Empire of The Sun Tag Team Game - Imperial Perspective

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Timeline:
When do you expect to close the Phillipines as a going concern?

REPLY: As soon as possible. I don't like enemy air bases or submarine bases in the heart of what should be our major SLOC. I am pretty creative and able to move much faster than history for all locations EXCEPT Bataan and Manila. I am not sure it is practical to force them quickly - or if it will hurt the assault units if one does? I once knew chap from Ireland who felt that supply sinks could be a big problem. And certainly 40 units running to one hex can be a problem - IF they do that. I expect to neutralize air units in a few days. I expect to have everything that matters on Luzon except the center four hexes (Baguio, Clark, Bataan, Manila) - in a week. I expect Baguio and Clark to fall fast - and Manila next - and Bataan last - but it is not clear for sure how long that will take? However - it probably will be less than half of history.


Are you going to take Borneo, Amboina, Kendari and Balikpapan while you are taking the Phillipines or only afterward?

Well - I move into the southern area fast - isolating fleeing units. But I see the vital wedge as driving toward Borneo from Palau - and I reagard Cagayan and Jolo as the points to start with. It takes a bit of time to get to Ambon - and I am not even trying for Kendari right away. My focus is the other direction - Thursday Island - and all points North of it to Ambon and Palau. Also I am working on Rabaul - and some nearby points. I hope to create a big block in the areas not well defended - and start working up the primary air bases by construction. When the PI are secure I then move on to Kendari and Borneo and Java. If all goes well - we then invest the Darwin area.



When do you foresee yourself invading the DEI and when do you foresee it falling?

REPLY: It is somewhat flexable - but I generally try to move twice the pace of history. I find that greatly minimizes resistence. But I don't commit exhausted units and I take the time to work up a few functional advance air bases.
I use long range air to shift power as reqired and otherwise timetables are determined by shipping to move the units and supplies.

You have said you envision requiring 2 divisions and 2 Brigades to take the Phillipines. Do you believe that you will require more units to go for Borneo and Java? If so how many divisions and Brigades would you require?

REPLY: I am ignoring Sumatra and Sarawak - and Brunei - and the very Western end of Borneo (all yours).
Historically a force from Malaya hit the West end of Java - and AI does that as well. Not sure you want to do that - but forcing the enemy on Java to worry about two forces is not entirely bad strategy. I am flexable on Western Java - and I figure you on Banka and Sumatra will focus him almost as much as you invading Batavia would. I am coming from the East - securing all the lesser islands and then attacking under cover of land based air from Borneo, Celebes and the lower islands. I will bring the armor from PI to help. My main concern is enough base units and garrisons to leave in the wake of the offensive forces - but we better have one more fresh division - as insurance.

I can certainly guarantee you the 2 divisions and 2 Brigades but am interested in how much more you would like and when you will need it. I particularly require the answer to the Java operations as it will impact the timing of my operations against Sumatra.

REPLY: My concern is the Southern area - Darwin - New Guinea - the Solomans. I got no units to speak of and - focused on Hawaii, PI and DEI - virtually none to send. I will need an offensive unit to take Port Moresby - probably - and it probably will take two to get Darwin. Maybe three months.

[Monter_Trismegistos]

I am sceptic if that game will ever start. Sid, you are still acting like a dictator, in a sense that you are not sharing with Nemo with your plans. Dictator does not need to inform lower ranks about his plans, he is the planner, he is the only person that is giving the orders. Here is different situation. You are not Nemo's superior - you are on the same level of command. You have to cooperate, so you must give him as much information as possible. He (probably [:D]) can't read in your mind so you must write it here.

Now Nemo has to guess what your moves will be. All you said is so generic that makes it completely worthless. We still don't know which units are you going to send to Philippines and which of these units are next scheduled for DEI. Or if some of DEI bases are going to be invaded during invasion of Philippines? When Nemo asked about that, you had more less refused to answer because it was obvious. It was obvious for you, but not for him (he wouldn't ask if it was obvious).

Sid, I think you will communicate better if you will remember one simple thing: when you think something is obvious, it is not.

[Nemo121]

Sid,

If you would outline your actual plan and assumptions as clearly as you would outline objections and WHY things should be obvious I would actually have a clue what was going on.

I don't know yet, in detail, the following:
1. Do I get CVEs to cover my Sumatra and Malaysia operations - I've asked this several times.
2. How many Betty/Nell daitai do I get control of at game start?
3. Precisely how many of my army air units do you want control of at game start and do you think that any unit assigned to the phillipines is yours for the rest of the game?
4. how MANY divisions and Bdes you actually want during the first 6 months. I got one concrete figure ( 2 divisions and 2 Bdes for the Phillipines) and I was happy to agree to that. But I don't know about any other units you want elsewhere.


Honestly I simply am being told assumption after assumption and operating with a dearth of information. It is quite frustrating especially since i know you HAVE the capacity to post in great detail ( I reference all the posts telling me I don't know what I'm doing re: strategic bombing etc etc). I just wish you spent half the time clarifying what you require in terms of units IN DETAIL. It would save us both a lot of time and hassle.

I don't recall asking for "many divisions" to "mount operations with large numbers of divisions."

Correct. I am floundering in a sea of vagueness. That's why I want detail so I know what the hell your assumptions are. Every few days you pop in with a whole new list of assumptions and the ground is pulled out from under my plans. That sort of thing is unsustainable over multiple months/years.

I'm not alone in this Sid... I have had several emails which have pointed out the same thing and asking me variations on "How can you be enjoying this?", "It looks like a car wreck in the making" and "Do you actually have ANY idea what your forces are?"

My answers have been pretty much " I amn't any longer.", " Yes, a multi-car wreck" and "No, not really."

and Sarawak - and Brunei - and the very Western end of Borneo (all yours).

