The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

[Knucles2]

I suppose I can do more work on the 'first turn clickfest' for my game,just to kill some time. Just finished the sub clicks in the PI. Still have to scatter the rest of the ships. Then there's the AF to deal with. And the army. Then I can do more of the same in the US. Pilot training...Shifting army and marines where i need them.. Then there's the DEI...And Oz...Burma..

I better stop before
I talk myself out of playing again...[:D]

[Chickenboy]

Dan,

What sort of airpower do you have on hand for LRCAP work at Townsville, Charter Towers and surrounds? You've not reviewed your LBA OOB with us in this region.

[Canoerebel]

Whatever Nemo said sounds complimentary, but that's a level of thought above mine. I'm just innocently playin' the game....

[Canoerebel]

Right now, Townsville, Charters, and Cairns support roughly 200 fighters - mostly Spitfire, P-40E, Kittyhawk, and P-39. I think John will be very, very leery of taking on LBA. He did so at Perth roughly eight months ago and the KB got clobbered.

There is also a host of 1EB, 2EB and 4EB spread from Rockhampton to Cooktown.

[Cribtop]

Nemo, I see, I misunderstood what you were saying.

I believe I understand what you mean by positive and negative space actions, but could you define those terms so I'm sure?

[pws1225]

Going OT to Nemo121 - care to educate me on positive and negative space, or point to a resource where I can dig for myself?

[Canoerebel]

I have zero idea what positive and negative space actions are.

P.S. That comes as no surprise to those who witnessed the "jsigint" debacle several months ago.....

[Knucles2]

I hope we're now waiting for those candy junkies in Strawberry 12 for a first contact report...

[pws1225]

I thought CR's number sequences were metaphysical, and now I have positive and negative space to deal with. This game makes my brain hurt.

[Cribtop]

I am familiar with the terms in the artistic and architectural worlds, and that gives me some idea in the military realm, but want to confirm my understanding as Nemo's thinking is useful and has upped my game significantly.

[Canoerebel]

I should mention that, in sending the next turn, I employed a bit of a stutter step. The Allies armada will continue only two hexes north, remaining just two hexes from Townsville and its bevy of LRCAP. When I received this email from John a few minutes ago, I was glad I had made that decision: "It [the turn] will be MONSTROUS---or NOT—don’t know...I know NOTHING---NOTHING..."

[Canoerebel]

Then John closed another email with this comment: "Your Tricksy Opponent." That makes me nervous. I'm not concerned about my invasion armada snug up to Townsville...but I am wondering if he isn't pulling a move elsewhere that might discomfit me. An invasion of New Zealand? Of Ceylon? A strike on Pearl Harbor? I won't rest easy until I get the turn back, and that doesn't seem likely before late tonight per John's email. So you guys may know what's going on and what's happening long before I do.

[AcePylut]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Acepylut,
Simple answer.... Logistics and prep. Dan has prepped this enough that even such a delay won't stop his landings succeeding. The only danger now is terrible luck scuppering even hs superior plans. I not think that'll happen though and t worst we'll have a tactical draw which is also a US win.

I thought about that – reviewed things from all three levels of strategy (Tactical, Operational, Strategic)…

Strategically (Grand Strategy Level), Dan has achieved a surprise. All moves recently have focused on “what CanofRebel” is doing in the Coral Sea. The initiative has officially, firmly, and unequivocally turned in favor of the Allies in this game.

Operationally, Dan has achieved great surprise. This Operational Surprise accounts for all the troop prep and logistics necessary to successfully invade and repel counterattacks. Excellent Job Can Of Rebellion. Dan is prepped and has the guns and butter to make it work. Jon seems to be scrambling to throw up a defense of likely targets.

Tactically, there is no surprise. Jon’s moves, as noted in this AAR by Dan, and those email comments, make it obvious that a large battle is about to commence.

