Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions

[Titanwarrior89]

Why do that -it still seems their padding the japanese side...if your going to do that then you might as well decrease the US sub dud rate.....if your going to do something ahistorical with a site. This game could very well end up being totally ahistorical. You should be given at least the historical assets....no matter who it effects. The campaign game last too long in real time to do otherwise.[:-]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

One solution is to play a DaBigBabes game, as BigBabes disabled supply generation by refineries.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

Playing a historical game only works against the AI or with another player who will only play down historical lines. CR has always shown his ointerest in doing something a bit different, picket ships, invading the Kuriles or Iwo Jima etc.

I am a historical player, what can I say? I wasn't anticipating a fantasy game.

To be fair, I should have investigated his style of play before committing to the game. I didn't and I learned from it. I did enjoy the game right until the last turn however it is not a style I will attempt again. It just isn't me.

That's why I am thoroughly enjoying my game with Bradfordkay. We are in Nov 43. Both he and I look at the game and apply real world historical logic to it and we limit ourselves to what not only what was historically possible tactically but we also apply a human factor to the game. That is to say, we play as though those 1's and 0's actually represent flesh and blood. In a nutshell, that means no actions that would have been political suicide or unpalatable. So no bloody merchant ships sitting off enemy shores as pickets.

Chez

Chez,

That's the only way to play, IMO. Good on you for keeping true to yourself.

[denisonh]

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

quote:

Playing a historical game only works against the AI or with another player who will only play down historical lines. CR has always shown his ointerest in doing something a bit different, picket ships, invading the Kuriles or Iwo Jima etc.

I am a historical player, what can I say? I wasn't anticipating a fantasy game.

To be fair, I should have investigated his style of play before committing to the game. I didn't and I learned from it. I did enjoy the game right until the last turn however it is not a style I will attempt again. It just isn't me.

That's why I am thoroughly enjoying my game with Bradfordkay. We are in Nov 43. Both he and I look at the game and apply real world historical logic to it and we limit ourselves to what not only what was historically possible tactically but we also apply a human factor to the game. That is to say, we play as though those 1's and 0's actually represent flesh and blood. In a nutshell, that means no actions that would have been political suicide or unpalatable. So no bloody merchant ships sitting off enemy shores as pickets.

Chez




Chez,

That's the only way to play, IMO. Good on you for keeping true to yourself.

+1

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: denisonh

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

quote:

Playing a historical game only works against the AI or with another player who will only play down historical lines. CR has always shown his ointerest in doing something a bit different, picket ships, invading the Kuriles or Iwo Jima etc.

I am a historical player, what can I say? I wasn't anticipating a fantasy game.

To be fair, I should have investigated his style of play before committing to the game. I didn't and I learned from it. I did enjoy the game right until the last turn however it is not a style I will attempt again. It just isn't me.

That's why I am thoroughly enjoying my game with Bradfordkay. We are in Nov 43. Both he and I look at the game and apply real world historical logic to it and we limit ourselves to what not only what was historically possible tactically but we also apply a human factor to the game. That is to say, we play as though those 1's and 0's actually represent flesh and blood. In a nutshell, that means no actions that would have been political suicide or unpalatable. So no bloody merchant ships sitting off enemy shores as pickets.

Chez




Chez,

That's the only way to play, IMO. Good on you for keeping true to yourself.

+1

+1 More. "Gamers" (those folks who say "If the rules don't say I can't") should really make themselves plain up front..., so "Historians" (those folks who say "But that's impossible/rediculous in real life.") can avoid them.

[jetjockey]

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: denisonh

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

quote:

Playing a historical game only works against the AI or with another player who will only play down historical lines. CR has always shown his ointerest in doing something a bit different, picket ships, invading the Kuriles or Iwo Jima etc.

I am a historical player, what can I say? I wasn't anticipating a fantasy game.

To be fair, I should have investigated his style of play before committing to the game. I didn't and I learned from it. I did enjoy the game right until the last turn however it is not a style I will attempt again. It just isn't me.

That's why I am thoroughly enjoying my game with Bradfordkay. We are in Nov 43. Both he and I look at the game and apply real world historical logic to it and we limit ourselves to what not only what was historically possible tactically but we also apply a human factor to the game. That is to say, we play as though those 1's and 0's actually represent flesh and blood. In a nutshell, that means no actions that would have been political suicide or unpalatable. So no bloody merchant ships sitting off enemy shores as pickets.

Chez




Chez,

That's the only way to play, IMO. Good on you for keeping true to yourself.

+1

+1 More. "Gamers" (those folks who say "If the rules don't say I can't") should really make themselves plain up front..., so "Historians" (those folks who say "But that's impossible/rediculous in real life.") can avoid them.

+1

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89

Why do that -it still seems their padding the japanese side...if your going to do that then you might as well decrease the US sub dud rate.....if your going to do something ahistorical with a site. This game could very well end up being totally ahistorical. You should be given at least the historical assets....no matter who it effects. The campaign game last too long in real time to do otherwise.[:-]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

One solution is to play a DaBigBabes game, as BigBabes disabled supply generation by refineries.