No, we agreed they are yours and while I may have wanted them I am not prepared to accept them and raise the principle that things can be re-negotiated mid-game.... I don't want to have a game of "Re-negotiations in the Pacific". I want to settle things at the start in a VERY clear manner so that I can point to previous agreements in-game and cut off attempts to re-negotiate every little detail. If I don't do that then, frankly, I'll be driven insane by the constant re-negotiations.

You wanted all of Borneo and fought hard for it in your negotiations. Well, now you are stuck with them. I won't take them and open up the possibility of renegotiating old agreements ad nauseum.


When you say 3 months... Do you mean you will need the units for Darwin and PM in 3 months or do you mean you will need them for three months or what? Also does that mean that you think the DEI will be wrapped up within 3 months?



Sid,
Either we clarify things and agree there's no renegotiation mid-game or I think it is best one of us walks now and a new player comes in. That I still don't know how many divisions I will have for my operations, which army air units are mine and what level of escorts I can have for the Malaysian operations speaks volumes as regards the clarity and detail of communications... and what it speaks to is not excellence. I really have begun to think today that it is better for one of us to walk away and bring in someone else. If you want me to walk away then that's fine. If you want to walk and oversee both sides of the RHS model in-game ( which may have greater utility in terms of enhancing EOS in future releases) then that's fine too. I believe I know someone who would be willing to step in as the IJN commander.

This is why I've decided to give you the choice of sorting out these things in detail or finding another player for my role or letting me find another player for yours. It really is that simple... and now I'm gonna watch a movie and chill. Seeing Jet Li kick some ass in Fearless will take my mind off this I'm sure



Monter,
Thanks... It is nice to know I'm not being a complete moron and that things are as unclear to other people as they are to me. Hell I find it amazing that after all this "discussion" I still don't have a clue how many divisions I can send to Malaysia or just what sort of naval escorts ( in terms of CVEs) I can have. Thanks for the sanity check cause sometimes I do wonder if others can figure out what Sid thinks is obvious and I'm just completely missing the point.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

I am sceptic if that game will ever start. Sid, you are still acting like a dictator, in a sense that you are not sharing with Nemo with your plans. Dictator does not need to inform lower ranks about his plans, he is the planner, he is the only person that is giving the orders. Here is different situation. You are not Nemo's superior - you are on the same level of command. You have to cooperate, so you must give him as much information as possible. He (probably [:D]) can't read in your mind so you must write it here.

Now Nemo has to guess what your moves will be. All you said is so generic that makes it completely worthless. We still don't know which units are you going to send to Philippines and which of these units are next scheduled for DEI. Or if some of DEI bases are going to be invaded during invasion of Philippines? When Nemo asked about that, you had more less refused to answer because it was obvious. It was obvious for you, but not for him (he wouldn't ask if it was obvious).

Sid, I think you will communicate better if you will remember one simple thing: when you think something is obvious, it is not.

Wow.

Look - I do not have a detail plan. I am doing a mod - not planning a move. ALL I have - or thought I had - was a command area and set of missions. Now it appears I don't even have that: Nemo does not think it is clear that the units planned for invading PI are mine - and he posted above I need to "justify" EACH ONE. Further, he said I had to specify how long I wanted each one for? I tried to make that simple - I said "assume forever" - but he didn't like that. How can I know what will happen? And how can I send a unit far forward into a contested ocean - only to need to bring it back (at great risk of loss and cost in shipping) when some date I guessed arrives?

On the other hand, Nemo has not told me his "exact" (quoting an email from him) plans either. I cannot model my plan on his plan. Nor will I even attempt to make a plan until

1) The mod is frozen so BOTH sides can play with the EXACT game to study and practice with;

2) Nemo and I agree what units I have to plan with.

I am tempted to wholly revise my objectives. IF I cannot depend on having IJA units go somewhere and defend it, I dare not spread out from Hawaii to Noumea. ONLY IF I know what units are mine to control - or return - would any plan be possible.

You are operating on false assumptions and coming to invalid conclusions:

I cannot have a plan to communicate - and it would be wrong to attempt to make one - before we have settled the starting situation - and issued it for all to see;
to this point all is preliminary;

I cannot have a plan to communicate until there is some harmony of purpose: the missions assigned and the units to implement them and the units to garrison the areas taken must be specified or planning is impossible;

I need to listen to what people - and Nemo is the most vocal of them all - want different - and make that happen - and the time spend toing that means it is not available for planning;

It has nothing whatever to do with being a dictator. It is entirely to do with

1) We need to agree about who has what job and what resources to implement it;

2) We need to consider if preliminary ideas about what we might do should change things (Nemo has asked for - and got - changes to things like airplanes even)?

3) We need to minimize eratta and fold in changes related to (2) above.

These activities must occur FIRST and they wholly PREVENT issuing a plan before they are done.

Add to the above that - because I am not a dictator - I am not free to make a plan out of the context of what Nemo wants to do. He wants so many heavy bombers I will not get the long range fighters and torpedo bombers that normally could be built - so my plans must be adjusted accordingly. He wants to take areas not historically done, but we cannot create a single base unit - so I must operate more thinly spread - and my plans must be adjusted accordingly. This is dangerous - taking a much bigger area but having less air power and fewer bases in any given part of it - and it needs to be carefully done. Or the Allied counteroffensive will be swift indeed.

[el cid again]

[quote]ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Sid,

If you would outline your actual plan and assumptions as clearly as you would outline objections and WHY things should be obvious I would actually have a clue what was going on.

I don't know yet, in detail, the following:
1. Do I get CVEs to cover my Sumatra and Malaysia operations - I've asked this several times.

REPLY: And I answered the first time. CVEs are NOT available. They have a mission - and risking their loss forward means they could NEVER perform it. So we won't do that. On the other hand, I refuse to allow your landing forces to be uncovered. I refuse to give you a whole squadron of battleships to operate uncovered. I require that naval operations - even your naval operations - be covered by either land based air or CVLs. I have three different mechanisms in mind - and I so posted them:

a) Base short range army fighters forward when possible;
b) Cover with long range fighters; To this end transfer Zeros to JAAF; to the extent this is not possible in sufficient quantity, assign naval units; I listed the naval units already in Saigon from which tasking can be drawn;
c) Cover with naval fighters on CVL(s).

