Alternative to "surprise" first turn

[Hirohito]

ORIGINAL: mlees

Could be, but I was just trying play devils advocate...

I don't think he was being strong minded just to stir the pot, I assume he feels he's justified in his strategic vision. Some folks have a stronger individualism streak in them, and vigorously defend themselves, even to the point that is beyond reasonable. (IMO) They consider it "I'm just standing up for myself...".

What happened is quite simple. I posted strategies that I wanted to discuss the merits of from facts, and the vast majority of the responses were personal attacks and opinion, very few people actually wanted to discuss the strategies. I felt like they would work and spent a lot of time working them out many moves ahead making sure that every unit in the empire was engaged as often as possible, which I think is key to the Empire having any chance of success. I will admit that the stragies were risky and even grandiose. But, I think that if you are going to take the gamble of going to war with USA, Commonwealth, the netherlands, Britain, and China at the same time then you better bet big or you can't win big. I always thought that just taking the SRA and holding was a very bad move. It is like the Navy came up with a plan to start a war, not fight and win a war. Someone said (can't remember who) that "bad generals fight to win, good generals win then fight". This is what Yamamoto's plan did, put the Empire in a position where they had to fight to win. I tried to develop strategies that would put the Empire into the position of winning then fighting. Jackson said that you should always put your oponent into the unenvious position that their moves are dictated to them by what you are doing to them.

Between not finding very many people who actually wanted to discuss strategies using facts and figures beyond "that won't work because it won't work" and people making extremely insulting and disrespectful comments about me personally and travelling a lot with work and then getting sick I didn't have any time for this place.

I see that not much has changed. I make a post about a topic that I would think is important to a game like this, how do you have a first turn that is realistic, reasonable and balanced and most of the posts are personal attacks.

Sometimes I don't know why I bother with this forum, but I do like this game very much. I guess I imagine that I might find a few people who want to discuss the game rationally and logically. Mostly though I just get harrassed by loud mouths.

Hirohito

[mogami]

"Everything which is in any way beautiful is beautiful in itself, and
terminates in itself, not having praise as part of itself. Neither
worse then nor better is a thing made by being praised. I affirm
this also of the things which are called beautiful by the vulgar,
for example, material things and works of art. That which is really
beautiful has no need of anything; not more than law, not more than
truth, not more than benevolence or modesty. Which of these things
is beautiful because it is praised, or spoiled by being blamed?"

Marcus Aurelius Antonius

[Hirohito]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: Hirohito

Hello All,
I have been thinking a lot about an altervative to the "gamey" first turn if you use the japanese surprise option. Everyone agrees that allowing the japanese fleets to just sail as far as they want to go unmolested isn't "historical". Someone once said to me the house rules were put in place because the japanese did not have invisible, flying boats. Point taken.

So, what could be done to make the first move more like what really would happen, not just in terms of KB sailing out to PH but in other theatres as well.

I think the solution is to start the game on November 25th instead of December 7th. And then have a set of rules to guide what moves each side can make. For the allied player the rules would be:
1. No orders to units in PH.
2. Any orders in China to Chinese forces
3. TFs can sail between any two allied ports and anywhere within allied territorial waters.
4. No TFs can be created beyond the historical ones that existed on Dec 7.
5. Air units outisde of PH and china can be given search and recon orders as long as they don't overfly japanese held territory.
6. If the allied side spots japanese forces enroute to allied targets with definite hostile intent then the allied player can give any orders she wishes.

Rules for the japanese player:
1. Give any orders you want, just know that if the allies spot you they can respond.

How difficult would it be to create a scenario like this? I would think that the campaign game scenario could be modified to start on november 25th with KB leaving port streaming towards PH and all other fleets at their historical positions on november 25th.

Does anyone know the editors well enough to comment on this?

Thanks,
Hirohito

I have had exactly this thought before as well. It would be the best way to start a game IMHO. the Japanese player would have some extra choices to make - the more bold moves they attempt, the more chance that they are spotted by the Allies beforehand, thus losing the element of surprise. With an earlier start date and strict house rules it MIGHT work in PBEM. Not sure though.

The trick is how to decide your point 6. Possibly something along the lines of: If a Japanese TF is spotted X (not sure about the right number) hexes from an Allied base, Allied response is triggered.

