If you want to play an "Historic Game"
Play aginst the AI.
If you play PBEM no-one from either side will play in an historic manner after 7/12/41.
Tokyo Rose was a Hussy! Chez (J) vs. Canoe (A)
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
ORIGINAL: desicat
I am in no way saying that CR did anything gamey or wrong, I was just thinking that Chez came at the game in an entirely different manner. CR's style had caught Chez flat footed from the get go and that would explain Chez' forced delay into the DEI. Chez had an initial invasion thrust that CR demolished with a nice strike by a surface battle group.
Chez didn't cry foul - in fact I have no idea what he is thinking. I was just offering my poor opinion of how I viewed his play style.
And you may indeed be correct. He may have assumed that Dan would do a Brave Sir Robin and bug out of the DEI. If Dan had done that, Chez's strategy would probably be sound to this point. Where Chez failed is in adapting his plan to the actual on map circumstances. It seems at times where Chez had a fairly grand plan on how to conduct the first few months of the war. When events (dictated by our fine southern gentlman here) failed to develop according to that plan, Chez failed to adapt. In Biology it is said, "Those that fail to adapt perish"
"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
ORIGINAL: JeffK
If you want to play an "Historic Game"
Play aginst the AI.
If you play PBEM no-one from either side will play in an historic manner after 7/12/41.
Then why have house rules?
I will again state that these are not Chez' thoughts, just MY OPINION of how he approached the game.
CR gave several clues that this may be the case in his AAR. Note the explanation concerning carrier air stripped from CV's for operations from land, or the early war STF sorties deep into supposedly Japanese waters, or the use of picket ships, etc...
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
desicat, sorry, I have to diagree again. Midway is not an example of the IJN "splitting up" the KB. What was operational of the KB (1st, 2d and 5th CV Div) operated as a unit at Midway. The 5th CV Div was damaged (Shokaku) or was rebuilding its airgroup (Zuikaku) and simply unavailable. The CVLs you reference never operated as part of the KB, nor did any other CVL operate as part of KB. Certainly, the KB was committed to battle at reduced strength at Midway, but the available KB CVs were all there. Perhaps we are splitting hairs here, but operationally, the IJN did not typically operate the KB as Chez has done in this game. They kept it together, except at the Coral Sea.
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
and if I recall correctly the Junyo and the CVL were slower and couldnt keep up with KB, thus using them in the secondary theater
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
Junyo (25 kts 53 A/C) and Ryujo (28 kts 37 A/C). The Kaga made 28 kts and had 90 A/C while the BB Mutsu made 27 kts.
You are correct that these CV's never operated with the KB, but I would argue that they would have helped at Midway more than they contributed in the Aleutians.
You are correct that these CV's never operated with the KB, but I would argue that they would have helped at Midway more than they contributed in the Aleutians.
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
All one needs to do is read "Shattered Sword" to realize just how poorly the Midway Operation was planned (or not, as the case may be) by the Japanese.
Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
Well Cribtop hopefully I'll be able to provide a challenge. The situation is "challenging" for Japan to say the least. There are some positives though but many things I would change. In particular all these "picket ships". There's even a picket ship south of Sydney - that's just a wasted merchantman. It'll be sunk when you leave port and tell me nothing I can actually do anything about.
Ah well, lots and lots of restructuring but I think there are "opportunities".
Desicat,
You may well be right about the different aims of play by Chez and CR. I don't, however, think that differences in play style explain what has been happening. I think it is basically just that his decision-making loop has been frazzled and he hasn't been able to re-orient. As vettim pointed out for a historical/simulation player he has engaged in a lot of non-historic ops AND has left Sumatra - pretty much the reason Japan went to war - alone. That doesn't strike me as very simulationey ( if it isn't a word it damned well should be, its fun to say [8D] ).
Maybe someone who reads both could ask Chez what his current thinking is?
Ah well, lots and lots of restructuring but I think there are "opportunities".
