RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 8:52:29 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

"Lets see whats on Mu-Mu Atoll, only one baseforce with a value of 20 So I send the 333rd Special Naval Landing force value of 60.

Apparently you do not know about the Andromedon Affair!

There was this German raider in the Indian Ocean ran into a merchantman (His Majesty's Ship Andromedon) that put up an amazing fight - and one of his shells (a 5.9) killed the entire bridge team and armed security party. On that bridge was found a set of weighted sacks not thrown over by the dead men - containin a report written by the former governor of Malaya - that is a copy of the report en route to Singapore. It contained everything the British knew about defenses in the region - and it was grim.

The captain suspended raider operations, hid his raider and prize, and took a captured Norwegian tanker to Japan. He sent his find to Germany via Russian Postal Telegraph using commercial code - and got permission to give it to Japan - together with details of its capture. This event was a direct factor in the decision to fight made not long after (in July 1941). Japan had been planning operations against Hawaii since 1910 and 70% of the population there was Japanese. Japan began collecting intel on the SRA in 1938, using pearl fisehrmen, ships crew and business people. It obtained significant local support - including an RAF staff officer in Malaya.
It DID know what was in many places in detail!

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 31

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 9:07:18 PM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

quote:

IJN had an advocate of this move AFTER the death of Adm Yamamoto - (it is in the diary of his former chief of staff who replaced him - Adm Ugaki).

Hi, Sheesh what was he smoking? After the death of Yamamoto means after Japan had lost their CV and after Allies were beating the snot out of them in South and SouthWest Pacific. Now they are going to try to cut off Oz?
"Ugaki go to the back of the class your the weakest link"

As for India, well India got most of it's food from Burma and fishing. When Burma was lost the British decided it was dangerous to have so many fishing boats in Indian Ocean and confiscated them all. The two together brought on the famine. So Japan could feed India by giving them their boats back and sending the rice from Burma. But it would still take 160 Japanese Bns to garrison the place. Because unless the Japanese really changed how they treated occupied peoples they would have problems. But they would need to crush the Commonwealth forces. You can't depend on the Indians throwing them out for you.

I don't see any realistic magic answer for Japan. "we take this place we win" To win a war you need to destroy the ability of the enemy to fight. You can hope to destroy their will to fight but the will to fight only goes away if there is an alternative that appears better. If you put someone in a life or death battle and hope he loses his will your crazy. You have to give him a better option. He you offer freedom in return for help and then withhold the freedom your going to have a revolt. And revolts don't lose their will you have to crush them. (They have already decided it is better to fight and win or die then continue with the current condition) This is where debates about whether or not Japan or Germany could ever "WIN" the war lose me because niether ever gave their opponents any alternative. If you can't surrender without losing anything you fight till you win or die.
Japan and Germany were both given alternative "quit and have peace" that they eventually were able to accept.

_____________________________

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 32

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 9:29:25 PM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

Hi, Can you confirm the spelling "Andromedon" no such ship exists in registery of British Merchant ships from 1792 to 1993. There are 2 frigates named HMS Andromeda (1897) - a Diadem-class cruiser
HMS Andromeda (F57) - a Leander-class frigate
But no ship in any merchant marine I can find named Andromedon.

_____________________________

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 33

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 9:33:27 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

Mogami,

Very wise insight. The only place I will disagree with you is that, while in reality they (Japan and Germany) didn't give their opponents a choice, their propoganda was different. The propoganda was designed to affect their opponents' perceptions, because people make decisions based on their perceptions of what reality is rather than on what reality actually is.

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 34

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 9:36:04 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

don't see any realistic magic answer for Japan. "we take this place we win"

how about Washington DC?

_____________________________

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 35

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 9:37:45 PM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

Hi, If the Japanese can take and hold washington DC then they have already destroyed the American abilty to fight. If they just drop 50 paratroops there then we would wait for them to finish shooting congressmen and then throw them out.

_____________________________

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 36

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 9:38:25 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

that was your mistake....instead of landing in Canada you should have landed on base United States.

_____________________________

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 37

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 10:04:01 PM

matchwood

Posts: 71
Joined: 9/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: veji1

Honnestly you would probably end up in mid-late 1942 with no oil left, an exposed under belly and a big useless desert island under your boot...

