Timor - to take it or not?

Timor - to take it or not? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945

Message

Rybeck -> Timor - to take it or not? (3/3/2005 7:45:45 AM)
Is it worthwhile to take the island of Timor as the Japs? Since the eastern port town of Lautern is a mere 6 hexes from Darwin, when the Allies get their massive heavy bomber reinforcements (starting from June 1942?) they can quite easily pound all the JAp bases on Timor into rubble. It will also be very difficult to keep Timor supplied if the Allies decide to deploy very strong LBA in Darwin... Having taken the SRA (Borneo, Java, Palembang), wouldn't it be easier to defend SRA using Soerabaja-Kendari-Amboina-Bulla-Sansapor?

von Murrin -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/3/2005 7:59:38 AM)
More. I take it without lemon, sugar, milk, or any other pansy additive, please.[:'(] Take it but don't expect it to do anything except deny nice airfields to the Allies.

2ndACR -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/3/2005 9:51:58 AM)
I will have to second that opinion. Only major drawback is that it also gives the Allies a nice little training base for their pilots.

jwilkerson -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/3/2005 11:07:04 AM)
The whole Darwin counterattack area - is a sore point for me. The "as delivered" map ... puts a full rail line effectively servicing the 4 Northern Australian ports. And while Andy Brown's Map mod may fix this ... until it has been proven ... we can't use it for "real games" [ whatever they are !? ] ... so for example, in one game, in early March 1942 ... I'm facing 150 4E bombers operating out of Darwin under the protection of the AVG and a pile of other fighters ... Any Allied incursion into the SRA ( and this includes Timor ) is a knife at Japan's throat. Because the allies can use LBA together with fast transport invasions together with small AK supply runs to fuel an offensive in this area without commiting any carriers ... take the next set of fighter bases .. build em up ... build up more to bring in bombers ... and then repeat ... So Timor MUST be taken ... but given the early capability of Darwin .. cannot be developed ... but merely used to delay the primary Allied attack route from Northern Australia into the SRA ... [ at least until the Andy Brown map can mitigate this as the primary attack route ! ]. One trick the Japanese can use ... is to build up lots of forward fighter bases ... with no fighters ... then pop the fighters in for a turn ... shoot down some allied bombers with weak escort ( presumably you are reacting to a pattern ) then run away before death can rain down on you ... kind of a "hit and run" tactic. I use three threads of advance in the Southern Central area. Davao, Tarakan, Balikpapan, Java Kendari, Bali, Java Amboina, Timor I commit at least one division from the HmIs ( like the 4th ) to these threads, also the 56 Bde and the SNLFs and NLFs that start at Palau. I do not use the airborne here - though they were used historically against Timor. Also, I typically bring part of KB into this area ( I usually run KB in 3 parts ... something like 3 CV, 3 CV, 4-5 CVL/CVE ) with one part operating in the Solomons, New Britain area another in the Kendari area and the third part variable. But bottom line - take Timor and everything else in the area you can - protection of the SRA for as long as possible is the primary mission.

AmiralLaurent -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/3/2005 11:28:09 AM)
Take Timor. And don't try to use airfields here, just put troops and fortify if you can. If Timor is in Allied hands, most of DEI is under LBA range. Not a good news.

Nikademus -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/3/2005 4:43:40 PM)
Timor is pretty manditory in order to protect Kendari. The downside is that it will provide the Allied player with a free "training" ground for bombers

byron13 -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 2:57:01 AM)
You've got to figure that the Allies are going to pound the nearest bases to them. Might as well make them close to Oz to give you some buffer. If you hold a line further away, the Allies will just develop bases that are much closer to your valuable resources from which to pound you. Kind of like Guadalcanal, you take it not so much to hold it for yourself but to prevent the other guy from holding it. As Japan is trading space for time, timor gives you a little more space. jwilkerson hit on the main point. Darwin is too easy to supply from the interior. I think I read that Darwin didn't have full rail service until just a year or two ago. If the Allies had to supply it from Townsville, within range of Betties from Rabaul (or, in a bad game, from Port Moresby), or from Perth, running the Koepang gauntlet, it would would be more difficult to launch offensives from there, and Timor would be an extremely valuable piece of real estate.