Desicat,
You may well be right about the different aims of play by Chez and CR. I don't, however, think that differences in play style explain what has been happening. I think it is basically just that his decision-making loop has been frazzled and he hasn't been able to re-orient. As vettim pointed out for a historical/simulation player he has engaged in a lot of non-historic ops AND has left Sumatra - pretty much the reason Japan went to war - alone. That doesn't strike me as very simulationey ( if it isn't a word it damned well should be, its fun to say [8D] ).
Maybe someone who reads both could ask Chez what his current thinking is?
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
ORIGINAL: JeffK
ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon
ORIGINAL: Nemo121
What's this JFB stuff?[:D] Surely there's just good and bad play? A good player could take any side with facility. I think CR will provide a solid challenge to most irrespective of the side he plays. Good strategy is universal.
Absolutely Nemo! JFB's recognize good play and it is indeed universal regardless of the side. It's just happening a wee bit too much on the Allied side of late. Japan needs a morale boost.
I think CR, and to an extent GreyJoy have shown up a weakness in the methods used by many JFB. (Sorry if I've missed others, I dont read all AAR and I am sure there are JFB showing up weaknesses of AFB)
Many JFB use the KB like a bull in a china shop and dont worry a lot about a solid strategy, they get away with a lot as many AFB go into a shell, do the Sir Robin and allow the JFB to stay on the offensive.
CR marked his line in the sand at Palembang and threw Chez's "plans" into disarray, GreyJoy got cajoled into defending Gcanal and Rader didnt have any other options up his sleeve. Both JFB have then committed major errors and are suffering.
I could imagine both Chez & Rader had plans to sweep across the map (Rader nearly succeeded) and no plans to deal with a determined Allied player.
I hope Chez doesnt throw it in as many illinformed are suggesting, It could be good for JFB to have to fight from this position and in this time period. It would at least provide tips for others. (Maybe lack of an AAR by Chez has taken away some of the support from the crowd that might keep his interest up)
I ponder this thought daily. I have yet to read an AAR with a planned transition from the offense to a defensive stance. instead one or a series of disasters hit and the JFB either quits or struggles. i especally agree and have commented about the use of the KB. Primarly used as a weapon of terror but to what end? Sinking a bunch of xAK's does not get one to the end. Even sinking the whole damn USN CVTF does not get you there unless the plan is to exploit that loss to gain some position. It seems the IJ make a lot of noise, invade a bunch of stuff and then .... the machine takes over ...
"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
Crackaces
I understand where you are coming from but I have found every game I played enjoyable (even when I had my arse handed to me in the first AE Tourney). I would make the point that the RL war turned on some many tiny little actions that the course of the war would have been significantly altered. Maybe the final outcome is determined, but how we got there could have been substantially different. COnsider:
* What if the IJN first strike at Coral Sea had found the USN CVTF instead of Neosho and Sims?
* What if Lexington's DC had performed better?
* What if Tone's FP had launched on time?
* What if Yamamoto had not sent the light carriers to bomb Dutch Harbor?
* What if Mikawa had reorganized his forces and attacked the transports at Savo Island?
* What if the second strike at Eastern Solomons had found Enterprise or Saratoga?
* What is Spruance had pursued teh IJN CV's at Phillipine Sea?
* What if Halsey had guarded the San Bernadino Strait?
* What if Kurita kept pressing the attack off Samar?
While we cannot create the exact circumstances in the game, we can create similar scenarios within the system. To many, that is the enjoyment of AE. Not who is going to win the war but how do we get there. The say the joy is in the journey. I think that is true of this game
I understand where you are coming from but I have found every game I played enjoyable (even when I had my arse handed to me in the first AE Tourney). I would make the point that the RL war turned on some many tiny little actions that the course of the war would have been significantly altered. Maybe the final outcome is determined, but how we got there could have been substantially different. COnsider:
* What if the IJN first strike at Coral Sea had found the USN CVTF instead of Neosho and Sims?
* What if Lexington's DC had performed better?
