JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Rusty1961
Posts: 1239
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 4:18 am

JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by Rusty1961 »

Okay, I don't think my Japanese opponent can take Palembang from me until early '43.

He has launched two attacks against my "festung" and has about 1100AV to my-get this- 21,000 defensive AV (everyone has Palembang as their target and the x3 defense). His first attack cost him 11,000 KIA to my 1,000 and his next deliberate attack a week or so later cost him 5,000 to my 1,000. Of course, supplies aren't an issue for me.

Thus, given his push into Burma (he still hasn't taken Rangoon), I don't see him taking Palembang till he secures Burma.

My question is this: What impact on his economy and movement of units will he be subjected to given his failure to secure this vital piece of real estate?

He isn't doing any moving in China. We fought, bled, and withdrew to our respective lines. No change really since the beginning of the war.

And how can I take advantage of his postponing of his attack on Palembang with his new push in Burma.

Take care!

Rusty[:)]
God made man, but Sam Colt made them equal.
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: Rusty1961

Okay, I don't think my Japanese opponent can take Palembang from me until early '43.

He has launched two attacks against my "festung" and has about 1100AV to my-get this- 21,000 defensive AV (everyone has Palembang as their target and the x3 defense). His first attack cost him 11,000 KIA to my 1,000 and his next deliberate attack a week or so later cost him 5,000 to my 1,000. Of course, supplies aren't an issue for me.

Thus, given his push into Burma (he still hasn't taken Rangoon), I don't see him taking Palembang till he secures Burma.

My question is this: What impact on his economy and movement of units will he be subjected to given his failure to secure this vital piece of real estate?

He isn't doing any moving in China. We fought, bled, and withdrew to our respective lines. No change really since the beginning of the war.

And how can I take advantage of his postponing of his attack on Palembang with his new push in Burma.

Take care!

Rusty[:)]
Allies with 21,000 AV in early 1942? Where? I didn't think the Allies had that much AV on the entire board. [&:]
Image
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Rusty1961

Okay, I don't think my Japanese opponent can take Palembang from me until early '43.

He has launched two attacks against my "festung" and has about 1100AV to my-get this- 21,000 defensive AV (everyone has Palembang as their target and the x3 defense). His first attack cost him 11,000 KIA to my 1,000 and his next deliberate attack a week or so later cost him 5,000 to my 1,000. Of course, supplies aren't an issue for me.

Thus, given his push into Burma (he still hasn't taken Rangoon), I don't see him taking Palembang till he secures Burma.

My question is this: What impact on his economy and movement of units will he be subjected to given his failure to secure this vital piece of real estate?

He isn't doing any moving in China. We fought, bled, and withdrew to our respective lines. No change really since the beginning of the war.

And how can I take advantage of his postponing of his attack on Palembang with his new push in Burma.

Take care!

Rusty[:)]
Allies with 21,000 AV in early 1942? Where? I didn't think the Allies had that much AV on the entire board. [&:]
Sorry. Didn't answer the original question: Without securing Palembang, he's done. He simply must have that oil and fuel before 1943.

The Japanese have-maybe-six months petroleum reserves in the home islands that they can fall back on. Balikpapan, Soerbaja and other production sites on Java (I assume he hasn't taken Java yet?), some other Sumatra ports, Magwe, Miri and Tarakan will help him stave off the inevitable somewhat, but he's got to have Palembang to make it past early 1943.
Image
User avatar
DivePac88
Posts: 3119
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 9:50 pm
Location: Somewhere in the South Pacific.

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by DivePac88 »

ORIGINAL: Rusty1961

He has launched two attacks against my "festung" and has about 1100AV to my-get this- 21,000 defensive AV (everyone has Palembang as their target and the x3 defense).

So you have 7000AV, with 3 forts defending Palembang right? So the other bases on Sumatra and Java must be bare of troops. I would just Isolate you then roll you with a couple of divisions after Malaya is finished.
Image
When you see the Southern Cross, For the first time
You understand now, Why you came this way
User avatar
ChezDaJez
Posts: 3293
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:08 am
Location: Chehalis, WA

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by ChezDaJez »

My question is this: What impact on his economy and movement of units will he be subjected to given his failure to secure this vital piece of real estate?

I am in this situation in my game against Canoerebel. He still holds southern Sumatra including Palembang, Padang, Benkolen and Oosthaven. The denial of the oil will hurt but at the moment Tarakan and Balikpapn coupled with numerous smaller oilfileds are meeting my needs. The part I am worried about is the severe restriction these forces have placed on my movements. I am that I am unable to disband any major surface units for repair in any port within 4e range of Oosthaven. I am severely restricted in what units I can operate near Sumatra. Anything larger than a DD generates unwanted attention. Muchof the SRA is denied to the Japanese player becasue of this.

