Ok to Jap Fanboys (and girls) How far will you go!

[Dutchgy2000]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

ORIGINAL: Dutchgy2000

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, I don't understand your logic. It is like you move two pieces in a game of chess on turn 1 and I say "put 1 back" and you say "fine why bother playing"

NSounds like you are saying ´hey you can´t move your pawn 2 places forward (as white) as an opening move because if i had been allowed to move first i would have covered that field and there is no way you would have gone there then.´ Maybe i would, maybe i wouldn´t.. point is i would have had a choise.. you just say i can´t whatever my reasoning behind it.

Hi, No it is more like you move E4 and then D4 and when I say take that back you say "why bother"

The only thing i say ´why bother´ to is people insisting on playing out everything exactly like it happened 60+ years ago. [:)]

[mogami]

Hi Ducthboy we agree. Thats what I do on turn 1. I send all my TF out to sea where I want. I just don't go closer then 4 hexes away from enemy base. Now I have not teleported because my ships are where they would have been when PH is bombed. THe enemy still has to spot me but at least he has the chance.

[mlees]

Only because ya might have had a shot at them would you have been able to move doesnt mean thats a 100% given ya would definately have had a shot at them-

But the only other option is the teleported, unopposed invasions that nobody gets a shot at. Your absolutely opposed to giving the Allied player the option to move some units on turn 1 (ahistorical), but demand ahistorical abilities for the Japanese?

[moses]

No nothing is impossible. Anything could have happened. Japan could have loaded up 20 divisions on 300 transports with no escort and landed them 10 miles up the coast from San Fransico. It could happen. It might possibly have even been successful. Much more likely though 20 divisions would have been sunk in the most embarrasing attack in history.

You could sail a huge fleet past singapore toward India and perhaps go undetected. Not likely but it could happen.

But by exploiting the first term rules you can do things like this ,(understand SF takes more time in game), and they will work 100% of the time at zero risk. That is why many allied players will not allow it.

[Dutchgy2000]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi Ducthboy we agree. Thats what I do on turn 1. I send all my TF out to sea where I want. I just don't go closer then 4 hexes away from enemy base. Now I have not teleported because my ships are where they would have been when PH is bombed. THe enemy still has to spot me but at least he has the chance.

I alreadsy said i agree with that.. just somehow some people seem to have gotten it into their head i want to be able to land anywhere anyplace.. i don´t.. i just don´t agree the reasoning for not letting that happen should be ´if ya had done that i would have known and would have reacted´ .. we will never know.. because it´s just not possible to recreate with any certainty... so your sollution sounds ok to me.

[Dutchgy2000]

ORIGINAL: mlees

Only because ya might have had a shot at them would you have been able to move doesnt mean thats a 100% given ya would definately have had a shot at them-

But the only other option is the teleported, unopposed invasions that nobody gets a shot at. Your absolutely opposed to giving the Allied player the option to move some units on turn 1 (ahistorical), but demand ahistorical abilities for the Japanese?

No i am not opposed to the allies doing anything.. in whatever way you want to build that in...what i see happening then however is opening a whole can of worms when suddenly the allies organise themselves in one day like they kinda know whats going to happen... well yeez how ever did they figure that out i wonder.

[Dutchgy2000]

ORIGINAL: moses

No nothing is impossible. Anything could have happened. Japan could have loaded up 20 divisions on 300 transports with no escort and landed them 10 miles up the coast from San Fransico. It could happen. It might possibly have even been successful. Much more likely though 20 divisions would have been sunk in the most embarrasing attack in history.

You could sail a huge fleet past singapore toward India and perhaps go undetected. Not likely but it could happen.

But by exploiting the first term rules you can do things like this ,(understand SF takes more time in game), and they will work 100% of the time at zero risk. That is why many allied players will not allow it.

Yes i know and thats exactly the problem. Sure i am opposed to tactics like that.. but i am also opposed to any blanket rule stopping everything stone cold... if i wanna be crazy tojo that got it into his head to try and sail my 300 ship Tf unescorted past singapore... a little sneaky voice inside my head tells me that i should be allowed and try to... but i also aggree that if i try to you are more then allowed to have a shot at it. Point is how ya would agree on working that into the whole framework without having to resort to either allowing anything or allowing nothing at all.

[mogami]

Hi, I allow it by the TF ending turn 1 4hexes from Singapore and on turn 2 it sails on it's merry way.

[Mr.Frag]

No one is saying you can't do it. We are simply saying that *if* you do go ahead and do it, you have to do it in a credible manner.

If you want to grab Menado, go ahead and do so, but pretending that you sneaked past Menado & Amboina to land at Kendari on turn one is unacceptable.

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

No one is saying you can't do it. We are simply saying that *if* you do go ahead and do it, you have to do it in a credible manner.

