Team game 2 vs 3 - closed

[1EyedJacks]

H KDonovan,

Responses/Questions in Bold...

ORIGINAL: KDonovan

Just to finalize everything we have a 6 players

The Teams
Japan (how are you guys dividing it up btw??)
- Walkerd - China/Malaya/Burma <-- Bold = answers
- 1 EyedJacks - Pacific/Australia/Philipines
Allies
- Ctangus - India, SEAC, China, Russia (if needed)
- KDonovan - Dutch, Australia, New Zealand, SWPAC
- Scott - USAFFE, SOPAC, CENPAC, NOPAC, Canada, West Coast

The Game
- v1.804
- CHS - Extended Map
- Scenerio 157 (Nik mod changes)
- 2 day turns
- PDU ON
- Auto-Sub OFF
- Advanced Weather OFF
- Reinforcements FIXED
- Sub Doctrine OFF
- Allied damage control ON
- Historic OFF
- Vary Setup OFF
- Surprise ON
- Auto Upgrades OFF

House Rules
Stacking Limits
- no more than 50 aircraft per airfield size (float planes, patrol planes don't apply)
- doesn't apply too..Tokyo, Osaka, Karachi, Pearl Harbor, San Fran (staging areas)
- no more than 450 aircraft per carrier hex (represents a level 9 AF) (float planes, patrol planes don't apply - yes?)
Political Points
- no moving Kwantung army units out of Manchuria without paying PP
- no moving non-SEAC chinese units out of China without paying PP
- both of these restrictions include aircraft (AVG doesn't apply)

TF Limitations
- no more than 6 ships in a ASW TF
- no more than 6 PT boats in TF (max is 2 TF's per hex)

1st Turn rules
- only one port attack by japan - still in negotiation
- no CV hunting on 1st turn by japan, in return allied CV's won't interfere with PH raid
- KB strike will be redone if rained out on 1st day (if the 2nd day is rain out..too bad)
- no warp 1st turn landings (be realistic)
- allies can only give orders to ships at sea, and Chinese units (but not AVG)

Misc Rules
- no other ships allowed in PT Boat TF except when transferring
- no commando sub raids to gain intel
- russia must be activated 1 month prior to attack
- no training on "supply" to gain experience\
- no upgrading 2E to 4E bombers unless they historically did so

What did we decide on in regards to the "overall commander w/veto power" vs negotiation as we play? For myself, if there's a dispute that we can't work around I'd like some agreed to option that occurs B4 anyone gets their feelings hurt... Veto power is one option and an outside arbitrator is another - [;)]. I think I'm fine with either option so long as the commander is not part of whatever dispute is going on -<laughter>- after all, this is a game.

[1EyedJacks]

ORIGINAL: KDonovan

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

ORIGINAL: KDonovan



so you want to use the little KB for a second port attack?

Yup.

hmmm...will have to consult with my team members about this. Can you elaborate what 2 ports you intend to hit then?

Hi KDonovan,

Any ports we would hit other than PH would be within current range of Japanes LBs. KB and mini-KB would be used for Port attacks on strategic enemy bases. Any base within LB range is, I assume, fair target for LBs - right?

In truth, I don't mind telling you the specific ports I plan to hit if you really think you need to know for making a decision but it would ruin the surprise - <laughter>.

[KDonovan]

- no more than 450 aircraft per carrier hex (represents a level 9 AF) (float planes, patrol planes don't apply - yes?)

yep Patrol planes don't apply

[KDonovan]

Hi KDonovan,

Any ports we would hit other than PH would be within current range of Japanes LBs. KB and mini-KB would be used for Port attacks on strategic enemy bases. Any base within LB range is, I assume, fair target for LBs - right?

In truth, I don't mind telling you the specific ports I plan to hit if you really think you need to know for making a decision but it would ruin the surprise

so you basically want to be able to hit any number of ports on the 1st turn??[&:]

[1EyedJacks]

ORIGINAL: KDonovan

Hi KDonovan,

Any ports we would hit other than PH would be within current range of Japanes LBs. KB and mini-KB would be used for Port attacks on strategic enemy bases. Any base within LB range is, I assume, fair target for LBs - right?

In truth, I don't mind telling you the specific ports I plan to hit if you really think you need to know for making a decision but it would ruin the surprise

so you basically want to be able to hit any number of ports on the 1st turn??[&:]

No - just two ports on turn 1 will receive a port attack from air units. I just ment that possible targets are limited to bases within LB range and that LBs/Mini-KB can attack the same port.

Would you like me to list the initial invasion/attack sequence for Japan on turn 1? I don't mind sharing it - the plan seems totally realistic to me - and my only concern is that it takes away the actual surprise you will have when you watch turn 1.

[KDonovan]

No - just two ports on turn 1 will receive a port attack from air units. I just ment that possible targets are limited to bases within LB range and that LBs/Mini-KB can attack the same port.

Would you like me to list the initial invasion/attack sequence for Japan on turn 1? I don't mind sharing it - the plan seems totally realistic to me - and my only concern is that it takes away the actual surprise you will have when you watch turn 1.

oh ok..thanks for clearing that up. Will have to consult with my team members on this though.

