Question re moving to Wake Island (Full Version)

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



Message

Aranthus -> Question re moving to Wake Island (3/9/2021 11:59:34 PM)

What rule prohibits the US from moving land units to Wake Island before the US is in the war? I see in US entry options that there are limitations on moving units to Guam, the Philippines, and Pearl Harbor, but not Wake.



Courtenay -> RE: Question re moving to Wake Island (3/10/2021 12:47:56 AM)

The US can send the whole army to Wake if they want, except for stacking limits. And the Japanese would cheer them on.



Aranthus -> RE: Question re moving to Wake Island (3/10/2021 3:07:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

The US can send the whole army to Wake if they want, except for stacking limits. And the Japanese would cheer them on.


Then why would the game not let me debark an infantry corps to Wake from a transport?



Orm -> RE: Question re moving to Wake Island (3/10/2021 4:04:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aranthus


quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

The US can send the whole army to Wake if they want, except for stacking limits. And the Japanese would cheer them on.


Then why would the game not let me debark an infantry corps to Wake from a transport?

Because Wake Island is not a port and you have the amphibious option on?

Edit: With the amphibious rule on the land units can not disembark on Wake from a TRS.



Aranthus -> RE: Question re moving to Wake Island (3/10/2021 6:03:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aranthus


quote:

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

The US can send the whole army to Wake if they want, except for stacking limits. And the Japanese would cheer them on.


Then why would the game not let me debark an infantry corps to Wake from a transport?

Because Wake Island is not a port and you have the amphibious option on?

Edit: With the amphibious rule on the land units can not disembark on Wake from a TRS.


Thanks for setting me straight.



rkr1958 -> RE: Question re moving to Wake Island (3/15/2021 3:02:45 PM)

Just picked and starting reading E.B. Potter's bio on Halsey. I have and read Potter's bio on Nimitz twice (recently this past December).

Anyway something that struck me in the first chapter where Potter discusses the aborted relief attempt to reinforce Wake in December 1941. Potter and other historians of his time blame Fletcher for the delay, due to refueling his destroyers, of not be able to get the relief force to Wake before the Japanese had seized the island. However, Potter is of the opinion that if Halsey had been allowed to continue on with his task force, which was centered around the Enterprise, that that force would have had a good chance to retake Wake.



Orm -> RE: Question re moving to Wake Island (3/15/2021 3:13:11 PM)

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Especially when you know where the opponent has all his forces. I doubt that they who made a claim that Wake should have been reinforced in '41, or retaken, would have had the nerve to order such an operation with the information the US commanders had at that time.



Orm -> RE: Question re moving to Wake Island (3/15/2021 3:14:08 PM)

Thank you, Ronnie, for telling me about E.B. Potter's bio on Halsey. [:)]



rkr1958 -> RE: Question re moving to Wake Island (3/15/2021 7:06:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

Thank you, Ronnie, for telling me about E.B. Potter's bio on Halsey. [:)]
You're welcome. I suspect that sentiment about being able to retake Wake came from Halsey supports interviewed by Potter for the book. Potter stated in his forwarded that he was reluctant at first to write a bio on Halsey because initially he wasn't impressed with Halsey. But as he researched the book, and worked with Adm Nimitz on the Sea Power series he gained a greater appreciation for Halsey.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.359375