If you want to grab Menado, go ahead and do so, but pretending that you sneaked past Menado & Amboina to land at Kendari on turn one is unacceptable.

Why not make a scenario that places all forces where they were historically on Dec 7th with no super move bonus???

[BlackVoid]

My house rule is no bypassing enemy airfields (only the edges of allied posessions can be attacked) and one surprise area (all other places allies can do whatever they want). I would never play with the historical setup.

This is whole topic is not an even an issue, agree with your opponent before or play the AI.

[Mr.Frag]

Why not make a scenario that places all forces where they were historically on Dec 7th with no super move bonus?

Can't .. thats why there is a Dec 8th scenario. Too much special coding to handle the 7th.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

No one is saying you can't do it. We are simply saying that *if* you do go ahead and do it, you have to do it in a credible manner.

If you want to grab Menado, go ahead and do so, but pretending that you sneaked past Menado & Amboina to land at Kendari on turn one is unacceptable.

Why not make a scenario that places all forces where they were historically on Dec 7th with no super move bonus???

I was just thinking this...kinda like Pry's Dec 8th scenario but with the attacks. Problem here is the Jap player will freak saying historically Japanese planners were idiots and their strategy is better and insist on the uber move. I say screw Uber move (only in to allow KB to be off Hawaii anyway), place ships in TFs with historical loads, locations and destinations as they were the morning of DEC 7 PH time, and go. If somebody wants to change history, have them do it without the BS benefit of the first turn move bonus. Historically, aside from landings in Malaya and ground movements into Hong Kong and Malay peninsula on Dec 8th, no landings occurred. So you see, adding the move bonus to get forces off Malaya and Hawaii have led to impossible massive across the board moves by the Japanese player.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Why not make a scenario that places all forces where they were historically on Dec 7th with no super move bonus?

Can't .. thats why there is a Dec 8th scenario. Too much special coding to handle the 7th.

What coding is that? Move bonus?

[Mr.Frag]

What coding is that? Move bonus?

That and crippled morale rolls and crippled aa strengths and crippled ai to not screw up the orders, production partially cripped, all sorts of stuff in there to handle Dec 7th.

[Charles2222]

ORIGINAL: Dutchgy2000

I don´t think that for a second (although as allied i would think the KB was just that.. lol), but I also think everyone can´t get away with saying ´They would have been noticed´ all the time also.

KB's planes were noticed anyway, but they were wrote off as the US's own planes[8|].

[Mr.Frag]

KB's planes were noticed anyway, but they were wrote off as the US's own planes .

Remember that the earth rotates around the sun ... Dawn at Pearl Harbor is not the same time everywhere.

So a dawn attack at PH is almost half a day different then a dawn attack at lets say Khota Bharu. Expecting everyone to be sleeping 6 hours *after* the news of PH is expecting a lot. Memory serves, PH = GMT+10, Singapore = GMT-8. Even Wake would have 2 hours advanced notice (not that they could do much about it).

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

What coding is that? Move bonus?

That and crippled morale rolls and crippled aa strengths and crippled ai to not screw up the orders, production partially cripped, all sorts of stuff in there to handle Dec 7th.

u cant leave all that in and just take out the move bonus???

[medicff]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, I don't think anyone minds if you land on empty island in the Pacific. It is landing on size 4 airfields in the SRA on Dec 7th. Taking them on Dec 8th and having Betty/Nell operating from them on Dec 9th that makes them roll their eyes and say you are playing Star Trek not WW2 in the Pacific.
It is having bombardment and surface TF waiting in the hex for Allied ships in port.
It is having Japanese TF in Allied airspace but beyond range of Japanese CAP

Now in the historic turn 1 this is not a problem The extended move allows the AI a somewhat historic move without taking advantage of anything.

I think my house rules are reasonable and so far they have not limited me in any way.
I set my TF for 4 hexes from their targets. I have my aircraft set to support and fly CAP and i have surface TF in support.

I land on the target on Dec 9th I take it on Dec 10th I move in Betty/Nell on Dec 11th and they fly their first missions on Dec 12th. And all of it without exploiting anything.

And that is my point exactly! You can land anywhere and anyhow just don't take advantage of the turn one rule. Give the allies some small smidgeon of a chance (remember they can't muster much anyway). [:D]

[Mr.Frag]

u cant leave all that in and just take out the move bonus???

Yes, but then you would have to relocate all the missions that start and all the troops that get loaded to a location within range of the landings to have them work.

Your troops don't actually start the game loaded on ships, the load routine is broken in such a manner to force load units on the first turn to get them onto ships ... this is why the ships have to be at a base, not already at sea.

Easier just to start Dec 8th or play someone who agrees to your set of rules.