Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Shouldn't the Japanese always have a garrison on critical islands near the Home Islands, especially against a risk taker like Bullwinkle? Wouldn't these depot divisions make any move to the Bonins, Hokkaido, the Marianas or Sakhalin have to be a big nasty sigint blip instead of a stealthy operation? isn't that worth quite a lot to make sure your best troops can be mobile?

As you get into the center of the onion, yes, garrisons matter. They're core to the "defend enough" process I spoke to above. Garrisoning ones that can straddle a lot of approaches is obvious. But that isn't Baker, or Marcus, or Tulagi.

Look at your own game. Of the bases you mention here and in your previous post--Hokkaido, Bonins, Marianas, Sakhalin, Okinawa, Formosa, Ryukus (did I miss any) had you had these ten depot divs to plunk down on them, would they have stopped Jocke from standing in Korea at the end of the game?

The very problem I'm talking about comes from my experience in the game you mention. Due to the ability of the Allies to be mobile with a crapload of units, able to land 5kAV in one base in about a day, these depot divisions would have been priceless! Korea didn't end that game, strat bombing did, so anything earlier that could have slowed Allied progress would have prolonged the game.

1. They would have allowed me to better garrison the Burma and Thai coast, likely preventing the easy capture of Tavoy and the eventual encirclement of the Burma Army. (I could easily have avoided it anyway by taking the Pisanoluke road but simply miscalculated movement). (3 depot divisions)

2. They would have provided welcome reserves for the front lines and likely slowed Jocke at Sarmi, in the Moluccas and on Mindanao. (3 depot divisions)

3. They would have given me a few extra units to bulk up Formosa defenses and released some better divisions to go to Okinawa, slowing the fall of that base dramatically, and thus directly delaying the invasion of Korea. (2 depot divisions)

4. They wold have given me a few more units for the Marianas defenses that could easily have slowed the fall of those bases, thus postponing the strat bombing of the HI industry. (2 depot divisions)

All of these things would have helped prevent a landing in Korea when it happened and they would have also saved me supply by delaying strat bombing in several locations as the progress of the Allies slowed.

I don't get your point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Shouldn't the Japanese always have a garrison on critical islands near the Home Islands, especially against a risk taker like Bullwinkle? Wouldn't these depot divisions make any move to the Bonins, Hokkaido, the Marianas or Sakhalin have to be a big nasty sigint blip instead of a stealthy operation? isn't that worth quite a lot to make sure your best troops can be mobile?

As you get into the center of the onion, yes, garrisons matter. They're core to the "defend enough" process I spoke to above. Garrisoning ones that can straddle a lot of approaches is obvious. But that isn't Baker, or Marcus, or Tulagi.

Look at your own game. Of the bases you mention here and in your previous post--Hokkaido, Bonins, Marianas, Sakhalin, Okinawa, Formosa, Ryukus (did I miss any) had you had these ten depot divs to plunk down on them, would they have stopped Jocke from standing in Korea at the end of the game?

The very problem I'm talking about comes from my experience in the game you mention. Due to the ability of the Allies to be mobile with a crapload of units, able to land 5kAV in one base in about a day, these depot divisions would have been priceless! Korea didn't end that game, strat bombing did, so anything earlier that could have slowed Allied progress would have prolonged the game.

1. They would have allowed me to better garrison the Burma and Thai coast, likely preventing the easy capture of Tavoy and the eventual encirclement of the Burma Army. (I could easily have avoided it anyway by taking the Pisanoluke road but simply miscalculated movement). (3 depot divisions)

2. They would have provided welcome reserves for the front lines and likely slowed Jocke at Sarmi, in the Moluccas and on Mindanao. (3 depot divisions)

3. They would have given me a few extra units to bulk up Formosa defenses and released some better divisions to go to Okinawa, slowing the fall of that base dramatically, and thus directly delaying the invasion of Korea. (2 depot divisions)

4. They wold have given me a few more units for the Marianas defenses that could easily have slowed the fall of those bases, thus postponing the strat bombing of the HI industry. (2 depot divisions)

All of these things would have helped prevent a landing in Korea when it happened and they would have also saved me supply by delaying strat bombing in several locations as the progress of the Allies slowed.

I don't get your point.

The point is more troops would have slowed Allied progress, as outlined in specific detail above. There are never enough to go around as Japan.

