Allies in Scen 2

[jeffs]

Am about to start as the allies in Scen 2[&o]......Am experienced enough in Scen 1...but those experienced players
how do they adjust to Scen 2? [&:]
Outside of the obvious that my defense can not be nearly as aggressive (vs Scen 1) I get it...[:@]
a hard fight for PM is probably not a good idea in Scen 2 (I have pulled off in Scen 1)...What should I focus on the first year....[8|]
Any sands in the line that I should worry about..Or is mere survival a cause for massive celebration?[:-]

Enquiring minds (or in my case a total idiot) wants to know![&o]

Tidbits, thoughts, comments, exclusive strategies, sleazy tricks(ok..just joking there), random taunts[:D]...Anything is appreciated[&o]

[Cavalry Corp]

I am playing scn2 2 day turns now on Feb 12/42

I am Japs.

I can tell you provided you know where the KB is and all the Bettys etc are you can do quite a lot.

In my game the allied players has split the CV all over the map being very careful to only use them when he knows where I am and has raisded the north and centre even doing one port attack that damaged Hosho and Zuiho who were hiding there. He has sunk about 20 transports doing this and its damn annoying. He has also had some surface raiders in central areas trashing landings at Tarawa etc.

On the flip side Japan is very strong I have captued PM etc also Singapore and am in Sumatra. BUT in China he has taken to the offensive and taken two cities from me.

I short you must be more careful than scn1 but do not run away totally.

[Canoerebel]

In Scenario Two, auto victory is a distinct possibility if you are playing an aggressive and experienced IJ player.  That would be a very dicey match.
 
Other than that, Scenario Two is pretty similar to Scenario One.  You want to avoid fighting a heavy-attrition air battle in 1942 - in real life, that heavily favored the Allies; in most cases in AE, though, it favors Japan.
 
That means you want to fight air battles defensively as often as possible - over your bases where you lose few pilots and Japan loses more heavily.
 
Japan's army is stronger, which means China could be in trouble.  It will also be possible for Japan to "clog up the arteries" more effectively as the game moves into 1943 and 1944.  Advancing becomes a real grind for the Allies.
 
Japan's achilles heel is its navy.  Capital ships come in finite numbers.  Whittling those is critical, but unfortunately for you the Japanese player has to cooperate a bit.  You can't just unilaterally decide "I'm going to sink cruisers and battlelships."
 
Political points are pure gold.  Don't waste any by missing withdrawal dates.
 
Lots more, but now I'm tired of typing.

[dr.hal]

Keep the advice coming because I know once I whip Paul in scenario 1, he will want to come back and challenge in #2.... Hal

[pws1225]

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

Keep the advice coming because I know once I whip Paul in scenario 1, he will want to come back and challenge in #2.... Hal

Yep

[GreyJoy]

Don't know how it feels in scen 1, but in scenario 2, with PDUs ON, Japan will overwhelm you everywhere (air, ground, sea) till 1944.
In 1942, wherever you decide to stand and fight, know that he can sweep you to oblivion, nuke bomb your bases and break through your tiny wildcats, sinking your CVs.
He can take losses you will never be able to sustain.
He can outproduce you in terms of a/c 5/6 times till mid 1943.
Your only hope is to catch him offguard somewhere prior 1943, grab a piece of rock (with good def terrain) and make him bleed...bleed him...bleed him everywhere you can...
...but, above all, be patient...you will have to wait till the second half of 1943 in order to start thinking about the offensive.
 
...and, for the love of God, be carefull with China!!! If he conquers China early on...you're doomed. Simply doomed.
 
Ok, now, did i boost your morale?[:D]

[jeffs]

Ok, now, did i boost your morale?

Yep..PDU on...Just thrilled with that description![X(]

I guess I have to harass and annoy more than I usually do......[8|]

[Itdepends]

I've had good success in the air war making isolated bases/location untenable for my opponent with night bombing followed up by day bombing once he moves his fighters away. The key appears to be mutually supporting allied bases outside of normal (or even extended) escort range for his fighters. Avoid coastal hexes for your air bases where his naval superiority can cause problems with bombardment and make sure your bombers are back from the front line until his fighter threat is bombed into oblivion.

As far as a line in the sand goes- you need to be flexible- you can't stop a scen 2 Jap opponent if he wants something early on but you can slow him down, preserve your forces and make his life difficult somewhere else.

[dr.hal]

It looks like an extended version of the first 6 months in scenario 1 extended 3 or 4 times...ugh..

