RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room



Message


zace -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/5/2010 11:52:25 PM)

quote:

your allowances do not offset temporal metaphysical realities, as I have pointed out before. To whit: you assume surprise where there cannot be, due to the time zone differences. Assuming that surprise will exist in a game because, IRL, someone screwed the pooch big time is granting yourself too much benefit at the expense of your opponent.


From Wiki (instead of typing a lot myself)
quote:


After news reached the Philippines that an was in progress at around 03:00 a.m. local time on 8 December 1941 FEAF interceptors had already conducted an air search for incoming aircraft reported shortly after midnight, but these had been Japanese scout planes reporting weather conditions.

At 05:00 a.m. FEAF commander Gen. Brereton reported to USAFFE headquarters where he attempted to see MacArthur without success. He recommended to MacArthur's chief of staff, Brig. Gen. Richard Sutherland, that FEAF launch bombing missions against Formosa in accordance with Rainbow 5 war plan directives that Japanese territory from which an attack was likely to come be attacked. Authorization was withheld, but shortly afterward, in response to a telegram from General George C. Marshall instructing MacArthur to implement Rainbow 5, Brereton was ordered to have a strike in readiness for later approval.

Through a series of disputed discussions and decisions, authorization for the first raid was not approved until 11:00 a.m. local time for an attack just before sunset, with a followup raid at dawn the next day. In the meantime Japanese plans to bomb FEAF's main bases was delayed by fog at its Formosa bases, so that only a small scale mission attacked targets in the northern tip of Luzon. At 08:00 a.m. Brereton received a telephone call from General Henry H. Arnold warning him not to allow his aircraft to be attacked while still on the ground. FEAF launched fighter patrols and all of its bombers on Luzon between 08:00 and 09:00 a.m. as a precautionary move. However several confusing and false reports of air attacks culminated in an all-clear being announced at 11:00, at which time the bombers were ordered to land and prepare for the afternoon raid on Formosa. The squadron of defending P-40 fighters patrolling the area also landed at Clark Field to refuel.

At 11:20 a.m., the radar post at Iba Field detected the incoming raid while it was still 130 miles out. It alerted FEAF headquarters and the command post at Clark Field, a warning which apparently reached only the pursuit group commander, with no further action taken to safeguard the air forces.

When the Japanese pilots of the 11th Air Fleet attacked Clark Field at 12:30 p.m., they caught two squadrons of B-17s dispersed on the ground and its squadron of P-40 interceptors just preparing to taxi. The first wave of twenty-seven Japanese twin-engine bombers achieved complete tactical surprise, striking the P-40s as they taxied. A second bomber attack was supported by Zero fighters strafing the field that destroyed 12 of the 17 American heavy bombers present and seriously damaged three others. Only three P-40s managed to take off. A simultaneous attack on the auxiliary field at Iba to the northwest was also successful: all but two of the 3rd Pursuit Squadron's P-40s, short on fuel, were destroyed in combat or from lack of gasoline when the attack caught them in their landing pattern. The Far East Air Force lost fully half its planes in the first attack, and was all but destroyed over the next few days.


Not to mention they are only 7 hours apart....  Are you saying that the Japanese were incapable of using a clock to coordinate them within a little?  Or that the attack on PH would not have worked had it been a little later in the day?

Remember pearl was set so early so they could raid more times than they did....  If I am not allowed to strike multiple targets as IJ then the allies are not allowed to issue any orders including cap to any units at or within range of PH so I can make the decision to re-sortie the aircraft on the 7th (on that side of the date line)

Surprise is by definition making someone else screw the pooch.  It could be said that the Allies were so surprised that they were incapable of not messing up on 7 DEC 41

Who ever came up with the idea that Japan could not hit Manila and PH?  THEY DID.... they just didn't target the docks at both.




Chickenboy -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 12:41:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

quote:

You wanna come within Nell / Claude range of Kwajalein with mini-KB backing? Bring it on. I'll trade you a couple of CVLs for three of your fleet CVs any day of the week.


Your going to marry Mini-KB to the Marshalls for how long?? One or two months??

You have left the whole of the American fleet intact and this is going to stop me?? I have ideas on how your defense can be defeated, but I rather wait until I play the Allies against John to present them.

Whoa, Nelly. Where on Earth did I say that I intended to hold off the entirety of the American fleet with mini-KB and some Nells / Claudes at Kwajalein?

