Pearl Harbour question for WitP designers (Matrix/2By3) and BETA testers...

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

As far as I remember reading the Japanese had initially planned for additional
air strike on Pearl Harbour but fleet admiral refused the pledge from air
commander due to fears of US carriers and counter strike from LBA (Land Based
Aircraft).

The intended targets would be supply/ammo/fuel storage facilities and repair
facilities.

If I recall correctly it was later said that, if successful, this never
launched strike would matter more than what Japan did previously (i.e.
destruction of battleship row) because the only other repair facilities were
in USA and supply/ammo/fuel storage was also only in USA.


My question is if this will be simulated in upcoming WitP?


Leo "Apollo11"

[siRkid]

We are currently working on a special Pearl Harbor attack for the first turn of the campaign scenario.
Right now we are focusing on getting the first strike down, making sure the ships and airfields are attacked. As for a second strike, I’m not sure how the AI will handle this. I will ask about it. Of course, in a PBEM game this would be up to the player.

Rick

[TIMJOT]

Originally posted by Kid
We are currently working on a special Pearl Harbor attack for the first turn of the campaign scenario.
Right now we are focusing on getting the first strike down, making sure the ships and airfields are attacked. As for a second strike, I’m not sure how the AI will handle this. I will ask about it. Of course, in a PBEM game this would be up to the player.

Rick

Why special rules? The UV AI launches multiple attacks on same target, why would the PH attack be handled a special way? Not sure how or why the UV AI decides to launch a second attack when it does though. Can you enlighten us?

Thanks

[siRkid]

We'll for one thing the Japs used modified torpedoes in their attack which aren’t modeled in the normal game so we had to make allowances. Second, without the special rules the US will launch an air attack on the first pulse of the turn, before the airfields are hit. I'm sure there are other things being looked at that I’m just not aware of. The testers have asked that this be an option that can be turned on or off before the start of the game. I’m not sure if it will be.

Rick

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

Thanks for info and please keep us posted Rick...

BTW, are there in Pearl Harbour (or any other base in WitP)
specific storage/repair facilities that can be destroyed?


Leo "Apollo11"

[siRkid]

Right now we have a city attack option for aircraft that will do the job.

[Zeta16]

Why should Japan get to do more than in real life. They should get to attack what they did. If they get to do more the allied player should a chance of possible spoting before the attack or something else. Why should the axis player get a "unreal advantage" if the allies do not. In reading several books it is pointed out that the second attack did not do that much damage. So why would a third attack be expected to move the whole pacific fleet from this base to the west coast. Did they even have alot of HE bombs to attack repair and supply bulidings. I think it is a great myth that people think a third attack would have moved the fleet operations from Pearl to say san diego. I think people say that putting a blame on Nagumo for the whole outcome of the war. They say this because of a non third strike and how this gave the United States some time and a closer base. But the war was lost because of industrial might and poor plannig and cooperation on Japan's part. I just hope this game does not give Japan a chance to do something that did not happen with out the allies get these chances too.

[Chiteng]

Actually, those that advocated a second strike ignored several
very real issues:

Against a totally suprised enemy who was not even firing back
for the first 20 min of the attack, 10% of the First Strike
was lost.

Kido Butai had been running at top speed away from the
first strike launch point. It was no longer in range to launch
a second strike at the time Genda and the boys pushed for another strike.

42% of the returning planes showed significant batte damage
upon examination.

In other words Kido Butai had been shot up fairly well.
Islands dont sink. However much you mat wish to harm the enemy, you DONT cause yourself mortal damage doing it.

[TIMJOT]

Originally posted by Kid
We'll for one thing the Japs used modified torpedoes in their attack which aren’t modeled in the normal game so we had to make allowances. Second, without the special rules the US will launch an air attack on the first pulse of the turn, before the airfields are hit. I'm sure there are other things being looked at that I’m just not aware of. The testers have asked that this be an option that can be turned on or off before the start of the game. I’m not sure if it will be.

Rick

Thanks for the info Kid. Its greatly appreciated.

Wow:eek: you mean WitP is actually going to model depth of individual harbors, making Torp attacks in certain shallow harbors impossible? Very realistic, just not sure of the reasoning. If Japan wanted to mount a torp attack in a similar shallow harbor as Pearl, wouldnt they simply use the oversized wood fins in any case?

Regarding air attack. There should be a *chance* of a first pulse US airstrike, but I would think some sort of first turn shock effect would mitagate this with something like readiness hits, makeing it less likely then normal.

I just think trying to make the PH attack come out just as historical is counter productive. For players that want a historical PH outcome I suggest a December 7 , after attack start option, where all the historical outcomes are already factored in and then just take it from there.