Exactly what is not clear about this?

2. How many Betty/Nell daitai do I get control of at game start?

REPLY: Again, I posted an answer. I suggested immediate creation of an Army Sentai from the pool of Nells.
I also posted more than once - and you can see in all RHS scenarios - that 22nd Air Flotilla is in Saigon. I cannot go simultaneously to PI, Rabaul, Hawaii and DEI without this unit - yet to the extent you need it - it either must remain - or we must work up your own units to use the same types of aircraft to relieve its units for transfer. You said you wanted two daitai - so I hope that means that one regiment plus one daitai works for you. You NEVER agreed to the assignment of the regiment - or identified which one. I can arrange for this to occur ahead of time - so it won't be down on day one - but not if you don't identify it.


3. Precisely how many of my army air units do you want control of at game start and do you think that any unit assigned to the phillipines is yours for the rest of the game?

REPLY: I want the air brigade (5th?) assigned to the PI op - and absolutely I do think it must be moving with the major army forces that sweep PI and then DEI - not going somewhere else and leaving them unsupported. I also think it is irresponsible NOT to plan to defend the PI and DEI with army air units. I posted that I eventually need two more air brigades (from your long list of them) - one for PI - one for DEI - and one for New Guinea and Rabaul area.
Finally I posted about Hawaii - and you offered specific numbers of bombers - and better bombers than I asked for.
I said I want a regiment of interceptors to remain there later - and I need two to start with - because fighters cannot fight when exhausted. Figure that eventually Hawaii will have a recon unit, a fighter Sentai and a bomber Sentai. I intend to base an Air Flotilla such that it covers Hawaiian waters - even if Oahu is contested. I will pull back the other fighter and bomber units from Hawaii and send them to the Rabaul area.


4. how MANY divisions and Bdes you actually want during the first 6 months. I got one concrete figure ( 2 divisions and 2 Bdes for the Phillipines) and I was happy to agree to that. But I don't know about any other units you want elsewhere.

REPLY: Read above. I posted recommendations. 3 for Hawaii (but one not in divisional form). One for DEI. One for New Guinea/Rabaul (to which add one of those from Hawaii). Two for Darwin. [Not posted - one for Noumea - to RETURN after the op to reserve - reassign to you - not sure]. Otherwise I want garrison units - mostly low end brigades - and small specialist units - in particular CD units, AA units, base units for JAAF, tank companies -
and a few independent mixed brigades or regiments - more or less whatever is available in your view. [IF too much is available - they will be somewhere easy to feed and easy to transfer in any direction - including your direction - or I will flat out say "leave em in Japan or assign them where you please - not required"].


Honestly I simply am being told assumption after assumption and operating with a dearth of information.

REPLY: Me too. How many ships do you have you don't need for operations (so they can be used for moving resources and oil)? What are YOUR plans? I am interested to know (not just hope) that Manchukuo has enough to stop a Red Army invasion? That home islands are defended against raids and worse? That you plan three divisions (my posted advice) to invade Ceylon - or one (your stated preference) - or some other number - so I have an idea what needs moving and covering?

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Sid,

I don't recall asking for "many divisions" to "mount operations with large numbers of divisions."

REPLY: Yet you posted you were willing to assign such - and those quotes are quotes of what you said.

Correct. I am floundering in a sea of vagueness.

REPLY: So post somethign speific; tell me "exactly" (quoting your email) what you plan to do - and make recommendations what you think I should do. Better - list units you think I SHOULD have. If you agree that 48th division, embarked for Luzon, planned for Luzon, SHOULD be mine - why do I have to ask for it and then "justify" (quoting you again) it in writing? For sure, you say "you get to have 48 division, 16 division, 65 Brigade (and whatever brigade is on Palau) for PI, then DEI" that would be nailed down - not vague - and not dependent on my saying anything at all. If I knew what you planned to do ("exactly" and when) I would have a better sense of what too coordinate my planning with.

Otherwise, expect to wait. I am NOT planning at this time. I am going to complete the mod in the form we will use. It is not fair to plan and then change the rules on people. Let everyone plan from the same foundation. And I CAN NOT plan BEFORE that is done - neither is there time to do it nor would I know what to plan with? Finally - I cannot plan until WE get some kind of agreement that I can count on: I did not agree to do PI with NO IJA units - or with temporary units and then give them back - neither defending PI nor moving on to take DEI. Hearing you think I should say "I give them back in 4 weeks" (or something) makes me fear I should not move at all. I need to know what counters are mine to play with for sure in order to make a plan.



That's why I want detail so I know what the hell your assumptions are. Every few days you pop in with a whole new list of assumptions and the ground is pulled out from under my plans. That sort of thing is unsustainable over multiple months/years.

REPLY: IF you have plans, you might share them. That way I would understand the limits of what is possible for me.
Further - if you have some brilliant way to describe how you can know "exactly" what thousands of units will do "exactly" when - I could use it as a model to give you the same thing for my smaller number of thousands of units.
I don't think it is practical to plan out a long way except in general terms. But I do think one can agree on basic roles and missions and forces to implement those. So that is how I think. For me "exact" planning occurs at the moment I make a move - looking at what I have - where it is - the situation - I decide "load here, move there." I didn't know that until I did it.

I'm not alone in this Sid... I have had several emails which have pointed out the same thing and asking me variations on "How can you be enjoying this?", "It looks like a car wreck in the making" and "Do you actually have ANY idea what your forces are?"