For Jon to “win” this battle on all three layers, Jon needs to take advantage of the only place he has parity – and right now, that’s the Tactical Level. The only way he wins on the Tactical is to defeat the invasion – either on land, in the sea, or in Dan’s head.

If Jon kills the invaders on land in a tactical battle, it instantly becomes an operational level victory for Jon. Kill the invaders in the ships, same thing. Make Dan willingly turn the invasion around, the operation fails, Jon wins on the Operational Level. Any Operational Level victory by Jon pushes out the Strategic initiative Dan has by at least 2 months (2 months to re-prep and re-position forces minimum) unless winning that Operational Level cost Jon the KB, in which of couse Jon will have won Operationally (invasion failed) but lose strategically (lost his KB).


So how does Jon win on the Tactical level when disadvantaged on the Operational? Of the many ways it can be done (sink the troops, the ships, lucky die rolls, a sub placed in just the right place, etc.), one way that Jon move towards parity on the Operational Level is to delay the invasion. Every day that he gets before the troops land, Dan’s advantage in Operational Level surprise decreases… Jon’s troops gain prep -albeit not much prep (3-7 points total over 3-7 days?) – but what if that extra prep is enough to slide his unit to a level that reduces the AV drop from too little prep? What if, in those 3-7 days, Jon airlifts enough troops into to take that 2-1 to a 1-1 and stall the invasion (how many troops, raw AV, HQ, etc. can you bring into a base in 3-7 days? Is that enough to turn the tide). What if in those 3-7 days, his fort levels increase 1 and that does the trick? Will Dan be able to sustain these invasions for 2 weeks, 1 month, etc. if the battles turn into a stalemate on bases controlled by the IJ?


Imho, if Dan has already decided to invade, I don’t see any gain to be had by delaying another week. The hope of delaying at this point in time, is to hope that he guessed right on Jon’s proclivity to “see big bait, go after big bait no matter what” tendency. It’s a good gamble for sure given Jon’s play, but yet, it’s still a gamble. If Jon, against all his wishes and desires, doesn’t take the bait, then after those 3-7 days, Dan has gained nothing but lost something on the Operational Level. I bet the invasion will either be cancelled, or a heck of a lot bloodier, if delayed.

If the decision to invade is a “wait and see”, I’ll bet money that by the end of that waiting period, if Jon doesn’t “fly forward with the KB”, Dan decides against following through with the invasion, and Jon will have won a Strategic Victory after losing the Operational Victory, simply by “waving a bunch of Solid Red” on the Tactical Level .

SO that’s how I view it. The entire point of waiting is to hope that Jon can’t help but take the bait and move forward into what he HAS to know is a bad deal for him. Taking the bait would require Jon to completely dismiss the LBA threat posed by Oz, he would have to dismiss the great distance his CV’s are from a safe port (vs Allies being like 2 hexes), he would have to not care about being outnumbered in the air, etc. and he would have to dismiss everything in his mind that tells him ‘bad idea’. Is Jon really that stupid to charge into such a meat grinder? Ok…maybe not stupid, but do *you* think his overly aggressive play style overrules everything that the he knows he shouldn’t do at this point?

Delaying at this point - if the invasion is a go - only makes invading that much more difficult. Its entire hope is based on Jon being predictably aggressive. I have to believe that Jon knows better --- but I wonder if that matters.



So that's really the question for Dan to answer: Will Jon control his emotion to go smash everything in sight - or not?




Good luck and have fun. Sorry for the long winded post.

[Nemo121]

Positive and Negative Space - these are primarily artistic concepts but they deal with the concept of "shaping the battlefield" and maskirovka etc in the various different philosophical approaches to conceptualising doctrine etc.


Artistically positive space is that space in an image which is coloured in or the subject of the image. So in a painting of a vase the positive space is, traditionally, that space which is coloured and represents the vase. Negative space is that space around the vase.

Often if you then reverse the colours so that the space around the vase is coloured in ( colouring in the negative space ) you can:
a) see the outline of the vase represented by the contrast and
b) sometimes make out images which were hidden when only the positive space was used.