You posited about a 3 US CV versus mini-KB with Nells/Claudes out of Kwajalein. I'll take that try.

You wanna throw in the entire US Fleet? Cool. Congratulations, you beat me at Kwajalein and killed two of my CVLs. While you were pointlessly flexing your muscle on some god-forsaken island in the middle of nowhere with your *entire* fleet, I took Suva, New Caledonia, Port Moresby, Suva, Pago Pago and a couple other islands critical to your LOC. I also took North island of New Zealand, drank all their beer and left. Can't be everywhere at once, I guess.




ny59giants -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 1:30:42 AM)

quote:

You wanna throw in the entire US Fleet? Cool. Congratulations, you beat me at Kwajalein and killed two of my CVLs. While you were pointlessly flexing your muscle on some god-forsaken island in the middle of nowhere with your *entire* fleet, I took Suva, New Caledonia, Port Moresby, Suva, Pago Pago and a couple other islands critical to your LOC. I also took North island of New Zealand, drank all their beer and left. Can't be everywhere at once, I guess.


I'll take the capture of all the Marshalls vs those bases in early 42. I'll be threatening both Truk and the Marianas very early in the war. My LOC to Australia will have to go through the off map bases, but time is on the Allies side.




AW1Steve -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 2:30:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I should have mentioned in my original post that I would not consider surprise port attacks on BOTH sides of the international date line (e.g., PH and Manila) in the name of fairness. It's an either / or for me.


You could always send your "rampaging killer torpedo carrying Emily's"! [:D]




Chickenboy -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 2:40:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I should have mentioned in my original post that I would not consider surprise port attacks on BOTH sides of the international date line (e.g., PH and Manila) in the name of fairness. It's an either / or for me.


You could always send your "rampaging killer torpedo carrying Emily's"! [:D]

Shhh!!! It's a secret![:-][:D]




Chickenboy -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 2:45:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

quote:

You wanna throw in the entire US Fleet? Cool. Congratulations, you beat me at Kwajalein and killed two of my CVLs. While you were pointlessly flexing your muscle on some god-forsaken island in the middle of nowhere with your *entire* fleet, I took Suva, New Caledonia, Port Moresby, Suva, Pago Pago and a couple other islands critical to your LOC. I also took North island of New Zealand, drank all their beer and left. Can't be everywhere at once, I guess.


I'll take the capture of all the Marshalls vs those bases in early 42. I'll be threatening both Truk and the Marianas very early in the war. My LOC to Australia will have to go through the off map bases, but time is on the Allies side.

Gosh that's swell. Too bad Sydney and Brisbane fell whilest you were dawdling in the Gilberts and threatening Truk.

Look, this is pointless. You say potato, I say tomato. There's more than one way the war can play itself out, ny59giants.

OT: It probably won't help the conversation to mention that I grew up a Cowboys fan, having lived in Dallas for a number of years, so I'll avoid saying how much I disdain the NY Giants. [;)]




Chickenboy -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 2:56:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: zace

Not to mention they are only 7 hours apart....  Are you saying that the Japanese were incapable of using a clock to coordinate them within a little?  Or that the attack on PH would not have worked had it been a little later in the day?

The attack at Pearl was just after 7am Honolulu. That's midnight Manila. I'll accept a surprise NIGHT port attack as being roughly the same time. Wanna do that? Probably not. You're looking for a daylight MORNING phase attack. Manila has time to scramble. Just because they didn't IRL, dithered, and were destroyed on the runway doesn't mean that IJ players should be afforded the assumption of gross incompetence demonstrated by the Allied air command, Phillipines on that day.


quote:


Remember pearl was set so early so they could raid more times than they did....  If I am not allowed to strike multiple targets as IJ then the allies are not allowed to issue any orders including cap to any units at or within range of PH so I can make the decision to re-sortie the aircraft on the 7th (on that side of the date line)

I'm sorry, but I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say here.

quote:



Surprise is by definition making someone else screw the pooch.  It could be said that the Allies were so surprised that they were incapable of not messing up on 7 DEC 41

I would like to distinguish between gross incompetence and surprise. There is a distinction. One can 'give' the IJ player a first strike surprise. To also 'give' them first day morning phase incompetence is an unjustifiable boon, IMO. I've not seen that selector switch on setup.

quote:



Who ever came up with the idea that Japan could not hit Manila and PH?  THEY DID.... they just didn't target the docks at both.


