The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
4. Sabang and its host of shipping won't have any air cover for a turn or two. Worth the risk?

Is this really necessary? Couldn't you LRCAP with at least one CVE fighter group? Even if only a couple of fighters show up, it will be helpful in disrupting enemy air attacks on Sabang.

[JohnDillworth]

The carriers will rendezvous with the slow BB TFs.

Why? to protect them? They can't have much ammo left, send them to reload.

quick comment of searches. I know you want to get sea search up as quick as possible, if you have not already done so your might want to devote a couple of PBY's to seeing what he has where. you have a few days so lets take some pictures of the Malaysian OOB. I bet you have already done some of this

[Canoerebel]

Both good points and good questions.

1. I initially had the slow BBs retiring to Colombo to replenish, but changed the orders as they can help absorb attacks targeting the main Allied carrier TFs, which are nosing down toward Sibolga. I'll reevaluate this. This one is a tough call.

2. With Long Island damaged and likely to explode at any moment, I switched her F4F squadron to Copahee, which will cover the landings at Langsa. That's the only direct cover I'll have at Langsa - rougly 28 fighters - with possible bleedover CAP from the main carriers.

3. In the interest of speed, the main flattop TFs move to cover the pending landings at Sibolga (and possibly Padang). I need them there about two turns.

4. That leaves nothing (except empty Long Island) at Sabang.

5. John stood down all strike aircraft yesterday, possibly because he wants to organize things better instead of bleeding copious amounts of aircraft (109 downed on D-Day). He could attack tomorrow, of course, but he may not. This is one of those - do I play it safe and tight or is speed paramount now. With the KB hightailing it this way, I think speed is the preeminent item. At Sabang will be a host of transports, support ships, and a couple of fast BBs. They will have to take a one-day chance. Day after tomorrow, I should be able to fly fighters from Sabang's airfield.

[JohnDillworth]

They will have to take a one-day chance. Day after tomorrow, I should be able to fly fighters from Sabang's airfield.

Can't you leave a CVE? something to fly CAP? Can the Long Island handle planes? You need something to break up a possible attack on your bridgehead. Maybe he can't can't send hundreds of planes, but he can send dozens. and his planes can sink ships.

[Canoerebel]

Okay, gents. I'm giving further thought to:

1. Sending the slow BBs back to Colombo to rearm. BB Valiant will arrive at Sabang in a few days. AE and AKE will disband at Sabang tonight. With 100 Nav Support and a level one port, I might be able to rearm up to 8" guns, meaning everything but the BBs.

2. Transfering a Buffalo squadron or two to cover the ships at Sabang.

3. Sabang airfield has 72 damage. One more day and it should be able to host fighters, unless John bombs heavily.

4. John has a multitude of needs for his airforce right now - hit ships, hit Sabang airfield, hit ground troops that will move out of Sabang, airlift supplies and troops. He's stretched and just lost his best nearby airfield (Sabang). He didn't use torps yesterday, so he's probably scrambling to get an Air HQ in place - Georgetown is a good candidate.

There is immense pressure in dealing with the competing needs of speed and safety. Do I go for maximum disruption or a much less ambitious, but very strong and tight perimeter? Nemo would argue for the former; others for the latter. I'm somewhere in the middle, trying to push the envelope until John stops me. I'm gonna take some losses when John gets his act together - that's almost inevitable.

I'm looking at it this way? Is taking a chance in order to take Langsa and Sibolga worth it? Yes, yes, yes! These are two critical bases for many reasons, but part being once they are taken, the Allies will have the core triangle of bases in place, increasing safety (patrols) significantly, and then can begin to draw together in two places - at Sabang, the chief base, and wherever the next strike occurs (probably near Phuket).

I have maybe five more days to work with. Speed is paramount. If John whacks me good tomorrow, the issue is probably decided and I then concentrate fully on Sibolga, Medan and Langsa, to make them as strong as possible before the KB shows up.