Rubin's vase is an example of this. Link: Rubin's Vase

When you use the negative space you see two things clearly ( a vase and two faces ). THEN when you go back and look at the positive space-painted image you see what you didn't see before.


So, positive space use is about using the obvious space/game actions/communication etc to paint an image. The negative space use is about using the absence of positive space action/comms etc to paint an image. It may be the same as the positive space image, it may be different, it may include it or exclude it. Most deception plans here are about hiding things while a true maskirovka is about hiding certain things, showing others and disguising others.

Dan has shown John what John yearns for - fitting the plan to the id and the person's capacity for self-delusion ( both of which are significant in John and which I used against him when he and I PBEMed). John has, I'm sure, seen many actions in the positive space and, I'm sure, has also seen many actions or lacks of action in the negative space. He has, I'm sure, formed an image. What he hasn't asked himself is whether or not that image hides another image which might also be true.... or even worse, might be MORE true than the image he is seeing?

An example of this recently occurred in my own AAR where the positive spaces of Darwin, NorPac and Burma were used to disguise developments in the negative space of CENPAC successfully enough that 50,000+ US troops, dozens of transports, squadrons etc made it into Japanese-held territory and developed several bases over the course of a month without ever being spotted. Obviously positive and negative space don't have to be geographical but that's an example.

P.s. I agree CR may not label these things as I and others might and may not have the theoretical underpinning quite worked out BUT his thinking has clearly developed over time and he is definitely NOT as ignorant of deeper strategic thought and theory as he makes himself out to be in his postings.

This dipping of toes into the meta-layer is what I find interesting and to be singling out.

[Canoerebel]

[pws1225]

Thank you Sir. You have a gift for making the abstract accessible.

Regards, Paul

[Nemo121]

It’s a good gamble for sure given Jon’s play, but yet, it’s still a gamble.

I'll give you a tip. If you're ever sizing someone up figure out if they go in for self-reflection. If they don't then it is HIGHLY unlikely that they have the capacity to act against their own baser urges and instincts. John isn't given to deep thought ( and that's not a put-down, just reality, some are prone to deep thought, some are more superficial thinkers ) from what I've seen ( and from what I assessed when playing him ) and he definitely isn't naturally given to introspection and self-reflection.

There's a myth that crowds are predictable and people aren't but, to be honest, if you have reacters who don't have much capacity/practice with self-reflection you find they are quite predictable.

The initiative has officially, firmly, and unequivocally turned in favor of the Allies in this game.

I'm not so sure. I think we are still in the realm of - don't interrupt John while he uses the initiative to make a colossal blunder. But I agree we're either at or just past the tipping point alright.

As to your point re: the adding up of small changes to the point where they have a major impact. Good points but I would suggest that Dan has gone with super-awesome-massive-atomic-overkill force correlations for his targets such that only the adding up of major changes would change the outcome at this point. That's just based on my reading of the negative space of CR's comments from around the time I last posted --- I stopped posting before the countdown because I didn't want to breach OPSEC as I had concerns about readers breaching it and because I didn't see any point in being a tool of Dan's maskirovka when others were handily filling that role.

Is Jon really that stupid to charge into such a meat grinder?

Not stupid but insightless into himself sufficiently to charge into a meat grinder? Absolutely. You should read my AAR of a civil war game vs him ( someone posted a link to it last time, I've honestly forgotten where it is but its on the matrix forums. It was of the Battleground Gettysburg game ) since that is precisely what I lured him into doing. He lost the battle of Gettysburg in a single turn of the game because I lured him into a meat grinder made of his own hubris by using the positive space to show him what he wanted while the negative space showed my forces in full defilade massing for counter-attacks and ambushes.

Ok…maybe not stupid, but do *you* think his overly aggressive play style overrules everything that the he knows he shouldn’t do at this point?

