Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Leadership was what I chose, but that's just my best guess.  The only other thing that would make sense might be a high land rating.

quote:

I realize it's a big and fun part of the game for other players.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cribtop

So you disassembled his efforts at dissembling?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Rather than paraphrase, here's John's email for the 1/31/42 turn:  "Had a strange thing happen. Had a Shock Attack at Singapore but don’t know WHICH unit. Strange. No change in any of my three ID so guess it was an AI blip." 

Nothing more be said about it, but I thought you guys might prefer the actual message.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Rather than paraphrase, here's John's email for the 1/31/42 turn:  "Had a strange thing happen. Had a Shock Attack at Singapore but don’t know WHICH unit. Strange. No change in any of my three ID so guess it was an AI blip." 

Nothing more be said about it, but I thought you guys might prefer the actual message.

quote:

John has marched a unit across the Owen Stanley Mountains to Port Moresby. I'll find out via bombardment how strong it is. This is one of my high personal pet peeves (as articulated at length in GreyJoy's game vs. Rader). The game permits it; therefore there is nothing wrong with it; it's just my own personal "have you no shame?" feelings.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
If John is frustrated by the events at Clark Field and Singapore, he need only look at his recent uses of 56th and 22nd divisions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces
That said, I do agree that prohibiting movement across the Owen Stanley mountians makes a better game in that it presents the IJ with an historical problem with lots of decisions.

quote:


Personally, I do not think John is playing the game for the journey, but toward a final goal of winning -- no matter how much that upsets the play balance or game flow. I might suggest to the group that this is one more criteria for selecting a gaming partner.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces
That said, I do agree that prohibiting movement across the Owen Stanley mountians makes a better game in that it presents the IJ with an historical problem with lots of decisions.

Well, I don't see how disallowing Buna/Gona-Port Moresby overland travel across the Kokoda trail / track could be considered historical? But it's a fine line from there to allowing overland travel throughout the whole of P/NG. Then it's a short journey to allowing massive armies to march unimpeded everywhere in the impenetrable jungles of P/NG.

A spectrum from white to black. Which shade of grey is the right shade? This gets to the 'feels about right' stage and partner selection. It's critically important to understand one's prospective opponent and his attitude about these sorts of things.

quote:


Personally, I do not think John is playing the game for the journey, but toward a final goal of winning -- no matter how much that upsets the play balance or game flow. I might suggest to the group that this is one more criteria for selecting a gaming partner.

Agree. Dan's received all manner of comments like this to date, so I'll cease my observations along these lines.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
Philippines:  Clark is down to 25k supply, but John is giving this base little attention.  It may hold out as long as Singers if John doesn't reinforce.  Remember when John waxed ecstatic when Manila fell early?  He's not waxing over Clark. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces
That said, I do agree that prohibiting movement across the Owen Stanley mountians makes a better game in that it presents the IJ with an historical problem with lots of decisions.


Well, I don't see how disallowing Buna/Gona-Port Moresby overland travel across the Kokoda trail / track could be considered historical? But it's a fine line from there to allowing overland travel throughout the whole of P/NG. Then it's a short journey to allowing massive armies to march unimpeded everywhere in the impenetrable jungles of P/NG.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces
That said, I do agree that prohibiting movement across the Owen Stanley mountians makes a better game in that it presents the IJ with an historical problem with lots of decisions.

Well, I don't see how disallowing Buna/Gona-Port Moresby overland travel across the Kokoda trail / track could be considered historical? But it's a fine line from there to allowing overland travel throughout the whole of P/NG. Then it's a short journey to allowing massive armies to march unimpeded everywhere in the impenetrable jungles of P/NG.

A spectrum from white to black. Which shade of grey is the right shade? This gets to the 'feels about right' stage and partner selection. It's critically important to understand one's prospective opponent and his attitude about these sorts of things.

quote:


Personally, I do not think John is playing the game for the journey, but toward a final goal of winning -- no matter how much that upsets the play balance or game flow. I might suggest to the group that this is one more criteria for selecting a gaming partner.

Agree. Dan's received all manner of comments like this to date, so I'll cease my observations along these lines.

Historically the Australians did first defend along the Kokoda track and later pushed on to Buna, so there was some ability to move there. But from old movies I have seen of men hanging on to ropes to climb 50º slopes covered in slippery mud, no vehicles or artillery beyond mortars could make the traverse. Even mules had trouble bringing forward supplies.

