Lawrence of Arabia Gambit for the Rising Sun

[Raverdave]

 Horohito......now there was a a bloke was was 100% BS.

[JeffroK]

Thanks for digging up this thread, many interesting thoughts, until Hirohito made out Lawrence to be a Military Genius rather that a guerilla leader.
 
"Reinforced by the Australian Light Horse"
 
Bollocks!
 
Were the remaining 7 pages any better?

[Nemo121]

Well, his concept of taking Pearl Harbour early on and sacrificing in other areas of the Pacific (Noumea, Baker, Canton etc) in order to properly support that strike is a good idea as Admiral Laurent has shown ( and I've got an RHS 4.06 game going on in which I tried to do that except at a cheaper cost than Admiral Laurent had to pay and seem to have succeeded. Cost was high, about 30 ships lost in the PH operation in the first month but the surface US Pacific Fleet has been destroyed ( CVs ran to Oz as did a single Cruiser TF).
 
I've also taken Cold Bay and the Aleutians but to move farther into Alaska would require another major invasion ( of at least a half-dozen divisions ). In stock I think these two things would be possible whilst still invading the Phillipines but the lack of assault shipping in RHS is absolutely crippling and so I had to forego the Phillipines in order to concentrate on Malaysia which should be finished off by mid-January 42... its fall was delayed by an ueber-strong supply sink at Kuala Lumpur.
 
 
I think that going for Alaska is a reasonable strategy but not possible in a 1st turn rush, especially in RHS where there are many mutually-supporting bases in Alaska. I also think that the concept of bypassing the Phillipines is reasonable. I haven't read this thread but a comment in it leads me to believe he proposed that. It would appear though that while he did address the concept of phasing his assaults ( and needs to be commended for that insofar as it is something I see being ignored in so many AARs) he phased them improperly and then blamed the execution instead of looking to the plan.

[Zeta16]

Ok , I played him and he did move on me and take PH and the like, but I sunk most of his fleet around NZ in late 42 and until I had enough ships in 43 he had a nice barrier, he took Rusiia and China but I stoned him in India so it was a good game and we ended in a draw as I had taken Korea in mid 45, an dif I went for Japan instead I think I would have gotten a ton more points, but I was trying to lin=berate Rusiia to see if I could get there troops back into the game.

[jolly_pillager]

I have tried to ignore the PI in order to concentrate on PH and the reseults were not good.

Those little 3 plane raids out of Clark will devour your shipping, and Japan does not have enough bomber units to suppress everything.

Also invading PH is itself difficult. I wound up with 3 Division remenants sitting on PH where they couldn't DO anything, because I had to defend against a possible US counter attack from the West Coast.

I also had to leave my CV's in this area in order to have a rapid response available to any American attack.

The net result was that I was pinned down in a strategically useless location while the allies were free to run anti shipping raids on my SLOC's.

[Nemo121]

Well the key is to hold some Hawaiian bases with sufficient infantry to deter invasion and enough army bombers to pound Pearl into the dust AND enough Bettys and Zeroes to strike hard against any shipping which tries to make it into Pearl.
 
You don't need your carriers if you are willing to stage 100 Zeroes and 100 Bettys and 100 Sallys around Pearl. That force can be spared relatively easily. This will free the carriers for work elsewhere.
 
In my game my opponent has run two CVs to Australia ( I don't know where the third is) and so I'm planning to take my 6 fleet CVs and make for those waters also picking off Pacific Islands as I go. I have the requisite force based around Hawaii and would welcome an early attempt to retake it . Definitely though you need to commit those bombers and fighters to free up the CVs or else taking Hawaii is just a worthless illusion of success which renders you strategically hamstrung, as you noted jolly pillager.

[jolly_pillager]

And the problem is that you also need those same bombers to suppress Clark, Manilla, and Singers or you will get eaten alive by dinky little three plane raids on transports.

Of course, if you're willing to take the losses, you can make it work, but I am not sure it's worth it.