[AcePylut]

IF memory serves, CanoRebel took the DEI route north of Darwin against another guy, and I"m sure knows how bloody it can and will be to advance in this direction.

I view this as a complete surprise on all three levels (Strategic, Operational, Tactical). Moving forward: Strategic Surprise is gone - as the plans have been revealed and if Dan is getting DL's on a majority of tf's I would imagine his opponent realizes the New Guinea feint is a diversion. If Jon still thinks this is a diversion then surprise still remains - but i can't imagine how Jon would view New Guinea as more strategically important than the DEI.

Operationally - Major Surprise. And it still continues. I expect Dan to have Operational Surprise for at least 7-14 days. That's about when I expect the IJ reinforcements to arrive - and that's when the bloodbath war of attrition begins. There exists a great need during this phase, to grab everything you can. Grab the stuff you can't defend if you can do it on the cheap. At the very least, the stuff you can't defend (and don't plan on defending) forces the IJ to divert forces from your "real" defensive line, gives time to build up bases and a logistics structure to survive if the IJN shuts down or greatly diminishes ship-borne resupply. Let him throw himself against bases you don't care about while you establish your lodgement in Sumatra and re-org for expanding the gains.

Tactical - Surprise is over, but it was Major Tactical surprise. (To me, tactical surprise is a day to day thing - I jumped 40 undefended betties over Base XXX woot surprise.... he raided Seattle with his carriers and caught me with my pants down oh drat) Dan had what - 2-3 betty groups attack his ships over a couple days? Da Dude's got nothing in the area right now. Complete surprise!

Bravo on all three levels again!


Meantime, I wonder what is being done on the other 2/3'rds of the map. It's a long haul for the US to move it's navy around to the Pacific - either through off map or around Oz. Lots of potential for Jon to use his navy for whatever purpose it may be (and imho, the Pacific is now a side show. What does he gain by taking a few more god-forsaken specs of dirt?) ---- no need to answer, just waxing rhetoric here. In Nemo terms - lots of negative space here. An empty canvas. What picture do you want to paint on all this canvas to scare Jon away from doing something you don't want him to do?

[Canoerebel]

Alot of good points. Alot of smart folks probing the perameters and tough questions. It's hard! Hard! Fun! Fun!

I don't know if its a coincidence or not, but John has pulled back some of his troops in Burma. Is this just a minor move or is he preparing to transports divisions to Malaya and Burma. I'm watching and will try to work the Burma angle.

As for New Guinea, I stake everything I own on John knowing New Guinea was a ruse. He knows that Sumatra and vicinity is the real show. The Pacific is at least temporarily a sideshow, though I am trying to attend to things that will help me move forward later, when the time comes.

Sumatra will be the main battle for months to come (like Assam has been for the past four or five months). I have no doubt of this. I will push hard for a few more days to establish a perimeter for the very reasons Acepylut articulates. I expect, though to fight hard for Sibolga, Sabang and Langsa (and hopefully Medan). John has the means to win a sea battle and regain control of the lanes, but it's going to be a challenge for him to get troops to Sumatra in time, if I'm reading what he has where (far, far away) right.

I don't expect to be able to move further than Padang in Sumatra (even if I get that far). John is going to fill the southern half of the island with troops. So, into the medium term, I don't expect this to turn into Operation Palembang. What I do expect is another titanic Guadalancal (a/k/a Assam), with resulting opportunities to move elsewhere as a result of John's need to concentrate on this gaping, bleeding wound.

[paullus99]

John is a very one-dimensional defensive player. He calculates that if he can focus maximum force on a single avenue of Allied advance, he can crush that advance & withdraw for the next blow.

In this case, I do not believe that John can "mentally" be in two places at once (i.e. he's not going to split his main striking weapon - the KB) so any other operation that CR might have behind his back, can probably go ahead without much in the way of serious interference.

