RE: Splitting up the KB on Turn 0 for Turn 1 (Full Version)

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



Message

Alamander -> RE: Splitting up the KB on Turn 0 for Turn 1 (7/27/2020 12:52:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

I agree with Ranger Joe. Manipulation of the special movement, that represents the fact that those TFs had already gone to sea in the days preceding hostilities, especially to do things like Mersing that take advantage of knowledge of Allied dispositions, would be unacceptable.

Question for Alamander - what is the latest date that you have played to as the IJ in a PBEM?



Jan. 44.

As I said, what typically bothers allied players about magic moves are deep moves that would have been detected and negated the Dec. 7th surprise. In my current game, I invaded at Mersing, but not until turn 2, to avoid any controversy... partially... but also because I was concerned that my opponent might cover Mersing or nearby with TFZ. No serious PBEM player is going to do something like invade Singapore or Bataan on turn 1. What if TFZ remains in Singapore under air cover: a common PBEM tactic? You can kiss 1-2 divisions of crack troops goodbye, in addition to innumerable merchants.

If you are not talking about deep moves, I am not sure what the objection is to loading transports? Do you think it is fair that Japan not be allowed to load transports on turn 1? That's insane.

I don't think you understand what these TFs look like and do. Some contain no escorts, such as those at Saigon, and will probably have to pass over Dutch submarines. The TFs have to be modified. This is really not an option for any serious game.

Furthermore, I don't think you grasp the other point that I am making about merging TFs with magic move TFs to reposition them. As the Japanese player, you have TFs at sea with whole divisions loaded onto 10-knot xAKLs whose position is known to any allied player who opens the scenario file. 2 of these TFs are in range to be attacked by allied SAGs on turn 2 and one of them has no legitimate surface cover group or air cover.

Now... if it is a perfectly reasonable houserule to prevent the Japanese from hunting CVs (and it is reasonable), it seems just as reasonable to allow the Japanese player to use magic move TFs to reposition some assets so as to prevent the allies from exploiting infinite knowledge of Japanese start positions. Again, if we are not talking about deep moves, I am not sure what the objection is.



Ian R -> RE: Splitting up the KB on Turn 0 for Turn 1 (7/27/2020 7:50:41 AM)

Why did you stop in Jan 44?




Alamander -> RE: Splitting up the KB on Turn 0 for Turn 1 (7/27/2020 5:09:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Why did you stop in Jan 44?




Auto-victory, and real-life was placing demands on both of us. The game slowed after AV, a couple turns changed hands, then we both sort of dropped it. My opponent was a friend of mine, so it was sort of mutual decision with the idea that we would pick it back up later. But we never did. This was some years back.

Looking back on it, if we had picked it back up, I suspect that the empire would have collapsed pretty quickly, despite the AV. I was dangerously low on trained pilots and my supply reserves were not great. I did not have a sufficient pilot training program, overused my medium bombers badly, flying far too many supply intensive sorties, and was far too aggressive in defense of non-essential forward bases. I doubt that I would have survived to see the end of 1944.



RangerJoe -> RE: Splitting up the KB on Turn 0 for Turn 1 (7/27/2020 6:58:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alamander

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Why did you stop in Jan 44?


Auto-victory, and real-life was placing demands on both of us. The game slowed after AV, a couple turns changed hands, then we both sort of dropped it. My opponent was a friend of mine, so it was sort of mutual decision with the idea that we would pick it back up later. But we never did. This was some years back.

Looking back on it, if we had picked it back up, I suspect that the empire would have collapsed pretty quickly, despite the AV. I was dangerously low on trained pilots and my supply reserves were not great. I did not have a sufficient pilot training program, overused my medium bombers badly, flying far too many supply intensive sorties, and was far too aggressive in defense of non-essential forward bases. I doubt that I would have survived to see the end of 1944.


But you hit AV. You probably could have done some changes to your situation without doing too much to change the AV but could probably have saved/generated more supplies. Of you still had fuel, you could have increased HI at the beginning of the game and it would have paid for itself in mid to late 1943. After that, the supply increase is the frosting . . .



Alamander -> RE: Splitting up the KB on Turn 0 for Turn 1 (7/27/2020 7:56:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

But you hit AV. You probably could have done some changes to your situation without doing too much to change the AV but could probably have saved/generated more supplies. Of you still had fuel, you could have increased HI at the beginning of the game and it would have paid for itself in mid to late 1943. After that, the supply increase is the frosting . . .



