Japanese perimeter (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames



Message

Dr Deo -> Japanese perimeter (7/8/2011 11:54:25 PM)

First off, let me introduce myself. I played a little bit of WiF years ago, but stopped when my gaming buddy moved out of town. Back then I was active in the WiF discussion list and I became a beta tester of CWiF until Matrix took over and the public beta was closed. As time went by I lost interest, but I'm happy to see that Matrix has now reached "the beginning of the end" at least! :)

Anyway, I've now taken up CWiF again, to try out some strategies and now I'm stuck on how far to expand and how to defend the Japanese perimeter. I have three question marks:

1) NEI territories. NEI is a minor country aligned to NL, which is (usually) aligned to CW, but there's no minor country aligned to NEI. This means that after Batavia falls to the Japanese, NEI is completely conquered, right? The RAW says that a completely conquered country's territories become neutral if no major power has influence there. That means Dutch New Guinea (NEI territory) will become neutral if Japan hasn't taken a port or a major power has a garrison value there. However, the harrifications on Crete tell the opposite - the territory Crete belongs to the conqueror of Greece, even if CW has a higher garrison value! Applying that logic on NEI means that all NEI territory will be Japanese controlled after Batavia has fallen. Is that the general consensus?

2) Minor ports/islands. There are so many minor ports and small islands within Japan's perimeter that's impossible to garrison them all. I'm leaning towards only garrisoning the minor ports which are either a capital (e.g. Kuala Lumpur), have oil (Balikpapan, Tarakan) or border two or more sea areas (e.g. Kwajalein, Saipan). However, this means that for example I wouldn't garrison Guam once invaded and that Bonin Islands would be ungarrisoned as well. They could of course then be captured by the Americans relatively easy, but there are so many of them that it might be better to act reactively in force to any American threat to minor ports, rather than being spread thin. Comments?

3) Midway - Honolulu. I assume capturing Midway would only makes sense if Honolulu was also intended to be captured, because otherwise the supply lines are too threatened (if using LOS option). However, there's an ambiguous harrification on the US production multiplier if Hawaii is invaded. Hawaii wasn't a state at the time and shouldn't affect the multiplier, but how is Harry's "maybe" interpreted in practice? If it means the US multiplier goes up, I'd never even come near Honolulu with ground troops...



Ur_Vile_WEdge -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/9/2011 12:28:19 AM)

1) The status of the NEI has always confused me. I'm going to leave commenting to someone more qualified.

2) That does sound reasonable. If anything, as the Japanese, I have even fewer ground garrisons. (But I like to take a crack at India a lot of games, which needs bodies.) Remember, especially till 44 or so, when the U.S. is likely spamming supercombined actions with O Chits, the U.S. is going to be very strapped for actions, especially if they want to do stuff in Europe. The upside of this is that means you can garrison your islands with air units, and then threaten the following exchange.

U.S. sends fleet to invade Island.

You take a naval or a combined, and fly out your LBA to the 4 box  (Love those Japanese navs and FTR that have 14+ range) Search and make a kill run at their TRS.

To prevent this, the U.S. will probably shunt a huge fleet with a bunch of carriers and cruisers with AA to the sky to stop your LBA. But once their fleet is committed, it can't be uncommitted. You then run your fleet, with both Marines on something fast (ALWAYS keep the Marines together), and nab one of his islands. Playing musical territory with the U.S. is a game that favors you, since it's low intensity build point wise and high intensity action limit wise.


3) Firstly. Honolulu is *NOT* part of the U.S. Home country. You can tromp Japanese boots all over it without worrying about the multiplier. That also means it is possible to knock U.S. troops out of supply. In practice though, I'd only take a crack at Honolulu if the U.S. leaves it under-garrisoned, and since most players like to stick something like an HQ, a GAR and a Supply unit...........