Haha Australia = big useless desert island

(in reply to veji1)

Post #: 38

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 10:11:18 PM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

"Lets see whats on Mu-Mu Atoll, only one baseforce with a value of 20 So I send the 333rd Special Naval Landing force value of 60.

Apparently you do not know about the Andromedon Affair!

There was this German raider in the Indian Ocean ran into a merchantman (His Majesty's Ship Andromedon) that put up an amazing fight - and one of his shells (a 5.9) killed the entire bridge team and armed security party. On that bridge was found a set of weighted sacks not thrown over by the dead men - containin a report written by the former governor of Malaya - that is a copy of the report en route to Singapore. It contained everything the British knew about defenses in the region - and it was grim.

The captain suspended raider operations, hid his raider and prize, and took a captured Norwegian tanker to Japan. He sent his find to Germany via Russian Postal Telegraph using commercial code - and got permission to give it to Japan - together with details of its capture. This event was a direct factor in the decision to fight made not long after (in July 1941). Japan had been planning operations against Hawaii since 1910 and 70% of the population there was Japanese. Japan began collecting intel on the SRA in 1938, using pearl fisehrmen, ships crew and business people. It obtained significant local support - including an RAF staff officer in Malaya.
It DID know what was in many places in detail!

CID Where did you get the figure of 70% for the Japanese Population in Hawaii? Sounds WAY high. And of course, they proved incredably faithfull...., to the US.

And while information on British defenses in Malaya would certainly be of use, an awfull lot could have changed between June and December, so Mogami's points are still valid. The Japanese certainly had a good idea of how much was available in a theatre like Malaya or the P.I., exactly where it would be on the day of the attack wasn't a known factor. So a degree of uncertaincy as Mogami suggests would be a valid way of preventing exactly the kind of play he mentioned.

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 39

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 10:28:15 PM

anarchyintheuk

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline

The 1940 census lists the percentage of Japanese population for Hawaii as 37-38%. It doesn't show what percentage of that number were US citizens.

Go ahead and invade Aussieland. Just let us know how you do.

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 40

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 10:32:52 PM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

With his female attachment? Not bloody likely, considering her nationality...

LOL. Her Brother trains every day for the possibility of an 'altercation' with a Greek........

Germans don't much like them either but that is a different story altogether. Turkey and Greece have a mutual dislike of each other due to centuries of dispute. Germans don't like them because not only do they do the lowly jobs they invited them over for to do which they, the Germans were oh too superior for, but the Turks live there too in large numbers. One of those be careful what you wish for situations.

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 41

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 10:36:47 PM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

that was your mistake....instead of landing in Canada you should have landed on base United States.

I can't imagine a landing in Canada by Japan...how could they have done it IRL?

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 42

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 10:45:31 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I can't imagine a landing in Canada by Japan...how could they have done it IRL?

I'm envisioning a McKenzie Brothers episode...

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 43

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 11:09:14 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I can't imagine a landing in Canada by Japan...how could they have done it IRL?

easy. load up a troopship but first make them all update their wills since they wont be coming back eh?

_____________________________

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 44

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 11:45:48 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Take off, eh?

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 45

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/15/2006 11:53:09 PM

KDonovan

Posts: 1157
Joined: 9/25/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline

quote:

My next set of PBEM games will be one where I find a third party who is good (and fast) with the editor and both sides before turn 1 do a free deployment. (units would have to remain in their HQ areas) This way the Japanese player would really have to plan how he conducted the war because he would not know before hand where the Allied units were located. (He would have to write out turn 1 orders before he received the file and send his turn 1 to the moderator who would confirm it matched so even if he peeked at Allied deployments it would not effect his turn 1) Both sides would have a number of PP to use to change HQ of units. But Dutch would have to remain in DEI and Chinese in China and so on.
(Would love to see expression on sneaky Japanese players face when he teleports units to Noumea on turn 1 and finds 3 Allied divisions there. )

great idea Mogami

I've always thought it would be nice to have some variability in the starting defenses of the Pacific. I always thought it would be cool if you had control on the placement of a set number of units in each theatre. For instance lets say the starting units for ABDA remain the same except for 5 LCU's of your choice that can be relocated instantly to a base of your choice (within the same command). Your analogy of how Japanese players play is dead on. Yes in real life the japanese was probably pretty good in the area, but i doubt they new how many cooks where attached to the 2nd Dutch Rgt.