Neither of us really knew exactly what we were doing. I'm sure there are numerous things my opponent could have done better as well, such as focusing on higher VP objectives in 43 to prevent AV, instead of Centpac. He could have made short work of the Marshalls in early 44 and then moved on, rather than fighting a pitched battle there in 43. If I remember correctly, fuel was Ok, but not in abundance. I think the biggest mistakes that I made were overusing medium bombers, flying too many fighter sweeps, not leaving enough IJAF fighter squadrons on training missions, and not using idle groups (especially navy groups) to train. I remember thinking that my overuse of medium bombers was a major supply drain and that I could have accomplished the same objectives with less ground support or with more use of light bombers in place of the medium bombers.



RangerJoe -> RE: Splitting up the KB on Turn 0 for Turn 1 (7/27/2020 8:00:45 PM)

So you both learned which is a good thing. That still does not negate the AV but now you realize how close it really was.



Ian R -> RE: Splitting up the KB on Turn 0 for Turn 1 (7/28/2020 3:55:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alamander

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

But you hit AV. You probably could have done some changes to your situation without doing too much to change the AV but could probably have saved/generated more supplies. Of you still had fuel, you could have increased HI at the beginning of the game and it would have paid for itself in mid to late 1943. After that, the supply increase is the frosting . . .



Neither of us really knew exactly what we were doing. I'm sure there are numerous things my opponent could have done better as well, such as focusing on higher VP objectives in 43 to prevent AV, instead of Centpac. He could have made short work of the Marshalls in early 44 and then moved on, rather than fighting a pitched battle there in 43. If I remember correctly, fuel was Ok, but not in abundance. I think the biggest mistakes that I made were overusing medium bombers, flying too many fighter sweeps, not leaving enough IJAF fighter squadrons on training missions, and not using idle groups (especially navy groups) to train. I remember thinking that my overuse of medium bombers was a major supply drain and that I could have accomplished the same objectives with less ground support or with more use of light bombers in place of the medium bombers.


This comment is not PBEM specific, but the US (and to a lesser extent, other allies) do not get the flood of specialised assault ships, escort carriers, DEs, DMS, etc that carried the two-pronged offensive from the Gilberts & Solomons to the PI until the end of 1943. I reckon your opponent should have made you play on while he turned that AV right around.



Alamander -> RE: Splitting up the KB on Turn 0 for Turn 1 (7/28/2020 4:24:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R


This comment is not PBEM specific, but the US (and to a lesser extent, other allies) do not get the flood of specialised assault ships, escort carriers, DEs, DMS, etc that carried the two-pronged offensive from the Gilberts & Solomons to the PI until the end of 1943. I reckon your opponent should have made you play on while he turned that AV right around.


Yeah... I suspect if he had to do it over again, he would have waited for those APAs and so forth before messing around with atoll invasions in the Marshalls. As I say, we were both inexperienced, and he probably did not realize all the difficulties that come with landing on atolls. So, he got stuck in the Marshalls with a couple of atolls taken and some not. We fought there for a while. He could have steamrolled them a few months later, while focusing on some higher-value VP targets earlier to prevent the AV. And yes, he probably would have turned around that AV in short order, since I did not have many competent fighter pilots in the reserve pool: certainly not enough to withstand the onslaught to come.



RangerJoe -> RE: Splitting up the KB on Turn 0 for Turn 1 (7/28/2020 5:22:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alamander

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R


This comment is not PBEM specific, but the US (and to a lesser extent, other allies) do not get the flood of specialised assault ships, escort carriers, DEs, DMS, etc that carried the two-pronged offensive from the Gilberts & Solomons to the PI until the end of 1943. I reckon your opponent should have made you play on while he turned that AV right around.


Yeah... I suspect if he had to do it over again, he would have waited for those APAs and so forth before messing around with atoll invasions in the Marshalls. As I say, we were both inexperienced, and he probably did not realize all the difficulties that come with landing on atolls. So, he got stuck in the Marshalls with a couple of atolls taken and some not. We fought there for a while. He could have steamrolled them a few months later, while focusing on some higher-value VP targets earlier to prevent the AV. And yes, he probably would have turned around that AV in short order, since I did not have many competent fighter pilots in the reserve pool: certainly not enough to withstand the onslaught to come.


As I stated, you learned. I presume that he did as well. That made you better players.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.625