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/9/2011 2:32:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dr Deo

First off, let me introduce myself. I played a little bit of WiF years ago, but stopped when my gaming buddy moved out of town. Back then I was active in the WiF discussion list and I became a beta tester of CWiF until Matrix took over and the public beta was closed. As time went by I lost interest, but I'm happy to see that Matrix has now reached "the beginning of the end" at least! :)

Anyway, I've now taken up CWiF again, to try out some strategies and now I'm stuck on how far to expand and how to defend the Japanese perimeter. I have three question marks:

1) NEI territories. NEI is a minor country aligned to NL, which is (usually) aligned to CW, but there's no minor country aligned to NEI. This means that after Batavia falls to the Japanese, NEI is completely conquered, right? The RAW says that a completely conquered country's territories become neutral if no major power has influence there. That means Dutch New Guinea (NEI territory) will become neutral if Japan hasn't taken a port or a major power has a garrison value there. However, the harrifications on Crete tell the opposite - the territory Crete belongs to the conqueror of Greece, even if CW has a higher garrison value! Applying that logic on NEI means that all NEI territory will be Japanese controlled after Batavia has fallen. Is that the general consensus?

2) Minor ports/islands. There are so many minor ports and small islands within Japan's perimeter that's impossible to garrison them all. I'm leaning towards only garrisoning the minor ports which are either a capital (e.g. Kuala Lumpur), have oil (Balikpapan, Tarakan) or border two or more sea areas (e.g. Kwajalein, Saipan). However, this means that for example I wouldn't garrison Guam once invaded and that Bonin Islands would be ungarrisoned as well. They could of course then be captured by the Americans relatively easy, but there are so many of them that it might be better to act reactively in force to any American threat to minor ports, rather than being spread thin. Comments?

3) Midway - Honolulu. I assume capturing Midway would only makes sense if Honolulu was also intended to be captured, because otherwise the supply lines are too threatened (if using LOS option). However, there's an ambiguous harrification on the US production multiplier if Hawaii is invaded. Hawaii wasn't a state at the time and shouldn't affect the multiplier, but how is Harry's "maybe" interpreted in practice? If it means the US multiplier goes up, I'd never even come near Honolulu with ground troops...

Welcome to the forum![:)]

Take a look at the AI Opponent Geographical Breakdown thread (or some such name). There are screenshots there that show how the AI (actually Peter and I) figure the islands in the Pacific should be grouped. We started with Europe and then more or less worked our way around the globe, so the Pacific is towards the end.



Centuur -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/9/2011 8:56:11 PM)

About Dutch New Guinea, we always played it as being a part of the NEI home country. Which meant that when NEI was conquered by Japan, Dutch New Guinea is also conquered by Japan.

I also won't defend minor ports on Pacific Islands. There are to many of them. Apart from this there are the sayings: "he who defends everything, defends nothing" and "an attack is often the best defence"...





paulderynck -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/9/2011 10:32:57 PM)

NEI spans a lot of territory on the Asia and Pacific maps but it is all one minor country. Take Batavia and you conquer all of it. The CW still controls a third of Borneo and half of New Guinea and Portugal controls three or so hexes in the Timor area.

If Germany has conquered the Netherlands, then the conquest of NEI usually means the Netherlands is completely conquered - unless also playing with the large America map where the Dutch would still control Surinam (Dutch Guyana). In MWiF, Dutch Guyana is in play since the whole world is rendered at European map scale.



Orm -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/9/2011 10:48:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

NEI spans a lot of territory on the Asia and Pacific maps but it is all one minor country. Take Batavia and you conquer all of it. The CW still controls a third of Borneo and half of New Guinea and Portugal controls three or so hexes in the Timor area.


We have always played it this way. But now that the question been raised I've been looking for a rule for this and I have yet to find one. Anyone know where to find a rule for this? Because if there is no special rule for NEI alot of it will be handled as separate territories when NEI gets conquered.



paulderynck -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/9/2011 10:56:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

NEI spans a lot of territory on the Asia and Pacific maps but it is all one minor country. Take Batavia and you conquer all of it. The CW still controls a third of Borneo and half of New Guinea and Portugal controls three or so hexes in the Timor area.


We have always played it this way. But now that the question been raised I've been looking for a rule for this and I have yet to find one. Anyone know where to find a rule for this? Because if there is no special rule for NEI alot of it will be handled as separate territories when NEI gets conquered.