REPLY: One assumes you have all the forces in your command areas - and in the SAA on your side of the line we drew - and any other units planned to operate in those areas. There are plenty of other cases - particularly the reinforcements - and one assumes you will get to decide where those go - wether yours or not. Maybe you want this, but if you think I need it more - and say so - it isn't after all - but at least it was your choice. To the extent this comment is germane, how is it different for me? If YOU are unsure - what can I be sure about? I started with the assumption that ALL naval units in your areas were yours. You said "no - I don't want them." Now you complain that you don't know what is available or not? Sort of stewing in your own juce as far as I can see. You really could clarify this to a great degree: make your own list - say this is what I think is best - and I can say "I agree" or list things we need to consider in detail. Or vice versa, I could do that. Or go down the road of general principles, and you can ask for exceptions, but unless you do, the general principle tells you the answer.

and Sarawak - and Brunei - and the very Western end of Borneo (all yours).

No, we agreed they are yours and while I may have wanted them I am not prepared to accept them and raise the principle that things can be re-negotiated mid-game....


REPLY: Just because you didn't read - or don't remember - what was agreed does not change it. You can go back and see what was posted.

Further - it is NOT practical if we cannot renegotiate from time to time. You even said you wanted in principle to be able to do that. It seems to me we should always be free to make a proposal - and if it is acceptable - that is that.
Does not matter what we said before - just that we both agree now. ONLY in the case a proposal is not acceptable should we not change what we did before. Surely that is more reasonable?


I don't want to have a game of "Re-negotiations in the Pacific". I want to settle things at the start in a VERY clear manner so that I can point to previous agreements in-game and cut off attempts to re-negotiate every little detail.

REPLY: Me to. Total agreement.

[el cid again]

[quote]ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Sid,

You wanted all of Borneo and fought hard for it in your negotiations. Well, now you are stuck with them. I won't take them and open up the possibility of renegotiating old agreements ad nauseum.

REPLY: I will compromise to this extent (only): You insist they are mine, I will respect your insistence. I do not want to renegotiate command areas - but I would ALWAYS consider a request from you to do so for some good reason.
"I have too little do to - I conquered China and Russia and the enemy is tame in India - please let me have one of your two active fronts" - and further - if that were the case - I would likely say "I have a full plate in the East - take Australia" or something like that. Anyway - you can ask.

When you say 3 months... Do you mean you will need the units for Darwin and PM in 3 months or do you mean you will need them for three months or what? Also does that mean that you think the DEI will be wrapped up within 3 months?

REPLY: Sorry. Thought that was clear: I expect to complete phase one ops, repair up, and be ready to go to phase 2 ops in three months. That means I will have DEI secure and want to invade Northern Australia. I hope to have PM before that - but if not - I will go for it then as the backup plan. I believe the units sent to Darwin will be engaged in combat forever - until destruction. There may be a passive period - but sooner or later I expect the enemy to attempt to retake Darwin. I intend to contest it mightily - as long as I can - years if possible. It is not an island - so it takes some forces to not allow it to be too easy to overwhelmed.

[el cid again]

[quote]ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Sid,

Sid,
Either we clarify things and agree there's no renegotiation mid-game or I think it is best one of us walks now and a new player comes in.

REPLY: I agreed not to threaten to quit if I didn't get my way. I hold you to the same standard. Neither walk nor threaten to walk. I agreed to compromise if we disagreed. I hold you to the same standard: compromise. I too want to clarify things. I DO agree we don't renegotiate mid game. That does not mean either of us cannot make a request - but any request in the other area / units is either accepted or not - period. No argument. It is your unit - your decision, and vice versa. Propose a mechanism for clarification? Or just do yourself what you ask from me: tell me your exact ideas and I will then have a context to deal with. When there is no problem - there is no problem. We could then focus on the exceptional cases.


That I still don't know how many divisions I will have for my operations, which army air units are mine and what level of escorts I can have for the Malaysian operations speaks volumes as regards the clarity and detail of communications...

REPLY: Well - I tried to say we use principles. You don't seem to like them. Seems to me IF you can count on EVERY unit already assigned to the op - planned for it- loaded for it- based in your command area - in your TFs already - you would indeed know. It is only you who say that units on Formosa - clearly tasked with PI - should not be clearly mine - so that means I guess (in your mind) that units in Indochina are not clearly yours. But it is only fuzzy because you don't want to just honor the agreement in place - and stuff on your side of the line is on your side. IF I want something on your side I have to ask - and vice versa. But there is another way: we list all 17,000 units - and post a choice - case by case.

and what it speaks to is not excellence. I really have begun to think today that it is better for one of us to walk away and bring in someone else. If you want me to walk away then that's fine. If you want to walk and oversee both sides of the RHS model in-game ( which may have greater utility in terms of enhancing EOS in future releases) then that's fine too. I believe I know someone who would be willing to step in as the IJN commander.


REPLY: The problem would remain: you would not know how many divisions or air units are yours. Unless you became a dictator and just said "this and that" you would still somehow have to communicate. Much as you may not like to hear it - it will be easier with me than almost anyone else. I know something of your plans, something about the data set, and I am willing to agree to almost anything at this point. I have too much time invested in this - and the mod is too taylored to your desires - to walk away. So I will do whatever I have to in order to play it. It is a shake down anyway - it won't be perfect whatever we do. So I seek not perfection - just get a game going.

This is why I've decided to give you the choice of sorting out these things in detail or finding another player for my role or letting me find another player for yours. It really is that simple... and now I'm gonna watch a movie and chill. Seeing Jet Li kick some ass in Fearless will take my mind off this I'm sure

REPLY: I cannot negotiate alone. And if I did, surely someone would call me a dictator! I do not believe it is possible to really specify the "exact" plan for units in five figures - and "justify" that plan - unless some general principles can be applied. I have attempted to outline principles that make sense to me: things like

1) a unit is loaded to invade a place of an assigned objective;
2) a unit is planned for a similar place;
3) a unit is located at a base that is inside an agreed command area;
4) a unit is associated with one of the above in terms of support, escort, etc.

and you said you didn't like them. So I need some communications stream to find what principles you would like? And frankly - since you are not satisfied with my efforts - it seems to me much more productive if YOU "sort out these things in detail" and teach me how to do it?