Unfortunately I will never be able to take it because I simply do not have the land forces to overcome the 40+ land units at Palembang and Oosthave without stripping China, the SRA and Burma to the bone. I estimate that I would need upwards of 6000 AV and probably much more than that to dent the defense. Add to that the 400+ allied fighters and 200+ allied bombers that months of recon indicate are parked at Oosthaven and you end up with a fortress Sumatra that could never have existed in real life.

I have never encountered this tactic before and my hat is off to Canoerebel. It was a totally unexpected move. But it is one that I will develop a house rule for in future games. The house rule may either prohibit its use or simply remove any impediment to the Japanese player blitzing Sumatra before the fall of Singapore. This is not a gamey tactic as I do not consider it an exploit of the game mechanics. I do believe that it is so far removed from any historical possibility as to make it's real life WWII use a fantasy.

Chez
Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6417
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by JeffroK »

New HR

Allied players aren't allowed to.......................................................

You are playing a totally ahistorical scenario aren't you?
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
Rusty1961
Posts: 1239
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 4:18 am

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by Rusty1961 »

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez
But it is one that I will develop a house rule for in future games. The house rule may either prohibit its use or simply remove any impediment to the Japanese player blitzing Sumatra before the fall of Singapore. This is not a gamey tactic as I do not consider it an exploit of the game mechanics. I do believe that it is so far removed from any historical possibility as to make it's real life WWII use a fantasy.

Chez

You don't need a HR for this. As the Japanese there are at least to different tactics that can be used to prevent this.



God made man, but Sam Colt made them equal.
Rusty1961
Posts: 1239
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 4:18 am

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by Rusty1961 »

Allies with 21,000 AV in early 1942? Where? I didn't think the Allies had that much AV on the entire board.

The 21,000 is after all modifications have been added to the defense. Twice he's attacked and twice I've had an AV of 21,000. He's lost 16,000 men in total, so he's down a division in men.
God made man, but Sam Colt made them equal.
Alfred
Posts: 6683
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:56 am

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by Alfred »

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez
My question is this: What impact on his economy and movement of units will he be subjected to given his failure to secure this vital piece of real estate?

I am in this situation in my game against Canoerebel. He still holds southern Sumatra including Palembang, Padang, Benkolen and Oosthaven. The denial of the oil will hurt but at the moment Tarakan and Balikpapn coupled with numerous smaller oilfileds are meeting my needs. The part I am worried about is the severe restriction these forces have placed on my movements. I am that I am unable to disband any major surface units for repair in any port within 4e range of Oosthaven. I am severely restricted in what units I can operate near Sumatra. Anything larger than a DD generates unwanted attention. Muchof the SRA is denied to the Japanese player becasue of this.

Unfortunately I will never be able to take it because I simply do not have the land forces to overcome the 40+ land units at Palembang and Oosthave without stripping China, the SRA and Burma to the bone. I estimate that I would need upwards of 6000 AV and probably much more than that to dent the defense. Add to that the 400+ allied fighters and 200+ allied bombers that months of recon indicate are parked at Oosthaven and you end up with a fortress Sumatra that could never have existed in real life.

I have never encountered this tactic before and my hat is off to Canoerebel. It was a totally unexpected move. But it is one that I will develop a house rule for in future games. The house rule may either prohibit its use or simply remove any impediment to the Japanese player blitzing Sumatra before the fall of Singapore. This is not a gamey tactic as I do not consider it an exploit of the game mechanics. I do believe that it is so far removed from any historical possibility as to make it's real life WWII use a fantasy.

Chez

No need for a HR, the situation you face is largely self inflicted.

You were adament that you would not read the relevant AARs. There are AARs which discuss in great detail how to take advantage of an Allied festung Palembang commitment. Even in your own dormant AAR, where you placed strict conditions on the kind of advice you wanted, you were advised in general terms how to avoid the problem from getting out of hand.

Now the situation might be too late too retrieve. Based on your post there remains a basic question which you have not yet addressed. You say to dent the festung Palembang defences you would have to stripping other theatres to the bone. Yet you also lament about the difficulties caused by the festung Palembang. Well the question is really quite simple.

[center]Are these other theatres more important than Sumatra?[/center]

If the answer is in the affirmative, then carry on as you currently are. If the answer is in the negative, ie the overall health of the Japanese war effort is more adversely affected by the Allies retaining their current position in Sumatra, then you would be stripping to the bone the other theatres.