It's not a problem of hitting Manila AND PH. Any smart IJ player will certainly hit both-eventually. The question is whether the PI hit can occur with surprise on morning phase of turn one. You can blast Manila to kingdom come on days 2-the end of the war if you like and that's perfectly reasonable.




ny59giants -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 3:07:03 AM)

quote:

OT: It probably won't help the conversation to mention that I grew up a Cowboys fan, having lived in Dallas for a number of years, so I'll avoid saying how much I disdain the NY Giants.[;)]


I'm from Upstate NY and now live in the NE corner of Tennessee. When I moved here I didn't know that a certain TE, Jason Whiten, for the Cowboys was from here. No wonder I get dirty looks when I wear my Giants gear around town. [:D]

The other comments were just idle chit chat, but this now means a state of war now exist between us. [sm=sterb003.gif] [:D]

What do you think of the trade to the Deadskins of McNabb??




John 3rd -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 3:18:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I have voiced my opinion on this topic MANY times and I believe it is a case of hitting BOTH targets on Dec 7th.  I'll gladly split KB and hit Pearl with 4 CVs and nail Manila with 2 CV and Mini-KB.  Net result sees the Battleline damaged and out of the picture for enough time AND a number of SS gone forever.  Sinking those SS has a much stronger impact on the long-term then does sinking an old BB or two...

Before Castor and others go off regarding attaining surprise in both attacks, remember in the 2x2 we have running right now allowances were made for that.  Fighters at Manila were allowed to be set for CAP and a random number of SS were allowed to be formed up in TF (turn time stamp x 2 for SS allowed into TF).  Made no difference to the attack.

In Mike and I's upcoming AAR (Reluctant Admiral) using my new Mod we will follow the same HR for the double attacks. 

Yes, John, you have voiced your opinion on this topic MANY times. As I have mentioned previously, your HRs in the Philipines do not override the hard-coded first turn Allied CAP limitations / hard settings. Point being: whatever 'allowances' you offer to the Allies to permit first turn Manila / Clark CAP settings, the game hardcodes to 'nerf' them on December 7-8. Result: CAP don't fly as Allies have been told to expect.

Also, your allowances do not offset temporal metaphysical realities, as I have pointed out before. To whit: you assume surprise where there cannot be, due to the time zone differences. Assuming that surprise will exist in a game because, IRL, someone screwed the pooch big time is granting yourself too much benefit at the expense of your opponent.


Yes--and despite all your points--the Japanese still achieved total surprise that day in 1941.

I hold that Singapore would be completely different because the British were PREPARED and reasonably led. The Americans were not and they paid for it. It is a specious argument to hold forth about 'temporal metaphysical realities' when the truth is IT HAPPENED for real.

It is a boon to offer these HR to the American player. You don't have to when the reality of the actual events prove out the probable success of an attack.

Good use of Wiki Zace.




Q-Ball -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 3:18:40 AM)

I will go back to original topic rather than the McNabb trade, interesting as that is....

Assuming only one port strike is kosher (which I feel), I am in the Pearl camp. BBs are important in AE, moreso than in WITP. I appreciate the impact of sinking a bunch of subs, but in 1942, when it counts, sunken USN subs mean nothing (torps don't work anyway), and damaging or sinking 8 BBs means a ton. You just can't leave the BB fleet alone.

Also compared to WITP, the BBs you damage instead of sink are out of action alot longer. In my PBEM, I am STILL repairing Pearl damage, and it's almost mid-1943.

Even if you sink nothing, all the Pearl BBs will take meaningful damage.

Sure, 2 port attacks are better than one, but I think that's not kosher given the date line differences.




ny59giants -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 3:42:19 AM)

Brad,
I forgot that McNabb is a Chicago boy. He could have gone back home. [;)]
I have always hated the Cowgirls and always will. So, Mcnabb and the skins are not a big deal to me.

OT - A perfect Sunday in the fall is a Giants win and a Cowgirls loss. [:)]




Chickenboy -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 4:41:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Brad,
I forgot that McNabb is a Chicago boy. He could have gone back home. [;)]
I have always hated the Cowgirls and always will. So, Mcnabb and the skins are not a big deal to me.