This in turn would have likely delayed destruction of HI/LI production and possibly let the oil flow longer from the DEI. Production of supply for longer means the depot divisions could pay for themselves if they delayed stoppage of oil and strat bombing by 30-40 days. (Japan makes ~28k supply a day full out. Half that in three months of strat bombing and you have a supply problem. One month of 14k production is 420k supply. That feeds ten depot divisions for 2+ years. 50 points a day x 365 = 18,250).

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Shouldn't the Japanese always have a garrison on critical islands near the Home Islands, especially against a risk taker like Bullwinkle? Wouldn't these depot divisions make any move to the Bonins, Hokkaido, the Marianas or Sakhalin have to be a big nasty sigint blip instead of a stealthy operation? isn't that worth quite a lot to make sure your best troops can be mobile?

As you get into the center of the onion, yes, garrisons matter. They're core to the "defend enough" process I spoke to above. Garrisoning ones that can straddle a lot of approaches is obvious. But that isn't Baker, or Marcus, or Tulagi.

Look at your own game. Of the bases you mention here and in your previous post--Hokkaido, Bonins, Marianas, Sakhalin, Okinawa, Formosa, Ryukus (did I miss any) had you had these ten depot divs to plunk down on them, would they have stopped Jocke from standing in Korea at the end of the game?

The very problem I'm talking about comes from my experience in the game you mention. Due to the ability of the Allies to be mobile with a crapload of units, able to land 5kAV in one base in about a day, these depot divisions would have been priceless! Korea didn't end that game, strat bombing did, so anything earlier that could have slowed Allied progress would have prolonged the game.

1. They would have allowed me to better garrison the Burma and Thai coast, likely preventing the easy capture of Tavoy and the eventual encirclement of the Burma Army. (I could easily have avoided it anyway by taking the Pisanoluke road but simply miscalculated movement). (3 depot divisions)

2. They would have provided welcome reserves for the front lines and likely slowed Jocke at Sarmi, in the Moluccas and on Mindanao. (3 depot divisions)

3. They would have given me a few extra units to bulk up Formosa defenses and released some better divisions to go to Okinawa, slowing the fall of that base dramatically, and thus directly delaying the invasion of Korea. (2 depot divisions)

4. They wold have given me a few more units for the Marianas defenses that could easily have slowed the fall of those bases, thus postponing the strat bombing of the HI industry. (2 depot divisions)

All of these things would have helped prevent a landing in Korea when it happened and they would have also saved me supply by delaying strat bombing in several locations as the progress of the Allies slowed.

I don't get your point.

The point is more troops would have slowed Allied progress, as outlined in specific detail above. There are never enough to go around as Japan.

This in turn would have likely delayed destruction of HI/LI production and possibly let the oil flow longer from the DEI. Production of supply for longer means the depot divisions could pay for themselves if they delayed stoppage of oil and strat bombing by 30-40 days. (Japan makes ~28k supply a day full out. Half that in three months of strat bombing and you have a supply problem. One month of 14k production is 420k supply. That feeds ten depot divisions for 2+ years. 50 points a day x 365 = 18,250).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Personally I would much rather disband them so that whatever devices that have can be put back into the pools for units much better than them to use.

quote:

On your supply argument I think we have to back up a little here. To be clear on the facts, as the "depots" are actually nine "depot divisions" and one new Guards Depot Div, one has to look at what they actually are and where they are. All 10 LCUs come in at 35% training and 35% morale. Nine of them are carbon copies device-wise; the Guards is almost exactly twice as large but no better trained. TOEs are about 65%. The Guards and one Depot division can be disbanded; eight Depots cannot be. The PP cost to unrestrict one of the nine Depots, before reinforcements, is 611 PPs. In my test game I disbanded the Guards to see what happened to the pools, so I don't have a PP number, but I figure it's about twice given the TOE ratio.

So, to summarize, they're bad LCUs capability-wise, and they're nailed down in the HI unless Japan comes up with about 6721 PPs. At 60/day that's 112 days if my calculator batteries aren't dead. Nearly four months of not spending a PP point on anything else. If that PP cost is not incurred, even if the two disbands are let go, then Japan is stuck for the rest of the war with 8 depot divisions in the HI. It is also true that the ONLY way these 8 can "pay their way" is to either: 1) take a supply source that would otherwise not be taken, or 2) prevent loss of a supply source currently held or that will be held later, up to the equilibrium supply consumption/supply gain point. In the HI, if PPs are not paid, neither of these options exists. The 8 are a millstone. Perhaps not a back-breaking one if they don't fight and never are set for replacements, but as you say five-figures of supply consumption just sitting there. And recall this cost me only about 250 VPs. (An SST activation would have been only 70 men and no ships lost.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xargun