* What if Tone's FP had launched on time?
* What if Yamamoto had not sent the light carriers to bomb Dutch Harbor?
* What if Mikawa had reorganized his forces and attacked the transports at Savo Island?
* What if the second strike at Eastern Solomons had found Enterprise or Saratoga?
* What is Spruance had pursued teh IJN CV's at Phillipine Sea?
* What if Halsey had guarded the San Bernadino Strait?
* What if Kurita kept pressing the attack off Samar?
While we cannot create the exact circumstances in the game, we can create similar scenarios within the system. To many, that is the enjoyment of AE. Not who is going to win the war but how do we get there. The say the joy is in the journey. I think that is true of this game
"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
While we cannot create the exact circumstances in the game, we can create similar scenarios within the system. To many, that is the enjoyment of AE. Not who is going to win the war but how do we get there. The say the joy is in the journey. I think that is true of this game
Exactly. It's the constant tactical, strategic and psychological challenge of adapting to the circumstances your opponent puts before you.
I'm just about to begin my first PBEM as Japan and this is especially instructive and helps me realize how important it is to have a large set of interrelating goals in mind which also take into account possible counters to them. If you don't view all possibilities from your opponent's position and play as if your opponent could in fact take advantage of your own choices, then you're going to continue to leave your ass hanging in the wind.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
Well it is all about capabilities vs intentions. You have to assess the opponent's capabilities and then actually narrow that down to their intentions. If you aren't open-minded or thorough enough to conceive of what they conceive of then you'll be surprised and probably ripped apart. That's the nice thing with playing a good opponent, they'll think of things the AI wouldn't and so they stretch you in different directions than the AI. Of course not all players do this, some are very orthodox - there's nothing wrong with this of course, they're just not going to stretch you in the way that an inventive opponent will since you'll have a lot less to adapt to.
Since I'm much more about doing unto them than reacting to what they do unto me ( very Soviet of me I know
) I tend to pick a different "theme" for each game. In one game I might pick the "theme" of: "Winning without using CVs - which I've done as Allies; in another I might chose "Interior Lines" and play a game based on using superior interior lines, in another I might chose "forward defence" etc. Of course that's usually once the situation becomes old hat. For my first Allied game I sat down, analysed the strategic situation and chose what I thought was the best solution to the problems faced by the Allies - that solution was to occupy Southern Sumatra and became known as Festung Palembang. Were I to play the Allies again I'd chose a new "theme" to keep things interesting and to practice different skillsets.
So, there are many different ways in which to maintain the challenge and keep things interesting. Many centre around the interplay between you and your opponent but some can be sub-goals created by yourself in order to hone particular skills ( e.g. pushing through amphibious invasions without CV cover, raiding etc. )
One thing I'd suggest is that after every operation conduct an analysis of the operation and what went right, what went wrong and whether or not it actually achieved its strategic goals. Many people say, "It was successful, I'm brilliant." and leave it at that. They are missing at a minimum 50% of their learning opportunities. There's almost never anything so successful that you cannot learn a lesson from it. The more effort you put into learning and self-reflection the more rapidly you'll improve - since PBEMing is a skill to hone just like any others.
Are you going to AAR your game obvert?
Since I'm much more about doing unto them than reacting to what they do unto me ( very Soviet of me I know
) I tend to pick a different "theme" for each game. In one game I might pick the "theme" of: "Winning without using CVs - which I've done as Allies; in another I might chose "Interior Lines" and play a game based on using superior interior lines, in another I might chose "forward defence" etc. Of course that's usually once the situation becomes old hat. For my first Allied game I sat down, analysed the strategic situation and chose what I thought was the best solution to the problems faced by the Allies - that solution was to occupy Southern Sumatra and became known as Festung Palembang. Were I to play the Allies again I'd chose a new "theme" to keep things interesting and to practice different skillsets.So, there are many different ways in which to maintain the challenge and keep things interesting. Many centre around the interplay between you and your opponent but some can be sub-goals created by yourself in order to hone particular skills ( e.g. pushing through amphibious invasions without CV cover, raiding etc. )
One thing I'd suggest is that after every operation conduct an analysis of the operation and what went right, what went wrong and whether or not it actually achieved its strategic goals. Many people say, "It was successful, I'm brilliant." and leave it at that. They are missing at a minimum 50% of their learning opportunities. There's almost never anything so successful that you cannot learn a lesson from it. The more effort you put into learning and self-reflection the more rapidly you'll improve - since PBEMing is a skill to hone just like any others.