[Canoerebel]

I double checked 27th Div. The troops were indeed in Combat mode and the ships are indeed amphibious. But somehow the troops that came ashore are now in Strategic mode. They have zero disruption and fatigue, but are roughly 40% disabled! Weird little glitch that could have some major ramifications as one of my major gound units may be operating at only 50% or so effectiveness when finally in combat mode in three days. Augh!

[AcePylut]

"There is immense pressure in dealing with the competing needs of speed and safety. Do I go for maximum disruption or a much less ambitious, but very strong and tight perimeter? Nemo would argue for the former; others for the latter. I'm somewhere in the middle, trying to push the envelope until John stops me. I'm gonna take some losses when John gets his act together - that's almost inevitable. "

IMHO - just hinted on this - push forward as far and as fast as you can until the IJ starts to show up. I'm guessing you have 7-14 days before the navy arrives and the seas become dangerous to both sides.

I say - determine how big you want your "beachhead" to be. I say beachhead in the terms of "what do you want up and running and dangerous in 2 weeks? These have to be able to survive and thrive against anything without fleet support". At the same time, push forward as far and as fast as you can grabbing dots and whatnot, but don't fret if these get taken in the two weeks as these are just roadblocks/speedbumps.

Once you feel secure in your perimeter - you can basically go three ways - North, East, South. Decide on a vector and go nuke Tokyo.

I always have to hesitate when reading the "tactical" portion of Nemo's excellent psychological analysis. Not for the psyops but because we play two different styles of game. Quite frankly - Nemo is one of the very few people on here that understands and implements the old poker maxim of "don't play your hand, play the opponent". The psyops stuff is great - he has an incredibly way of "putting on paper and in proper terms" what I try to do - glean information from the meta-game (emails and AAR's and stuff) - the discourse on "negative/positive space" puts a phrase on something I've (and lots of others) always tried to do "create an illusory hammer here, to hide the real hammer over there", and just a good all around feel for the opponents mind. Our difference lies when it comes to game play, he plays the computer game and makes plans on what the engine allows. Having been an amateur historian my whole life, I have difficulties thinking outside of the historical capabilities of the units (PS Nemo - thank you for pointing that out - not by actually saying it - but from your discussions on knowing what the other guy will do. Sun Tze: Know yourself, know your enemy, 1000 battles 1000 victories. I analyzed my game play, and I don't really know myself as well as I need to.) Not that I don't know you can do things like 5 man para-drops from flying boats- but because I wouldn't feel right doing some things that can be done. I wouldn't think of grabbing a bunch of bases in the DEi with 20man para units, because para units "couldn't" do that in real life - a para drop required lots of prep and lots of base recon before they went in. It requires a little more prep than "hey I got an idea - take our 150mph search plane fly across 500 miles of enemy territory and land on this airbase we haven't reconned in 2 years and have no idea where to land - jus fly around and look for a clearing and, um, attack whatever roads and railroads or whatever is there. Got it? Now go young grasshopper".


Either way - just pointing out an alternative - and it all depends on the type of match you're playing. So far the match seems to be pretty "historical" in the sense that you're using your units in a manner consistent with the unit capabilities in 1942. Not sure if you want to push these limits as I would fear this match degenerating into an "Oscars sweep at 42k feet" match or some other silliness (silliness to me, as a historically based player - but perfectly acceptable if that's the type of game desired by the two fine opponents).

And oh yeah - push hard and fast and go beyond the beachhead as quickly as possible until the Japs start showing up in force. Then leave minor garrisons in the bases outside your beachhead while you consolidate and re-org your troops for the next push. Make preparations on what you can or can't do, should your sea lanes be severed or greatly disrupted. While I don't see this happening - you know Jon is aggressive and loves to smash - and right now, there's a whole lot of green that he sees could be smashed because the KB and all it's various forms is still intact. I expect a viscous, bloody battle with "all hands on deck". While it's great to be think about what you are going to do - expect the unexpected - at least consider what you'll do if the KB shows up and wipes out the US fleet CV's. What becomes of the Great Banda Aceh Green Earthquake then?