When I was originally thinking about this I envisaged a two-stage trigger: When one Japanese TF is spotted too close to an Allied base, then all Allied forces are free to move, but they cannot attack Japanese forces (i.e. war is not declared by the Allies) until either the Japanese attack the Allies, or a second 'trigger' TF is spotted.

Yes, Point 6 is tricky. Historical behavior by the allies makes it even trickier. For example, McArthur did almost nothing to prepare for war when he was being notified that Pearl Harbor was under attack via the undersea telegraph cables that had been lain just for this purpose. I think the attack on PH qualified as "hostile intent". I wish that WITP had a tactical mode and an option to go to a smaller scale screen. I would like to be the allied commander in PI with the ability to send individual planes to small, out of the way bases all over the phillipines and the ability to hide the navy in any of the myriad good hiding places, waiting for transports to pass by. I've always wondered if this would have changed the outcome of the PI campaign. Granted, 4 destroyers, a heavy cruiser, a light cruiser, the langley and a handful of pt boats probably couldn't have done much, but if you get a small scale map of the PI you see that small ships can hide in a veritable maze. Who knows what hit and run tactics might have done to the transports?

The British were equally delinquent, they had intelligence officers sending back daily troop strengths all over Indochina and Siam, these dispatches clearly showed a buildup which could have had only one target, yet the British generals in Malaya did nothing. To their defence though, there wasn't much they could do. The airbases outside of Singapore were undermanned and undersupplied, they didn't have enough troops to defend the coast, but it would have been interesting to see what might have happened if the British had viewed Japanese forces entering Siamese territory as an act of war.

I've often wished that WITP would let us play it that way. Start the game with Siam neutral and have an option that Japanese forces entering Siamese territory allows a British response.

Would a few divisions thrown into Siam have made a difference?

So, point 6 is complicated by the fact that historically even given obvious hostile intent the allies often did nothing. Perhaps the allied forces could have a random factor on whether they would obey orders or not in the face of anything short of actually being bombed themselves prior to the declaration of war?

I think this would mimic situations like McArthur's lethargy while the attack on PH was going on and the British lethargy while the Empire was occupying Siam.

Hirohito

[AmiralLaurent]

I played with the same idea. A game starting on 1st Dec 41 with no surprise, no first turn move by the Japanese. All Japanese recon and bomber units are grounded.

All the Allied fighters are at a low level CAP, all the bombers grounded, all the patrols at a low level of patrol. US CV are in PH. Most ships are docked. Force Z (PoW, Rep, 4 DD) is in Trincomalee.

Japanese player may do what he wants with all units.

Allied player may use all Chinese units, transports from Karachi or USA (unescorted or lightly escorted), Force Z and US CV TF. Other units may be activated by Japanese activity, with an activation point system:
_ any Japanese recon over an Allied base is worth 10 points.
_ any Japanese naval sighting of an Allied ship/TF is worth 1 point.
_ any Japanese TF seen by Allied patrol planes is worth 1 point if between two Japanese bases, 100 points if less than 7 hexes from an Allied base and more than 3 hexes from a Japanese base.
_ any Japanese sub seen at sea is worth 10 points, in an Allied base hexe is worth 100 points.
_ any Allied patrol plane shot down by Japanese AA/CAP is worth 50 points.
_ Japanese arrival in Thailand (first unit there) is worth 100 points.

To activate an air unit and change orders by 10% (for example raise CAP of 10% is worth one point): 1 point
To use a docked ship: 1 point for every 10 VP of the ship
To use a ground unit: 1 point for every 50 squads of the unit

War began if:
_ Japanese planes or ship attack an Allied base or ship.
_ Japanese land in an Allied hex.
_ a Japanese TF ends the turn (and is seen) at 4 hexes or less of an Allied base and more than 2 hexes of a Japanese base.

Allied player may give attack orders to its unit only after "war began". On first day of war, all units in threatened areas (where Japanese have been seen) may be fully used, in other area activity should be raised to alert status but not fully used.

Allied submarines should remain in Allied hexes, except those allready at sea, that should not move.

After each turn, both players should roughly agree how much activation points the Allied player has.

[mlees]

I went to new york and got my computer. Then I got extremely ill.

Glad to "see" you out and about again, then.

I posted strategies that I wanted to discuss the merits of from facts, and the vast majority of the responses were personal attacks and opinion, very few people actually wanted to discuss the strategies. I felt like they would work and spent a lot of time working them out many moves ahead making sure that every unit in the empire was engaged as often as possible, which I think is key to the Empire having any chance of success.

