"SIr Robin" Ethimology

[Reg]

[:D]

[gottagofish]

If you want to use the Sir Robin strategy, you have to answer three questions or be case into the valley of death (or whatever it was called, it's been awhile since I last saw the movie).)

[bradfordkay]

If you use the Sir Robin strategy I think that sooner of later you get eaten... [;)]

[AW1Steve]

I for one feel the need to take exception to the animosity of the JFB's who came up with the taunt "Brave sir Robin". Here's why: I once did ma study of all of the allied forces versus all of the available Japanese forces in the Pacific , and found that with the exception of air craft carriers , the allies SHOULD have been able to slow the Japanese assault to a crawl. Please notice the operative word SHOULD. That's with numbers alone. Quality , well that's another matter. Japanese NAVAL pilots , and aircraft generally had the edge on allied. The IJAAF and ground troops , not so much.

So why did the allies perform so badly? Quite simply , their forces were arrayed as colonial police forces. They were more afraid of their native populations than the Japanese (ESPECIALLY the Dutch). In essence , they were configured in just about the worst possible array to fight invasion as was possible. And many of those troops were colonial , or 2nd rate European troops. Untrained pilots , and troops. Troops that had not srved in the jungle , faced modern weapons or worst of all, armor.

Ships were scattered also for colonial duties , and "showing the flag". The bulk of those ships were older , unmodernized warships considered "unfit for European waters". Planes were whatever could be purchased from available stocks , with the best aircraft and pilots sent to Europe.

All of these resources needed to be reassembled into usable and sizable units , combined , trained and intelligently lead. That means a withdrawal, retreat , regroup, re-organization. Or you can leave them scattered , in small pockets , unsupplied and cutoff. In other words, left to die.

I collect as a hobby books of this period that deal with strategy , military theory and analysis of Sea power in the Pacific. The American books tend to consist of two theories. 1) we can not hold the Philippines , and need to grant them independence as soon as possible so we can reduce our presence and forces there. and 2) The Japanese can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag and we have no reason to fear them. USN Naval officers were divided with 3/4 believing the former and 1/4 the latter. Both Admiral Hart and Richardson DEFINATLEY felt the former , and did everything they could to pare down the Asiatic fleet , remove the Marines ,dependents and gunboats from China , and dependents from the PI. That's a pretty good endorsement of the "Sir Robin" strategy. And considering that until 1943 there really wasn't very much new construction in the Pacific, that means Coral Sea , Midway , Guadalcanal and the New Georgia campaign were fought pretty much with entirely pre-war ships.

USS America (Mike Floyd) followed the theory popular with todays US Army of "Embrace the suck" , and asked the "Magnificent Dixie" to come up with the "Brave Sir Robin Fan boy" banner and the rest is history. In other words , fight where you can , delay, redeploy and remove the units you need later. Or "Don't eat your seed corn".

I personally follow a variation of "Sir Robin". I call it "Vampire Chicken". Lay traps , minefields , and ambushes. Use good defensive ground as much as you can. Sacrifice colonial troops , or those that can't removed (or are not worth the risk of ships). Anything Modern in shipping that can be upgraded needs to be pulled back. Outdated ships , planes and "already dead" (can't be withdrawn) go down fighting. All you can do is pull them back , regroup , update and retrain them. Aircraft should be left fighting till their numbers are too small to matter , then withdraw the few survivors to regroup and train.

IF you can save these units , and send forward new units , you can start the re-conquest sooner. The more you save , the sooner you can start your return. As Churchill said. "Some chicken. Some neck".


So as trash talk goes , "Sir Robin" is excellent. But if a Japanese player some how feels (and I've met a few who did) that "Sir Robin" is unmanly , or somehow "gamey" , I have too ask "how poor is a General/Admiral that can't deal with a retreating/regrouping enemy?". What do you want , the AFB to open his seacocks or line up and advance his ships shooting gallery style?

[Big B]

I happen to be in a new PBEM right now - in the first weeks after Dec 7th (as Allied) and facing this very situation.

My Japanese opponent is intelligent and experienced and is aggressively pressing his advantage - making 'hay while the sun shines'.

The Allied dilemma is simply this:
The Japanese have a crushing advantage at the moment in sea & air power in the Indonesian/Philippine geographical arena....making most counter moves suicidal and pointless.

An Allied player CAN do something to contest this space for a while - but not without first consolidating force. Gather warships and air units into something more than piecemeal unwarranted sacrifices....... this is called Brave Sir Robin.