Enjoy! I am. And please ignore everything I said cuz I don't know squat 'bout me-self

[pws1225]

I can't help but think that a push across to Malaya is a priority for you right now. It offers the possibility of cutting off all of the army in Burma, cutting the rail connection between Singers and Rangoon, and opening a land campaign that potentially threatens Rangoon, Bangkok and the rest of southeast Asia. If you don't move now, John will have time to reinforce what now must be very weak positions.

[Canoerebel]

That would be an easy call if I had two more divisions. But the dynamic is that I risk fatally weakening my position in Sumatra by taking a troubling but unsustainable position in Malaya. I have to work that dynamic carefully. I want to vex John totally and apply maximum disruption and consternation, but not at the cost of losing Sumatra. I do have troops to work with, but not the kind that would make a serious long-term cut across Malaya. Unless, that is, the KB lingers long enough (or gets defeated in battle) to permit the Indians to arrive in force.

Everybody reading this is smart. If I had landed in force only at Sabang, folks would be urging me to push to Medan and Sibolga and the offshore island. If I push that far, they'd naturally look further ahead and inquire about Padang and Malaya. Had I brought ten divisions to threaten those places, some folks would look further ahead and see opportunities at Benkolen, Oosthaven and Kuala Lumpur. While I'm looking ahead too, I also have to balance threats and needs. And, to top it off, there are seven zillion details that I'm privy to that others aren't (even this AAR isn't exhaustive).

There are imminsely competing interests here as posts today show - play carefully and cover the ships; be bold and move forward while the moving is good; attend to Sumatra first and then move to Malaya; give Malaya highest priority. At the moment, my efforts are leaning towards the aggressive end of the scale, but as soon as problems crop up that might pose a threat to the core position, I'll switch to a less aggressive posture. It may be John that determines which way I go.

[crsutton]

Well Canoe, the choice is yours. Even playing conservative will probably spell doom for John. If he does not throw you out of Sumatra then I see nothing bright in the fortunes of Japan. But it will be touch and go. Given the weakness of the Allied air force, I think a top Japanese player can throw the Allies out of Sumatra at this stage of the war, but it will take excellent play on his behalf with most all the force he has. Personally, I think I would be a bit cautious and force him to find a solution rather than try to run the table on him. But, there is the fun factor of just going hell for balls too....Phunket is a nice place to hold. He really is reaching a point where it is difficult to pull off many counter invasions.

I just think that I would rather be in your shoes..[;)]

[Canoerebel]

The orders have been entered. The slow BBs are retiring to Colombo (a nod to John Dillworth) and two Buffalo squadrons are aboard Long Island (a nod to Chicken Boy). Tomorrow is a critical day. If it's messy, that will tell me alot. If it's clean, the Allies are probably going to be in good shape no matter what.

...and what about BB Mutsu at Port Blair? I won't get sidetracked by that little morsel, but if a good opportunity presents itself somewhere down the line....

[Schlemiel]

As someone who reads both AARs, I do not see any opportunities for a reader to have tipped off John to anything even unintentionally before his own thinking coalesced, based simply on the timing and nature of both John's posting (and his evidence that is absent from this aar) and audience posting. I do not think any unintentional leak is likely in the future either, based on current patterns (giving more detail here might be too much of an unintentional Opsec breach anyway).

That said, I love surprises in AARs, so even though I do not believe you have any strategic or operational imperative to avoid giving out details of missions, I think it really adds to the fun and flavor of an AAR to do so. I really hope to see more forum prestidigitation here (and you might need it if you ever hope to catch Greyjoy). You could even create a little narrative for us of the dummy inflatable shermans floating across the Malacca Strait

[Encircled]

He's closed the gap on Greyjoy to 10 pages in less than a week!

Mind you, if he really wants to catch him, then his invasion of Fusan involving Junks and PT boats is going to have to work....