OT - A perfect Sunday in the fall is a Giants win and a Cowgirls loss. [:)]

Wow. You have increasingly fewer good days in the fall, ny59giants. [:'(]




ny59giants -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 5:22:31 AM)

Andre,
That was some party at Jerry's new house last September. [sm=00000028.gif]




zace -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 5:40:37 AM)

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: zace

Not to mention they are only 7 hours apart....  Are you saying that the Japanese were incapable of using a clock to coordinate them within a little?  Or that the attack on PH would not have worked had it been a little later in the day?

The attack at Pearl was just after 7am Honolulu. That's midnight Manila. I'll accept a surprise NIGHT port attack as being roughly the same time. Wanna do that? Probably not. You're looking for a daylight MORNING phase attack. Manila has time to scramble. Just because they didn't IRL, dithered, and were destroyed on the runway doesn't mean that IJ players should be afforded the assumption of gross incompetence demonstrated by the Allied air command, Phillipines on that day.


quote:


Remember pearl was set so early so they could raid more times than they did....  If I am not allowed to strike multiple targets as IJ then the allies are not allowed to issue any orders including cap to any units at or within range of PH so I can make the decision to re-sortie the aircraft on the 7th (on that side of the date line)

I'm sorry, but I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say here.


Addressing these together.  The raid happened so early on the 7th local date in HI because the Japanese had time and plans to launch the planes multiple times against the island.  If you are saying the raid has to be that early then why can't KB strike multiple times in a single day against HI?  The game mechanics limit this.

If you are saying the game mechanics say you can have a morning raid on both then you miss the point.  The surprise would happen in both places if you hit manila at 8am and HI at 2-3Pm.  You would still have plenty of time and since AE restricts me from carrying out multiple attacks the same day with the same planes this is more realistic in the context of the game.

Not to mention that the attacks on Manila do not always go in the AM phase and in truth I have had a PH attack go in the afternoon phase.  IRL the IJ did not attack the harbor there but instead destroyed the planes.  In the game you can just build more from supplies....never mind that the frames arn't even on the island.

It is very fanboyish to say that one side can not do something because of how it matches with reality while wearing shades that block out actual reality then not restrict the other side.  IF manila were not attacked that day (clark in reality) then none of the ships likely would have left port.  Are you saying that the IJ player can't attack manila but then the Allies can't sortie ships for 4 days or until they do?

The whole idea that the IJ were not capable of coordinating raids across time zones is rather insulting IMHO.  We have every indication from history that they were well within their capability to do so if they wanted and the fact that they did not want to do this on PH day is not a representation of abilities and should not restrict as though it were.

quote:

I would like to distinguish between gross incompetence and surprise. There is a distinction. One can 'give' the IJ player a first strike surprise. To also 'give' them first day morning phase incompetence is an unjustifiable boon, IMO. I've not seen that selector switch on setup.


What you call incompetence I call surprise.  You look at things with the eyes of today on.  Remember this is 1941.  Most Americans believe that they will stay out of the war, that war will not come to them, that this could never happen.  When PH happened it put everyone in shock and the reactions of other commands you read that day are because of this...  You are too stuck in the movies where the US was itching to go to war.  This just wasn't the case.

Go read on reactions to traumatic situations which are thought to be impossible.  The first reaction is denial and largely the non-responsiveness of commanders across the globe was because of this.  Then when it finally set in that this was correct, was not a drill, and actually happened they went into stunned mode and just didn't act at all.  All of this is because of surprise on a national level.




John 3rd -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 6:48:21 AM)

Nicely said Zace.

I too really believe that the Commanders in Luzon---read Dugout Doug--would have been caught flat-footed from a Port Strike.  The Commander of the Asiatic Fleet was very competent but even he didn't react quickly.  The Japanese crushed Clark in the afternoon when the Americans had had well over 8 hours warning.  The Japanese strikes came in over land along a route predicted and they achieved surprise. 

What are the chances of the surprise coming from an ocean attack with even less warning?  It is much greater.  Michael and I chatted about this on the phone earlier today and we see the 'sortie x number of SS' HR as a great relief to the Asiatic Fleet.  Some prepared SS Skippers could--and actually did--simply pull the plug and submerge to the bottom of Manila Bay to wait out the attack.

If the game allowed for surprise on at PH and surprise off at Manila then I might think somewhat about that; however, this is not allowed and so isn't a viable option.  It is still anyone's call as to allowing this.  This is a HR matter for players to decide upon.  Let each pairing decide whatever they think is possible and/or realistic.





mike scholl 1 -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 11:44:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: zace

Go read on reactions to traumatic situations which are thought to be impossible.  The first reaction is denial and largely the non-responsiveness of commanders across the globe was because of this.  Then when it finally set in that this was correct, was not a drill, and actually happened they went into stunned mode and just didn't act at all.  All of this is because of surprise on a national level.