And to add to what AW1Steve eloquently explained above - I will say this; it's worse than stupid to 'eat your seed corn'....realistically - it's vainglorious and the height of bankrupt thinking.

Furthermore, historically, the Allies didn't really do that.
There was a reason why the British concentrated on saving Singapore, and the Americans retreated to Bataan....they didn't merely stand and die on the spot.
That's also why the ABDA had ships from Australia, Britain, the NEI, and the USA....they left their current stations and Concentrated Force.

If any Allied commander thought the Japanese were a pushover on Dec 6th 1941 - no one thought that by Dec 10th....

[Sardaukar]

As Allies, I never abandon defence of Singapore, Philippines or DEI. One thing I do, though, is to evacuate 2 brigades of 8th AUS Div (I'd hate to abandon them), send 18th UK Div to Burma or Australia instead of Singers. 2 Indian brigades and one Gurkha brigade going to Singers go to Burma. Sometimes I also evacuate base force from Cebu and try to get it to Port Moresby.

It is not wise to reinforce failure. [8D]

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar
{snip}....
It is not wise to reinforce failure. [8D]

Let's face it, if this were the North African Desert(where movement were possible) instead of isolated islands - the Allies would pull back to the Alamein line, and play Montgomery - building up an overwhelming counterattack force [;)]

[adarbrauner]

Were I an Allied, I'd try to pull out my best units from Malay.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: adarbrauner

Were I an Allied, I'd try to pull out my best units from Malay.

Problem with that is....you need to tie up Japanese units in Malaya as long as you can. If you pull out too many units, IJA will have Singapore earlier than historical. Then all those units will be in Burma or somewhere else causing trouble.

So, it is a balancing act. [8D]

[Barb]

Just like Sardaukar pointed out - you can reinforce and slow down the Japanese tempo and tie down significant amount of troops. I did send both Indian Brigades and 18th UK division (Both Indian Army and UK are low on high-quality equipment/squads at the start, but their later use will just increase your demands on those precious equipment/squads you need to fill other units). I had also performed quite active defense in the DEI area poking here and there with surface raiders and I had actually managed to keep Allied air losses below the Japanese! Not to mention that Singapore fell in April or May 1942 tying down about 5 divisions and lot of additional units...

So sometime a forward active defense can pay off a very nice dividend... [;)]

Just a side note: IRL - Allies were hard pressed to assemble any meaningful surface fleet to counter the Japanese moves. A lot of ships was tied down escorting convoys! It is not like in the game where you can sail complete division worth convoy without any escort half-way around the world! Each convoy or oven troopship sailed under escort of a warship when troops were embarked. And I do not mean Minesweeper! Think of BB, CA, CL. Now assign each convoy carrying troops around the map a warship to escort and see what you are left with...

[RogerJNeilson]

In all military operations if you become predictable you become defeated.

Roger

[LargeSlowTarget]

"Sir Robin" is perfectly ok if you see AE just as a game, which allows to do lots of things which would not have been possible, plausible or advisable in IRL. From a purely "technical" POV and with perfect hindsight it just makes sense to anticipate evacuation, to save as many forces as possible, to upgrade and train and then come back with a vengeance. If this "anything goes" type of gameplay is you cup of tea, then "Sir Robin" is a viable strategy.

However, a full "Sir Robin" get-away and a comeback later with the steamroller makes for a rather boring game. An active defense with traps, ambushes and nasty surprises is much more interesting for both sides, maybe coupled with a last-minute "run for it" of remnants.

Personally, I'm in the "role-player" camp. IRL, abandoning the colonies was not an option for the Allies. Therefore I do apply self-restrictions and do not evacuate ground forces from the SRA. I also treat as Manila an "open city" and do not defend it - in order to spare the civilians - although Manila would be the best choice in technical terms (good defensive terrain, no supply spoilage, no malaria). That is when playing as Allies - when playing Japan, I don't apply such qualms.

But to be honest, I don't follow the historical paradigm slavishly - to "replay history" would be the other extreme from "anything goes". So reinforcements like 18th Div and the Indian Brigades go to Ceylon or Burma instead of heading to their doom at Singers. But what ground forces are already in place are condemned to stay there - only air groups and surviving ships will try to get out when the end is near. Singers can be tough for the Japanese even without reinforcements - defending it instead of pulling out may buy valuable time for reinforcements to arrive at more important places.

