Manila vs PH

[koniu]

I`m just preparing for my first PBEM game as Japan, and I have dilemma, attack PH or Manila.
I do not know what will be best for me. Sunk/damage few BB in PH or focus on SS in Manila

For now I decided to attack Manila and try to sunk as many ss as I can

This will be probably best for my in long term, when in early `43 US torpedoes will stop being useless and my ASW will star to be

[Chickenboy]

You may want to browse this thread:
 
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2272554&mpage=1&key=manila%2Cparadigm

[trojan58]

Manila, take out the subs. They are far more dangerous than a few old BB's that you may not sink anyway

[koniu]

Thanks

I`m searching forum manually, but i must miss it

[findmeifyoucan]

Few old BB's that still can be nasty in bombarding your naval and air bases if left in tact to say nothing of possibly catching the Enterprise or the Yorktown if the American player isn't careful! Besides, two PH strikes back to back pretty much guarantees that most of these BB's will be sunk at PH!! Don't forget all those aircraft you are also blowing up in the process in the pre-turn at PH and other support ships!

Subs are nasty and an interesting option to go after in the Philipines but if you have sufficient ASW escort you will sink those too in time. In one game after 3 weeks of the war I have already sunk 10x subs due to ASW escorts of my transports and miscellaneous bombing and bombarding of various naval bases in the area !

[khyberbill]

You will get a lot of differing opinions. My take is this; I never play Japan and am quite happy when KB launches against Manila for three reasons. 1) US subs are worthless until the beginning of '43 and not much better until '9/43 when I have lots of them around. By then I have lost 10 or 15 anyway to ASW and the most I have ever lost in 1 day turns is 9 at Manila and 10 were lost on 2 day turns-I have a HR on two day turns regarding a port attack on Manila that reduces the damage. 2) I would rather have KB rampaging near Manila than Pearl Harbor. I find those old BB's quiet helpful for soaking up torpedoes in CV TF's, leading invasions (shore batteries tend to target BB's instead of the APA's), and they are also good on bombardments. and finally 3) It can be quite a jolt to start the game with 6 sunken BB's at Pearl. And the rest out of commission for a long time as opposed to 10 subs.

[CV 2]

The subs just arent that effective before 1943. The BBs are worth a fair number of points. But the MAIN reason to hit Pearl isnt subs or BBs. Its airplanes. Anyone that says the subs in Manila are more important than the BBs AND aircraft at Pearl isnt thinking long range.

[Hanzberger]

R U guys playing with reliable USN torps on or off? What's usually the consenus on this?

[Sardaukar]

If you hit Manila, you have also the benefit that you can keep KB supporting the landings to DEI etc. and interdicting Allied surface forces.

Also, Allied subs are not useless before 9/43 (or even 1/43), not even those with Mk 14 torpedoes with 80% dud rate. You still get decent amount of sinkings and S-boats do not suffer from big dud rate anyways.

Using KB to support operations around PI & DEI will most likely net more sunk shipping that area (that Allies cannot evacuate to Australia or India), Also it will make either reinforcing DEI or evacuating units from Singapore practically impossible for Allied player, limiting Allied options. It will also screen your landings quite well against Allied surface forces, preventing possible nasty surprises. And it will most likely allow quicker conquest of DEI and quicker access to oil there.

There are quite a few things to consider when choosing between PH & Manila.

[jeffk3510]

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger

R U guys playing with reliable USN torps on or off? What's usually the consenus on this?

I try to keep it historical...

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger

R U guys playing with reliable USN torps on or off? What's usually the consenus on this?

I have hardly ever seen where PBM opponents agreed to play with reliable USN torps = On. Most people (Allied players included) want that historical limitation because it's part of the situation being gamed.

[CV 2]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

If you hit Manila, you have also the benefit that you can keep KB supporting the landings to DEI etc. and interdicting Allied surface forces.

Also, Allied subs are not useless before 9/43 (or even 1/43), not even those with Mk 14 torpedoes with 80% dud rate. You still get decent amount of sinkings and S-boats do not suffer from big dud rate anyways.

Using KB to support operations around PI & DEI will most likely net more sunk shipping that area (that Allies cannot evacuate to Australia or India), Also it will make either reinforcing DEI or evacuating units from Singapore practically impossible for Allied player, limiting Allied options. It will also screen your landings quite well against Allied surface forces, preventing possible nasty surprises. And it will most likely allow quicker conquest of DEI and quicker access to oil there.

There are quite a few things to consider when choosing between PH & Manila.

First of all, there are only 4 "S" boats in Manila.

Secondly as for evac to Australia or India, you GREATLY under-estimate the power of the PBY to lift troops out. Leave Pearl untouched and you have all them Cats on Java in 3-4 days pulling troops. Which lends itself to not needing ships in the NEI and thus the KB has no targets other than what starts in HK and Manila.

Plus the fact that you surrender the eastern Pacific to the allied carriers. You can cover your forces in the NEI with land based air and the 3 lights just fine, dont need the KB there.

[Alfred]

The link provided in post #2 leads to a very, very lengthy thread which thoroughly canvassed the question raised by the OP. So far I haven't seen any new arguements advanced. We should let the OP fully digest that thread first.