[jeffs]

Thanks everybody for the advice and commentary[&o]

It seems what I have feared...Early 1942 lasts for 18 months[8|][X(]

With all the pilots he is training now....Does it mess up his logistics with such a high HI burn rate?

[kbfchicago]

good move asking for advice, I did not...  previously played scenario 1 through a couple of times vs. AI, in my first PBEM and we went with scenario 2.   Neither me nor my worthy Nippon opponent had previous non-AI experience (other than a few short scenarios not completely played through just to get the feel of PBEM).

We're up to the end of 2/42.  As the allied player I went with what worked with the AI games, was not overly aggressive with the defensive line but I did try to cover all the key avenues (DEI, S. Papa NG, Lunga/Numia, Mid/S. Pac Islands, Aluts).  Finding my self spread a bit thin and unable to keep up so the line is already broken.  Lost a CV toss up I should never have gotten into...protect them!  Just the fact they are out there will cause some pause in the IJ offensive.  Without a significant CV presence he now knows he has nearly free a hand anywhere he wants it.

- You can likely get a couple of early jabs in, take'em and run.  i.e. US CA group in the Cebes, Commonwealth BC group out of Singagpore, a CV strike if you're really lucky... don't stick around anywhere for a second shot, you'll regret it.

- Be prepared to be responsive to what IJ primary axis of advance is (i.e. he'll set the pace and priority).  What I'm finding is you have let him have is way on the primary, making efforts to set costly but futile defenses, and look to take shots on the supplemental axis.  The sooner you can figure his intent out the better.

- I was not prepared for the level of sustained effort IJ has been able to make in China.  At this point I think I may loose it and fear as noted above I will really be screwed.  I was hopeful he had diverted resources (has been slow in Burma/Malaya) for an "extra" effort in China but in the end that may not be the case (jury is still out on the Intel read here), he may have just waited for additional air cover as my DEI/Brit sqdns put up the good fight early on that may have caused him some pause.

Sorry to keep the story line a bit vague but don't want to put any real intel out on the forum, I'm gett'n my butt kicked as it is...

I would also push for some "political" restraint in my next scen 2 game (see: tm.asp?m=2440843&mpage=1&key=) for some excellent historical boundaries to put in play. 

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: jeffs



With all the pilots he is training now....Does it mess up his logistics with such a high HI burn rate?

Not if he captures all of the resources and oil that he needs. He will have not trouble with production.

If you are playing versus an experience Japanese player who understands production you can expect one or more of the following.

1. More Japanese aircraft than you could ever imagine. If he is aggressive, your pools will be stretched tight all through the game. He will always have plenty of air frames and pilot quality will not be a problem.

2. Face the real possibility of losing China, or of a Japanese auto victory in 1942. I would recommend that you request that auto victory not be part of your game.

3. A 3/4 year delay at the least to the real beginning of your counter-offensive.

4. Virtually a complete build out of all Japanese carriers by early 1944 at the least-including a lot of extra carriers.

5. Early arrivals of all aircraft types. Sometimes by many months.

6. Possible major early invasions of India or Australia.

One hell of a challenging and fun game.

Be very careful about house rules. As few as possible. I would never recommend that you agrees to restrict Indian units over the Burma border. If you have to pay PPs to use these units then you will never have enough. The Japanese player gets so much more ground assets in scen #2 that they should not be whining about an Allied offensive in Burma in 1942-43.

[Crackaces]

Not to hijack this thread but I recommend reading GreyJoy's thread. It is both informative and inspiring. Here Rader leverages every advantage agasint a newbie to conquor India and China .. but in 1944 Greyjoy is a seasoned veteran giving Rader more than he asked for ..[8D]

Everytime I fear dispair in my little scenario 1 contest .. I just have to glance at Greyjoy's thread to get the needed inspiration to contine getting stompped on until 1943 in my foray and 1944 in scenrario #2 ..

On crsuttons comment about home rules .. since one is going ahistorical anyway .... I am almost thinking that no Allied withdrawals and reliable torps should be the word of the day for scenrario #2 ..but I am a AFB ...[;)]

[crsutton]

Well, the point is to give the Japanese player a boost and I think no withdrawals would tilt the balance well back into the Allies hands. I don't think I would mess with torpedoes either. The sub war works pretty good until the Japanese super Es come on line in early 44. Problem really is that they come into play just about the time the Allied get the better torps. I would rather see them fix the escorts-which I consider to be one of the biggest issues in the game. But I may be a bit biased about that.[;)]