Grotius -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 3:42:03 AM)
I agree about the ease of supplying Darwin. Is the Combined Historical Scenario modifying the railroad system in Australia? For that matter, do any of the existing map mods change it? I don't suppose 2by3 plans to change it, do they?

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 4:12:36 AM)
Take it! You'll feel better about yourself.[:D]

stubby331 -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 4:51:00 AM)
quote: I don't suppose 2by3 plans to change it, do they? Quite a few people have been pushing the "revise Australian rail network" cart since day one when the game was released. (see thread entitled "Can the map of Australia be improved?") No positive response, hence Mr Brown takes matters into his own hands and brings out a beauty. [&o]

jwilkerson -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 9:24:17 AM)
Yup - as per Stubby - one of Andy Brown's initial motives for doing his map mod - was to correct the Broome -<=> Darwin area rail situation vis-a-vis the delivered game. I've contributed some testing to Andy's mod - but need to play an actual game on it to get comfortable with making that the standard map. 2x3/Matrix have show zero interest in making any corrections to the map. For my money - the delivered map - is probably a game breaker - because of the enhancement of the Darwin counterattack route. Having the Allies able to jump back into the SRA/DEI by late 42 - obviates the need for the Solomons/New Guinea offensives or the CENPAC offensives of the historical war. Just drive into the SRA take everything and either go to the Peace table ... or prepare to go into the Phillipines. Even with the 5/1/42 start, the allies can set up Darwin as the primary counterattack area well before the end of 1942 (I'm currently running this one as the Allies against the AI for a test ). Guess from which direction ships approach the main Darwin warf ? [ answer: from East to West !!! the main warf is on the East side of a southerly projecting pennisular ] there are some good maps of the port on the internet ... just look up Port of Darwin.

Tom Hunter -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 2:04:16 PM)
Correct me if I am wrong about this but I don't think the allies went up the coast of New Guinea because Darwin had no rail connection to the rest of Oz. I think it had more to do with MacArthur's "I shall return" speech and maybe US anti colonialism. Mac had to retake the Philipines to get his place in history. The US was an anti colonial power so helping the Dutch and British regain their colonies was not an important objective. This explaination makes more sense to me than saying that the lack of a Sydney to Darwin express train stopped the use of Darwin as a jump off point. Has anyone read a good history on this question? I have not seen any explaination for it in my reading but I have not been looking for it. In game I don't think the a historical rail line is the key to counter attacking out of Darwin, I think its supply from India and that will come with or without the rail line. Thoughts?

ragtopcars_slith -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 3:25:57 PM)
Timor is definitely important, and as it would be, I haven't been able to get control of that darned island! [:@] It's mid august '42 in my game against Desert Fox, and he won't let it go... tons of bombers and fighter aircraft that I just cannot seem to take out... and as others have pointed out, it means he is bombing Kendari and some of my other nearby bases[X(] tough nut to crack due to Darwin being so well supplied[:(] derek

moses -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 3:50:44 PM)
Why didn't the Japanese take Darwin and northern Austrailia historically? It was very isolated and could have been taken without all that much effort. Answer: It was of near zero value as base of operations for the allies. Very little happened there because its supply line was ridiculously long. That the game allows supply to be moved to this location with ease is just wrong.

Grotius -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 4:00:46 PM)
quote: Correct me if I am wrong about this but I don't think the allies went up the coast of New Guinea because Darwin had no rail connection to the rest of Oz. ... I think it had more to do with MacArthur's "I shall return" speech and maybe US anti colonialism. I agree to some extent, but I also think it's important to fix the railroad if it's ahistorical. It's not just supply that's at issue; it's the ease with which the Allies can transport troops from Sydney or Brisbane to Darwin. In fact, I see troop movement as the real advantage of the RR. The RR might not auto-move enough supply to support an invasion of the DEI, but it certainly can be used to move 5 divisions of ground troops from Brisbane to Darwin.