Are you going to AAR your game obvert?
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
Are you going to AAR your game obvert?
Yes, I will. How could I refuse the analysis and advice so many experienced players can offer?
It should begin next week sometime, just after I stop obsessing over the details of the first move.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
-
Canoerebel
- Posts: 21099
- Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
- Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
- Contact:
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
desicat is right about the way Chez is approaching the game - as a simulation. Nemo and others are also right that you really can't approach this as a simulation - it's not World War II beginning with the first click of the mouse; it's Scenario Two, and I started the game with a very healthy concern about Japanese auto victory. So, from the outset, I felt like I was fighting for my very survival. That really wasn't a concern for the Allied powers in the Pacific in the real war, nor, in my opinion, is it a concern in Scenario One.
Via email, Chez says that this carrier group was on a smash and dash mission to interdict shipping heading south of Oosthaven. He also commented that he "never uses death stars," that he's glad he's glad that he didn't commit more carriers because Japanese strike aircraft can't penetrate without overwhelming air superiority, and that facing an Alied death star is therefore essentially impossible.
Well, rather than me paraphrase, here's what he said: "Their mission was to interdict any of your shipping tht might be leaving Oostahven, especially those pesky CAs. They were simply to dash and smash and hightail it out of there. I've never operated KB as a deathstar so that is why there were only 2 CVs. Which is just as well in this case because I am pretty sure that I would have lost every CV I had for no gain. Japanese bombers just are not able to penetrate an allied deathstar unless they have overwhelming fighter superiority."
Chez is wrong, IMO. With one more carrier present he would have sunk at least Hornet and possibly Formidable. As it was, a few of his strike aircraft did get past the CAP and attack those two ships, but he was just a bit shy on numbers from getting high-probability strikes. Moreover, Allied players (including me) have seen a multitude of instances in which uber Allied CAP wasn't sufficient to stop a Japanese strike that was numerically much less.
Secondly, this wasn't an Allied death star. I can't tell Chez that right now, because I would love it if Wasp catches him totally by surprise in NoPac during the next few weeks. In addition to Wasp not being present, Long Island is in SoPac, Hermes is at Colombo, and 1+ USN fleet CV squadrons were in Sumatra and didn't participate. To explain: I had stripped York and Ent of aircraft, moving the planes to Sumatra, while the two carriers went to Colombo for refit (they're still there). When the Japanese carrier TF moved towards Cocos, I moved one fighter group and two SBD groups to Cocos, meaning two Avenger squadrons, two SBD squadrons, and one F4F squadron remained in Sumatra. Steve was facing three American carriers, planes at Cocos from a fourth, and two RN carriers.
I wonder if Steve thinks he is fighting historically as he sees it (not employing death stars) while I am not (by employing, as he sees it, death stars). Is he of the opinion: "I'm fighting with one hand tied behind my back. My opponent isn't."?
Given the parameters for this match as articulated in the original "opponent wanted" notice, I don't think there's any basis to complain about how the game is going, but I would naturally be disappointed if my opponent, who is a gent and a courteous player, felt like things weren't kosher. Nevertheless, I'm going to continue on as I have, knowing that we began the engagement under clear parameters.
Via email, Chez says that this carrier group was on a smash and dash mission to interdict shipping heading south of Oosthaven. He also commented that he "never uses death stars," that he's glad he's glad that he didn't commit more carriers because Japanese strike aircraft can't penetrate without overwhelming air superiority, and that facing an Alied death star is therefore essentially impossible.