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Well, the point is to give the Japanese player a boost and I think no withdrawals would tilt the balance well back into the Allies hands. I don't think I would mess with torpedoes either. The sub war works pretty good until the Japanese super Es come on line in early 44. Problem really is that they come into play just about the time the Allied get the better torps. I would rather see them fix the escorts-which I consider to be one of the biggest issues in the game. But I may be a bit biased about that.[;)]

Absoultely .. but scenario #2 assumes that Japan violates the Naval Treaties with zero response and that Hitler is still the number one bad guy. In my opinion, the Clausewitzian catch-22 becomes the forefront, [using an economy of force to achieve diplomatic objectives now an overwhelming force that has to be managed] as the IJ becomes more of a threat to the US and now truly wakes up the Sleeping Tiger. It becomes scenario #1 with a lot more stuff involved. To me, just taking a cursory look .. it seems to be a more interesting "scenrario #1" to not do the withdrawl and have reliable torps because the Allies have something to play with and to do .. rather than just get beat up until late '42 ..and in besides CR's game ..in scenario #2 getting stomped until late '43 early '44.

My thoughts on withdrawal are around the ahistorical events not compensated for in the game. For example, IJ invades Oz and there is the Brits withdrawing units .. coming back to the paragraph above .. Japan was contained in RF in June '42 and thus Hitler got our wrath the game models this but have Japan threaten the US and our attention wold be drawn elsewhere ...

Just my sophomoric 2 cents ...

Back to the war!

[Knyvet]

I don't think the Japs get many if any different naval assets in scen 1 vs. scen 2 (may be wrong) - what do you mean by violates Navel treaties?

The main differences between the two scenarios involve the Japanese economy (Japan starts with higher resource reserves) and not ships or planes and some of the econ advantage is lost because of the additional HI spent training pilots (30k HI + at the start of every month and cannot be altered). That is my impression having played a little bit of both scenarios and reading postings - I have not, however, gone through the daatbases to compare the differences. I have noticed in the past people confuse Iron Man with Scenario 2 - they are very different however.

[Cap Mandrake]

Oh yes they do. In scenario 2, JJ actually outstrips US carrier production in 1942. The USN gets a couple of 19 Kt CVE's in late 42 but that is it.

Imagine you have played a couple of WITP games as the Allies and it was too easy. I promise you will NOT have the experience with Scenario 2. [:D]

They will chew up the Little Yellow Chinese Bastards like so many pork-stuffed won-tons. There will be Japanese fighters that could serve in the Korean war by mid '42. They will use the surfeit of fuel they possess to start bar-b-q's. If they want something in early '42, they can take it.

The trick is to use geography like Itdepends said, and get every B-17 and B-24 to the center of the battle. And it is fun.

[SireChaos]

ORIGINAL: Knyvet

I don't think the Japs get many if any different naval assets in scen 1 vs. scen 2 (may be wrong) - what do you mean by violates Navel treaties?

The main differences between the two scenarios involve the Japanese economy (Japan starts with higher resource reserves) and not ships or planes and some of the econ advantage is lost because of the additional HI spent training pilots (30k HI + at the start of every month and cannot be altered). That is my impression having played a little bit of both scenarios and reading postings - I have not, however, gone through the daatbases to compare the differences. I have noticed in the past people confuse Iron Man with Scenario 2 - they are very different however.

Indeed.

Navally speaking, Japan gets a ton of additional destroyers (6 Fubuki III, 12 Shimakaze, 12 Akitsuki, I think) and probably a lot of smaller stuff, E´s, SC´s and so on; also, Shinano is a Taiho class rather than a BB conversion in this scenario, meaning she costs less to build.

[Knyvet]

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Oh yes they do. In scenario 2, JJ actually outstrips US carrier production in 1942. The USN gets a couple of 19 Kt CVE's in late 42 but that is it.

Have not checked the US side yet, but below are the IJN carriers - there is absolutly no difference between the databases for scen 1 and scen 2 when the carriers become available or how many are avilable to the IJN. Your recollection may be influenced if you play with variable arrival times. I also need to check the US side, maybe their carriers delays are different between the scens.

[USS Henrico]

ORIGINAL: Knyvet

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Oh yes they do. In scenario 2, JJ actually outstrips US carrier production in 1942. The USN gets a couple of 19 Kt CVE's in late 42 but that is it.

Have not checked the US side yet, but below are the IJN carriers - there is absolutly no difference between the databases for scen 1 and scen 2 when the carriers become available or how many are avilable to the IJN. Your recollection may be influenced if you play with variable arrival times. I also need to check the US side, maybe their carriers delays are different between the scens.

I play the Allies, but my understanding is that the Japanese ability to accelerate those carriers is considerably enhanced in scenario 2. Which would account for the earlier arrival dates.