You will find a number of specific proposals in your email - and not reading them is not helping very much. To insist I do this alone - in a way that will please you - is probably wholly impractical. In fact - having spent four hours writing to you with a single response (to the effect you are "taking a break") - and not giving me any encouragement or guidance or coordination - I think I must now cease my efforts. Until you address the great amount of information provided there is no point in proceeding further. I repeat - if I sorted out everything in great detail - someone would say I was dictating.

It could be easier: you could assume you have every thing Yamashita had - or could have had but turned down.
If it is in Indochina, or Hainan, or China, or Japan, or Korea, or Manchukuo, or the Northern Area - it is yours - unless some exceptional factor makes it clearly not yours. We would then only have to manage a much smaller list of unclear, ambiguous cases. Also - you could try reading what is written - accepting what is offered - and asking for anything else you really think you need. You could try making a plan and - if some case seems ambiguous in your mind - ask for clarification. I grant I replied to your request for air cover with principles. Among those was that I insist you have it. I want you self supporting off land bases insofar as possible. And I will fill in the blanks. But UNTIL you say "yes - I will cover from Singora immediately" I cannot know I don't have to cover the Singora forces. Etc.

[Nemo121]

Sid,

I am tired, tired, tired of this. Nonetheless I'll touch on a few points quickly for clarity's sake and then respond to the over-arching point.


1.

He wants to take areas not historically done

Yes, the IJA wants to take Ceylon. Apart from that whatever additional territory is to be taken is in the IJN's domain and, thus, can be vetoed by the IJN. Not really the massive drain you make it out to be IMO.


2. Covering Malaysian landings... Well land-based air doesn't have the range to cover the landing properly in the first couple of days so it would have to be covered by CVLs ( which can be lost just as easily as CVEs) and which I would assume are much better used cutting off the Allied escape routes south from the Phillipines. Also the CVLs don't gather a sufficient mass of Zeroes to provide enough CAP to really break the Dutch and British superiority of numbers. I've tested this in-game. CVLs on their own often take damage. The CVEs backed by a CVL or two absolutely break the back of the naval strikes directed against them.


3.

You NEVER agreed to the assignment of the regiment

Actually I did. I never specified which daitai we were talking about because I didn't know which ones you required. Also I'll note that while the presence of Army units on Taan is sufficient to make them yours since they are on a Navy-controlled island BUT this doesn't seem to apply when there are Betty daitai on the mainland you want control of. This sort of inconsistency in your suppositions an assumptions makes it impossible for anyone to be able to assess a situation and know what belongs to them and what belongs to the other. I would have thought that if it was a navy air unit and on the mainland then it would be IJA - given that you say IJA units on IJN-controlled islands should belong to the IJN. It seems, however, that this isn't so. All in all it is confusing.


4.

I want the air brigade

This is another problem. Can you please quit using terms which don't apply in-game and which you haven't explained. What is an "air Brigade"? Do you mean a Sentai or 3 Sentais or what? The game has sentais, talk of Brigades is needlessly confusing. Also it seems that you are using regiment and sentai interchangeably... Is brigade now supposed to be used interchangeably with these other two terms also?


5.

I posted recommendations. 3 for Hawaii (but one not in divisional form). One for DEI. One for New Guinea/Rabaul (to which add one of those from Hawaii). Two for Darwin.

It seems to me that given the 4 divisions you need initially ( 2 for Hawaii and 2 for Phillipines) and 4 Brigades that the other divisions you are looking for can easily come from the Phillipines invasion force. If you have 3 division equivalents and figure you need one for DEI then take 1 from the Phillipines and head over to the DEI with it. I think that is crazily light. I much prefer to hit the DEI with 4 or 5 divisions to be honest but it is your choice. I do, however, predict disaster if you hit it with just a single division.

Same for Darwin and Noumea... A half-dozen divisions for each target is much more likely to be the bare minimum than 2 for Darwin and 1 for Noumea. Still, this isn't my problem anymore.


6. North and Western Borneo.
No Sid, they were definitely yours.

Here's the quote from my post:

Ok, let me give you my final position... I'll trade you Java and Borneo ( in total) in return for having eastern Ceylon and Sumatra... I think that's pretty fair... You get that non-malarial base you've been lusting for and full control of Borneo - which you can fit into your Grand Escort Command etc - while I get to have Sumatra ( which is directly beside Singapore and Malaysia and an essential first line of defence for Malaysia) and control over how the forces in eastern Ceylon are utilised... since Ceylon is essential to IJA plans in India .

7.

Sorry. Thought that was clear:

No Sid. Nothing is clear until you state it. Thinking it but not saying it doesn't make it clear. And when you say it giving out to the other person for not telepathically knowing it is just bad form.



8. As to your statements in private that it is dishonourable to quit...

Well Sid, I have tried to clear up issues time and again and I was fully prepared to play a game in which the IJA and IJN would have different ideas of what they wanted to achieve.. I envisioned a game in which we would argue a bit over strategic priorities and so on. What has happened here is like a car wreck in slow motion. A car wreck which has robbed this idea of ANY sense of fun or enjoyment. I literally dread reading what you write because I have a sense that I can ask as many questions as I want but it is pure luck if your answer deals with any of them in a substantive way.

To be honest I'm not enjoying it any more, find it amazing that you could say privately today that you were surprised when I said this to you privately today - given that I'd been saying this in posts here several times over the last few weeks - and really do feel that it is impossible to play in a team with someone who just assumes that huge swathes of strategy and gameplay are "obvious" to everyone without him saying anything about them.

