obvert -> RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent (3/4/2017 9:27:53 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel I've never played Japan, but I can understand using points as a legitimate measure of success or failure. The Allied player eventually has to mold strategy towards victory points too. In an indirect way, that's what I've been doing all along. But to this point, and for some time yet to come, I'm willing to trade victory points (the troops on Celebes, the value of xAP and 4EB, etc.) for ground. It's still too early to let points directly guide operational and strategic planning. If points were my chief objective, I'd be more focused on making progress towards Rabaul and Port Moresby; Batavia, Soerabaja and Singapore. But the driving force has been to take the high ground ( Assam, Sumatra, Aleutians, Marshalls, DEI, Luzon), force John to commit his combat ships, and chew at them. That forumula worked, sometimes expensively and sometimes cheaply, until John simply stopped committing his navy in recent months. The victory points come easier when the Kaigun collapses. Actually, if you were really focused on VPs, you'd forget about the Kaigun, and you'd concentrate on getting in range of the HI with your B-29 beasts! Nothing adds VPs faster than bombing the HI, hitting all of those stranded merchies in port, and torching the training groups on the ground in the overstocked airfields of Honshu. You're obsessed with the his navy almost as much as he is! (Or maybe because he is) [:D]
|
|
|
|