What is the process if Japan lands on the west coast ? I want to say everything in the queue is moved up 6 months, but am not sure.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xargun

What is the process if Japan lands on the west coast ? I want to say everything in the queue is moved up 6 months, but am not sure.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

My two cents (oh, not again). Having followed this thread I think the tactic in the context of this campaign is fine. Bull and Loca are in a no holds barred, bare knuckle, street fight, that's fine. In another venue I would consider this a 'gamey' tactic. Now hold on, don't go off half cocked, let me explain. I don't wanna start a row here. The player would be using knowledge of the 'rules' to spark an event he would have no way of knowing would happen IRL. Yes, the Japanese player must be preparred for such events to occur, as Alfred has stated. If my opponent were to use such tactics elsewhere (such as Palembang, or Balikpapan) and were successful, I might cry in my beer, but I would say touche. If I as the Japanese player had the option to activate the troops or not I would say touche. But to just use this as a tactic I would prefer a different opponent. In any event it failed in all aspects, except to activate the 'depot' divisions. Just MHO don't beat me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

No. The Allies immediately get substantial new LCUs as well as a very large device dump into the pools. The details are in that emergency reinforcement thread Alfred mentioned.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jmalter

This might be as good a time as any, to address my fellow forumites:

What it is, threads such as this one, w/ Moose & Albert & obvert & GJ & all other participants, add immensely to my enjoyment of our game. This recent thread is like another tasty juicy rare roast beef entree at a favorite restaurant, it provides plenty of 'food for thought'! Y'all engage my brain & enlarge my thoughts.

You guys rock - I wouldn't get half as much pleasure from WitP:AE w/o reading & joining in to this forum.

My best respects & thanks to every damn' one of you.

best regards,
jmalter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

My two cents (oh, not again). Having followed this thread I think the tactic in the context of this campaign is fine. Bull and Loca are in a no holds barred, bare knuckle, street fight, that's fine. In another venue I would consider this a 'gamey' tactic. Now hold on, don't go off half cocked, let me explain. I don't wanna start a row here. The player would be using knowledge of the 'rules' to spark an event he would have no way of knowing would happen IRL. Yes, the Japanese player must be preparred for such events to occur, as Alfred has stated. If my opponent were to use such tactics elsewhere (such as Palembang, or Balikpapan) and were successful, I might cry in my beer, but I would say touche. If I as the Japanese player had the option to activate the troops or not I would say touche. But to just use this as a tactic I would prefer a different opponent. In any event it failed in all aspects, except to activate the 'depot' divisions. Just MHO don't beat me.

To address the "gamey" idea one must first, as you do, state clearly that the design gives Japan no ability to activate these ten units. No ability at all. They are therefore completely at the sufferance of the Allied player. That is the design. Similarly, the various emergency reinforcement packages on the Allied side operate in symmetry for the Japan player. If he doesn't go to NZ that package stays in the Allied barn.

So, given that, the question arises if the "gamey" charge is leveled: when is it NOT "gamey" to activate this Japan depot div. package? To do so requires landing on a hex with the Japan national country code in the pwhex file. Should the Allies never do so? If so, why not? Is a landing at any time on Para Jima or the HI "gamey"? Or is there some date certain whereupon such a move does not become "gamey"? Or, is there also a minimum required Allied sacrifice of men and ships which ought to be offered up? How much? 1000 men and 10 transports? 5000 and 50? What is the exact number, please?

That's what you get when you go down the "gamey" trail. Or, you could play the game as designed and get far more interesting questions put before each player.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

My two cents (oh, not again). Having followed this thread I think the tactic in the context of this campaign is fine. Bull and Loca are in a no holds barred, bare knuckle, street fight, that's fine. In another venue I would consider this a 'gamey' tactic. Now hold on, don't go off half cocked, let me explain. I don't wanna start a row here. The player would be using knowledge of the 'rules' to spark an event he would have no way of knowing would happen IRL. Yes, the Japanese player must be preparred for such events to occur, as Alfred has stated. If my opponent were to use such tactics elsewhere (such as Palembang, or Balikpapan) and were successful, I might cry in my beer, but I would say touche. If I as the Japanese player had the option to activate the troops or not I would say touche. But to just use this as a tactic I would prefer a different opponent. In any event it failed in all aspects, except to activate the 'depot' divisions. Just MHO don't beat me.