You assume so much telepathy on the part of your team mates that it is scary. If I were a real army officer I would, quite frankly, have had you assasinated as being impossible to work with and kept my fingers crossed that the next IJN commander appointed would be willing to rely on more than telepathy when it came to informing me of plans and dispositions. This isn't real life and so, obviously, assasination is off the cards [:D]. It is however a GAME and meant to be FUN. In my work I may have to put up with all sorts of people, and I do... I put up with rapists, murderers, drug addicts, paedophiles etc. I have many patients who fit in each of the categories just mentioned... I play WiTP to ESCAPE from that reality, sit back and craft a cunning plan which I then try to carry out. I find enjoyment in fine-tuning the plan until it has no margin for error and will either succeed with an unbelievably low force commitment, in excessively speedy time or with few casualties ( although usually one of the first two and rarely the latter). Recently the prospect of playing with you has filled me with dread and a growing sense of despair ( and no those are not exaggerations). Quite simply with your (lack of) communication I can see myself getting frustrated at the sense that I'm floundering without sufficient info. I can also foresee you continuing to parachute assumptions into the mix ( which will frustrate me even further) and a combination of the two will make me angry and I'll lose my temper. At a point along the way I will also take to dreading the arrival of a turn and view the game as an unwelcome committment and not FUN!!!

I'm on holidays this week and I felt I had to make a choice. MY decision was to raise this issue one last time as otherwise I could see it ruining my holiday. So, I raised the issue and today I've received about a dozen emails all going into great detail on communications styles and mistakes I've made etc etc but I haven't seen the creation of the clarity I think is essential. I also haven't seen any posts or emailsdealing with which of us you think should leave... although I did receive the email in which you berated me and called me dishonourable ( and implied that I was breaking my word) by talking of leaving. To be honest that last email made my decision for me.

It is my opinion that when someone with whom you are supposed to be on a team uses those sorts of terms to try to enforce you remaining on that team that that's a sure sign it is time to go. Sid, I NEVER would have agreed to this game if you had UP FRONT told me even half of the "assumptions" you parachuted in after we got started. When we started you said the IJA had veto power. I accepted it under that one condition because I knew that it would be difficult to reach concensus with you (I'm not completely blind about these things after all). When I tried to use that veto power you conveniently swatted it aside. Similar situations arose time and again where I state something based on something you'd said before and you stated a completely undiscussed "assumption" of yours which negated what I was doing. Etc etc etc... It can only happen so often before you begin to believe that's going to continue happening. This sudden appearance of assumptions hasn't stopped today and so, since you didn't respond to my suggestion that you should nominate one of us to quite I'm left with no option but to quit myself.


I'm quitting before I get more frustrated and angry and do myself no favours by venting my feelings with the strength with which I hold them. I'm sure you'll have no problem finding someone to play with you and now that they have some idea of all of the assumptions which underline your play ( I had none since you didn't tell me any of them when asking if I'd be interested) you may even end up with someone who will be agreeable to all your assumptions.


Anyways, I'm getting frustrated just thinking about it so Ill go now. I wish you the best and regret having to quit but it was the best option available in terms of my mental health. I'd be delighted to continue this team game with someone else but I do not feel that I can team up with you. I do wish you the best in your search for a replacement and I hope that now they know what they will be getting into they will be much more able to self-screen for compatibility than I was since none of these assumptions were mentioned when you initially asked me to sign on.

Take care and best of luck. I'll watch the game unfolding with interest.

[2ndACR]

Man, just trying to read El Cids reply's make my head hurt. Sorry, but I prefer to run the whole war myself. No one to negotiate anything with that way.

[el cid again]

You have missed some technical points above:

Land based air can cover Malay landings on the first day - and in two different ways:

1) Use Singora as an air base on the first day. IF you fly in ground support on the first day there is no significant loss of operational efficiency either. Fly in an entire Sentai of Ki-27s to cover the force landing at the port.

2) Long range land based air (that is, Zeros) have the ability to cover a landing at Khota Bahru (or similar point).

3) I have pre-allocated 3/4 of the zero pool to arm up an independent JAAF Chutai - and then reduced the pool - such that one of the long range fighter squadons available to you is available day 1 - and is in Cambodia - and is JAAF.

There are problems with the situation:

1) There are not enough Zeros in the area - or total - at first.

2) Long range fighter cover degrades in quality over time - and if not rotated - will cease to be effective.

3) There may be circumstances under which a naval force under your control needs immediate local air cover beyond what can be provided on normal ships. [Note, however, that I deliberately assigned primitive first generation float fighters, and these are remarkably effective in breaking up attacks and reducing their effectiveness, and rarely they actually shoot down enemy planes: I regard this as less than adequate but far better than nothing.]

For that reason - there should be a CVL task group. Since just one lucky submarine can destroy it as a functional unit, ideally there should be 2 CVLs in it. I don't think that is possible - but I want to do it - in spite of the cost and risk to forces which will operate uncovered in other places - and so I will try. It is possible these ships will operate Claudes - and I don't regard that as ideal either - but (a) in RHS a Claude has the zero bonus and (b) I request you upgrade CVL fighter groups as a priority - although I give the JAAF higher priority still for Zeros in the first few days - until it has some.

[el cid again]

Taan: this is a good example of gross miscommunication and misconceptions based on that.

Taan is NOT a navy controlled island! Never mind that naval units are there. Never mind that a naval base is there (so is an army base). In my view this should have been clear to you because:

1) Hainan is a base for units which are to invade Malaya, and possibly China. That means you need to control the things there. Historically - that was where the HQ of Southern Area Army was located - although for reasons unclear to me it is not in any version of WITP. It remained there too - when Tsuji wrote he "diserved a thousand deaths" for giving bad advice about Guadalcanal - the command was still there.

2) Hainan is not a base for operations related to the Philippines - and except for the case of Northern Borneo - which is ambiguous since neither of us is planning to take it - no units related to my sector of DEI either.

3) Hainan is a "safe" air base for operations over China, Indochina and the South China Sea. Safe in the sense it cannot be overrun easily by a Chinese land offensive. Clearly the JAAF needs to operate from there in some circumstances. JNAF - in a few months - stands up one tiny unit of Kates armed for ASW on this island.

4) If you draw a line from the Sunda Strait (at the West end of Java) to Taan you will see there can be no debate that Hainan is on your side of that line.

