Origin of the ONE PORT ATTACK house rule...

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Origin of the ONE PORT ATTACK house rule...

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 >> Origin of the ONE PORT ATTACK house rule...

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Origin of the ONE PORT ATTACK house rule... - 12/9/2004 9:24:38 PM

Gilligan

Posts: 78
Joined: 6/19/2002
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline

Hey guys,

I am setting up a game with someone, and while going over rules, I mentioned the "one port attackon T1" rule, and he asked about how that came about. Thinking about it, I couldn't tell him. Anyone have any insight as to how that came about, and why? I just remember reading it from posts when the game was first out, but can't remember the reason for it.

Thanks in advance...

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: Origin of the ONE PORT ATTACK house rule... - 12/9/2004 10:37:38 PM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

I think its because In real life, the Japanese only bombed Pearl harbor. They didn't bomb Pearl, Mainla, Singapore, Soerabaia, and other stuff. In real life, Japan only knew for sure where the US Pacific Fleet was, not FOrce Z, the Dutch Navy, the Asiatic Fleet, etc.

_____________________________

Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.

(in reply to Gilligan)

Post #: 2

RE: Origin of the ONE PORT ATTACK house rule... - 12/9/2004 10:56:19 PM

tsimmonds

Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline

Also, 0800 in Hawaii is like 0300 in Manila and 0200 in Singapore. Makes it tough to coordinate those simultaneous surprise attacks at first light on Sunday morning when first light occurs 5 or 6 hours later at some targets than at others.

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 3

RE: Origin of the ONE PORT ATTACK house rule... - 12/10/2004 5:23:29 PM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

Also, 0800 in Hawaii is like 0300 in Manila and 0200 in Singapore. Makes it tough to coordinate those simultaneous surprise attacks at first light on Sunday morning when first light occurs 5 or 6 hours later at some targets than at others.

This is the primary reason. As to not really knowing where many things were in the PI,I don't think this is accurate. The Japanese had been flying missions over Luzon for weeks using specially stripped and unmarked Nells, a fact not unnoticed by the PI forces, and another reason why the PI forces were not exactly "surprised" (more incompetently led) and were expecting a move by Japan on a daily basis.

PH and the initial moves were planned months in advance of the games start date. Japan should have to commit to attacking PH at the very least, thereby nixing any chance of any further port attacks on turn one due to the time difference. Main reason why I'm not too keen about the "Manila Option" and am an ardent supporter of other house rules which Mogami listed which keep the silly and overgenerous Japanese first turn capability to somewhat believable and plausable proportions.

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to tsimmonds)

Post #: 4

RE: Origin of the ONE PORT ATTACK house rule... - 12/10/2004 6:40:57 PM

2ndACR

Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline

Oh WAH Ron, you just hate the fact that KB will slaughter your main offensive weapon on day 1 of the war while in port.

I have no problem with 1 port attack though. Just go after Manila.

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 5

RE: Origin of the ONE PORT ATTACK house rule... - 12/10/2004 8:22:39 PM

BlackVoid

Posts: 639
Joined: 10/17/2003
Status: offline

Singapore + Manila port attack could have been easily coordinated.
I like better to have a house rule that allows surprise in 1 area:
Malaya, PH or PI.

In all other places the allies are free to move, in the surprise area no movement is allowed on the first turn.

Hindsight works for both sides. The allied player knows that POW and Repulse are vulnerable. The japanese know that the PH attack will only catch obsolete ships at port.

I think both players should be allowed to change the initial plan of their side (not commit to PH and not attack with force Z).

Regarding the first turn move bonus: a good house rule or self restriction for the japanese is not to attack in locations where surprise could not have been achieved historically (eg: Kendari, Rangoon, S. Borneo ...)

Forcing historical choices for 1st turn defeats the purpose of the game in my opinion.

In the end though it all comes down to what you agree on with your opponent.

(in reply to 2ndACR)

Post #: 6

RE: Origin of the ONE PORT ATTACK house rule... - 12/10/2004 8:38:14 PM

2ndACR

Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline

I always leave POW alone on day 1. I want her to come out and play first.

Otherwise she runs away, never to be seen again until later in the war, like in late 1942.

For me, I do not want a history lesson. Hindsight does work for both sides. I, as the Japanese know that for the first 6 months, subs are my major problem. I prefer to hit Manila with KB and eliminate as many as possible on day 1. Plus it puts KB in position to support the DEI operations from the start and not spending a month getting back to the area. I know that Japanese ASW is horrible for the entire war, I can counter surface threats pretty easily, but underwater threats are the bain of my existance.

The Allied player also knows that those subs in Manila are his main offensive weapon for the 1st 6 months or so. They are the one way that he can inflict losses without alot of risk to himself. If they are removed from play on day 1, he knows that to slow or effect the Japanese advance that he will have to use surface forces and air power only.

Everyone knows what the objectives of the Japanese are on day 1. The SRA. Everyone knows that in 1943 the tide will slowly start to turn against Japan. I have no problem with the 1 port attack, but do not whine when I go after Manila and leave you with all those torpedo magnets.

(in reply to BlackVoid)

Post #: 7

RE: Origin of the ONE PORT ATTACK house rule... - 12/10/2004 9:27:13 PM

Xargun

Posts: 3690
Joined: 2/14/2004
From: Near Columbus, Ohio
Status: offline

Like they mentioned above it is mostly a matter of time difference.. If you bomb PH at dawn - so search planes don't spot you 200 miles off the coast - which I think they would have easily... Then Manilla and Singapore are warned and although they may not get any ships out of port, all AA and CAP is fully manned and ready at dawn...

Also a consideration I feel is that Japan was using its best pilots for this port attack - her CV pilots... AND they only had enough planes / pilots to make good 1 such attack... What was moe important.. killing FOrce Z (1 BB, 1 BC and some cruisers and DDs) or killing the US CVs and her BBs ? They were not all that worried about the brits... The IJN has their own BBs to handle Force Z, plus they had their betties / nells in Saigon waiting for Force Z or whoever to sortie from Singapore... PH was the perfect choice.. 90% of the US Pacific Fleet sitting in one place, waiting to be smacked around... In all, the chance to hit the US CVs in port made the decision for them... we all know the CVs were the primary target, then the BBs... With the US CVs gone, Port Moresby falls... And a lot of different things happen - Midway would be completely different..

I personally think - using hindsight - hitting Manilla is the best bet - kill those damn subs.. BUT, to maintain any historic semblance, PH has to be hit on turn 1 and nowhere else... Maybe a port raid on Singapore with betties / nells - but that would be it.. Japan did put much worry on the subs..

Xargun

(in reply to 2ndACR)

Post #: 8

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Origin of the ONE PORT ATTACK house rule...

Page: [1]