Because you cannot eat oil or shoot oil from rifles. That's why...refineries should not create supply, that is for HI/LI.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89

Why do that -it still seems their padding the japanese side...if your going to do that then you might as well decrease the US sub dud rate.....if your going to do something ahistorical with a site. This game could very well end up being totally ahistorical. You should be given at least the historical assets....no matter who it effects. The campaign game last too long in real time to do otherwise.[:-]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

One solution is to play a DaBigBabes game, as BigBabes disabled supply generation by refineries.

Because you cannot eat oil or shoot oil from rifles. That's why...refineries should not create supply, that is for HI/LI.

Well you CAN eat oil...once. [:-] It won't sustain an army though.

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89

Why do that -it still seems their padding the japanese side...if your going to do that then you might as well decrease the US sub dud rate.....if your going to do something ahistorical with a site. This game could very well end up being totally ahistorical. You should be given at least the historical assets....no matter who it effects. The campaign game last too long in real time to do otherwise.[:-]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

One solution is to play a DaBigBabes game, as BigBabes disabled supply generation by refineries.

Because you cannot eat oil or shoot oil from rifles. That's why...refineries should not create supply, that is for HI/LI.

Would be correct except for fact that devs made the abstraction that aircraft consume only "supplies" not "avgas" when flying. In game the only place which produces "avgas" is a refinery hence why logically, to be consistent with this abstraction, refineries produce some "supplies".

Consistent with this abstraction is the situation that the Japanese Home Islands have a huge surfeit of excess refineries, compared to local sources of oil feedstock, whose "supply" generation represents "avgas". Given the game design, it really is stretching the idea that all those Japanese planes flying could be supported with no "avgas"; that all those refineries did not need any oil to be imported in order to be converted into "avgas".

Once one starts fiddling with any particular subset of the game design, there are always unintended consequences elsewhere and logical inconsistencies are brought out. Whenever one engages in abstractions, one is caught in subjective decision making.

Alfred

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Alfred
Would be correct except for fact that devs made the abstraction that aircraft consume only "supplies" not "avgas" when flying. In game the only place which produces "avgas" is a refinery hence why logically, to be consistent with this abstraction, refineries produce some "supplies".

Consistent with this abstraction is the situation that the Japanese Home Islands have a huge surfeit of excess refineries, compared to local sources of oil feedstock, whose "supply" generation represents "avgas". Given the game design, it really is stretching the idea that all those Japanese planes flying could be supported with no "avgas"; that all those refineries did not need any oil to be imported in order to be converted into "avgas".

Once one starts fiddling with any particular subset of the game design, there are always unintended consequences elsewhere and logical inconsistencies are brought out. Whenever one engages in abstractions, one is caught in subjective decision making.

Alfred

+1

[Canoerebel]

I don't recall things starting out that way in the game between Chez and I.

First, I made it clear in the Opponent's Wanted advertisement that I was looking for an experienced IJ player who was capable of pursuing auto victory (though I wasn't asking that he actually do so). Second, it was a Scenario Two with all its goodies. Third, we would be following the game in which I had just been pushed to the brink of defeat by Q-Ball. So, I knew that Chez would have access to the collective wisdom of the Forums and assumed that some pretty smart folks might be helping him take the game one step further. I was very, very concerned that I might be on the losing end of an auto victory.

Chez started out with grand ideas of invading Oz, something which wasn't possible on a large scale in WWII. Had things not gone sour, we'd have been fighting a non-historic war in favor of Japan in the middle of Australia. Instead, we ended up fighting a very strange war in Sumatra. Both sides had it within their power to address that situation and win the campaign, so it wasn't some kind of unfair play on the part of the Allies.

[Yaab]

ORIGINAL: treespider

Yes the balance will be altered because a Palembang producing 600-1000 points of supply per day in 1944 is much different than a Palembang producing 0 in 1944. The Japanese will have a large supply source 100 hexes closer to the front that will not require as much shipping to move. As a Japanese player I would rather ship supplies 10 hexes from Palembang rather than 100 hexes from Osaka.

So, is the Fortress Palembang in reverse a viable Japanese tactic in the late war? Do you bypass it as Allies, take it or maybe level it with heavy bombers?

[CyrusSpitama]

With the Allies, I think the issue is more that they don't NEED Palembang for anything others than VPs. Japan NEEDS this location to maintain the engine of their empire. If Japan did this tactic, I would think the Allies would just hold water borne parades in the area nearby and just bypass it.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: jetjockey

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: denisonh


+1

+1 More. "Gamers" (those folks who say "If the rules don't say I can't") should really make themselves plain up front..., so "Historians" (those folks who say "But that's impossible/rediculous in real life.") can avoid them.

+1

Don´t get me wrong, I am a historical wargamer as well, and in general I refrain from undertakings that can be considered excessively ahistorical or unrealistic.

But I really feel the need to jump in for Canoerebel here. He is a very experienced player with many games udner his belt. He has a talent to identify certain key
aspects in his campaigning and works towards them, and he faught the cream of players doing the same. Hell, as he said, he was pushed back far into India
in the same scenario (under a different patch admittedly).