[dtravel]

Are we so bored that we're kicking someone who hasn't posted in diety knows how many months in a year old thread?

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: moses

I took his idea and ran numerous tests to find out how to make it work. After demonstrating the correct way to conquer Russia quickly he still was unhappy and claimed I was deliberately doing my invasion wrong in order to make him look bad!!!! Go figure.

My purpose in doing the three Russia AAR's was not to show that invading Russia was wise or historical. I just wanted to highlight problems with ground combat that I thought should be fixed. The logic being that if I could defeat Russia in 2 months against a good player then something must be wrong. I think I was somewhat successful as many changes were eventually made.

The AAR's are still posted and I strongly suspect that Russia can still be conquered quickly despite improvements to ground combat. BUT it is entirely unclear as to if this strategy would be good on a whole map game.

It requires 5 Chinese and 5 SRA divisions plus a couple zero squadrens be commited to Russia through February. I doubt that conquering Russia will make up for the reduced capapility in other areas of the map.

The real key to this situation is that the Japanese Player is allowed to manuever his forces into the most advantageous positions to launch his attack..., while the Allied player is stuck with the idiotic deployment of the scenario designer. If you really want to "fix" this situation, have the Japanese "violate" Soviet neutrality on turn one so that the Russians can re-deploy as well. If you are going to claim you "beat" someone, you need to give them a chance to "play" first. It's only fair...

[moses]

I agree totally. Russia would be more or less completly defensible if the allies had even a limited ability to redeploy in the face of large-scale Japanese movements.

I never claimed to "beat" anyone. When I played Ameral Laurent in the test game he knew upfront that the deck was stacked. I was just trying to demonstrate the holes in the game in hopes that some of them would be plugged.

Remember there were lots of posters back then who argued that the ground combat system was just fine.

[Nemo121]

Pillager,
 
Well, obviously,you are going to have to commit some forces to the Phillipines but, honestly, you should be well able to destroy any aerial resistance out of the Phillipines in the first week or so. Plan for another couple of weeks to destroy the forces in Malaysia and DEI and use that time to build up the airfields in the other Hawaiian Islands and then transfer 100 Sallys out to Hawaii and pound Pearl.
 
I had a level 5 airfield there by the end of December and have pounded the aerial forces at PH into uselessness. I think that apart from some Kingfisher raids in the southern Phillipines I only ever faced 2 or 3 air raids operating out of the Phillipines. My aerial supremacy was just too extensive for raids out of the phillipines to be worthwhile.
 

As far as Russia goes: I think we have to respect the context in which Moses' game occurred but, yeah, if you are going to invade russia then it should either be active from Day 1 or activated at least a month before it is going to be invaded so that the Allied player can re-deploy. Of course if the Allied player uses Russia to base planes out of or transfer them between US to India ( and vice versa) then he loses the right to that warning IMO. Turn-arounds fair game.

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Of course if the Allied player uses Russia to base planes out of or transfer them between US to India ( and vice versa) then he loses the right to that warning IMO. Turn-arounds fair game.

I seem to remember seeing somewhere that Allied units moved into unactivated USSR get "interned" and can't move or attack. So this isn't possible.

[Nemo121]

Nope, I've had a guy do this against me. He flew them into Russia, rebuilt his B17 formations etc using the supplies in Russia and then flew them back to India to conduct bomber raids... Rinse and repeat...

[dtravel]

*mutter mutter*  Its not supposed to be possible.  Another area getting tinkered with in patches trying to make it work right.  *mutter mutter*

[buzzz123]

A couple of comments from a REAL pro (yeah right. Check MY joining date and number of posts!!!!) Idiot.
 
Anyway.....
 
