Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (Full Version)

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



Message

wild_Willie2 -> Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/25/2005 6:51:12 PM)

He guy's, how do you feel about taking the "Darwin" route in a Pbem game.

In my game V. Aqi, I took the this route up north strait into the SRA. I was forced to take this route as I lost 3 allied carriers early in the war, and I couldn’t use them for air cover during invasions, so I was forced to use "land" base air cover instead. To my supplies, taking the "Darwin" route is a VERY good choice. We are playing with player defined upgrades ON, And I can operate my ships under a 500 planes heavy bomber covering force, making Aqi's carriers virtually useless (he will not risk them near my bombers). It is February 43 in our game and i have cut of 2/3 of aqi's oil supplies already. Aqi has fortified the major bases in the area, but there are SO many bases left that I can easily bypass them and take the "next" base instead, building to a level 5 AF it up quickly with 7 or so engineer units in order to operate heavy bombers from that AF.

Aqi, has only Palembang and Brunei left as feasible oil centers, and I think that I will be threatening Brunei in the next 3 weeks as I am planning a landing on Borneo.

Japanese oil will last for about 7 month’s before running out, so the war will be almost concluded by the end of 43...

Is there a defence against this tactic ???




[image]local://upfiles/14273/F30393A0039642869B91BEC981CD45A9.jpg[/image]



WiTP_Dude -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/25/2005 7:04:30 PM)

The Japanese player should consider landing in Darwin in every standard scenario 15 match they play. Then you can buy the time to build up the defenses of the bases in the eastern parts of the Dutch East Indies (Timor, Kendari, Ambonia, ect). Otherwise I think the Allies can cut off oil shipments to Japan by the middle of 1943.



wild_Willie2 -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/25/2005 7:14:52 PM)

The problem with a Darwin landing is the fact that the allies can send 30 or so units there overland within a few weeks no PP needed to move units overland in Australia. This will cost the japanese player a LOT of supplies and weapons to hold onto Darwin for a few weeks...

So a landing isn't really an viable option....



AmiralLaurent -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/25/2005 7:50:09 PM)

Death Star + BB + a reaction force of 4 Div + 200 Betties bombing Allied AF at night at range 15.



moses -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/25/2005 7:54:57 PM)

I tested this a long while ago and came to the same conclusion you have. It is far too easy to supply norhtern austrailia in the game. This was one of the prime reasons for Andrew Browns map and the scenario's that have grown out of it.



Crimguy -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/25/2005 8:53:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: moses

I tested this a long while ago and came to the same conclusion you have. It is far too easy to supply norhtern austrailia in the game. This was one of the prime reasons for Andrew Browns map and the scenario's that have grown out of it.


You think it's cheating, cheap, or simply gamey?



ChezDaJez -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/25/2005 9:00:05 PM)

quote:

You think it's cheating, cheap, or simply gamey?


I don't think it's a matter of any of those. More like unrealistic. It's just one of many instances where the game gives a player more than what would normally be expected. That applies to both sides.

Chez




John III -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/25/2005 10:24:47 PM)

The Japanese COULD have easily taken Darwin during the early phase of the war. They simply didn't want to get entangled there. That was part of the army-navy struggle that went on. I think the game allows the players TOO much latitude here. It cannot reflect the lack of cooperation and in-fighting between IJA and IJN.

I'll take NW Australia ANYTIME to keep those damned 4-E bombers away from me!



Crimguy -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/25/2005 11:29:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez
I don't think it's a matter of any of those. More like unrealistic. It's just one of many instances where the game gives a player more than what would normally be expected. That applies to both sides.


Let me rephrase: How would you feel if your Allied opponent took this route in a PBEM? Would you feel that it was a cheap way to win? Would you feel anger at the designers of the game? I think I would feel the latter.



ChezDaJez -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/25/2005 11:50:53 PM)

quote:

Let me rephrase: How would you feel if your Allied opponent took this route in a PBEM? Would you feel that it was a cheap way to win? Would you feel anger at the designers of the game? I think I would feel the latter.


IRL, the Allies had considered an invasion launching from Darwin but decided against it due to the logistical difficulties present. Those logistical difficulties are still present only to a lesser degree.