For these reasons - your confusion confuses me! No wonder you have no idea what you control. You are not thinking about any of the principles I stated (several times) above. You are not looking at a map and seeing where this island is. I don't control the Andaman Islands either - although they are indeed islands. Nor Great Natuna Island.

Now it is true there are naval units on Hainan island. Many of the ships are associated with transport operations re Malaya - or other points you control. Only the larger tankers - which are empty - probably are mine (as Grand Escort Command) - they need to return to Japan to get fuel - for your bases. Both transports and escorts are needed for your task groups. We might trade ships - but the numbers should remain as is. The only question is about land units.
The naval base at Taan stays - and is yours - forever. Because it is needed to support ships and ASW air ops - yours, mine and civil. Probably some of the small naval units provide island security - covering the strait - which land units CAN cross. Any others would be of value to me - but I have to ask for them. I have asked for every small unit available - and I regard these as some of them.

Note there is a major naval base at Cam Rahn Bay. It is the best natural harbor in Asia (except at Guadalcanal),
and it is a good terminus for convoys distance wise - on the Asian rail net. It is a fine air base as well. And it is yours - IJN or not. It has a mission and that mission won't end unless you are about to lose Indochina. It should be clear that Viet Nam is yours - so bases there are under your control. We may have to sort things out in some places - but why do so when it is clear?

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Sid,


4.

I want the air brigade

This is another problem. Can you please quit using terms which don't apply in-game and which you haven't explained. What is an "air Brigade"? Do you mean a Sentai or 3 Sentais or what? The game has sentais, talk of Brigades is needlessly confusing. Also it seems that you are using regiment and sentai interchangeably... Is brigade now supposed to be used interchangeably with these other two terms also?


REPLY: Well - perhaps you are not familiar with RHS or with the historical JAAF OB? There are two air brigades in the Southern Area at start. One is in Indochina and one is on Formosa. [There is yet another in China]. It is easy to know what units are involved - because there are no exceptions: all the JAAF units on Formosa belong to one brigade, all the JAAF units in Indochina belong to another, and all those in China to yet another. These are the functional major units of the JAAF - just as Air Flotillas are the functional major units of the JNAF. JNAF starts with four Air Flotillas - one of them in reserve in Japan. 21st and 23rd are on Formosa and Palau. 22nd is at Saigon. Eventually a reasonable number of others appears - and even inactive areas (e.g. Northern Command) gets one. These major units are not simply a collection of air units - they also include base units - and engineering units. Just as a naval force needs air support - so does a field army. Not even in China did IJA attempt to operate without air support. It didn't occur to me you would want to do that. Note that these units are quite different in composition and function. Naval air units are optimized for locating and engaging ships. They also are not numerous enough to take on JAAF functions in major land campaigns. To try would be to insure defeat at sea.


5.

I posted recommendations. 3 for Hawaii (but one not in divisional form). One for DEI. One for New Guinea/Rabaul (to which add one of those from Hawaii). Two for Darwin.

It seems to me that given the 4 divisions you need initially ( 2 for Hawaii and 2 for Phillipines) and 4 Brigades that the other divisions you are looking for can easily come from the Phillipines invasion force. If you have 3 division equivalents and figure you need one for DEI then take 1 from the Phillipines and head over to the DEI with it. I think that is crazily light. I much prefer to hit the DEI with 4 or 5 divisions to be honest but it is your choice. I do, however, predict disaster if you hit it with just a single division.

Same for Darwin and Noumea... A half-dozen divisions for each target is much more likely to be the bare minimum than 2 for Darwin and 1 for Noumea. Still, this isn't my problem anymore.

REPLY: You are misreading what I said. I didn't say it takes 1 division to take the DEI. I said it takes one MORE division. Further - I pointed out that the force from the PI was only one of two which hit Java - and the other came from Malaya. If you are not going to hit the Batavia end of Java - I might have to revise this estimate. But for me - divisions are the big units - I don't often need a corps.


6. North and Western Borneo.
No Sid, they were definitely yours.

REPLY: This does not change that, for reasons of sea control, I later posted I believed you should control the area. I think that it is useful to ops vs Malaya and Sumatra to have bases on the Western end of Borneo. I think that there needs to be patrols over the South China Sea. I am mystified why you - who wanted all of Borneo - are being difficult about this? I think you secretly must like being difficult.

[Nemo121]

Sid,

Assumptions aren't clear to me until they are said TO me. It may have been clear to you but it wasn't in the slightest clear to me that Taan was mine. It is a base involved in invading the Phillipines and so I thought you wanted it when you said that bases involved in the Phillipines invasion were yours.
 
 
Again, there is a NEED to state things clearly. Stating things clearly ONCE does take some time BUT it saves FAR MORE TIME over the course of weeks and months.
 
 
Remember this: YOUR ASSUMPTIONS ARE NOT CLEAR TO OTHERS UNTIL YOU STATE THEM. Once you STATE something clearly I am aware of it. Until you state it I am not aware of anything.
 
 
As to Taan etc... Well IF I remain on then you would, obviously, have the right to base bombers there as part of the Grand Escort Command's efforts to guard our shipping.
 
 
What are you going to use the CVEs for? I have no idea what their tasking is... I would have thought the CVLs would have been more effective for naval operations in terms of speed etc but if you want the CVEs then so be it... As far as maximising protection goes... If I am only going to have 2 CVLs to cover the landings at Johore Bahru I will fly the Claudes and Kates/B4Ns off the carriers and fly my land-based naval Zero squadron onto them. This is still insufficient for proper protection but so be it...
 
Have a read of my AAR "Chumming the Water" and look at the excellent work my mini-KB ( 1 CVL and all the CVEs) has done around Singapore. It is now heading up the west side of Sumatra ready to drive the Royal Navy away from ceylon. I think the CVEs could really do some useful work in this role but you are the Navy CO. I just offer an opinion.

[Nemo121]

Sid,
 
Air Brigade is NOT a term in the game and it is NOT a term you explained prior to use. Again, I am NOT telepathic. God this is frustrating!!!
 