[JohnDillworth]

and what about BB Mutsu at Port Blair? I won't get sidetracked by that little morsel, but if a good opportunity presents itself somewhere down the line....

If she is there she must be hurt pretty bad. Can she even reload there? I guess you could bombard when you have nothing better to do. Or send a bunch of bombers in and hit here with a bunch of 500 pounders. I think the best thing to do would be ignore her. She is not going anywhere and it gives John something to worry about. Unless you need the points save her for a training mission in a few months. She is already dead.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Encircled

He's closed the gap on Greyjoy to 10 pages in less than a week!

Mind you, if he really wants to catch him, then his invasion of Fusan involving Junks and PT boats is going to have to work....

Hear hear! I'll post a vacuous pointless post to pump up CR's page count! Who's with me?

[Nemo121]

Tithe: Another vapid post to increase CR's post count.

Do I go for maximum disruption or a much less ambitious, but very strong and tight perimeter? Nemo would argue for the former; others for the latter. I'm somewhere in the middle, trying to push the envelope until John stops me. I'm gonna take some losses when John gets his act together - that's almost inevitable.

If you do anything less than going for maximum disruption you're throwing your immense strategic victory away and settling for something minor and non-transformative. Obviously that's still better than what 90 to 95% of people would have gained from your previous situation ( most wouldn't have tried what you tried and most would have settled in to defend Sabang and environs abandoning all ambition). You are pushing for more but you are still acting as Montgomery ( worried about what the other guy will do unto him ) than Patton ( making the other guy worry about whats being done unto him ).

In the real war who did the Germans fear most? Who actually achieved more? Who actually gained more per soldier lost? The answer for all of these things is Patton. The Germans were far and away the most effective general staff organisation our civilisations have ever seen and Patton was pretty much the only enemy commander they faced whom they viscerally feared because they knew he could tear them up in unpredictable ways which were almost impossible to defend against. Hell they'd have given him a Panzer Korps in their army at any stage and I can't think of another US or British CO I could say that for.


I'd like to offer a situation from a current game:
I made a very bold and risky move in Burma. People were aghast at the loss potential and, once again, started talking about insensitivity to losses and some myth about me taking huge losses in games. I pointed out that I'd probably end up taking Burma on the cheap. Now, some time later I'm just about to take Pegu after it has been abandoned by the Japanese. I lost fewer than a dozen transports and in the ground fighting in Burma - because of the superior position I gained I've lost well under 100 squads while destroying several hundred squads of enemy troops. I did take some unfortunate losses when 6 ships were sunk by air attack on the first day since I was making the attack without air cover but even counting those Burma has been taken extremely cheaply and quite quickly and my army is in brilliant shape to push through and exploit into the enemy's strategic depth whilst leaving about 3 enemy divisions trapped and dying in my rear.

This is the sort of victory you get if you push on until the enemy stops you instead of pushing on until your own insecurity stops you. I'm not trying to pollute your AAR with exploits from another but I do think that a real world example just might make you see that the path to low casualties isn't always the safe path. Overall I'm quite certain that temerity and safety now will cost you greater losses over the next 6 months than dash.


As to whether or not John3rd is benefitting from OPSEC breaches...
1. Clearly someone has told him that you've raised this issue. I would ask him how he found out. If he found out through PMs then I think that's highly worrying since then people ARE, demonstrably, discussing what you are writing in your thread with him. Sure, they mightn't be saying what they think is game-relevant material but they ARE breaching that important line whereby they don't mention ANYTHING which happens in your AAR to him. It is also very worrying if they are doing this by PM. If they have nothing to hide then they should be posting it publicly to his AAR. If they are PMing then christ only knows what they're giving away without intending to.

Note: This is the best case situation whereby these people aren't intending any breaches... Unintentional breaches etc DO happen and even discussing the success of this plan via PM with him IS, IMO, a significant breach of conduct as a good player can make a lot from even such posts. I am quite certain I'd be able to deduce quite a bit from such PMs were I to receive them.