JMHO

Regards

[LTCMTS]

I personally hope that the first strike option on Pearl Harbor can be turned off. There was considerable opposition to the Pearl Harbor strike and one reason for having an accurate simulation is to simulate those decisions and alternatives that were not chosen, especially at the strategic levels before the onset of war. It would be interesting to explore the possibilities inherent in a Japanese decision to execute their primary OPLAN of the "Decisive Battle" against an American naval counteroffensive through the Mandates, or the reaction of the Japanese if the US executed the strategic defensive embodied in several "Rainbow" plans or if the Japanese by-passed the Philippines and went for the NEI and Malaysia through the French Indo China.

[siRkid]

IMHO you can have your cake and eat it to. Why not have a First strike option that will let the AI simulate a surprise attack on PH that produces semi-historical results? This would allow the US player to play a semi-historical game from 7 Dec on. We could have a scenario, which starts on Dec 8th for a historical game. You could turn the option off and let the US prepare for the Japs in a variation that assumes the US was ready. The AI could make the decision for a second and third strike base on variables only Gary understands. And then there is the Human vs Human with what ever house rules you want.

[madflava13]

I'm with Kid on this one...

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

Originally posted by Kid
Right now we have a city attack option for aircraft that will do the job.

OK.

But no specific supply (ammo/fuel etc.) and repair facilities to be targeted?


Leo "Apollo11"

[siRkid]

I can ask that supplies and oil storage be added to this.

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

Originally posted by Kid
I can ask that supplies and oil storage be added to this.

GREAT!!!

There are already separate targets for Repair/Naval/Merchant shipyard !

WOW!!!

Please do ask for supply and oil storage as well !


Many thanks for answering!


Leo "Apollo11"


P.S. Would it be possible to show similar pic of Pearl Harbour as target?

[TIMJOT]

Originally posted by Kid
IMHO you can have your cake and eat it to. Why not have a First strike option that will let the AI simulate a surprise attack on PH that produces semi-historical results? This would allow the US player to play a semi-historical game from 7 Dec on. We could have a scenario, which starts on Dec 8th for a historical game. You could turn the option off and let the US prepare for the Japs in a variation that assumes the US was ready. The AI could make the decision for a second and third strike base on variables only Gary understands. And then there is the Human vs Human with what ever house rules you want.

No problem with options. As long as they are options. I would think if one wanted a game that ensures a surprise PH attack, that would be a simple matter of freezing US recon for the first pulse. If there is no siteing their can not be an pre-emptive attack.

Potential PH options?

1) Historical = Dec 8th start: historical pre-conditions and losses

2) Semi-Historical = Dec 7th start: hardcode surprise first strike,but with variable results.

3) Un-historical = Dec 7th start: varible surprise, varible losses, possible pre-emptive strikes. Basically the first turn is played like any other turn except maybe some readiness/shock penalties in affect.

Personally I am with LCMTS, I dont care how many PH options there are as long as there is a "No Pearl Harbor Option" I will be happy.

[LTCMTS]

What if there were specific scenarios written with different start points, that assume start positions for Allied and Japanese forces based on the specific set of assumptions for that scenario. One scenario would have the historical start position and point. Additional scenarios would have alternative start positions and points based on alternate event timelines, such as no Pearl Harbor attack as a precursor to Japanese attacks in the Far East or better strategic and operational intelligence for the US or higher readiness levels on Hawaii after 27 Nov or tactical warning received from radar in alternate Pearl Harbor scenarios. A seperate scenario where the British/NEI (and French?) player has to defend his Far East possesions against a Japanese attack that bypasses the Philippines. Or a straight up Orange-Blue scenario.

[TIMJOT]

I would love a scenerio that would have a variable US entry into the war, if the Japanese player chooses not to attack US possesions or ships. It would be very tricky to program Im sure, but it would bring a totally different dynamic and uncertainty to a campaign.

As I see it, There would be a die roll on the first turn to see if the US declares war imediately even if not attacked. The odds are increased incrementally every turn. Of course if Japan attacks a US ship, plane or possesion war is declared automatically. The US player would be free to redeploy and reinforce its bases during the interim. Maybe even re-allocate supplies and resources from SF to Karachi to model increased lend/lease. It all sounds pretty complicated and I doubt anything like it would be included in the initial release, but perhaps it could be developed as some sort of expansion pack down the road.

[madflava13]

I also like options... I personally prefer the historical start - PH and all - to see if I can make the war end sooner/later, whatever. But I would also be interested in scenarios where PH never occurs. I remember having long debates with Byron and others about US strategy had the whole battleline been intact at war's start. This would be an interesting scenario to play out. Also, what about a PH scenario where the US carriers are in port?

I am no programmer, so I don't know a thing about the difficulties making this reality... But I think options are good. The more the better, in fact... WW2 was a fluid environment, with many individual factors affecting the major battles and outcomes... I'd love to see this modeled.

[madflava13]

Sorry for the double post -- I got too excited...