Nikademus -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 4:17:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tom Hunter Correct me if I am wrong about this but I don't think the allies went up the coast of New Guinea because Darwin had no rail connection to the rest of Oz. I think it had more to do with MacArthur's "I shall return" speech and maybe US anti colonialism. Mac had to retake the Philipines to get his place in history. The US was an anti colonial power so helping the Dutch and British regain their colonies was not an important objective. This explaination makes more sense to me than saying that the lack of a Sydney to Darwin express train stopped the use of Darwin as a jump off point. Has anyone read a good history on this question? I have not seen any explaination for it in my reading but I have not been looking for it. In game I don't think the a historical rail line is the key to counter attacking out of Darwin, I think its supply from India and that will come with or without the rail line. Thoughts? Several factors were at work. First off, yes there was Mac's goal of returning to the Philippines but it went even larger than Mac's personal agenda. The US Chief's of staff were pretty unanimous in their viewpoint that they were not going to spend American lives fighting to "restore the colonial powers" as they saw it (SEI) hence all the preposals by Churchill and company to support invasions of various points involving the SEI met pretty fierce resistance. 2ndly, there was the logistical issue. "Fortress against the Sun" which chronicles the B-17 in the Pacific, pretty much echoes what Bergerud wrote about the state of logistics in Oz during the 1942 phase of the war. Even as late as late-42, US airmen were still facing difficulties keeping their aircraft ahead on the serviceable/unservicable ratio since the main depots and logsitical heads were located in SE Oz. (eventually moved up to the NE to help support ops in NG.) Spare parts in particular were a prize commodity. Darwin and the rest of Northern Oz were pretty far away and somewhat isolated given the size of the continent and the rail issue has already been mentioned. It is regrettable that the map belies the true situation there. lastly, Even bereft of the political factors, US strategy was always focused on a Pacific oriented thrust against Japan. Mac's influence modified this strategy coupled with the industrial gear up and Japan's own moves (which were just as much a factor in determining US strategy) to produce what became the S and SW Pacific theaters.

rtrapasso -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 4:46:35 PM)
quote: Even as late as late-42, US airmen were still facing difficulties keeping their aircraft ahead on the serviceable/unservicable ratio since the main depots and logsitical heads were located in SE Oz. (eventually moved up to the NE to help support ops in NG.) Strange fact i just read: even though Townsville was connected by rail, it was a different gauge rail than what was used in the rest of Australia. I'm sure this messed up resupply to NE Australia.

Nikademus -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 5:26:21 PM)
yep..just goes to show..........Ozzies are strange. [:'(]

AmiralLaurent -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 7:31:33 PM)
The fact that both Darwin and Derby have 300 ressource centers and so produce 18 000 war supplies per month is also helping to supply big Allied bases in the area.

Nikademus -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/4/2005 7:36:46 PM)
true. Darwin very quickly becomes a very good base for medium and heavy bombers as a result. I wouldn't have a problem with the resource points being reduced in tandem with a map adjustment.

jwilkerson -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/5/2005 2:12:56 AM)
I haven't read a detailed contemporary study that indicates why the Allies avoided Darwin. Many of the reasons given in this thread may be valid - but at the same time I know the US chiefs were very aware of the Japanese oil problem and the submarine war was focused on making this a bigger problem for them. So if it is true that the Americans avoided DEI so as to not recapture colonies this would fly in the face of wanting to remove Japanese oil sources from the Japanese. Using subs only might not have been enough to do the trick. If direct occcupation is an option - one would think that would have to be considered. I'll start looking for some strategic discussions on this. One guess is that Darwin is really a place that has to be supplied by ship. At least IRL. Can an offensive against DEI be based out of Darwin ? In the game as it is now ? I think yes - though I'm still in the process of proving it. But once you have enough of a buffer ( Timor might be enough ) then convoy's from Perth can kick in and start bringing supply into the Broom ... Darwin area ... once this happens you're home free. The overland Darwin supply only has to bootstrap you into gaining enough of a buffer to start bringing in the convoy's.

philabos -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/5/2005 5:10:19 AM)
Just a historical note - the railway to Darwin was completed in 2003 .