Tell you what. Get AE fixed so that the AVERAGE Japanese losses at a surprised PH equal the historical (29 aircrews and 41 aircraft lost or damaged beyond repair), and I'll listen to your theories about what might or could have happened. As long as the loss average remains somewhere between 9-10, then "historical" arguments are bunk.




Chickenboy -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 12:11:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Andre,
That was some party at Jerry's new house last September. [sm=00000028.gif]

Were you talking about the playoff game that we hosted for the 2009 season? That would have been in January. How'd the Pipsqueaks do in the playoffs? [:'(]




Chickenboy -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 12:20:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: zace

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: zace

Not to mention they are only 7 hours apart....  Are you saying that the Japanese were incapable of using a clock to coordinate them within a little?  Or that the attack on PH would not have worked had it been a little later in the day?

The attack at Pearl was just after 7am Honolulu. That's midnight Manila. I'll accept a surprise NIGHT port attack as being roughly the same time. Wanna do that? Probably not. You're looking for a daylight MORNING phase attack. Manila has time to scramble. Just because they didn't IRL, dithered, and were destroyed on the runway doesn't mean that IJ players should be afforded the assumption of gross incompetence demonstrated by the Allied air command, Phillipines on that day.


quote:


Remember pearl was set so early so they could raid more times than they did....  If I am not allowed to strike multiple targets as IJ then the allies are not allowed to issue any orders including cap to any units at or within range of PH so I can make the decision to re-sortie the aircraft on the 7th (on that side of the date line)

I'm sorry, but I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say here.


Addressing these together.  The raid happened so early on the 7th local date in HI because the Japanese had time and plans to launch the planes multiple times against the island.  If you are saying the raid has to be that early then why can't KB strike multiple times in a single day against HI?  The game mechanics limit this.

If you are saying the game mechanics say you can have a morning raid on both then you miss the point.  The surprise would happen in both places if you hit manila at 8am and HI at 2-3Pm.  You would still have plenty of time and since AE restricts me from carrying out multiple attacks the same day with the same planes this is more realistic in the context of the game.

Not to mention that the attacks on Manila do not always go in the AM phase and in truth I have had a PH attack go in the afternoon phase.  IRL the IJ did not attack the harbor there but instead destroyed the planes.  In the game you can just build more from supplies....never mind that the frames arn't even on the island.

It is very fanboyish to say that one side can not do something because of how it matches with reality while wearing shades that block out actual reality then not restrict the other side.  IF manila were not attacked that day (clark in reality) then none of the ships likely would have left port.  Are you saying that the IJ player can't attack manila but then the Allies can't sortie ships for 4 days or until they do?

The whole idea that the IJ were not capable of coordinating raids across time zones is rather insulting IMHO.  We have every indication from history that they were well within their capability to do so if they wanted and the fact that they did not want to do this on PH day is not a representation of abilities and should not restrict as though it were.

quote:

I would like to distinguish between gross incompetence and surprise. There is a distinction. One can 'give' the IJ player a first strike surprise. To also 'give' them first day morning phase incompetence is an unjustifiable boon, IMO. I've not seen that selector switch on setup.


What you call incompetence I call surprise.  You look at things with the eyes of today on.  Remember this is 1941.  Most Americans believe that they will stay out of the war, that war will not come to them, that this could never happen.  When PH happened it put everyone in shock and the reactions of other commands you read that day are because of this...  You are too stuck in the movies where the US was itching to go to war.  This just wasn't the case.

Go read on reactions to traumatic situations which are thought to be impossible.  The first reaction is denial and largely the non-responsiveness of commanders across the globe was because of this.  Then when it finally set in that this was correct, was not a drill, and actually happened they went into stunned mode and just didn't act at all.  All of this is because of surprise on a national level.


Zace,

First off, cool it with the fanboy comments. Those don't sit well in this forum. You want to debate, let's talk. Keep the name calling off of the forum.

So hard coding surprise in the game where surprise occured IRL is the order of the day? Because of incompetence in the Phillipines (you read surprise) an 8 hour alert must be assumed to equate to how things shook out IRL. Therefore, two port surprise attacks are warranted?