To address the "gamey" idea one must first, as you do, state clearly that the design gives Japan no ability to activate these ten units. No ability at all. They are therefore completely at the sufferance of the Allied player. That is the design. Similarly, the various emergency reinforcement packages on the Allied side operate in symmetry for the Japan player. If he doesn't go to NZ that package stays in the Allied barn.

So, given that, the question arises if the "gamey" charge is leveled: when is it NOT "gamey" to activate this Japan depot div. package? To do so requires landing on a hex with the Japan national country code in the pwhex file. Should the Allies never do so? If so, why not? Is a landing at any time on Para Jima or the HI "gamey"? Or is there some date certain whereupon such a move does not become "gamey"? Or, is there also a minimum required Allied sacrifice of men and ships which ought to be offered up? How much? 1000 men and 10 transports? 5000 and 50? What is the exact number, please?

That's what you get when you go down the "gamey" trail. Or, you could play the game as designed and get far more interesting questions put before each player.

Hey Moose if you see in my post I said such an action in your game was fine. I only use the 'gamey' expression here for lack of a better one. I myself would probably find the extra troops as an advantage for Japan, they never seem to have enough, and I don't think the supply issue would be too severe. In your context you are simply using your knowledge of the rules to spark an event for the purpose of putting a strain on your opponent. In your game I said fine. So I'll just call it 'gaming the game', how's that? Again in your game the way you have it set up, I say fine. If and when I get to a level where I can PBEM I'll see what I'd prefer then.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

I knew this was gonna be a PITA. Listen Moose this is why I said I didn't want to cause a row. OK, I guess you understand what I'm saying? You are using your knowledge of the rules to spark an event that you have no way of knowing if it would occur IRL to gain a perceived advantage. If you were attempting an invasion to stay fine, but you're not. Again I said, in the context of your game there's absolutely nothing wrong with what you've done. You have no rules. Its not an easy thing to put exact parameters on something like this. Look around you, the world is not black & white, its mostly grey. Some games the Allies could conceivably be invading Japan early. To put some kind of date or whatever on it would also be unfair. The easiest thing would have been to give Japan the option to activate the troops or not. Oh, did I say that outloud, I have no idea how easy it would be to code. I'm not asking the Dev's to change anything here either. I think they have enough on their plate as it is. I'm saying I would not use such a ploy in my games. If you wish to that's fine. I doubt we'll ever be opponents, nothing wrong with that. And if we were I'd accept that this is your style of play. Heck as I said I might even welcome the extra troops as Japan, I've not gotten that far in my games as Japan (v. AI).

quote:

Not trying to be a PITA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Hello, you answered some of your questions with the snapshots of this thread:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2622371&mpage=1&key=Japanese%2Cemergency%2Creinforceme?

On the snapshots:
- they are white
- disband button is not grayed
- they should consume few ARM points, as they are mostly light inexperienced infantry

No, that was my brother.

Funny thing about memory as you get older. I can recall my 8th grade English teacher's car--make, model, color. I can't recall my first wife's birthday, and I went through twenty of them. I don't recall ever posting those screen-shots. I have looked at the Allied ER posts many times, but not the Japanese. Somewhere in there I remembered "depot", but not the rest. Funny.

Anyway, the reason I asked was this. I'm in late-May 1942 and considering doing an SST landing on Japanese soil to activate the Depots. I realize everything is a trade-off. What I'm trying to do is make them eat HI supply. Lokasenna and I are in a scorched-earth game. He's told me supply is his constant worry as we're playing non-historical R&D and he went a little nuts right away. He's also expanded well past historical limits and is in reality kicking my behind in multiple areas, especially islands. I have let him to some extent since much of my navy has been consumed in an all-out war in the Aleutians which I think I've "won", but at a cost elsewhere. On my side, as I've retreated/been kicked out of Chinese cities, I have visited fire and destruction on the newly-Japanese base as I've been able, focusing on LI, with a view to making him haul supply to western China with all the waste that entails.

The trade-off with the Depots is multi-faceted. They are big but untrained. Six-eight months gets them to national experience averages though. They are pretty filled out, so Arms points don't look like a thing. Most of them can't be disbanded, so they're a little bit of a millstone. They're yellow restricted.

