Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

I am interested in opinions from those who generally, usually, almost always play the Allied side on various Japanese first turn strikes.

The four major variations with which I am familiar:

The Classic - Full Pearl Harbor Strike by the Kido Butai (KB); Land Based Air (LBA) attacks on airfields in the Philippines and Malaya
The Split - 4 CVs (usually CARDIVs 2 & 5) hit Pearl Harbor, whilst 2 CVs (often CARDIV 1) and LBA strike the Asiatic Fleet
The Asiatic Special - Full KB strikes Manila
The Singapore Noodle - Full or partial KB strike on Singapore

I am interested in the Allied perspective on these, and others you have experienced, in two domains:
Efficacy - How likely are these to inhibit Allied early and mid-term operations
Reasonableness - Could the have been reasonably conducted while achieving surprise

Thanks,
Mike

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Singapore is a waste of time if the Allied send Force Z elsewhere. Some minor warships and merchantmen, but there are better targets elsewhere.

Manila can hurt Allied sub operations and their immediate ability to interdict landing operations.

Pearl is a nice VP haul and can mess with redeployment of Allied assets elsewhere.

quote:

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

From the Allied side, I'd rather see the KB in the Central Pacific than hitting Manila. Having the KB hit the subs in Manila then move to assist in Malaya and the DEI will likely open up an early incursion into Ceylon/India. Not really much the Allies can do to counter a rapid exploit in this direction, especially if Singers falls early, or the focus is on isolating rather than initial taking the PI.

If the KB is off Pearl, its going to take a long time for this to get somewhere vital....and that's likely SOPAC which is a long way to bring sizeable IJA ground troops.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gandalf

I wonder what the effect would be if the Japanese player could instruct his forces to specifically go after the Sub, Support and Fuel storage facilities at Pearl Harbor, rather than concentrate on the Battleships as they did. Might make an interesting "what-if" Dec 8th scenario to wipe those out at Pearl and leave the Battleships intact, since actual gameplay does not allow the Japanese player this choice.

Hmmmm? I might have to look into this, now that the idea occurred to me. Any takers to make this worthwhile? or has it been done before?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro

It might be interesting, but in this game engineers repair to quickly to make such attacks as meaningful as they might have been in real life. Not to mention even mods like DBB fail to slow down logistical flow in a realistic way. The result would be too negligible in my mind in terms of slowing down Allied operational tempo.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gandalf

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro

It might be interesting, but in this game engineers repair to quickly to make such attacks as meaningful as they might have been in real life. Not to mention even mods like DBB fail to slow down logistical flow in a realistic way. The result would be too negligible in my mind in terms of slowing down Allied operational tempo.

So other macro effects would have to be "baked in/simulated" to make it work? Still might be doable if one could fiddle with the logistical flow to accompany this type of strike. I've not attempted a mod "with this particular game" so I wouldn't know yet if that is possible, I'm assuming that it is possible, since you can have scenarios with different start dates picking up at different times in the war and I assume those logistical macro settings can be adjusted accordingly in the editor

quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Must...not...reply.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

I am interested in opinions from those who generally, usually, almost always play the Allied side on various Japanese first turn strikes.

The four major variations with which I am familiar:

The Classic - Full Pearl Harbor Strike by the Kido Butai (KB); Land Based Air (LBA) attacks on airfields in the Philippines and Malaya
The Split - 4 CVs (usually CARDIVs 2 & 5) hit Pearl Harbor, whilst 2 CVs (often CARDIV 1) and LBA strike the Asiatic Fleet
The Asiatic Special - Full KB strikes Manila
The Singapore Noodle - Full or partial KB strike on Singapore

I am interested in the Allied perspective on these, and others you have experienced, in two domains:
Efficacy - How likely are these to inhibit Allied early and mid-term operations
Reasonableness - Could the have been reasonably conducted while achieving surprise

Thanks,
Mike

I don't know enough about what Allied Intel there was on major IJN units in the northern part of the South China Sea to comment on likelihood of surprise in the Manila/Singapore scenarios. I know the Allies were aware of troop buildups and transport convoys along the Vietnam coast but they never thought the Japanese would dare to attack so they surprised themselves.

In stock, KB starts out in the Kuriles and the magic first turn move is limited to 75 hexes, IIRC, so I don't think KB could strike Singapore first turn in game.
The only reasons to go after Singapore on turn one are to support a Mersing gambit and to try catch Repulse/Prince of Wales before they can move away.

The Manila strikes would be aimed at stopping interference by subs, but with US torpedoes at 80% or 90% dud rate (except the S-boats) they need not bother. The Asiatic fleet is too weak to seriously intercede in Japanese plans if the IJN escorts the troop convoys properly. That should be the main use of the Mini-KB and their cruisers and BBs early on.

The Allies can lose everything in the far east and it will only have effect for about 9 months.

The BBs at PH are completely un-needed for the first six months or more. They are highly desirable for bombardment in support of Allied invasions from late 1942 on, but they are not completely essential there either. Ergo, the attack on PH does not give Japan a knockout blow either, beyond the first 6-9 months.

Unless you are playing one of the scenarios souped up for Japan, they simply do not have enough goodies to defend all the places they must in order to protect the resources they grab early on and the shipping to move the oil/fuel/resources.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

From my perspective it is patently unfair to an Allied player for a Japanese player to request a non-historical first turn with surprise.

It you want the benefits of surprise you take the historical path that provided an opportunity for it.

If you want to be free to hurt the Allied player on turn one in new and creative ways the cost of doing so should be the sacrifice of surprise.

Japanese players always seem to want to have their cake and it too.

quote:

ORIGINAL: szmike

Imho Japanese players just explore possibilities. In the end of the day surprise doesn't make much of a difference for Allies, but it helps Japanese to keep those pilots a day longer at the least.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Not hitting Pearl gives the Allies a lot of search aircraft.

That can be crucial if the Japanese are planning a major non-historical expansion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

From my perspective it is patently unfair to an Allied player for a Japanese player to request a non-historical first turn with surprise.

It you want the benefits of surprise you take the historical path that provided an opportunity for it.

If you want to be free to hurt the Allied player on turn one in new and creative ways the cost of doing so should be the sacrifice of surprise.

Japanese players always seem to want to have their cake and it too.

quote:

The Classic - Full Pearl Harbor Strike by the Kido Butai (KB);