That Canoe is using tactics and strategies he knows from his past experience, also taking into account that he never seemed overly interested to replay WWII 1:1, makes
it obvious what style he would pursue as an opponent. As he stated himself, he wanted an opponent to pull every trick to achieve auto victory. What this implies
is pretty obvious and does not require ANY further hint that he was never planning to play a historical campaign.

So, anybody who thinks that "Gamers" should advertize their intentions upfront is surely not talking about Canoerebel. He did exactly that. Advertizing his playing style upfront.

That I, as a historical player, should attempt to clearify my playing style with my opponent to avoid compatibility issues is one of the basic agreements
required for a successful PBEM. Blaming someone else that your expectation did not match the reality because you did not ask is something I refuse to understand.

[jrcar]

Palembang is more than "just" an oil refinery and a swamp.

It was once the capital of an ancient civilisation and as a city has been in existance since the mid 6th centuary AD. The centre of an empire that was made rich on trade well before Singapore. Today it is still the second largest city in Sumatra one of the largest cities in Indonesia.

So IMHO it should be a source of supply (food etc) and had a small manufacturing base so may have been capable of small arms ammunition manufacture and repair... if the conditions were right.

I won't get into the whole debate about supply from refineries, I think aircraft fuel is a critical item that shoud be tracked... however quickly it becomes a logistics simulation that many would not find interesting...

Palembang was used as a Brit airfield and it was a military option to defend.

I am in the "all bets are off camp" post first strike 7 Dec, I'm interested in exploring options that weren't "historic" (want history, read a book), however I am also interested in trying to put most of the constraints in place that the real commanders had, except the political ones. That then gives you an insight into how much the society and politics of the day altered potentially optimum military options... A good lesson for military strategists of today to remember as it is the society and political situation that significantly shapes military action.

Cheers

Rob

[Sardaukar]

One thing is also that Japanese player needs to recognize critical places he has to get and prevent Allies to concentrate defensive power to key points.

Even historically, if Allies had been bit better prepared and co-ordinated, Malaya, Suva and Sumatra might have proved tough nut to crack.

Basically, Japanese player needs to crush those places quickly. If it takes more forces than historically, so be it, since both have historical hindsight. If it takes to bring KB to play, so be it. If it's worth attacking with division, it is worth attacking with 2-3 divisions. Militarily, massed superior capability usually gives least own casualties and maximizes enemy casualties.

Like Shattered Swords well says about Operation MO (against Port Moresby), IJN should have realized that either location is worth attacking with full Kido Butai or none at all. Penny packets just give then weaker opponent chance to deal nasty surprises by achieving local parity or even superiority.

This is good advice to IJ player, I think.

[Dili]

One solution was to have 2 supplies: "supply" and "military supply" or maybe better lets call the later "tech supply". The first came from all small industries and includes food, water maybe a little of military etc the other is from aircraft, weapons, afv, and big factories. Doesn't make sense that Palembang and Balikpapan can supply big list of stuff that could only be made in Japan.
That means also that an unit should consume supply, tech supply and also fuel(more vehicles/travel more fuel)
Of course there would be the need to transport both supplies so it was an added complexity but i think it is not too much compared to benefits.
Simplifying the pilot management and making ships dock automatically and fully automatic convoys defined by user could compensate for it.

[Sredni]

I've seen this mentioned as a counter to fortress palembang in other discussions but didn't see it in the OP or in the thread proper:

LRCAP palembang to prevent the allies from flying in squads using all the dutch flying boats and transports.

[Dan Nichols]

ORIGINAL: Sredni

I've seen this mentioned as a counter to fortress palembang in other discussions but didn't see it in the OP or in the thread proper:

LRCAP palembang to prevent the allies from flying in squads using all the dutch flying boats and transports.

To be honest, the Dutch forces that can be gathered in that manner are not decisive. You can not move any of their heavy equipment without changing their HQ and using ships. The largest forces are the Burma Brigades that start the game loaded on transports and the British 18th Division that is also loaded at scenario start. If the Allied player really wants to make a large FP, then one or both of the Indian Divisions starting in Malaysia can be moved with no PP cost.

[Sredni]

ORIGINAL: Dan Nichols

ORIGINAL: Sredni

I've seen this mentioned as a counter to fortress palembang in other discussions but didn't see it in the OP or in the thread proper:

LRCAP palembang to prevent the allies from flying in squads using all the dutch flying boats and transports.

To be honest, the Dutch forces that can be gathered in that manner are not decisive. You can not move any of their heavy equipment without changing their HQ and using ships. The largest forces are the Burma Brigades that start the game loaded on transports and the British 18th Division that is also loaded at scenario start. If the Allied player really wants to make a large FP, then one or both of the Indian Divisions starting in Malaysia can be moved with no PP cost.

Every little bit helps (hurts), and with proper netty coverage shipping troops to fortress palembang is a no go (torpedoing every ship that gets close to sumatra seems like a perfect solution to F.P. to me), leaving air transport. LRCAP of palembang is the proper counter to this tactic from what I understand.

*shrug* Just tossing it out for consideration.

[Chernobyl]

is it not possible to land at Palembang on turn 1?