I think these quotes from RAW do it:

From Control:

A territory is either:
ï something similar to a home country but without a capital city and only reachable by an INF rather than a MAR (e.g. Gibraltar, British Somaliland, Papua); or
ï an island that is not part of a home country (e.g. Truk is a territory, but Sumatra is not because it is part of the Netherlands East Indies).

From US Entry Option 43:

The Netherlands East Indies is a minor country consisting of all the 1939 NEI-controlled hexes in the Bay of Bengal, Bismark Sea, East Indian Ocean, South China Sea and Timor Sea. Its capital is Batavia.

From the Glossary:

Netherlands East Indies [the 1939 “NEI”-controlled hexes in the Bay of Bengal, Bismark Sea, East Indian Ocean, South China Sea and Timor Sea]



Orm -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/9/2011 10:59:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

NEI spans a lot of territory on the Asia and Pacific maps but it is all one minor country. Take Batavia and you conquer all of it. The CW still controls a third of Borneo and half of New Guinea and Portugal controls three or so hexes in the Timor area.


We have always played it this way. But now that the question been raised I've been looking for a rule for this and I have yet to find one. Anyone know where to find a rule for this? Because if there is no special rule for NEI alot of it will be handled as separate territories when NEI gets conquered.

I think these quotes from RAW do it:

From Control:

A territory is either:
ï something similar to a home country but without a capital city and only reachable by an INF rather than a MAR (e.g. Gibraltar, British Somaliland, Papua); or
ï an island that is not part of a home country (e.g. Truk is a territory, but Sumatra is not because it is part of the Netherlands East Indies).

From US Entry Option 43:

The Netherlands East Indies is a minor country consisting of all the 1939 NEI-controlled hexes in the Bay of Bengal, Bismark Sea, East Indian Ocean, South China Sea and Timor Sea. Its capital is Batavia.

From the Glossary:

Netherlands East Indies [the 1939 “NEI”-controlled hexes in the Bay of Bengal, Bismark Sea, East Indian Ocean, South China Sea and Timor Sea]


Thank you. [:)] I read it but I needed you to connect the dots for me.



Dr Deo -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/14/2011 8:47:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I think these quotes from RAW do it:

From Control:

A territory is either:
ï something similar to a home country but without a capital city and only reachable by an INF rather than a MAR (e.g. Gibraltar, British Somaliland, Papua); or
ï an island that is not part of a home country (e.g. Truk is a territory, but Sumatra is not because it is part of the Netherlands East Indies).

From US Entry Option 43:

The Netherlands East Indies is a minor country consisting of all the 1939 NEI-controlled hexes in the Bay of Bengal, Bismark Sea, East Indian Ocean, South China Sea and Timor Sea. Its capital is Batavia.

From the Glossary:

Netherlands East Indies [the 1939 “NEI”-controlled hexes in the Bay of Bengal, Bismark Sea, East Indian Ocean, South China Sea and Timor Sea]



Thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for! :)

Though, I still wonder why Harry says that Crete is reverts to German/Italian control once Greece is conquered. Especially since it says explicitly in the RAW that Crete is a territory separate from Greece... but that's another topic!



paulderynck -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/15/2011 3:19:01 AM)

I'm not aware of where Harry has said that.



Dr Deo -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/15/2011 9:52:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I'm not aware of where Harry has said that.



From the PDF of Harry's clarifications:


quote:

Q I want to be sure I understand the conquest rules. Italy and
Germany have taken Greece, but not Crete or any of the
other islands. Do they still belong to Greece and the CW?

Ans No. They belong to the conqueror (unless occupied by the
CW). Date: 10/01/97


quote:

Q Greece being completely conquered, Greek units (where
ever they are) are removed from the game. If the CW unit
is on Iraklion (the sole port of Crete) then Crete is conquered
by the CW, if the CW unit is not on Iraklion, what
happens ? Crete is not conquered by the CW and reverts
to Neutrality ? What happen to the CW unit which is then
in a Neutral Territory ? Is that you call a can of worms ?
(strange expression - In French : un sac de noeuds)
WiF is making me crazy...