OTOH they're a bunch of decent-sized fighting divisions. Japan as I understand it has PP room in 1943. They could be freed up to go out to many places where a new division would help greatly. The Marianas come to mind right away. If they're not fighting they don't use THAT much supply. I'm not worried about facing them in the HI in 1945. If that happens I did something wrong. I'm worried about them rampaging in the first half of 1943. OTOH, I really need to exert supply pressure to the max right now, as auto-vic is on the table when Chungking falls. (He's relentlessly strat-bombed Chungking out of the supply business. It's getting by on 400/day.)

Looking at my excellent screen-shots I'm more on the side of not activating than doing so. Any Japan players have an opinion on THAT?

Bullwinkle,

You are underestimating the damage you can do if you pick the right target and launch a proper "volunteers" only mission. The JFBs are just trying to discourage you on purpose.

1. Only the Guards Depot div comes in at full TOE (actually it is overstrong). The other 9 reinforcing divs come in at only 65% of TOE. That means they will consume many armament and manpower points directly (and even more HI points indirectly).

2. It is absolutely irrelevant that the main component of these divs is "light" infantry. The cost to add a single IJA Infantry squad is based on load cost which is either 17 or 19 (check with editor to see which particular one has been used for these units). Hence the minimum cost, per single squad, is:

17 armament points plus 17 manpower points. Note that indirectly consumes 102 HI points, points which normally would never be used up by a Japanese player before 1945 and therefore unavailable to build advance aircraft in June 1942.

3. Not too many Japanese players build up a large armament pool by mid 1942. They just don't suffer the army losses to require one. their increase in consumption of armament points tends to occur later when they start to get normally scheduled reinforcements. Thus you would be forcing them to change their production priorities away from their beloved advance aircraft.

4. Rare is the Japanese player who has a substantial PP surplus in mid 1942. It will be a tough decision for them to expend PPs now on units which could not be really used on the frontline now (when the divs are cheap being at only 65% of TOE, but still a substantial expenditure) instead of supporting their frontline operations, or waiting until 1943 when PPs may be more plentiful but the divs will be more expensive if filled out.

5. Even if the PPs are spent, they will still use up new cargo space and incur unplanned for fuel consumption in being transported away from the Home Islands. Once there they create additional pressure on the SLOC. Once deposited on islands (which is what your JFBs are suggesting is their preferred use of the divs) you simply bypass them or if they have been deposited on an island which is in the headlights of the 3rd/5th fleets, being starving they present bonus VPs to the Allies.


From the above you can see I would not be deterred. But the trick is to capture a base with industry to make it worthwhile. Refresh your memory with s.13.6 of the manual.

(a) capture a Japanese aircraft factory it should become permanently lost to aircraft production
(b) capture a Japanese HI factory and it's production halves. Hence if initially it is size 100, the Allied capture brings it down to size 50. Then when recaptured by Japan it becomes size 25. It would therefore cost Japan 75k in supplies and 75 days to bring it back to it's original size. Not to mention the lost aircraft production in the meantime
(c) capture Manpower centres and the reduction is down to 10%

Japan starts with little in the Home Islands and most Japanese players do not reinforce the home front at the expense of the frontline. Therefore what you should do is:

(i) find out which production bases start off lightly defended on 7 December 1941
(ii) check through signit to see if they have subsequently been reinforced
(iii) send sufficient force (if necessary on xAP vessels) made up by "volunteers" of course (remember you can subsequently resurrect the destroyed unit). Travel silently
(iv) land and capture by coup de main the industrial centre. You just have to hold for one day to get the benefit

then hear the howls of protest from JFBs (but perhaps not from your opponent) at such a sneaky move. Have no sympathy for them for it will teach them rnot to play a soundly based military operations game using RTS tactics, forgetting all about rear area defence and all the non sexy things which they find to be boring.

Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: guctony

By the way as side note don't you think that you give IJ time to prepare 10 division. they will have full prep, equipment, Training and moral. I think when they arrive in 1945 or 44 there would be no time for training. And I think 1945 national training level is lower then 1942. Even left in HI now he has more coverage for HI bases in 1945.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: guctony

By the way as side note don't you think that you give IJ time to prepare 10 division. they will have full prep, equipment, Training and moral. I think when they arrive in 1945 or 44 there would be no time for training. And I think 1945 national training level is lower then 1942. Even left in HI now he has more coverage for HI bases in 1945.

It doesn't really matter. Those depot divisions are divisions in name, but almost totally lack firepower compared to even an early US Army division. Even in x3 defensive terrain they struggle to hold on defense. Look at their TOE ... firepower doesn't show up in the combat odds, only AV, but all of us know that firepower is a critical component of any attack/defense. So those depot div's look like ~400AV, but in reality they don't fight at all like 400 AV allied units.