My concern is, I have a feeling that your attack includes the Big KB taking care of Manila or Signapore, and Little KB/LBA taking out the other. Thereby leaving SRA completely defenseless, and no fun at all.

[1EyedJacks]

ORIGINAL: KDonovan

No - just two ports on turn 1 will receive a port attack from air units. I just ment that possible targets are limited to bases within LB range and that LBs/Mini-KB can attack the same port.

Would you like me to list the initial invasion/attack sequence for Japan on turn 1? I don't mind sharing it - the plan seems totally realistic to me - and my only concern is that it takes away the actual surprise you will have when you watch turn 1.

oh ok..thanks for clearing that up. Will have to consult with my team members on this though.

That's cool. BTW - where did you get the maps you display in your Battle 4 New Jersey AAR? I wanna steal them - lol.

[KDonovan]

That's cool. BTW - where did you get the maps you display in your Battle 4 New Jersey AAR? I wanna steal them - lol.

i made them myself...i can send them to you if you want for your AAR (if your doing one)


btw...added something to my previous post

[1EyedJacks]

ORIGINAL: KDonovan

No - just two ports on turn 1 will receive a port attack from air units. I just ment that possible targets are limited to bases within LB range and that LBs/Mini-KB can attack the same port.

Would you like me to list the initial invasion/attack sequence for Japan on turn 1? I don't mind sharing it - the plan seems totally realistic to me - and my only concern is that it takes away the actual surprise you will have when you watch turn 1.

oh ok..thanks for clearing that up. Will have to consult with my team members on this though.

My concern is, I have a feeling that your attack includes the Big KB taking care of Manila or Signapore, and Little KB/LBA taking out the other. Thereby leaving SRA completely defenseless, and no fun at all.

Mmmmm - I can C your concern. Does it help to know that one of those two ports is not on the list of targets for December 7th? [:'(][:'(]

[1EyedJacks]

ORIGINAL: KDonovan

That's cool. BTW - where did you get the maps you display in your Battle 4 New Jersey AAR? I wanna steal them - lol.

i made them myself...i can send them to you if you want for your AAR (if your doing one)

Yes please. netwolf@cebridge.net is my email address - and thanks.

[ctangus]

Manila and Attu Island? [;)][:D]

I'll put in my two cents. I think there's a couple things wrong with how WitP models Dec 7th attacks against Manila & Singapore:

Manila - I agreed to a Manila attack one game & of the 27 subs there 20 or 21 were sunk. IRL Cavite was attacked on Dec. 10th. One sub (Sealion) was destroyed at her moorings - several got underway & submerged. IIRC roughly 9 subs were in port at the time - 2/3rds of the force had sortied on Dec 8th and 1/3 was kept in reserve.

With the exception of the subs, the surface losses I took at Manila were devastating, but seemed real.

With surprise, perhaps a better ratio could have been achieved by the Japanese against the subs, but not nearly as large as WITP will produce. It could perhaps be worked around by allowing a certain number of subs at Manila (no other ships) to form into TFs, but not to move.

Singapore - The capital ships in Linga Roads were protected by torpedo nets. A small flight of bombers (Nells I think) were sent on a port attack against Singapore day 1, but were carrying bombs and turned back because of weather. An attack there might be ok if it were done from a range that prevented torpedo attacks. Though if the full KB was sailing through South China Sea for a week, I'd argue surprise should be off & limited orders should be allowed to the units on Malaya.

Hong Kong maybe? Iloilo to take care of Houston? Those would seem like fair game to me.

[ctangus]

One late argument against a Singapore attack: I want to play with POW at least a day or two! [:'(] I promise I'll give you a chance to sink her...

[1EyedJacks]

ORIGINAL: ctangus

Manila and Attu Island? [;)][:D]

I'll put in my two cents. I think there's a couple things wrong with how WitP models Dec 7th attacks against Manila & Singapore:

Manila - I agreed to a Manila attack one game & of the 27 subs there 20 or 21 were sunk. IRL Cavite was attacked on Dec. 10th. One sub (Sealion) was destroyed at her moorings - several got underway & submerged. IIRC roughly 9 subs were in port at the time - 2/3rds of the force had sortied on Dec 8th and 1/3 was kept in reserve.

With the exception of the subs, the surface losses I took at Manila were devastating, but seemed real.

With surprise, perhaps a better ratio could have been achieved by the Japanese against the subs, but not nearly as large as WITP will produce. It could perhaps be worked around by allowing a certain number of subs at Manila (no other ships) to form into TFs, but not to move.

Singapore - The capital ships in Linga Roads were protected by torpedo nets. A small flight of bombers (Nells I think) were sent on a port attack against Singapore day 1, but were carrying bombs and turned back because of weather. An attack there might be ok if it were done from a range that prevented torpedo attacks. Though if the full KB was sailing through South China Sea for a week, I'd argue surprise should be off & limited orders should be allowed to the units on Malaya.

Hong Kong maybe? Iloilo to take care of Houston? Those would seem like fair game to me.