I play almost exclusively as the Japanese player and that is one of my big fears. If the Allies can stock enough material and men to launch an offensive from Darwin, Japan is going to have problems stopping the LBA from decimating the resource areas in the SRA. Is it cheating? No. Is it gamey? No. Is it fair? No, but war shouldn't ever be fair. This area is the most critical to Japan so just don't be surprised when the entire Japanese fleet shows up at Darwin to do something about it!!!

As far as the designers of the game, sure they made some mistakes but it's a game and I'll play it to the best of my ability without resorting to gaminess. Just think, we wouldn't have anything to bitch about if they got it 100% right! We would only have ourselves to blame for our poor play![:D]

Chez



ADavidB -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 12:03:16 AM)

quote:

Let me rephrase: How would you feel if your Allied opponent took this route in a PBEM? Would you feel that it was a cheap way to win? Would you feel anger at the designers of the game? I think I would feel the latter.


As Admiral Laurent wrote above, a few hits with a big Japanese bombardment fleet and a couple of passes by the KB can turn Darwin into a junkyard pretty fast. Remember, there is only one other Allied base near by, and it isn't that close.

Also, in order to use Darwin as a staging ground for attacks into the DEI, the Allied player must put ships into Darwin. Now go back to Admiral Laurent's comments again...[;)]

I'm not saying that it can't be done, but by the time the Allied player can bring together enough forces, supplies and fuel to sustain a big campaign in that region, he may as well consider using those forces, supplies and fuel somewhere else that might be more in line with the objective of bringing Japan to its knees.

Dave Baranyi



wild_Willie2 -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 12:24:39 AM)

One of the main faults that led to this disaster for Aqi, is the fact that he DID NOT see my attack comming. He used his Hk6-8 for night bombing some obscure bases instead of using them to see my ship ans supply buildup. I was able to mass virtually the entire allied fleet in Darwin without Aqi knowing about it. Once I had everything in place, it was virtually impossible to stop me. He delayed me at Kenadi, by stationing 300 fighters and the KB there, but by then I had my first level 5 airbase base and 300 heavy's ready to counter the KB. After a 2 month mexican standoff, and heavy air losses on both sides (I lost 200 P38's there and was down to 20 operational AC, but did not mind THAT because the unlimited allied pilot pool) I had used my barges and Para's to secure smaller nearby bases. Thus leapfrogging past Kendari and rendering it useless. Aqi withdrew the KB east and is now unable to return it because I dominate the SRA with my bombers...



wild_Willie2 -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 12:31:56 AM)

I am still waiting for Aqi to send back my turn, I send over 4 BB and 8 CA's to bombard sourabaja at night (most likely packed with planes) and set 400 heavy to attack sourabaja at dawn and am very anxious to get the results back. Hopefully the naval bombardment will have knocked out the sourabaja AF, because I am sending my heavies in without escort (attack range is 10, while P-38 only goes 9). Either way, next turn will be a bloodbath. Just hoping that it will be a JAPANESE bloodbath [;)]



Crimguy -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 12:34:20 AM)

This strategy relies, then, on the Japs not keeping Darwin in a state of rubble? I'm curious about this approach - when did you commence a buildup of Darwin? From 1941, or did you start amassing materiel there much later, say Nov 42?



wild_Willie2 -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 12:54:16 AM)

I started my buildup in mid 42, I had lost 3 carriers while getting to cockey the second time i met with the KB (killed 300 jap carrier planes the first time and got away undamaged, while hitting a jap CVL badly). As there was no effective Japanese naval search in the Darwin area, I was able to bring in al the supplies from India and the states that I needed, including the britisch fleet and my remaining 3 carriers. If there had been any japanese opposition in that area the preparations for the offensive would have been A LOT more difficult this early in the campain..



WiTP_Dude -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 1:20:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wild_Willie2

I started my buildup in mid 42, I had lost 3 carriers while getting to cockey the second time i met with the KB (killed 300 jap carrier planes the first time and got away undamaged, while hitting a jap CVL badly). As there was no effective Japanese naval search in the Darwin area, I was able to bring in al the supplies from India and the states that I needed, including the britisch fleet and my remaining 3 carriers. If there had been any japanese opposition in that area the preparations for the offensive would have been A LOT more difficult this early in the campain..