My experience with the depot divisions is that they can withstand one attack, will suffer +40% disablements and corresponding morale loss, and then fold on the next attack. Pretty much in line with my expectations for +45yo troops with 4 weeks training and no arty (as they are intended to represent).

This is in contrast to the US troops who are intended to represent first rate troops diverted from Europe. We are not, and should not, be comparing apples and apples here. These are apples and raisins.


So, if you train those units up to 80 exp, you will still see the same thing. Use them on attack and disablements/losses will be really high as the units have no organic firepower. They will add to the AV of your attacks, but they will always be very expensive for IJ to use. As someone else noted above, if I was the allies, I would LOVE to give them to the IJ player to use. It will bleed their economy that much faster with a false sense of superiority. As an IJ player, I would hate them as all they will do for me is consume supply the entire game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: guctony

By the way as side note don't you think that you give IJ time to prepare 10 division. they will have full prep, equipment, Training and moral. I think when they arrive in 1945 or 44 there would be no time for training. And I think 1945 national training level is lower then 1942. Even left in HI now he has more coverage for HI bases in 1945.

It doesn't really matter. Those depot divisions are divisions in name, but almost totally lack firepower compared to even an early US Army division. Even in x3 defensive terrain they struggle to hold on defense. Look at their TOE ... firepower doesn't show up in the combat odds, only AV, but all of us know that firepower is a critical component of any attack/defense. So those depot div's look like ~400AV, but in reality they don't fight at all like 400 AV allied units.

My experience with the depot divisions is that they can withstand one attack, will suffer +40% disablements and corresponding morale loss, and then fold on the next attack. Pretty much in line with my expectations for +45yo troops with 4 weeks training and no arty (as they are intended to represent).

This is in contrast to the US troops who are intended to represent first rate troops diverted from Europe. We are not, and should not, be comparing apples and apples here. These are apples and raisins.


So, if you train those units up to 80 exp, you will still see the same thing. Use them on attack and disablements/losses will be really high as the units have no organic firepower. They will add to the AV of your attacks, but they will always be very expensive for IJ to use. As someone else noted above, if I was the allies, I would LOVE to give them to the IJ player to use. It will bleed their economy that much faster with a false sense of superiority. As an IJ player, I would hate them as all they will do for me is consume supply the entire game.

The question is, why would you be attacking with the depot divisions? That's not their purpose.

I'm of the opinion that all Japanese LCU's have a use. The Depot Divisions get sent to bases needing garrisons to free up better units for the frontline. The closest the Depot divisions should ever come to the frontline is defending an exposed base from paratrooper attack or defending an island with CD guns (which also solves the lack of artillery problem).

A perfect example of how to use the Depot Divisions would be Truk. It's unlikely the Allies will invade Truk, but at the same time you don't want them to get it on the cheap. Plonk down a Depot division to man the trenches in front of the Naval Fortress and you've a decent defence ready in case the Allies do attack.

If they bypass Truk, well, you've a division cut off, but at least it's not a very good division.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

So, given that, the question arises if the "gamey" charge is leveled: when is it NOT "gamey" to activate this Japan depot div. package?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amoral

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

So, given that, the question arises if the "gamey" charge is leveled: when is it NOT "gamey" to activate this Japan depot div. package?

If your intention in landing is to force a bad AI decision because you know about a limitation in game mechanics, then your intention is to game the system

I don't agree with your definitions here. It's not a "limitation" or "not a limitation." It just is. It's the way the game is coded. And as I said elsewhere it's in symmetry with the emergency reinforcement packages of the Allies. Neither player can activate their own packages. Given that I don't find your premises valid, I don't find your conclusion valid either.

If your intention is to land and create havoc (or to land and conquer) your intention is to simulate an operation.

My intention was to land, activate the packages at a known cost to myself, and to cost Japan supplies thereafter for greater strategic reasons. Whether that was a good decision has been debated up-thread, with good arguments for both sides.

When has nothing to do with it. It is about your intentions, and what the driving objective behind the OP is.

When has a great deal to do with it. The decision turns almost completely on "when." It would be dumb to invest a full US Army regiment and two good xAPs in July 1945 to activate these depot divisions in order to consume supply.

There is nothing wrong with gaming the system. Lots of board games are all about knowing the mechanics and how to use them. It's just important that both sides be on the same page as to "are we playing a game" vs. "are we simulating a conflict".

That was agreed to in abundant detail before the game began, and in subsequent emails.