Wait. I'm easily confused. You worked out these strategies before you got your computer? Did you do this in your head, or on a friends computer?

I'm trying to learn the scenario and database editors. I want to make custom scenarios for the various strategies I have written about. The out of the box setup isn't useful for most of them.

Ok, that's fine. But you can see how, if you need to mod the setup of the standard scenario to get your strategies to work, that other folks, who only have the standard scenario as a starting point, are gonna be dubious of the strategies, can you not?

For example, McArthur did almost nothing to prepare for war when he was being notified that Pearl Harbor was under attack via the undersea telegraph cables that had been lain just for this purpose.

I am guessing he (among many others in the higher chains of command) was in some kind of emotional shock. The western powers felt war was a good probability, but I guess they thought that they would be able to have more of some kind of forewarning. Hitler pounded the podiums with his fists and threatened everybody when he was upset, while the Japanese always seemed to be cool and reserved.

I would like to be the allied commander in PI with the ability to send individual planes to small, out of the way bases all over the phillipines and the ability to hide the navy in any of the myriad good hiding places, waiting for transports to pass by. I've always wondered if this would have changed the outcome of the PI campaign. Granted, 4 destroyers, a heavy cruiser, a light cruiser, the langley and a handful of pt boats probably couldn't have done much, but if you get a small scale map of the PI you see that small ships can hide in a veritable maze. Who knows what hit and run tactics might have done to the transports?

Well, OK, if you want to, go ahead. It's not close to reality, but the game allows you to, so, try it. (In reality, there were only a few places a cruiser or destroyer can refuel. There are only so many airfields, that had stockpiled fuel and ammo. That's why our forces did not disperse immediately, at the start of the war.) Let me know how it works out.

However, I think that to split your troops and aircraft into bunches of little packets scattered everywhere will allow the Japanese to pick them off with less losses than if they Allied forces were more concentrated and coordinated. Just a noob opinion..

The airbases outside of Singapore were undermanned and undersupplied, they didn't have enough troops to defend the coast, but it would have been interesting to see what might have happened if the British had viewed Japanese forces entering Siamese territory as an act of war.

The Brits were busy pooping their pants over Rommel approaching the Suez Canal. The forces in the far east were left with the slimest of pickings in regards to reinforcements.

So, point 6 is complicated by the fact that historically even given obvious hostile intent the allies often did nothing. Perhaps the allied forces could have a random factor on whether they would obey orders or not in the face of anything short of actually being bombed themselves prior to the declaration of war?

The Allied cluelessness is easy to critisize with hindsight. But remember, they assumed
that:
1)They would have more warning before war was actually declared, and that they would actually get the reinforcements the politicians were promising them, before then.
2) The Japanese would not be so stupid to fight a war with China, U.S., Britain, Australia, Netherlands, all at the same time.
3) That there was actually a plan (at the top of the command structure) in case of war with Japan.

[Ron Saueracker]

Why not simply have the game start with the historical forces at sea as they were on Dec 7th? If this is not to your liking, select historical revision and have game start on Dec 1st with Allies inactive like Soviets. As soon as first Allied position or force is attacked, Allies activate. Simple.

Only reason we have this horse powerd first turn movement silliness is because they decided to combine the two. Essentially it is whether to attack PH or not, or change composition of PH forces. Therefore, they needed ability to get KB to PH.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Hirohito

Hi,
Then I got extremely ill. It took a long time to recuperate. To be honest, I almost died.

Hirohito

Sorry to hear that, man. Best of luck.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Hirohito

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Actually, from what I saw he was hostile toward others. [8|][:-]

Only in response to venemous personal attacks from people who did not have any facts to back up their accusations.

Just FYI, I was thinking about you calling WITP_Dude "clearly inept" while you were arguing about your strategies with 3rd parties.

[mlees]

Why not simply have the game start with the historical forces at sea as they were on Dec 7th? If this is not to your liking, select historical revision and have game start on Dec 1st with Allies inactive like Soviets. As soon as first Allied position or force is attacked, Allies activate. Simple.

Whatever the two players agree to amongst themselves is ok by me... the AI is remarkably quiet about it too..[:)]

They included an editor, so I guess that if I want something different, I could try and learn how to use that.

Some folks want absolute historical accuracy, others want "what if". I am partial to both.