The Japanese player better put some Emilies and Dinahs in the Timor area if they aren't invading Darwin. Otherwise they are pressing their luck.



Tom Hunter -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 1:39:27 AM)

In my first game with Blackwatch (cancelled because the Zero bug took away 1,400 planes from his pool) he failed to take or recon Sumatra.

Over the course of months HMS Hermes and various AKs and APs moved 500 aircraft and about 6 divisions worth of stuff into Sumatra. In September 42 the British returned to Malaya, within a few days of landing they controlled most of the penninsula, had air bases set up and were pumping supply in. The Japanese were reduced to a couple brigades in Singapore and the British controlled the Sea around Malaya.

No one should ever complain about a big attack that comes out of a place they did not recon. Your opponent made his bed, now he is lying in it.

Though I have never gotten past September 42 I don't like the Darwin route because it is easy for the Japanese to disrupt. The Allies have much better launch pads in the South Pacific and Burma. Darwin is a high risk - high reward play. Congratulations on playing it successfully.



kaleun -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 1:47:39 AM)

Reminds me of my game (Shame and Execration) with warspite. I managed to hold on to Timor and retake the Banda sea islands that he had taken and left ungarrisoned. Based on those islands I made a lunge for Amboina (an oil base) but finding it garrisoned too strongly for my small force, had to settle for Bulla instead.
Also I expanded Lautern to base some B-24s in there, and managed to drive his LBA out of Kendari. He is getting resources out, and supplies in (I presume) via AGs.
The downside however is that these two operations run the supplies of Darwin down so fast that I needed to send two large convoys up to Darwin. Convoys that were direly needed in the New Guinea/Solomons area.

So perhaps Darwin can be resupplied too easily via that railroad, but since the allies wil then need to compromise elsewhere, perhaps not gamey.

Maybe Warspite can comment on this too.



moses -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 4:17:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crimguy

quote:

ORIGINAL: moses

I tested this a long while ago and came to the same conclusion you have. It is far too easy to supply norhtern austrailia in the game. This was one of the prime reasons for Andrew Browns map and the scenario's that have grown out of it.


You think it's cheating, cheap, or simply gamey?


I would avoid using this route. But I also enforce very strict rules on the Japanese start up as well. In other words I don't allow any of the first turn crazyness that others allow.

I guess if you think that Japan can launch 20-30 invasions on turn one then there should be nothing wrong with the allies using the rules to do crazy things as well.

To me its just sad that this has not been fixed as it seems to be one of the easiest fixes possible. Just change 5 to 10 of the connecting rail hexes to roads and the problem is solved. Then you have to ship in supplies and troops making it much more difficult to sustain these offensives.



ADavidB -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 4:31:35 AM)

quote:

To me its just sad that this has not been fixed as it seems to be one of the easiest fixes possible. Just change 5 to 10 of the connecting rail hexes to roads and the problem is solved. Then you have to ship in supplies and troops making it much more difficult to sustain these offensives.


The railroad connection doesn't allow big offenses to be run out of Darwin - not enough supply gets in. A B-24 group eats up a huge amount of supply when flying a serious bombing campaign. So if you want to use Darwin, you have to be prepared to ship in a lot of supplies - and unless the Japanese player is sleeping, that isn't an easy thing to do.

Cheers -

Dave Baranyi



moses -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 4:58:35 AM)

I don't think thats true. I tested this a long time ago by using the editor to transfer in hundreds of heavy bombers with fighter support. I also put 1000 or so AV of ground troops in Darwin. Withing 2 or 3 days full supply had transfered there. I put a bunch of transports there to see if I could load supply and then just haul it to Timor. I had no problem loading all the supply I wanted and my base stayed on the edge of green and orange supply levels over an extended period of time.

This was done on a previous version of the game of course but I don't know that anything has changed in this respect.

I think as long as you have supply in Austrailia it will move to Darwin in whatever quantity is needed.



moses -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 5:03:45 AM)

Kaleun:

This raises a strange aspect of the supply system. Rail supply to Darwin is based on the supply requirment at Darwin and not for the region it is supporting. The only was to get large supply to Darwin is to have a large force there to keep the supply requirement there.