Cmdrcain -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/5/2005 7:08:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warrenup Just a historical note - the railway to Darwin was completed in 2003 . Gee I guess the Oziees have a one week a month work week and 3 weeks a month vacation time... for it to have taken this long to build a mere railway [:D][:D]

bradfordkay -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/5/2005 10:21:09 AM)
I'm into March '42 in my campaign on Andy's map, so I'm just getting into the time period where Timor and Darwin are becoming important. The other day I ocunted the hexes to Darwin, and I believe that Whyalla is just close enough on the rail/road network to send supply to Darwin, but not close enough to get supply to Broome, Derby, and the Wyndham. I am testing by starting to ship a surplus of supply to Whyalla, and will see if that improves Darwin's supply situation. Even so the allied player will have to send some supply TFs into the area, because of the three other bases. These TFs will be vulnerable to air attack, which I believe is why there was no major allied offensive based upon Darwin. They did run supplies overland, but I don't think they could have run enough overland to support a serious offensive.

BlackVoid -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/5/2005 1:43:33 PM)
You need Timor. If allies use Darwin as a major base, especially if too early, just hit it with KB or a large bombardment TF. Losing 100+ heavy bombers is no fun for Allies. [:D] Once it shut down you can kill all the bombers at leisure.

moses -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/5/2005 4:49:01 PM)
Its easy to draw all the supplies you want to north Austrailia. Whatever the supply requirements are, they just go there automatically. Heres how to test it quickly and easily: Use the editor to move tons of units and aicraft there at the start. I think I moved 5 or 6 divisions and a couple hundred bombers there. On your first turn your supply will be way below your required level for all these divisions. A couple turn later you will be at your required supply level. Its easy. I then brought transports up to Darwin and loaded supplies for offload to Timor. As you draw supplies your supply level drops of course. Then after you stop drawing suplies it goes back up to normal level. I saw nothing that would stop me from basing whatever I wanted in Darwin.

rtrapasso -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/5/2005 5:31:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warrenup Just a historical note - the railway to Darwin was completed in 2003 . A little misleading. There was a railroad going into Darwin since at least the 1920s. Problem was that it ended a few hundred kilometers south of Darwin - with about 1000 km. between the connection at Alice Springs. The gauge of the Darwin link also might have been different than the standard gauge - the article i found was a bit hazy on when things got switched over.

bradfordkay -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/5/2005 6:54:07 PM)
" Its easy to draw all the supplies you want to north Austrailia. Whatever the supply requirements are, they just go there automatically. Heres how to test it quickly and easily: " You failed to notice that I mentioned that I am using Andrew Brown's map. He has removed the railroad racetrack that 2by3 has installed in western Australia. The only location on his map that is within WITP supply drawing range of any base in SE Oz is Darwin, and the base within range is Whyalla. Check out his map and you will see what I am talking about.

moses -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/5/2005 7:01:21 PM)
Bradfordkay: Sorry. Yes Andrew Browns map sounds excellent. I wish some of those changes wee incorporated into the stock scenario. Who knows maybe they will at some point.

Tristanjohn -> RE: Timor - to take it or not? (3/5/2005 7:22:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BlackVoid You need Timor. If allies use Darwin as a major base, especially if too early, just hit it with KB or a large bombardment TF. Losing 100+ heavy bombers is no fun for Allies. [:D] Once it shut down you can kill all the bombers at leisure. That's junt fine. Exploit one game problem (super supply to Darwin) with another (super bomardment TFs sailing in the night to reduce Darwin to ashes). [:D]

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.7338867