Well, rather than me paraphrase, here's what he said: "Their mission was to interdict any of your shipping tht might be leaving Oostahven, especially those pesky CAs. They were simply to dash and smash and hightail it out of there. I've never operated KB as a deathstar so that is why there were only 2 CVs. Which is just as well in this case because I am pretty sure that I would have lost every CV I had for no gain. Japanese bombers just are not able to penetrate an allied deathstar unless they have overwhelming fighter superiority."
Chez is wrong, IMO. With one more carrier present he would have sunk at least Hornet and possibly Formidable. As it was, a few of his strike aircraft did get past the CAP and attack those two ships, but he was just a bit shy on numbers from getting high-probability strikes. Moreover, Allied players (including me) have seen a multitude of instances in which uber Allied CAP wasn't sufficient to stop a Japanese strike that was numerically much less.
Secondly, this wasn't an Allied death star. I can't tell Chez that right now, because I would love it if Wasp catches him totally by surprise in NoPac during the next few weeks. In addition to Wasp not being present, Long Island is in SoPac, Hermes is at Colombo, and 1+ USN fleet CV squadrons were in Sumatra and didn't participate. To explain: I had stripped York and Ent of aircraft, moving the planes to Sumatra, while the two carriers went to Colombo for refit (they're still there). When the Japanese carrier TF moved towards Cocos, I moved one fighter group and two SBD groups to Cocos, meaning two Avenger squadrons, two SBD squadrons, and one F4F squadron remained in Sumatra. Steve was facing three American carriers, planes at Cocos from a fourth, and two RN carriers.
I wonder if Steve thinks he is fighting historically as he sees it (not employing death stars) while I am not (by employing, as he sees it, death stars). Is he of the opinion: "I'm fighting with one hand tied behind my back. My opponent isn't."?
Given the parameters for this match as articulated in the original "opponent wanted" notice, I don't think there's any basis to complain about how the game is going, but I would naturally be disappointed if my opponent, who is a gent and a courteous player, felt like things weren't kosher. Nevertheless, I'm going to continue on as I have, knowing that we began the engagement under clear parameters.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
CR, for a lawyer, you sure have a big heart. Why do you worry so much about playing "kosher". You've done nothing out of the ordinary except to play well and mainly w/i the strictures of good military principles (concentration of force, appearing where the enemy least expects it, applying force at strategically important locations, like Palembang). Yet, fairly frequently you take time out to hand wring about playing fairly.
Of course one must be sporting and stay within the agreed terms of the game, but all else is fair. This is war after all and those LYBs pulled one hell of a sneak attack w/o a declaration of war. Think of the home folks and how they lust for revenge against these sneaky LYBs.....and I'm old enough to know that we did.
He lies beaten, but unbowed. Time to start the slash and burn attacks that will finish this menace to American supremacy in the Pacific for the next 100 years. Victory in 1943!!
It will be very entertaining to watch your game as you become the real hunter rather than the cautious, but dangerous, hunted.
Of course one must be sporting and stay within the agreed terms of the game, but all else is fair. This is war after all and those LYBs pulled one hell of a sneak attack w/o a declaration of war. Think of the home folks and how they lust for revenge against these sneaky LYBs.....and I'm old enough to know that we did.
He lies beaten, but unbowed. Time to start the slash and burn attacks that will finish this menace to American supremacy in the Pacific for the next 100 years. Victory in 1943!!
It will be very entertaining to watch your game as you become the real hunter rather than the cautious, but dangerous, hunted.
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
I guess I'm confused - he's opposed to operating the KB as a "Death Star" even though, for the most part, the Japanese did operate their carriers together (up to Midway) - since they realized that having multiple carriers together was necessary for full mass attacks (something the US was behind on up until late 1943).
He needs to really change his thinking here - he isn't operating even historically correct at this point (much too timid, as opposed to history).