OK. So on or about June, 1942, The IJN is bound to assume some major loss of initiative in a carrier battle in the game? This should be assumed in the game that the USN gets off a plucky attack that decapitates the IJN force. After all, that's what happened IRL.

Look, what happened IRL cannot be coded into the game mechanics. You want the same level of surprise / incompetence that happened IRL? Fine. Have a December 8 historical start. No problem.

That's about all I've got to say on this matter, zace. Thanks for your posts.




John 3rd -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 3:04:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1


quote:

ORIGINAL: zace

Go read on reactions to traumatic situations which are thought to be impossible.  The first reaction is denial and largely the non-responsiveness of commanders across the globe was because of this.  Then when it finally set in that this was correct, was not a drill, and actually happened they went into stunned mode and just didn't act at all.  All of this is because of surprise on a national level.




Tell you what. Get AE fixed so that the AVERAGE Japanese losses at a surprised PH equal the historical (29 aircrews and 41 aircraft lost or damaged beyond repair), and I'll listen to your theories about what might or could have happened. As long as the loss average remains somewhere between 9-10, then "historical" arguments are bunk.



Has that been going on? The only attack I've conducted resulted in me losing 20+ Vals and 20+ Kates. It was horrific to watch...




mike scholl 1 -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 3:38:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1


quote:

ORIGINAL: zace

Go read on reactions to traumatic situations which are thought to be impossible.  The first reaction is denial and largely the non-responsiveness of commanders across the globe was because of this.  Then when it finally set in that this was correct, was not a drill, and actually happened they went into stunned mode and just didn't act at all.  All of this is because of surprise on a national level.




Tell you what. Get AE fixed so that the AVERAGE Japanese losses at a surprised PH equal the historical (29 aircrews and 41 aircraft lost or damaged beyond repair), and I'll listen to your theories about what might or could have happened. As long as the loss average remains somewhere between 9-10, then "historical" arguments are bunk.



Has that been going on? The only attack I've conducted resulted in me losing 20+ Vals and 20+ Kates. It was horrific to watch...



Look at all the posted AR's. It's very uncommon for the Japanese to lose as many as 20 A/C..., and it's generally around 10. If you lost 40, you must be the only other person in the world with luck as bad as mine. [:(]




bklooste -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 4:45:22 PM)

Nemos AAR is interesting PH wasnt sunk and wake not taken and at the start of 42 he invades the Marshals with all the old BBs.




bklooste -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 4:47:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1


quote:

ORIGINAL: zace

Go read on reactions to traumatic situations which are thought to be impossible.  The first reaction is denial and largely the non-responsiveness of commanders across the globe was because of this.  Then when it finally set in that this was correct, was not a drill, and actually happened they went into stunned mode and just didn't act at all.  All of this is because of surprise on a national level.




Tell you what. Get AE fixed so that the AVERAGE Japanese losses at a surprised PH equal the historical (29 aircrews and 41 aircraft lost or damaged beyond repair), and I'll listen to your theories about what might or could have happened. As long as the loss average remains somewhere between 9-10, then "historical" arguments are bunk.



What about the almost 400 allied air craft lost or damaged beyond repair historically at PH id gladly give 41 aircraft for that.




witpqs -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 5:52:52 PM)

Part of the decision to attack Pearl Harbor early on a Sunday morning was that is was assessed to be the time of least readiness and awareness.

The surprise achieved was not simply a matter of "We are here and you didn't see us coming!"




zace -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 6:34:09 PM)

quote:

First off, cool it with the fanboy comments. Those don't sit well in this forum. You want to debate, let's talk. Keep the name calling off of the forum.


Perhaps I did not use the comment well.  It was not to say in game one side or the other but to believe that one side is capable and another is not is exactly that.  Don't get me wrong we do it every day.  Ask around the US before 9-11 and see how many US citizens thought it was even remotely possible.  We always see things the way we want unfortunately.

The comment that started this was that it is physically impossible for the IJ to attack both Manila and PH with the same effects as the surprise effects in the game.  This is clearly wrong as they did it.  If you have ever tried to attack both you will learn that with weather and everything else you rarely get what you are expecting...

The statement that it can't be done is wrong.

quote:

The surprise achieved was not simply a matter of "We are here and you didn't see us coming!"

It largely was...except they did see it coming.

The same surprise could be achieved at dinner.




witpqs -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 7:30:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: zace

quote:

The surprise achieved was not simply a matter of "We are here and you didn't see us coming!"