The game is not meant to be strictly historical, but if one wants to adhere to the spirit of the thing only units without vehicles and artillery should make the traverse, and the rate of movement should be slowed by using Combat/movement or Rest/movement. If the spirit of historical difficulties is not a consideration, the fact that the tunnel works both ways is a balance of sorts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces
That said, I do agree that prohibiting movement across the Owen Stanley mountians makes a better game in that it presents the IJ with an historical problem with lots of decisions.

Well, I don't see how disallowing Buna/Gona-Port Moresby overland travel across the Kokoda trail / track could be considered historical? But it's a fine line from there to allowing overland travel throughout the whole of P/NG. Then it's a short journey to allowing massive armies to march unimpeded everywhere in the impenetrable jungles of P/NG.

A spectrum from white to black. Which shade of grey is the right shade? This gets to the 'feels about right' stage and partner selection. It's critically important to understand one's prospective opponent and his attitude about these sorts of things.

quote:


Personally, I do not think John is playing the game for the journey, but toward a final goal of winning -- no matter how much that upsets the play balance or game flow. I might suggest to the group that this is one more criteria for selecting a gaming partner.

Agree. Dan's received all manner of comments like this to date, so I'll cease my observations along these lines.

Historically the Australians did first defend along the Kokoda track and later pushed on to Buna, so there was some ability to move there. But from old movies I have seen of men hanging on to ropes to climb 50º slopes covered in slippery mud, no vehicles or artillery beyond mortars could make the traverse. Even mules had trouble bringing forward supplies.

The game is not meant to be strictly historical, but if one wants to adhere to the spirit of the thing only units without vehicles and artillery should make the traverse, and the rate of movement should be slowed by using Combat/movement or Rest/movement. If the spirit of historical difficulties is not a consideration, the fact that the tunnel works both ways is a balance of sorts.

Because it works in game it's tough to limit. My game with Jockmeister is a perfect example right now. I was forced out of Port Moresby after a long siege and several Japanese units retreated to the hex representing the pass to Buna. They had motorized support, large artillery, DP, and AA guns, radar, the works. This is in December, so the beginning of the rainy season, or what could be considered the monsoon.

I had the option to move SE to Milne Bay, but that would undoubtedly have led to several units starving and I'm not sure that journey through rugged tropical jungles would have been any easier for the equipment in tow.

Once I reached Buna I noticed the Allies starting to march. They also went right over the Owen Stanleys, and several units did not even use the 'track' hex. I'm still not sure what they are, but i would put money down that it's at least two if not three divisions.

So is that okay? What is okay?

A house rule would not stop the forces retreating to a position on the mountains, but it would prevent intentional crossings.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

John has marched a unit across the Owen Stanley Mountains to Port Moresby. I'll find out via bombardment how strong it is. This is one of my high personal pet peeves (as articulated at length in GreyJoy's game vs. Rader). The game permits it; therefore there is nothing wrong with it; it's just my own personal "have you no shame?" feelings.

If such moves were a backbreaker in your affair: Read John vs. Nemo in a PBEM Gettysburg contest. A flaw in the game is stacking limits. As things start to go Nemo's way John starts stacking units to an unbelievable level gaining what seemed to be a melee advantage toward the end gaol of winning. Nemo follows suit and takes a great advatage overall . game ends as "borked" ...

I do think that is one huge premise before starting WitP AE in particular is to ask the question, "Are we going to assemble a bunch of home rules to delude ourselves that this game is a similation", or do we need to make up a list of home rules to make the game more playable? I might suggest that with each home rule it introduces its own "gameyness." The other game expierence is like the the game The Moose is playing ... play the game as desgined with all its faults as a game. I beleive the former starts to break down with the air module detacting raids at the target rather than at the very least first base crossed [forget circles of apollonius], the naval model has a problem with BB's shooting big guns at small targets, and the ground model has a problem with small fragements of support troops exerting the same influence in a hex as a full strength Corps. Just three pretty major constraints to a similation IMHO besides many other nits.

That said, I do agree that prohibiting movement across the Owen Stanley mountians makes a better game in that it presents the IJ with an historical problem with lots of decisions. Personally, I do not think John is playing the game for the journey, but toward a final goal of winning -- no matter how much that upsets the play balance or game flow. I might suggest to the group that this is one more criteria for selecting a gaming partner.

Just as a note, I am now convinced that an all out attack in Burma using US forces has such an effect in this game. Although it very possible in the game -- it upsets game flow so much that it ruins game balance and the experince overall. I am not sure the Owen Stanely Mountain thing falls in that category