Alfred

[PresterJohn001]

Pearl Harbour all the way, like the historical context and really... sink subs or battleships.. its answers itself !!!

Ok those allied subs are not very effective due to torpedoe failure, and later the allies get loads and loads of subs so BB's are better option. Kido Butai is out of position but
really theres not much real damage the allies can do if its not there.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: CV 2

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

If you hit Manila, you have also the benefit that you can keep KB supporting the landings to DEI etc. and interdicting Allied surface forces.

Also, Allied subs are not useless before 9/43 (or even 1/43), not even those with Mk 14 torpedoes with 80% dud rate. You still get decent amount of sinkings and S-boats do not suffer from big dud rate anyways.

Using KB to support operations around PI & DEI will most likely net more sunk shipping that area (that Allies cannot evacuate to Australia or India), Also it will make either reinforcing DEI or evacuating units from Singapore practically impossible for Allied player, limiting Allied options. It will also screen your landings quite well against Allied surface forces, preventing possible nasty surprises. And it will most likely allow quicker conquest of DEI and quicker access to oil there.

There are quite a few things to consider when choosing between PH & Manila.

First of all, there are only 4 "S" boats in Manila.

Secondly as for evac to Australia or India, you GREATLY under-estimate the power of the PBY to lift troops out. Leave Pearl untouched and you have all them Cats on Java in 3-4 days pulling troops. Which lends itself to not needing ships in the NEI and thus the KB has no targets other than what starts in HK and Manila.

Plus the fact that you surrender the eastern Pacific to the allied carriers. You can cover your forces in the NEI with land based air and the 3 lights just fine, dont need the KB there.

Most IJ players would love to have Allied player to shuttle troops with PBYs around DEI. Attrition is brutal, I know because I have tried it. [8D] It'd kill Allied naval search capability in couple of weeks.

Surrender Eastern Pacific to Allied carriers? What about Eastern Pacific? Unless IJ player is really going to over-extend himself to invade those areas, I don't see what's the point of contesting places that do not provide resources, supply, oil, fuel or VPs?

As Yamamoto et all found out, Eastern Pacific is LEAST important and most useless area for Japan to contest.

[roy2008]

make both, Manila and PH, send Carriers to hit PH, and send carriers to hit Manila, with a little luck can you kill the most Subs in Manila and the BB in PH

[CV 2]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar


Most IJ players would love to have Allied player to shuttle troops with PBYs around DEI. Attrition is brutal, I know because I have tried it. [8D] It'd kill Allied naval search capability in couple of weeks.

Surrender Eastern Pacific to Allied carriers? What about Eastern Pacific? Unless IJ player is really going to over-extend himself to invade those areas, I don't see what's the point of contesting places that do not provide resources, supply, oil, fuel or VPs?

As Yamamoto et all found out, Eastern Pacific is LEAST important and most useless area for Japan to contest.

Mid-Jan 42. I have every combat squad out of Malaya and Java that isnt perma restricted (and even a few of those units moved). The changeable Malaya command went to ABDA as well as the Dutch. I lost 28 PBYs on the ground at Pearl, and 28 to attrit moving troops (15 PBY-4s and 13 PBY-5s). I think most of the PBY-4s were lost pulling a few naval base forces out of the PI at max range.

I'll take that trade ANY day of the week.

KB is off Perth. There isnt an allied ship for 1500 miles in any direction except a few scattered local minesweepers. And thats WITH a Pearl Harbor strike. Imagine what I could do with the 28 I lost there (not to mention all the fighters I lost as well). Most of III corps is sitting in Ceylon. Most of ABDA is in Oz with a few units in South Africa.

More than happy to send you a save if you would like to verify. I "search" with Hudsons and B-17s.

Can argue about it until the cows come home. Im willing to prove it. Are you?

[Sardaukar]

Well, everyone has his own style and strategy. [8D] 

[topeverest]

I find it difficult to justify a manila CV strike strategy. Those American BB's will wreak havoc in an experienced players hands. Besides, I see nothing of value in Manila that cant be destroyed with surface groups patrolling, LBA, and a few CVL's. In any event, were you to overkill commit to Manila as Empire, I would love to be Allies with 8 extra BB's as toys in 42.

[Nikademus]

given the tendancy for Allied players to be far more aggressive vs. their RL counterparts and with knowledge that player one has one hand tied behind his back trying to suppress the SRA while guarding against early incursions into the outer mandates.......my preference is to allow the PH attack. It is valuable to destroy alot of those planes on the ground and take out the BB's from harrasement/bombardment duty. Leaving PH vulnerable for a time also gives Player one pause. He must defend this vital base which takes away from adventures in the Mandates or even the SRA via the off map routes or the US-NZ-Oz route.

I can see the value of a Manilla strike though. I've been stung more than once by all those subs but one can also have the Formosa AF bomb Manila too. Having KB in the SRA early has merit as the first thing Player two always does is start the SIR ROBIN resource/ENG unit evac. It also discourages the fast surface raids that are virtually impossible for land based air units to defend against due to the way the combat phase works. The con of course is that once KB's location is firmly ID'd......player one is more free to create chaos with it's US fleet and carriers.

pros and cons either way but personally i lean towards PH over Manila.