|
obvert -> RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42 (11/9/2011 8:03:29 AM)
|
quote:
quote:
quote:
FatR said:
"Not really. Both Singapore and most of the Philippines can be easily bypassed and isolated. In my opinion, the key to Japanese success in the initial phase is speed and preventing the Allies from reinforcing or consolidating their defenses by securing key bases very early. You have only a few weeks of total Allied weakness in the air, so they need to be used to the fullest."
This is easily the defining difference between a gamer and a simulator. A gamer will look at your statement and say, "Yeah, absolutely, that's what you have to do to win." A simulator looks at your statement and thinks, "What? Are you crazy? That would never work IRL!"
Chez
I guess the problem is we would never know what would have happened IRL if the Allies had 'played' the war differently. This is the problem with the idea of simulation as you state it. The Japanese might have come up with all kinds of daringly innovative means of acquiring the resources they were desperate to have if the Allies had reinforced Palembang or some other critical point. They actually did for the most part by-pass the PI. The Dutch airforce is pitiful and not worthy of concern until the Hurricanes show up, so most arguments about why one couldn't take and hold Sumatra early, even IRL, don't hold water. Palembang itself makes a fine defensive airfield. The japanese in the war didn't seem nearly as concerned with protecting their forces and limiting casualties as you are either, witnessed by the Malaya campaign in particular. Scenario 2 is also completely outside the possibilities of the Japanese IRL at the time, mostly based on political and economic conditions. It is completely based on saying 'what if' these conditions had not existed? But it does make for a better game! [:)]
We simply don't know 'what would have or would not have worked IRL' because only one course can be taken, but that is exactly why this game is fun. Games are about innovative and creative problem solving. The Japanese probably played through many of these courses before deciding on the strategy they took to conquer the SRA. They most likely had contingencies set up for other possible Allied reactions. We get to have contingencies for what our opponents decide to do in the game. We all seem to have some limitations as well based on what might have been possible, and have a code of ethics that lets us stay within the grounds of what is fair to our opponent. By all means the game can be used for all kinds of different ends and played in numerous different styles. I just think these things need to be very clearly stated before the game begins to make sure opponents are on the same page more or less, and can deal with the places where they are not.
Your game has been fun not only for you and for CR but for the rest of us to watch in his AAR. I just wish we had had your side of the story throughout so we could have understood many of the reasons you were making the moves you did. That said, having started an AAR myself, I know it takes a LOT of time.
I hope in future you play an opponent who wants to simulate and we get to read what this would look like. I may yet be convinced that the game could accomodate this kind of limitation. It would be a fun read anyway.
|
|
|
|