This is taking a long time so let me shed some light on our intentions.. KB will not attack Singapore or Manila. Mini KB is slotted to attack Manila's port from the east side of PI. Naga is slated to be invaded by the 16th Division currently stationed @ Amami (their Future Objective is Naga @ 100% so in theory they've been planning for this for some time). Mini KB, in effect, will be 3 seperate TFs as 1 carrier is @ Paula, one is at Sasebo, and 2 are @ Hiroshima. LBs stationed @ Formosa that can range Manila are currently slated to participate in a Port Attack on Manila (they were assigned to take out the Clark Airfield prior to reassignment). All of this seems plausible to me and in no way gamey. It is not my intent to make the game no fun or to leave SRA defenseless but it is my intent to strike hard @ the transport shipping currently @ Manila to reduce the allied ability to remove stored oil/resources in the PI and later in Java while Walkerd is slogging his way through Malaya.

Please let me know if you find the planned PI operations seem unreasonable and I will make other plans for the mini-KB. I want to have some fun with this game - really! <laughter> But the game has to be enjoyable for your side also - we all want to have fun (and we all want to win - <more laughter>).

[ctangus]

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

All of this seems plausible to me and in no way gamey. It is not my intent to make the game no fun or to leave SRA defenseless but it is my intent to strike hard @ the transport shipping currently @ Manila to reduce the allied ability to remove stored oil/resources in the PI and later in Java while Walkerd is slogging his way through Malaya.

Please let me know if you find the planned PI operations seem unreasonable and I will make other plans for the mini-KB.

Thanks. That seems plausible to me, also. Plus now I know I can play with POW for a day or two at least. [;)]

I hope I didn't come across as over-critical - I've never doubted your intention to play a fair & fun game but sometimes interpretations on what's fair vary.

It's a little bit more Kenny's call than mine (since Manila's his theater of operations) but I'm ok with your plans.

I want to have some fun with this game - really! <laughter> But the game has to be enjoyable for your side also - we all want to have fun (and we all want to win - <more laughter>).

I'm with you there.

BTW, Christmas '42 in the Dai Ichi building in Tokyo... [:'(]

[1EyedJacks]

ORIGINAL: ctangus

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

All of this seems plausible to me and in no way gamey. It is not my intent to make the game no fun or to leave SRA defenseless but it is my intent to strike hard @ the transport shipping currently @ Manila to reduce the allied ability to remove stored oil/resources in the PI and later in Java while Walkerd is slogging his way through Malaya.

Please let me know if you find the planned PI operations seem unreasonable and I will make other plans for the mini-KB.

Thanks. That seems plausible to me, also. Plus now I know I can play with POW for a day or two at least. [;)]

I hope I didn't come across as over-critical - I've never doubted your intention to play a fair & fun game but sometimes interpretations on what's fair vary.

It's a little bit more Kenny's call than mine (since Manila's his theater of operations) but I'm ok with your plans.

I want to have some fun with this game - really! <laughter> But the game has to be enjoyable for your side also - we all want to have fun (and we all want to win - <more laughter>).

I'm with you there.

BTW, Christmas '42 in the Dai Ichi building in Tokyo... [:'(]

No problem ctangus. You and KDonovan don't know me from Adam - and trust on the playground of WiTP has to be earned. We've all seen bad scenes in the forum and I certaintly don't want to cause any heartache. [:)][:)]

Oh - and you're on - Christmas '42 in the Dai Ichi building in Tokyo. I'll bring the saki and you can bring some of those Red Cross candy bars - Walkerd should have captured you by then... [:D][:D][:D]

[KDonovan]

1st turn seems fine....lets play

ps - USAFFE is Scott1964 area

[ctangus]

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

Oh - and you're on - Christmas '42 in the Dai Ichi building in Tokyo. I'll bring the saki and you can bring some of those Red Cross candy bars - Walkerd should have captured you by then... [:D][:D][:D]

Bah - captured me? Never! And I should add Easter '42 in Shanghai... [:'(]

[ctangus]

ORIGINAL: KDonovan

1st turn seems fine....lets play

Cool!

ps - USAFFE is Scott1964 area

Oops. Considering I'm one of the allied players I should know that. [:(] Hopefully I'll have it all figured out before the end of 1942. [;)]

[ctangus]

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

- no moving non-SEAC chinese units out of China without paying PP

I had a last-minute thought on this house rule. I have no problem with this rule as far as Burma and/or India goes. But what if I decide to invade Indochina? (The Japanese get 4 extra divs in that event.) Korea? (Yea, right, like I'd ever get there. [;)])

It's not a huge issue for me either way, but I'd like a little more freedom of action, if only to present some more uncertainty to the Japanese. I'd prefer the house rule: no Chinese command units to Burma or India - any going there must be SEA Command.

Again - it's not a big deal to me either way - but I also don't want to start prepping 250K Chinese troops for an invasion of Indochina (as an example) if that would be considered unfair.

[ctangus]

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

What slot do we use? 3X2=6... Slot 6? [:D][:D]

I just noticed this. [:D] We could also use slot 2 for the Japs -> Allies & slot 3 for the Allies back -> Japs. [;)]

Doesn't matter to me in fact; I created a fresh install for this game so any slot would do.