Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Why, eh? (9/15/2010 4:20:34 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel If I can take and hold two or three or four good bases in the Kuriles and/or Sikhalin Island in '43 or early '44, I would jump at the chance despite the drawbacks of (1) triggering Japanese inantry reinforcements; (2) triggering kamikazees effective 1/1/44; (3) distance from good ship repair facilities; and (4) challenges in supplying and supporting my troops. Surely everybody agrees that the primary Allied objective in AE is to close on Japan as soon as possible. Of course, the Japanese player may prepare his defenses sufficiently to thwart such a move, but many Japanese players neglect NoPac...primarily because many Allied players do. The Allied player should at least create the appearance of a threat, becaue that forces the Japanese player to shift troops and aircraft to NoPac or risk disaster. Late 1943 or 1944 is a different proposition than trying a move now in hopes of drawing him away from India, which I thought was the topic. By all means garrison Attu and Kiska, but jumping at Para. Jima in 1942 seems like an op with no objective to me. And call me odd, but I don't think that the Allies' objective is to close on Japan as soon as possible. The core objective in 1942 and 1943 is to attrit/cripple the Japanese economy, to pull down armament and vehicle point banks, to prevent HI bank growth, and to opportunistically sink whatever portions of the IJN that can be sunk on the way to sinking the merchant marine. Concurrent with that, hauling millions of tons of logistics forward, as well as troops, training/filling-out/upgrading TOE of same, and getting the 1944 hammer ready. I would say that attritting the Japanese air effort was also key--as it was in RL--but like you I've come to understand that the game doesn't really allow that in Scenario 2. So, just staying out of the way of Allied air losses until the P-47/Hellcat era is a secondary objective. Psychological factors like threats are fine, and work with some players (nations), but I think they must be credible, and the player open to worry. I'm not sure, in this game, that threats, fake-outs, diversionary attacks, etc. are going to be as useful as they have been against other players. Just my impression. I've never played PBEM, so the psych portion of the game is foreign to me.
|
|
|
|