is that enough for the Allied player to assume Oz is off the table? Which target(s) in Oz should convince an Allied defender that India is off the table? Can the Japanese in Scenario 2 take eastern India/Calcutta and have enough to also take Oz?

In this game with Q-Ball, the key wasn't the targets, it was the commitment of Japanese infantry divisions. Brad set up an elaborate deception that he was targeting Australia, but since I never saw any infantry divisions come ashore, I was very skeptical and began to suspect India was his target by early January 1942. So, to me, the key to identifying the true targets is to follow the infantry divisions.

quote:

AcePylut
Read my AAR Spilling Blood, and Panzer was in position by March 15th to sweep down the coast. He said he didn't have the troops to do it though. Draw a line from Brisbane, to alice Springs, to Perth... that's what I held. I didn't have a lot of available AV, or wouldn't have if the sea line from CT-Perth was interdicted.

Q-Ball committed somewhere between 15 and 17 IJA divisions to India, plus dozens of smaller units and support units. Turn such a force lose in Oz in early 1942, with the KB and combat TFs imposing a blockade, and I think Oz is toast. Now, it's true that India will be a problem as you move into mid '42. Maybe even earlier. The British will be a threat to invade in SEAC - Indonesia, Burma, and Sumatra will be likely targets - and Japan wouldn't be able to employ the KB until the land campaign was "a sure thing." (At some point, the massive Japanese army would be strong enough to fight without the support of the KB, and at that point the tether on the KB would be released).

But if an IJ player could conquer Australia by mid 1942 in exchange for some problems in Burma or Sumatra, I think he's in good shape.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 1/27/2011 5:31:55 AM >

_____________________________

"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper�s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 1379

RE: One Weird Battle - 1/27/2011 6:23:46 AM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

But if an IJ player could conquer Australia by mid 1942 in exchange for some problems in Burma or Sumatra, I think he's in good shape.

Can he do it by then, however? It seems to me he has to secure Java, Sumatra's oil, and at least the western DEI to secure his backdoor before going long into Oz. I haven't really studied it either, but it seems to me India is a 2-sided problem for the Japanese (west and south) while Oz is a 360 degree problem, with large sea distances involved on the southern coast. With two main avenues of approach for the Allies, I'd think Oz would be far easier to sneak reinforcements into than India.

There are lots of differences once the Japanese are ashore in force, from different levels of self-funding supply generation in Oz and India, internal road networks, weather (monsoons), the role of NZ or Tasmania as a stage for re-taking, much different yard capacities and balance (India favors the Japanese, especially after Ceylon falls), etc.

I'm still in Show Me mode on Oz being easier. I don't see a strategic hinge in Oz with the same oomph that Karachi has in India.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 1/27/2011 6:24:25 AM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 1380