Bottom line, none of this requires a HR. As I said, the situation is largely self inflicted. Not a problem if you think there are more important objectives than eliminating the Allied position in Sumatra; not so benign if you believe Palembang is more important than the other objectives but refuse to allocate the resources to deal with Palembang.

Alfred
User avatar
1EyedJacks
Posts: 2304
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 6:26 am
Location: Reno, NV

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by 1EyedJacks »

ORIGINAL: Rusty1961
Allies with 21,000 AV in early 1942? Where? I didn't think the Allies had that much AV on the entire board.

The 21,000 is after all modifications have been added to the defense. Twice he's attacked and twice I've had an AV of 21,000. He's lost 16,000 men in total, so he's down a division in men.

16k of squads destroyed? Plus hvy losses in gunz? Do you have air superiority over Palembang? Just curious...

TTFN,

Mike
TTFN,

Mike
Rainer79
Posts: 603
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 7:49 am
Location: Austria

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by Rainer79 »

ORIGINAL: Puhis

I think this shows one of the drawback of the supply system. Palembang can self-support huge number of troops just because there's big refinery.

I guess men there have well oiled digestion...

Of course that refinery could be bombed into the ground to leave large numbers of allies starving.

Refinery capacity is not normally a bottle-neck of japanese production.
User avatar
LoBaron
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by LoBaron »

Fortress Palembang can and has to be avoided early in game. If it is already set up, whether you capture it or not, the troop investement
will hurt you so much that it will cost you months of the Grand Campaign. Its one of the best time buyers for the Allies.

The point where you realize you need massed troop concentration to get rid of Palembang its already too late.

That said, I think that if you do not read the forums all the time and shuffle through every more or less heated discussion, or read every
AAR in vincinity, chances are quite ok that you do not notice that danger in avance.

A HR is not neccesary if you know what can happen. You simply cut it off early and move in aggressively. Then the same strategy that favours the Allies
in case of success can end up in major CW/ABDA losses. Its a gamble for both sides.

On the other hand the ability to support a whole army by Palembang ressources alone is ahistorical, so if its ok to implement a HR against
low level HB attacks, why not against Fortress Palembang? Matter of tast IMHO...
Image
User avatar
LoBaron
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by LoBaron »

Good point. Although it still might be something equally irritating to the Japanese player as redeploying huge armies to just conquer that
small rotten base. [:)]
Image
User avatar
Puhis
Posts: 1737
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:14 pm
Location: Finland

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by Puhis »

I think this shows one of the drawback of the supply system. Palembang can self-support huge number of troops just because there's big refinery.

I guess men there have well oiled digestion...
Chris21wen
Posts: 7525
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Cottesmore, Rutland

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by Chris21wen »

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

...... or simply remove any impediment to the Japanese player blitzing Sumatra before the fall of Singapore.

Can I ask why the Japanese cannot do this?
User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4082
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by Andrew Brown »

ORIGINAL: Puhis

I think this shows one of the drawback of the supply system. Palembang can self-support huge number of troops just because there's big refinery.

I guess men there have well oiled digestion...

Indeed. And an oversight on my part. With hindsight, I would not have had refineries output any supply points - just fuel, and this is my recommendation for any modders out there.

Andrew
Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
User avatar
Erkki
Posts: 1460
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 5:03 am

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by Erkki »

In the betas from at least p8 and onwards refineries dont generate supply.
User avatar
LoBaron
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by LoBaron »

ORIGINAL: Erkki

In the betas from at least p8 and onwards refineries dont generate supply.

There goes Fortress Palembang. [&o]
Image
User avatar
koniu
Posts: 2763
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:19 pm
Location: Konin, Poland, European Union

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by koniu »

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

ORIGINAL: Erkki

In the betas from at least p8 and onwards refineries dont generate supply.

There goes Fortress Palembang. [&o]
There goes Fortress Palembang.

I am playing q4 now and they still do. I am not remember in what version i have start my PBEM. There is an passibility that no supplies from refineries applies only for new games.

Image
Attachments
raf.jpg
raf.jpg (91.29 KiB) Viewed 376 times
"Only the Dead Have Seen the End of War"
User avatar
n01487477
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:00 am

RE: JFB question: Failure to capture Palembang in '42

Post by n01487477 »

ORIGINAL: Erkki

In the betas from at least p8 and onwards refineries dont generate supply.
This is wrong - they do unless you are playing an economic mod.
[edit]beaten by koniu
[edit2]I think Erkki is thinking about LI being able to be turned off. This is the change. Michael has no need to change this as it can be manipulated in the editor.
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”