Hirohito was obviously a bit nuts (to invest that much time into a game he probably did not even own is clearly a little loopy), BUT, at least he was thinking outside the box. Too many players get stuck on the 'copy the historical timetable' path, which makes for a very predictable result. At least the esteemed Admiral was trying to figure a way to do something different and thus produce a different result. Yes, his plan was overly ambitious. And yes, to claim he was imitating 'Larry' of Arabia was hard to figure. But at least he was trying. Give him a little credit.
 
his real mistake was refusing to even TRY a PBEM against anyone (i guess he would have needed to go and buy the game to do that?!). I cant believe i read this entire thread waiting for the link to the game - and all for NOTHING. AAAARGH!!!

[Dino]

Its not supposed to be possible.

Says Mr.Frag?

Another area getting tinkered with in patches trying to make it work right.

Don't remember seeing it addressed in any of the paches...

As far as i'm concerned, it works fine as it is...If nothing else, it's a workarround for the fact that you cannot transfer them via Atlantic.

China-Russia shuttle is a bit gamey, though.

*mutter mutter*

Glad to see you found your cranky pants...[:)]

[Dino]

ORIGINAL: buzzz123

his real mistake was refusing to even TRY a PBEM against anyone

Not sure a PBEM would have been conclusive...You can have a good plan and still lose...To win a PBEM one also needs to master the game mechanics...Besides that, any opponent in this case would know exactly what to expect.

I'm not saying this is a good strategy, but it certanly was a good read (both pro's and con's).

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: Dino

Its not supposed to be possible.

Says Mr.Frag?

I don't remember where I read it, but if Mr.Frag said it was not supposed to be possible then I would have automatically assumed that it was.

Another area getting tinkered with in patches trying to make it work right.

Don't remember seeing it addressed in any of the paches...

As far as i'm concerned, it works fine as it is...If nothing else, it's a workarround for the fact that you cannot transfer them via Atlantic.

China-Russia shuttle is a bit gamey, though.

*mutter mutter*

Glad to see you found your cranky pants...[:)]

Stinky motel rooms make it easy to find them.

[6971grunt]

[quote]ORIGINAL: Hirohito

>This is a case of one armchair general having read a book >about history,
Actually, I have probably read over a thousand books on military strategy. I was in the first gulf war where I was shot in the back, how many wars have you been in?[X(]

Knowing this crowd, I would rethink admitting I got shot in the back - it could lead to some harsh observations.[8|]

I've served my combat time in Vietnam [and I wasn't shot in the back] so I guess I can address Hirohito on the same level playing field.

I would agree that Hirohito should have tested his theory by PBEM - what better way to test his plan?.

If he was serious about a discussion of his plan, he wasn't listening to the comments of many concerning supply and resources. I agree that this is a flaw in his plan that I did not see him adequately addressed.

Additionally, I would have suggested that he address the issue of the two American carrier groups West of the Hawaiian Islands. I on of my present games - we managed to attack and sink both carriers on day 1. We followed up with an invasion of the Hawaiian Islands 7 days later [have taken PH].

I would also question the wisdom of leaving the PI unattended in the middle of my convoy routes [that entire area is one big bottle-neck]. We undertook a strategic seige [with boots on the ground and air force in Norther Luzon] of PI and are now [6/42] just taking out Manila [all the rest of PI has been taken]. We were concerned about the presence of so many submarines of the Asiatic Fleet, but he made no mention of this problem.

The Plan we are using is similar to Hirohito's thoughts, but we have not invaded Alaska [not sure this is a good use of blood and treasure]. We have seized all of Sumatra, Java, Borneo, Malaya, most of Burma, all of the Pacific Islands except Fiji, Pago Pago and some others in that area [USN retook Christmas Island[8|]. We have also taken Noumea. Allied shipping losses are over 400 ships [40% combat ships 60% Aps/AKs].

However, supply IS still an troubling issue - fortunately we took Palembang on the first turn and are grabbing as much oil and resources as we can - so we are keeping our selves "above-water" [for the time being].

My advise to Hirohito - play out your plan - these guys will try to "twist your underware" if your talk-the-talk, but don't walk-the-walk[:-]

[RUPD3658]

Bump for a classic....even a crazy one[;)]