[Encircled]

A full "Sir Robin" against someone who is expecting one and goes for it accordingly could get nasty for the allied player.

India and Oz are vulnerable at the start, and you need to slow down the IJA/IJN as long as possible in the DEI and Malaya

[adarbrauner]

LargeSlowTarget, I may disagree;

No allied country, no Churchill, no United Sates nor even Nederlands would have ever left there their troops did they know they had no chance whatsoever to survive or be evacuated, realistically.

But here we now what they stand against, and where.

The most realistic stance for the allies should be to evacuate/retreat before it be too late, problem is, that's so much not easy.

I'd like to to see how the allied player manages to evacuate Maly and Philliines, he may provide the Japanese with the sweetest of the occasions to drawn all of his troops easily.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: adarbrauner

LargeSlowTarget, I may disagree;

No allied country, no Churchill, no United Sates nor even Nederlands would have ever left there their troops did they know they had no chance whatsoever to survive or be evacuated, realistically.

But here we now what they stand against, and where.

The most realistic stance for the allies should be to evacuate/retreat before it be too late, problem is, that's so much not easy.

I'd like to to see how the allied player manages to evacuate Maly and Philliines, he may provide the Japanese with the sweetest of the occasions to drawn all of his troops easily.

You don't have to get out all the equipment - you can evacuate cadres of key units by air (usually using Dornier and Catalina patrol aircraft) and use them to rebuild the unit after the trapped part have been destroyed. There is a big experience difference between using a cadre vs. buying the unit off the destroyed units list and starting from scratch with all green troops.

[Canoerebel]

Yup....

[LargeSlowTarget]

As I said, playing with perfect hindsight and only taking into consideration the game mechanics, it makes sense to evacuate since you know you have little to no chance to stop the Japanese forces.

However, this does not take into account factors which existed IRL and more or less forced the Allies to fight against hopeless odds.

The Dutch troops would not leave 250.000 Dutch civilians at the mercy of the Japanese without putting up a fight, regardless of chances. In any case they were too numerous to evacuate and had nowhere to go, Holland being occupied by Germany.

The British realized the weakness of Singers without landward defenses, a sizeable fleet and adequate airforce, but since it was the keystone of the Pacific defence strategy of the Empire - basically "Australia and New Zealand are being defended by Singapore" and a symbol of colonial rule, it was impossible not to fight for it.

And for the US, it was understood that the defense of the Philippines was doomed :



Source : Louis Morton, The Fall of the Pilippines. Center of Military History US Army. Washington DC 1993.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

As I said, playing with perfect hindsight and only taking into consideration the game mechanics, it makes sense to evacuate since you know you have little to no chance to stop the Japanese forces.

However, this does not take into account factors which existed IRL and more or less forced the Allies to fight against hopeless odds.

The Dutch troops would not leave 250.000 Dutch civilians at the mercy of the Japanese without putting up a fight, regardless of chances. In any case they were too numerous to evacuate and had nowhere to go, Holland being occupied by Germany.

The British realized the weakness of Singers without landward defenses, a sizeable fleet and adequate airforce, but since it was the keystone of the Pacific defence strategy of the Empire - basically "Australia and New Zealand are being defended by Singapore" and a symbol of colonial rule, it was impossible not to fight for it.

And for the US, it was understood that the defense of the Philippines was doomed :



Source : Louis Morton, The Fall of the Pilippines. Center of Military History US Army. Washington DC 1993.

This is largely my perspective as well.

By the game (as an Allied player), it makes perfect sense to extract every useful land, air and sea unit possible and hide out in the safe waters of Southern Australia, Pearl Harbor or Karachi and wait for the storm to abate. Move your LCUs to reinforce these theatres by unassailable off-map convoys that have very limited space for interdiction and where you can focus your ASW and air search assets. Move LCUs via magical transcontinental teleportation wherein they can arrive intact in India after a relatively short (and infinitely safe) off-map jaunt. Do all these things. Play the code! Have fun! It's just a game and has no bearing on the real world politics or mindset of the time.

Or you can try to, as LST has done, replicate / honor the mindset of the time.

The usual outcry-and the reason I avoided entering this periodic flamewar-in-the-making is for the AFBs to decry the Japanese ability to overextend themselves and invade India or Australia or CONUS or wherever else it makes no sense for the Japanese to invade. It's a fair cop.