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 46

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/16/2006 3:16:51 AM

Accipiter

Posts: 120
Joined: 7/22/2004
Status: offline

So to sum up....my thoughts on a planned invasion of Eastern Australia is a VERY BAD idea. The idea was to try this in a PBEM game and execute it within a couple weeks of game start, hopefully before any reinforcement arrived in Australia. And since it was going to be in a PBEM game, the chance of success has gone from VERY BAD to LUDICRIOUSLY BAD.

Most of the time, I have the attitude at the start of the game, to basically follow history (roughly) and by no means actually expect to win as the Japs. But in this game, I was thinking of just trying something different and wasn't sure if it was even really possible (seeing that I haven't gotten a PBEM even as far as 1/42 yet .. waiting on 1.8 to fix those bugs)). But if it could be pulled off, it'd be a load of fun.

My plan was to to isolate PI initially, but not invade. Those divisions and the ones in and around Japan would load up and travel to Truk. With a little luck, Rabaul would be in Japs hand by this point. From there, with heavy BB/CA bombardment groups and the KB providing air cover, move in to Brisbane with those 5 Divisions. Once (and if) Brisbane fell, I'd move in LBA to support additional operations across Australia. The next major attack would be at Syndey. If Syndey could be captured, then I wouldn't have to worry so much about shipping in tons of supply, since I could produce a portion of it locally. My hope at this point would that supply for the Australians would drop and the rest of their forces on the island would suffer as a result, allowing the rest of E and SE Australia to be taken. The KBs primary mission would be to prevent re-inforcements from reaching Australia. Smaller units would be used to take the NE while the larger force would focus on the SE.

The divisions set for Malaya would continue as planned and I would try to save enough PP to transfer command of a Chinese division to support DEI operations. Once Malaya was conquered, those divisions would be shifted to operations in the DEI. Once the DEI was under Japanese control, they would land in force in Northern Austalia.

This would all be contingent upon a successful attack on the Asiatic and Pacific Fleets. Enough so that Allied operations would be severely hampered.

Besides the fact that the operation would liley not succede, the more I think about it, leaving PI in Allied hands for so long may be a big mistake.

BTW, what happens to unit that are suppose to appear in a base if that base is controlled by another player or being contested? If it goes to the capital, then Syndey would likely have to hit first although victory there would be even harder to achieve.

(in reply to KDonovan)

Post #: 47

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/16/2006 5:12:20 AM

Ideologue

Posts: 47
Joined: 12/14/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Can you confirm the spelling "Andromedon" no such ship exists in registery of British Merchant ships from 1792 to 1993. There are 2 frigates named HMS Andromeda (1897) - a Diadem-class cruiser
HMS Andromeda (F57) - a Leander-class frigate
But no ship in any merchant marine I can find named Andromedon.

It's actually "Automedon." Like the guy from the Iliad. One of the Myrmidons if I remember correctly.

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 48

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/16/2006 5:16:06 AM

Ideologue

Posts: 47
Joined: 12/14/2004
Status: offline

In a recent pbem game that ended in concession before I could do it, I was going to invade Darwin and possibly some eastern Australian bases once I was able to redeploy troops from China (I didn't conquer China, but I'd basically destroyed their ability to conduct offensive ops).

Maybe my opponent shouldn't have conceded.

(in reply to Ideologue)

Post #: 49

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/16/2006 5:20:14 AM

Ideologue

Posts: 47
Joined: 12/14/2004
Status: offline

I don't really see an invasion of India as being impossible, just requiring a completely different kind of East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere than the one that existed.

Sort of like a Nazi occupation policy that didn't exist might have been better for the German war effort.

< Message edited by Ideologue -- 3/16/2006 5:21:11 AM >

(in reply to Ideologue)

Post #: 50

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/16/2006 12:52:42 PM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

"Lets see whats on Mu-Mu Atoll, only one baseforce with a value of 20 So I send the 333rd Special Naval Landing force value of 60.