2. If there are posts there in public then that's better since that provides community review of what is said. I'd imagine it is via PM though since it'll be the natural tendency of people to gravitate towards saying this sort of thing privately. They should fight this tendency and post these sorts of things publicly to his AAR or not contact him at all.


I think what will have happened is that there were discussions via PM commenting on the game which gave him information through deduction and general background without ever veering towards anyone intentionally breaching OPSEC. People can deduce a lot from WHAT people ask about and WHEN and at what RATE. A flurry of PMs asking him to post pics of the NORPAC situation since he "hasn't updated that in a while" all coming in within a week of eachother realtime unmatched by any spike in other ignored areas is, to me, a clear sign that my opponent is looking at a NORPAC invasion.

Each individual PMer would be able to say, "I didn't breach OPSEC" ( and they'd be right ) but taken together even the slowest forumite couldn't help but see a clear pattern and draw the appropriate conclusions. My sense is that what we're looking at is the end result of this sort of PMing where individual PMs don't breach OPSEC but taken together they add up to a clear picture.


2. One reason I wouldn't play him is that he, along with JWE/Symon both defended FatR when he, on two separate occasions, admitted posting my entire strategic plans to my opponent- via PM. He defended him and justified his actions in ruining two PBEMs and stating that if I played another he would feel perfectly justified in breaching OPSEC and posting my plans again ( this is one reason I play only people I know wouldn't read such a PM and it played a part in me leaving ).

Bottom line: He chooses to associate himself closely with the one person in our community who has, himself, admitted that he breaches OPSEC with malicious intent. I think that asking him if FatR has ever discussed your game with him is a sensible precaution. I'd go so far as to ask him not to discuss the game with FatR at all. Why? Well even if you trust John3rd ( which is your choice ) I think past history has shown you cannot trust FatR ( by his own admission ).

I don't imagine that that's the cause of this though although FatR hasn't logged in since 9th June and so one could draw correlations there. As I said, I think this is the result of multiple people PMing with each PM abiding by the letter of the rules but the pattern and rate of PMs adding up to a clear intelligence picture.

I've seen this in the responses in which people have all focused on each individual post and few have spoken to the issue of the ebb and flow of PMs as being the indicator ( which is what I'm assuming happened ).

So, did John or any individual poster cheat? No. But did posters give away the plan via the ebb and flow and pattern of PMs? Highly likely, yes. Does it explain what happened given the facts we are aware of? Absolutely.

I'd be quite willing to bet that if you maintain your stricter OPSEC in future John3rd will continue to be surprised as this peaking of "innocent" questions via PM ( each of which, individually, is innocent ) won't, when taken together, tip him off again.

So, no real blame here. Just people being people and John putting stuff together but also something which IS amenable to management - as we've just seen. I wouldn't play John for all sorts of reasons but if I were playing him I would make him not discussing the game with FatR a stringent condition. You may wish to consider the same as I wouldn't put anything past FatR given his past, self-admitted, conduct.

[Nemo121]

Tithe: Ephemera to tithe the post count.

Acepylut,
Ah in the Soviet Army they had parachutists even when they didn't have parachutes. Fly low enough, slow enough and with deep enough slow and fewer than 20% of the troops will die when they jump from the airplane without chutes. In the Soviet Army that was an entirely acceptable loss rate given the mission.

It actually made sense too because it stopped the Germans spotting parachutists dropping down to meet guerilla bands and thus triangulating their landing zones and positions. You'd lose more than 20% if that happened so it wasn't just some crazy tactic done by suicidal vodka-totting Russians but was actually precisely the best way for them to achieve something that needed achieving given their limited means.


I take your overall point though that while I support improving the accuracy of the game engine I DO play the game engine in front of me as opposed to the history behind me. I am happier the closer the game engine gets to modelling the history but I won't stop myself from doing something just cause history didn't "allow" it. History is a story of choices taken. It doesn't mean they were the only choices which could have been taken.