Yes, absolutely. I used this flaw to crush him in my game against him when I identified it as part of his personality make-up and I believe Dan is planning to use the same flaw in this game. I also believe that so long as no-one breaches OPSEC by asking "innocent" questions in John's AAR about risks unconsidered etc ( or sends PMs to him which are highly questionable given their private natures ) that we will see him doing the same here. If people breach OPSEC then all bets are off obviously.


pws,
My pleasure. I'm sorry but I think it is still a little abstruse but I'm under time pressure and had to rush the explanation. I'll try again tomorrow if people have difficulty grasping it. It wasn't as clear as I would like it to be.

[Cribtop]

Great description, Nemo.

[Nemo121]

CR,

So he's still commenting on the turns despite being asked not to.

"Your Tricksy Opponent."

Self-soothing, wish fulfillment. Nothing more. He's tense and uncertain of himself and is projecting outwards the confidence and self-image he cannot convince himself to feel internally since much of his personal self-esteem comes from the esteem in which others hold him. If he can convince you he's tricksy then he can believe it and he can relax --- hence it is a self-soothing behaviour designed to elicit a soothing reaction from you. He is practically begging you to agree he's tricksy so he can dissipate the tension he feels. Most people would deny it or shoot back something about themselves being tricksy also. But with a man like John telling him what he wants will get him to accept whatever accompanies that message --- and that can be used to guide him into doing what you want.

This next bit is a bit tricky and nasty but I'll say it on the basis that if he is using emails to taunt etc after you've asked him to stop then using emails as part of the meta-game is fair-game. I wouldn't, for example, do this in a game vs Damian since we keep most of the meta-play to the joking and making such outrageous claims that we both know they can't possibly be true realm and he's a friend.

Right now you want to bolster the odds of him making the move you wish --- a reckless attack on your forces in a position in which, as much as possible, the odds are stacked in your favour. What he wants from you ( as a narcissist ) is for you to recognise AND admit to him that he is tricksy. If you do this then his fear will be assuaged and he will be likely to forge ahead - which is what you want. You could also add in a little neurolinguistic programming at the subliminal level to reinforce his perception of the esteem in which he's held by substituting forum-inclusive words instead of referring only to yourself in your reaction. This will cause him to feel that MANY feel he is tricksy and a good player and assuage his fears even more. The message itself is best kept simple....

"Yes, we all know you're tricksy alright. You've caught me out before and I'm very worried you'll catch me out again. I keep looking at the map wondering just what you're up to and what I've missed."

"we all know" --- many people in the forum admire your trickery, cleverness etc.

You've caught me before --- he so wants this to be true and it puts you in a one down inferior position in his mind. He will love this and it will feed into his belief that god owes him a victory in the game. We've all seen that when things go well its cause he's brilliant and when they go poorly the game code is to blame.

"I'm very worried you'll catch me out again." ---- Again adopting a one-down position and admitting to worry. The use of the word VERY invites him to compare it to his own worries and conclude that he isn't VERY worried thus you are more worried than him and inferior and to be attacked. His worries will drive him to attack you as an external expression of attacking them.

"I keep looking at the map wondering just what you're up to and what i've missed." --- He must be anxious, he must be doing this. Rather than ignoring it name it and invite it into YOUR narrative. He likes YOUR narrative ( that you're piss-scared ) more than he likes his own ( that he's piss-scared and thinking he's F'ed something up somewhere ) and so by naming it yuo invite him to adopt your narrative since he prefers it to his. He won't rationally deconstruct it or examine it, he will go with the palatable myth he prefers in preference to the reality he doesn't.


Obviously it is your choice whether or not to pull that trigger but if you write that back to him ( modified to sound as though it is written by you ) then he WILL bite --- assuming no-one breaches OPSEC ( I imagine they would though ) --- so long as you don't lose your nerve first and move out of position.

[GreyJoy]

My english is too poor to comment what Nemo has said... i think i got the meaning however...and i cannot but agree.

For the rest.... i have nothing to say about the strategic situation....