Apparently you do not know about the Andromedon Affair!

There was this German raider in the Indian Ocean ran into a merchantman (His Majesty's Ship Andromedon) that put up an amazing fight - and one of his shells (a 5.9) killed the entire bridge team and armed security party. On that bridge was found a set of weighted sacks not thrown over by the dead men - containin a report written by the former governor of Malaya - that is a copy of the report en route to Singapore. It contained everything the British knew about defenses in the region - and it was grim.

The captain suspended raider operations, hid his raider and prize, and took a captured Norwegian tanker to Japan. He sent his find to Germany via Russian Postal Telegraph using commercial code - and got permission to give it to Japan - together with details of its capture. This event was a direct factor in the decision to fight made not long after (in July 1941). Japan had been planning operations against Hawaii since 1910 and 70% of the population there was Japanese. Japan began collecting intel on the SRA in 1938, using pearl fisehrmen, ships crew and business people. It obtained significant local support - including an RAF staff officer in Malaya.
It DID know what was in many places in detail!

SS Automedon

From: Naval Attach� in Berlin.

To: Chief, Third Section Naval General Office Tokyo.

12/121630/1940 73900.

I have received from the German Navy the minutes of a meeting of the British Cabinet held on 15 August this year dealing with operations against Japan. The document will be sent by the next courier; meanwhile here are the main points:

1-Although Japan cherished the ambition of Capturing Singapore, the existing situation would not allow Britain to send her fleet to the Far East, and she must defend it by sending Army and Air Force reinforcements.

2. Japan would probably invade French Indo-China of Siam as a first stop, and the Netherlands East Indies and Singapore would follow. However, Britain was not in a position to resort to war in the event of an attack on French Indo-China or Siam.

3-Hong Kong would be abandoned, but would continue resistance as long as possible.

4.-If the operations against the Italians in the Mediterranean should proceed rapidly and successfully, it would be possible to send a fleet to the Far East.

5-Operations must be conducted jointly in the Netherlands East Indies.

6- Since it was probable that the Japanese would occupy Suva in the Fiji (?) Islands as a base, one Brigade must be sent there from New Zealand.

Navy Trans 08-12-45

Top Secret Ultra.

Notes from a British Cabinet meeting 15/8/1940, so while it gave a lot of intel on intentions, probably little more than a background to the OOB and Unit Locations. (It might have sunk French Indo China though!)

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 51

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/16/2006 1:06:45 PM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ideologue

It's actually "Automedon." Like the guy from the Iliad. One of the Myrmidons if I remember correctly.

Hi, OK thanks Achilles chariot driver. (Who had to go back and tell Achilles his buddy Pat was dead)

I don't see any thing contained in that Nov 1940 document that would help a Japanese player plan his turn 1. and surprise...it didn't clue the Japanese that going into Indo China would trigger the USA boycott. (Just that Brtain would not do anything)

The Automedon stuff helped Japan decide to plan for war but it did not provide much help in deciding what size force was required to take Noumea.

< Message edited by Mogami -- 3/16/2006 1:08:18 PM >

_____________________________

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to Ideologue)

Post #: 52

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/16/2006 1:20:02 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mogami

The Automedon stuff helped Japan decide to plan for war but it did not provide much help in deciding what size force was required to take Noumea.

Of course it didn't...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to mogami)

Post #: 53

RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion - 3/16/2006 1:47:51 PM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

Hi, I have seen where the documents were really to bait the Japanese into entering the war and getting the USA on Britain side but I wonder how they knew the ship would be taken by a german raider. My conclusion is the report held no real secrets and so was sent by "snailmail" when in fact the CIC Southeast Asia was on leave and could have hand carried it if he had thought it so important. Just because it was classified "Secret" does not mean it really held anything vital. The fact that the Commonwealth would not enter war over Indo China might have been news but the Japanese were none the less caught by surprise when their occuping Indo China resulted in American boycott.

This occured in Nov 1940. I would allow the Japanese to make their turn 1 using Nov 1940 Allied deployments

< Message edited by Mogami -- 3/16/2006 1:48:35 PM >

_____________________________

I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 54

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Feasibility of eary Australia Invasion

Page: << < prev 1 [2]