It largely was...except they did see it coming.


The fact that two radar operators saw contacts, reported that to a new lieutenant who misinterpreted the report and the information went no farther is not relevant. In fact, there is serious doubt among historians that even the best handling of the contact would have had material effect.

Conspiracy theories aside (I presume you are not referring to them), there was no cohesive view that they were coming to Pearl Harbor, nor any that they were coming on that day. The various pieces of information here and there in the vast pool of greatly dispersed information notwithstanding.

This is partly the state of affairs that the first turn surprise code represents. The remaining part is the attack occurring early on Sunday morning. You say:

quote:


The same surprise could be achieved at dinner.



The IJN planners disagreed with you, as they specifically cited early Sunday morning as the optimum time due to the lowest level of readiness. I have yet to see any historian's opinion that agrees with what you assert on this.

What you propose is reasonable provided that First Turn Surprise is OFF, and the Allied player gets to set air group missions as desired. The reason for that second point is that the air group settings were designed as part of the first turn surprise setting. Remember too that many important units at Pearl Harbor start the game with many devices disabled for the purpose of aiding the IJ starting attacks. It is my understanding that IRL there were not so many AA guns, for example, without crews or otherwise out of service.

That way IJ still gets in a powerful blow, but at somewhat higher risk.




mike scholl 1 -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/6/2010 10:34:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Nicely said Zace.

I too really believe that the Commanders in Luzon---read Dugout Doug--would have been caught flat-footed from a Port Strike.  The Commander of the Asiatic Fleet was very competent but even he didn't react quickly.  The Japanese crushed Clark in the afternoon when the Americans had had well over 8 hours warning.  The Japanese strikes came in over land along a route predicted and they achieved surprise. 




Oddly enough, the reason the Japanese were so successful in the PI was that they DIDN'T show up when they planned to..., the weather in Formosa had them "socked in" all morning when the Americans were up looking for an attack. It cleared up just in time to let them catch the US on the ground re-fueling and preparing it's own strike. Blind stupid luck, good or bad, depending on your point of view.

I'm not defending MacArthur..., the man was a first-class jack-ass (along with Bereton, his air commander). But the Japanese not only benefited from good planning in their opening moves..., they also had a world-class run of "good luck" in everything they tried. Which turned against them about the first of May, and "crapped out" entirely in early June.




John 3rd -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/7/2010 1:01:28 AM)

Your point is well taken Sir.  The weather did impact the mission and it played right into the Japanese hands.  CRAZY how that worked isn't it.  They still had that peacetime lethargy though.  Let's see...how about we land ALL the planes, refuel ALL of them at the same time, and then get back up after out lunch and cup of coffee...

BRILLIANT!




bklooste -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/7/2010 3:07:32 AM)

Clark , Fall of France and Tarantino shows local surprise , readiness and a "peacetime attitude" are more important than strategic surprise .  It is for this reason that i think 2 port strikes are reasonable .

How mamy planes did the british lose at Tarantino ?  And they were already at war ! 




mike scholl 1 -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/7/2010 5:14:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bklooste

What about the almost 400 allied air craft lost or damaged beyond repair historically at PH id gladly give 41 aircraft for that.




I believe if you check the actual data, you'll find that the Allies didn't have close to 400 A/C at PH..., and that the actual loss was 186.




bklooste -> RE: Manila or Pearl-new paradigm? (4/7/2010 1:14:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1


quote:

ORIGINAL: bklooste

What about the almost 400 allied air craft lost or damaged beyond repair historically at PH id gladly give 41 aircraft for that.




I believe if you check the actual data, you'll find that the Allies didn't have close to 400 A/C at PH..., and that the actual loss was 186.



I have checked it many times my memory wasnt that far off :-) .. ok here goes Of the 402 American aircraft in Hawaii, 188 were destroyed and 159 damaged (thats 347 , and many of the damaged planes were unrepairable just like the Japanese since we now count these as "destroyed" ) . eg Of 33 PBYs in Hawaii, 24 were destroyed, and six others damaged beyond repair. The three on patrol returned undamaged.

You show me an AAR with almost 90% of allied planes damaged and almost 50% destroyed ( more if you count damaged beyond repair)

Leaving the allies with 3PBYs alone in PH is worth 20 extra aircraft but i note in some AARs japan does loose 40+ and damaged is normally in the 30-60 range but i never seen more than a fraction of the allied losses. :-)




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.671875