As to misreading. No Sid, you said "One division for DEI". You didn't say "one MORE division for DEI". You said ONE... This is, again, another example of lack of clarity. Ok, I'm signing off now as I'm getting frustrated again.
 
As to why I say no to Borneo... no, it isn't cause I like being difficult. It is that I don't want to create a precedent of re-negotiation.
 
In any case take this up with the next guy you recruit into the game... That last post just reminds me again of why I would not enjoy a team game with you.
 
Best of luck.

[el cid again]

[quote]ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Sid,
You assume so much telepathy on the part of your team mates that it is scary.


REPLY: This is plain false. At no time have I said or implied telepathy was appropriate. You are experiencing unfulfilled expectations. I am sorry for you. But they were YOUR expectations - not expectations I set.

It is far more scary that you do not apply your own reasoning to yourself. You have not communicated your assumptions or expectations - except in the negative sense of complaining when I didn't (by telepathy?) understand them perfectly. You have not told me "exactly" what you wanted to do, when, and where, and what units you needed to do it - nor what units you think I need. The concept of leading by example seems to be one you have not considered: if you feel there is a reasonable and practical way to say "exactly" what is planned - and quickly - you could either show by example how to do it or at least answer queries when asked.

You also are not comprehending what I post - or not reading it at all: I have NOT planned a detail campaign. I am working on the mod. I won't attempt to do more than preliminaries until EVERYONE has the mod. It is not fair to do otherwise. And it is not possible to do otherwise: IF I do not work on it we can not ever finish it. To demand an 'exact' detail plan - complete with 'justification' - before I have spent any time on the matter - and before we have come to terms about what is available to whom - is grossly unreasonable. I won't stand for any more outrageous personal attacks of this sort: you required I be respectful - I require the same in reverse.

If you missed it - then process the information now - and apologize. I cannot tell you what I have not worked out. And I have no intention of working anything out until it is clear you will be civil, and won't break your word about things like "no ultimatums I will quit if I don't get my way." I also won't work it out before we agree we have a completed product - not less than a few days off if we DO NOT argue any more.

I too am not having fun. But I have invested many hundreds of hours doing tasks you set for me - and I am unwilling to leave the whole set of ideas untested. I need you to try to use what was designed for your use - so we can know if it works as intended - or not. And I have a hundred other things you don't even know about that need testing.
I am going to finish the mod - and if you have not diserted the cause - I will then work out a plan - based on whatever is available. If you don't let me have enough - I won't go as far. Simple.


This isn't real life and so, obviously, assasination is off the cards [:D].


REPLY: Glad to hear it.

It is however a GAME and meant to be FUN.


REPLY: Check your inbox. I have proposed a mechanism to achieve that.

In my work I may have to put up with all sorts of people, and I do... I put up with rapists, murderers, drug addicts, paedophiles etc.


REPLY: And I am in the same ball park as they are? Wow. Seriously, this is about control. You are always in control of people - and you somehow fear not controlling me in microscopic detail. I have a solution that will give it you - without the need to "justify" each unit in a formal Pentagon style report (I hope). Check your inbox.


I'm on holidays this week and I felt I had to make a choice. MY decision was to raise this issue one last time as otherwise I could see it ruining my holiday. So, I raised the issue and today I've received about a dozen emails all going into great detail on communications styles and mistakes I've made etc etc but I haven't seen the creation of the clarity I think is essential.


REPLY: And you yourself have failed to define what you want in any sense - even the most abstract and vague.
In spite of being asked publically and privately. Just HOW can "clarity" be achieved to your satisfaction?
I made a wide variety of proposals - and not one of them has produced a response. I think what is going on is more subtle: "lack of clarity" is an excuse; you have made up your mind already - and whatever I say or said - however heroic - is really germane: you are going to say "it wasn't clear enough" and - never having defined what would be - no one can say your standard was not indeed met. I saw you do this once before.

There are two problems in this case: we have created some interest in this project - and some people have invested some time on it. We have some obligation to behave in a civil way; Also, we have done a great deal of work - and it needs to be tested. EOS would not be in its present form except for your lobbying for what you wanted. Be honorable enough to help me understand how this package works.

As for the rest - I am finished debating with you: its all on your shoulders now. YOU make it clear. YOU tell me what units I have. I may ask for something - but only once. You no longer own IJA - you own Japan. I just work here. If that isn't enough control - well I will let that go... I have a backup plan. Either take charge and SHOW me the clarity you want - or quit - in spite of our agreements not to do so - and our long negotiations (which, I think, produced a remarkable division of tasks). But I will not abandon this project. I have a man year in it. And I don't make promises I won't keep (in this case to the group).

[Nemo121]

Sid,

Thanks but no thanks. It wouldn't work. No point prolonging the agony. I wish you the best of luck in finding a new player to replace me. I'm sure you'll have no problem doing so and now that they know what they are getting into I am sure you'll get someone compatible.

In the meantime I think I'll put my own mod together and try to set up a small team game using that.


P.s. Thanks for calling my motivations into question and for implying that I'm being dishonourable. I'm not going to argue against this as I don't wish to engage in pointless, wearing argument. I'll just say that it makes my decision easier to stick to. Now there is no point discussing this further with me. I've made my decision. You are free to hold whatever views you wish about it.

[veji1]

So I guess The Empire of The Sun failed to declare war on the treacherous allies du to civil war ? [:D][:)][8D]

[VALEA VERDE]

Looks The Empire of The Sun won allready the war!

[el cid again]

So much for "I take my commitments seriously."

We will start a new AAR tomorrow. Need to issue x.34 at this time. This regretfully has a lot of things Nemo asked for - but I am not going to take them out because he won't be around to use them. Those things he suggested which got folded in are uniformly pretty good stuff.

We have a volunteer - one who has long worked closely with me on RHS - and who does not need telepathy to understand how to apply a general principle without listing the details for every unit in the set. Signing off to backup and upload 5 and 6. 34 with the aircraft and air unit revisions.