So strangly you can greatly improve your supply situation in the area by sending in a bunch of bombers to sit at Darwin and scream for supply. Then let the bombers sit and load the supply up on ships to support your attacks.



ADavidB -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 5:40:06 AM)

quote:

I don't think thats true. I tested this a long time ago by using the editor to transfer in hundreds of heavy bombers with fighter support. I also put 1000 or so AV of ground troops in Darwin. Withing 2 or 3 days full supply had transfered there. I put a bunch of transports there to see if I could load supply and then just haul it to Timor. I had no problem loading all the supply I wanted and my base stayed on the edge of green and orange supply levels over an extended period of time.


Having your supply at the edge of green/orange is not a good way to assure constant bomber attacks. I find that you need to be in the "twice needed" range to be able to consistantly send out good, solid attacks and repair your planes quickly. So from that perspective rail transport isn't enough to meet my needs.

Cheers -

Dave Baranyi



Burzmali -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 6:07:28 AM)

That's why you stuff the base with any junk bombers you have around. If you don't have them fly, they won't use supply, but they still help to pull it in. That way the legions of doom (tm) can commence to build a bridge of bombs across the pacific.



esteban -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 6:23:46 AM)

Is it gamey to launch an attack from Darwin into the SRA? No more than ahistorically evacuating a ton of units from Malaya and the Phillipines, running the PoW/Repulse to Ceylon on December 8, and hiding the U.S. Pacific fleet on the West Coast until May, 1942.

However, the rail network is the biggest "anachronism" in the game.

I think that in future games I will probably try to use the mod map for PBEM, simply to avoid that problem.



kaleun -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 6:24:39 AM)

"That's why you stuff the base with any junk bombers you have around. If you don't have them fly, they won't use supply, but they still help to pull it in. That way the legions of doom (tm) can commence to build a bridge of bombs across the pacific. "


Now that would be gamey.
(Note to self, remove those bombers I have sitting at Darwin for lack of a better place to keep them)[;)]



AmiralLaurent -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 9:10:34 AM)

The supply system of NW Australia is unhistorical (ressource centers and rail) but in RL Japan had more troops in DEI than in Solomons at any time of the war. While in many games Japanese player (me included) will rather continue to attack and so use troops elsewhere than in DEI.



jrcar -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 9:33:59 AM)

In one of my PBEM games I too built up Darwin, but I shipped in supplies to do it, initially in single ships until I'd blown Kendari to hell then in large convoy's direct from India. My opponant didn't bother doing long range airstrikes against fighter CAP, prefering to husband his Nells and Betty's instead.

After some awesome cruiser battles in the Timor Sea that ended in a draw tactically, but a strategic victory for me, I've now started taking some of the North PNG bases and Timor.

To stop me he has to commit KB... and when he does the central Pacific will ignite... if he doesn't then he risks his Oil.

He has taken Nomea, and it is well garrisoned, so those troops had to come from somewhere, and it looks like the NEI was where they had come from.

Historcially the rail line to Darwin would have needed to be significantly improved to move the tonages required... but it could have been done if it was directed. Instead the decision was to use shipping in the SWPA.

As long as you are risking shipping to supply Darwin, then IMHO this approach is both feasible, and historically accurate.

If the Japanes player decides to focus forces elsewhere then this approach is even more reasonable.

Cheers

Rob



Rainerle -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 1:23:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrcar

Historcially the rail line to Darwin would have needed to be significantly improved to move the tonages required... but it could have been done if it was directed. Instead the decision was to use shipping in the SWPA.


Hi,
IIRC some australian forum members pointed out that this rail line was finished only 1-2 years ago.



jrcar -> RE: Taking the "Darwin" route in a Allied PBEM (9/26/2005 1:30:19 PM)

Yes that was me :)

There was rail to Alice Springs, then a section of road, that was heavily upgraded during the war, and then more rail to Darwin.

A study was done about the effort to mount offensive ops from Darwin, using the road/rail link and coastal shipping. It would have been feasible, but the decision was made to go the SWPA route. Logistically it was easier.

But Darwin COULD have supported ops, the rail line COULD have been upgraded, but coastal shipping would still have been required.

Hence as long as you are shipping stuff in via sea this is historically feasible.

Cheers

Rob



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.171875