The most likely timeframe for Japanese autovictory ("winning the GAME") is January 1943. A lot of things have to go 'right' for this to happen. For the Japanese player to get an achievable autovictory in 1943, they need a 4:1 margin of VPs. A sizeable portion of this must come from captured Allied LCUs. Luzon, Hong Kong and Singapore usually provide a goodly chunk of these LCU VPs. China another share. Some more will have to come from Dutch forces trapped and captured on Java, Sumatra and maybe Ambon and the odd capture of Ceylon or other such.

Cagey Allied commanders will strive to deny naval VPs to Japanese players until the risk of autovictory has passed. You are unlikely to find too many PBEM Allied commanders that risk a couple/three partially damaged / depleted CVs against the Japanese KB in June 1942. They're likely too busy keeping their precious carriers safe (and-oh by the way-avoiding any possiblity of Japanese autovictory).

So, from the JFB's perspective they see the Allies running ahistorically for the hills, avoiding naval conflict for game-related purposes and denying the Japanese player feasible grounds to establish victory (IN THE GAME). All this is perfectly possible in the game and is rewarding to the Allied player that disavows any historical rationale for standing and fighting / risking his naval assets until after January 1, 1943. Some Allied players go further and avoid serious confrontation until the Essex carriers come en masse or the CVEs start piling up or the Hellcats come or the Allied torpedo curse is lifted or...or...or...

From the Japanese player's perspective, they see this as overly-cautionary gameplay that-by default or by design-denies them any semblance of victory. It's a frustration to find that, months into a game, that you and your opponent do not share the same 'world view' about the relationship between historical mindsets and the game unfolding before you.

I think moderation is the key to all things here. Allied players that pull everything they can as fast as they can as far as they can run the risk of frustrating their opponent's rationale for playing the game. It wouldn't surprise me at all if this resulted in dropped games by the Japanese player in 1943. After all, there clearly wasn't a 'meeting of the minds' about how this thing would play out philosophically.

I've also suggested-in a fit of pique-that Japanese players exposed to these "Sir Robin on Steroids" techniques *not* drop games, but play on to spite the Allied player. Namely, that they should ,after their initial Japanese expansion has been completed, immediately fall back to the home islands as quickly as possible. You know-to preserve their forces and avoid giving the Allies 'freebie' VPs. Abandon Burma, the DEI, Philippines, etc. Everybody back to the home islands.

Deny the Allies any meaningful personal experience in the game. After all, they didn't so much capture it in a brilliant feat of arms, you abandoned it in your headlong dash to ahistorical safety. You're preserving your forces to 'fight another day'. Let them discover the empty feeling of swinging at air for a ****ing year or more of game time/ real time.

Think that would be a 'historical' match? Think it would leave a bad taste in the mouth of Allied players looking for a historical match? Because I do.

Good PBEM partnership starts with a compatible mutual philosophy and balance. Give and take. If, by your headlong flight, you take away a meaningful possibility of Japanese AV, that's changing the balance of the game. You should be up front with your prospective partner about it and let them decide whether you are compatible. Just like house rules or philosophies about "Fortress Palembang" or the overuse of the magical Japanese first move bonus, these approaches should be open for discussion and consideration.

[MBF]

well said fowl one

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Revthought

I always play the game (I'm an Allied player) like I am fighting a real war. This means, to me, that I am going to put up a fight for things. For example, for me completely abandoning Singapore is impossible. This would never have happened for political and ideological reasons far beyond what is possible to model in the game. Similarly, I'm always going to offer resistance in the Philippines and the Dutch, with the help of the US and the Commonwealth, are always going to try and stop you from landing in the DEI if you're playing me.

Now that being said, I am willing to be more sane about this. Exposed undefendable positions? Abandon them. Force Z sailing straight into the maw? No thanks. Reinforcing Singapore? Not a great idea. In fact, evacuating some Australian forces? If I can manage it!

So for me its a mix. I am going to fight the Japanese player, but I'm going to do it with more thought and composure than was possible during the real war.

The pure "Sir Robin" I do not like, and this isn't because I think its an "invalid" strategy. It's perfectly valid if you are treating WiTPAE and a pure game where everything is just chits and game pieces. Nothing wrong with that. It's just, for me the game isn't fun unless I'm pretending those chits represent their real life counter parts.

It all comes down to whether or not you enjoy WITPAE purely as a game or you enjoy WITPAE as a game and simulation (imperfect of course). Both are totally valid, its just I fall very firmly in the latter category and not the former.

Hear hear. [8D]