He needs to really change his thinking here - he isn't operating even historically correct at this point (much too timid, as opposed to history).
Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...
-
Canoerebel
- Posts: 21099
- Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
- Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
- Contact:
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
7/22/42
DEI: CA Portland TF finished off an IJN DD damaged in yesterday's clash. Four Allied fighter squadrons moved to Padang and intercepted unescorted strikes by Nells and Bettys, downing 30 aircraft while losing none. The loading of troops bound for the islands north of Oosthaven began yesterday. I may also divert the fast transport convoy carring the Marine raiders to Soebert (and island just south of Padang). Not sure here - I want to secure that island to prevent Steve from effectively "surrounding" Padang and getting a base close to my shipping lanes. If I drop the marines there, the APDs will then report to Oosthaven, where they can begin shuttling troops to the islands of Sumatra's northeast coast. BC Renown left Colombo for Cocos yesterday. Another RN R-class BB is on the way there from Capetown.
CenPac: Most of the KB is sighted near Mili - three CV with a report of 32 fighters, 42 bombers, and 40 auxillary.
NoPac: Troops bound for Para are loading at Adak Island. Wasp will pass through the Aleutians tomorrow and enter the Berring Sea.
Into the Wild: Canoe HQ heads back to the Smokies today or tomorrow morning for a camping trip that will include our daughter, who is in college just down the road. We will resume the war Monday.
DEI: CA Portland TF finished off an IJN DD damaged in yesterday's clash. Four Allied fighter squadrons moved to Padang and intercepted unescorted strikes by Nells and Bettys, downing 30 aircraft while losing none. The loading of troops bound for the islands north of Oosthaven began yesterday. I may also divert the fast transport convoy carring the Marine raiders to Soebert (and island just south of Padang). Not sure here - I want to secure that island to prevent Steve from effectively "surrounding" Padang and getting a base close to my shipping lanes. If I drop the marines there, the APDs will then report to Oosthaven, where they can begin shuttling troops to the islands of Sumatra's northeast coast. BC Renown left Colombo for Cocos yesterday. Another RN R-class BB is on the way there from Capetown.
CenPac: Most of the KB is sighted near Mili - three CV with a report of 32 fighters, 42 bombers, and 40 auxillary.
NoPac: Troops bound for Para are loading at Adak Island. Wasp will pass through the Aleutians tomorrow and enter the Berring Sea.
Into the Wild: Canoe HQ heads back to the Smokies today or tomorrow morning for a camping trip that will include our daughter, who is in college just down the road. We will resume the war Monday.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
ORIGINAL: vettim89
* What if Tone's FP had launched on time?
Analysis in Shattered Sword showed that it would likely not have found the USN carriers, due to cloud cover. And IIRC showed it would likely not have found them on the return leg either.
Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
I have to say about the discussion of the WWII sim notion applied to Chez's strategy - if it really were WWII (or a super-good sim), I think he would be worse off strategically for the forays into SoPac and allowing the Allied build-up on Sumatra.
Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home
RE: Das darf nicht var sein!
ORIGINAL: witpqs
ORIGINAL: vettim89
* What if Tone's FP had launched on time?
Analysis in Shattered Sword showed that it would likely not have found the USN carriers, due to cloud cover. And IIRC showed it would likely not have found them on the return leg either.
That is my understanding also .. the PBY's were led to the TF by radar while IJN had only their eyes to find our CV's .. clouds made this problem worse. As far as the game goes so far my experince has been that it is represented well. I have had multiple occasions in my game where I found the KB but the IJ player had no clue I was lurking. The relavancy to this thread is the danger of the KB to push the envelope thinking for example the Mavis PA's are equal to the PBY. Very bad assumption. Even worse is to push the envelope where no Naval scouting exists besides ship based float craft. Though it is tough I see .. a "Midway" can be reproduced. In this case there was a simple clash where the IJN did not committ enough forces to have an exchange like Coral Sea rather than a USN first strike at Midway.
"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"