Ans Avec l’amour, non? If the CW is not on Iraklion, Crete
becomes controlled with whoever conquered Greece
(inexplicably, my French phrase-book doesn’t cover this
last expression). Date : 14/01/97



Red Prince -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/15/2011 11:53:09 AM)

Out of curiosity, was there any reason given as to why Greece/Crete differs from other minors and their neutrals?



Froonp -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/15/2011 12:37:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dr Deo
From the PDF of Harry's clarifications:

This is the Clarification document from 10/10/1998 (*), that we took as a basis for the FAQ we did with Harry a couple of years back.
As you may notice, this question was not taken in the FAQ, because the answer at the time was wrong.

As of RAW7, this answer is wrong and Crete is controlled by the country who have the most influence there when Greece is conquered, and if no one has units there, it becomes neutral.
See Complete Conquest in 13.7.1, 7th paragraph.
Crete is a Territory (no capital).


* The first question is from a Clarification email from Harry to the WiF list on 10 January 1997 and the second one from a Clarification email from Harry to the WiF list on 14 January 1997.



Froonp -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/15/2011 12:38:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Prince

Out of curiosity, was there any reason given as to why Greece/Crete differs from other minors and their neutrals?

Greece/Crete don't differ from other minors' conquest and their territories.



Red Prince -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/15/2011 12:55:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp


quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Prince

Out of curiosity, was there any reason given as to why Greece/Crete differs from other minors and their neutrals?

Greece/Crete don't differ from other minors' conquest and their territories.

I see that now. Thanks.



paulderynck -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/17/2011 4:18:27 AM)

Yes. The new FAQ is available at the ADG site.



brian brian -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/18/2011 10:26:02 PM)

I think a good way to look at the Japanese perimeter is through the lens of the old Avalon Hill game Victory in the Pacific, to which the WiF:FE map owes a lot.

Specifically, what matters are airbases for land-based air, and particularly the land hexes that border two zones. In my opinion. This makes the Marshalls an initial ground combat zone, followed by the Bonins, and these are worth garrisoning with white prints in case a massive USN sub raid knocks out their supply. In other words, the Nimitz strategy has a lot of upsides in WiF....the MacArthur strategy, not so much. The Allies also have the option of making a major strategic shift from Pearl Harbor as their main base to Calcutta, which can be a bit time consuming but can gain a lot along the many routes into cracking the Japanese perimeter in the South China Sea. Hint: the secret door into the Lonely Mountain for Bilbo & crew is the usually still CW controlled Christmas Island.

You use the bases you have to establish air superiority (or at least, transport survivability) in the zone in front of your bases and then conduct landings on the hexes bordering the next zone. This does allow the enemy to counterattack from the other zone, using unmolested transports and shore bombardment, and the Defensive Shore Bombardment optional becomes a factor on strategy & tactics.



paulderynck -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/20/2011 6:10:54 AM)

If the Japanese conquer NEI, Christmas Island is automatically conquered because the Japanese will control all the ports in that sea zone. So I've never seen the CW hold onto Christmas Island.

From RAW: "You also conquer a territory if you control every port and coastal city in every sea area the territory has a coastal hex in."



brian brian -> RE: Japanese perimeter (7/22/2011 6:07:54 PM)

thanks Paul. that is one of the more difficult rules to remember and we have definitely missed correct hex control at times as a result. I am glad MWiF will have finally cleaned up which little spots of land belong to which Territory for purposes of that rule, especially in the CW areas east of the NEI, as well as changing control of empty hexes automatically.

Christmas Island is still an interesting back-door into the Co-Prosperity Sphere though. It will most likely never be in supply nor garrisoned and can then be landed on at will by the Allies. This is true of many places in the Japanese perimeter; as many have pointed out, the Rising Sun can't defend the whole thing with their limited land units. I like to focus garrison efforts on a few key places and the places where Partisans can hurt the Japanese economy. But more importantly is to have a reaction force ready; the Imperial Guard, the 1st SNLF and perhaps the Yamamoto or Yamashita HQs can quickly put a hurt on a disorganized Allied landing force that may have just taken some casualties and expended a lot of it's own air and naval support...



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.046875