Island hopping?

[James Ward]

As the WA in the Pacific I see no need to do this. As long as I get a single base within fighter range of Japan I can invade. There seems no point in retaking the Phillipines, or any other island. Does anyone island hop?

[dapamdg]

The only reason I can see to grab enemy held islands is to avoid Op Fire if the island has Arty or Air, or to avoid interdiction points when you move through them. Op Fire is obvious, but interdiction points are easier to overlook and they do hurt. Grabbing some islands will also allow you to deploy land based air nearer the combat zone and thus increase your own offensive punch.

[Barthheart]

It also allows you to place supplies forward to keep your fleet in supply. This is very important for the US.

[James Ward]

I realize you need one island to invade from but why liberate the Phillipines (or any other area for that matter) when you can just seize a single island near Japan and take them out totally? It sort of defeats the purpose of Japan setting up a defensive perimeter by seizing the eastern Pacific islands. Maybe when the Op fire thing gets working better it will become necessary to retake the other islands but as it stands now it doesn't make much sense to me.

[Barthheart]

Well If the Japanese player lets you do that then go ahead. This lets the Japanese fleet concentrate in one area though and will make life harder for you. I'm by no stretch an expert on Japanese or Wallies strat. in the pacific though.[:'(] The only real incentive to take back islands are any that have resources. I usually try to starve the Japanese into submission before assaulting the home islands. Tha way they can't build new or rebuild the damage you do, or do research.

[James Ward]

The only real incentive to take back islands are any that have resources. I usually try to starve the Japanese into submission before assaulting the home islands. Tha way they can't build new or rebuild the damage you do, or do research.

Certainly that should be the reason but a sub/air campaign will also do that. If the WA get subs and bombers in strength in SE Asia you can pretty much kiss those southern resources goodbye.

If you could only launch invasions from ports and only over a certain distance then the islands become more important and building a defensive permiter makes much more sense. As the WA I rarely take more than one island and as Japan I rarely defend them long, only as long as they are useful for airbases.

[mavraamides]

I agree. With the way the game is currently playing, there is no need (and often no time) for the WA to do anything but a direct assault against the home island. Once the WA innevitably have complete control of the seas they can simply build a floating bridge of transports all the way to Japan and using CAG's to wear down the troops invade the main island. Then all of Japan falls.

There is no need for the sort of war of attrition that we saw in the real Pac Theater. No need to retake the Phillipines, China, or any of the countless islands between America and Japan.

I think this points out a fundamental issue in the game mechanics in general:

I believe it is too easy to carry out amphibious assaults. Whether it be Gibralter, Scottland, Italy, Sicily or Japan. This is especially true about long range invasions like Japan from the West Coast.

I think the flaw in the game mechanics that allows this is the floating bridge of transports I mentioned earlier.

What stopped the US from a direct assault on Japan in the first place? The fear of having huge numbers of assault craft sunk by ship or plane on their way to the island and the resulting loss of thousands of soldiers, supplies and equipment. The longer the trip, the greater the risk. The more enemy occupied islands between America and Japan, the more possible places for air and sea strikes against the transports.

But in WAW, a player can string together a series of tranny's and move huge numbers of troops great distances in a single turn with no risk of loss.

Even if the Jap player had 10 fleets of subs, the only thing stopping the US player from moving troops all the way accross the Pacific is whatever forces are on the target island itself. Of course, the next turn the Jap player may sink all the tranny's, but the troops are all safe and sound on their target island. If enough supplies were moved, they can hold out for quite some time as well.

I'm not saying anything can or even should be done about this. Just trying to point out why island hopping is not needed. In fact, seemingly the only value of the islands in this game are whatever resources they may hold.

[James Ward]

Just trying to point out why island hopping is not needed. In fact, seemingly the only value of the islands in this game are whatever resources they may hold.

And none of the eastern Pacific islands that Japan historically seized even have resources. But seizing them was the basis for the entire Japanese strategy. They wanted to build a defensive perimeter to defend the SE Asian resources, wear the US down and hopefully negotiate a peace or get a stalemate. I think a little change in the invasion rules would go a long way to making this a real strategy to pursue.

[Toby42]

I'm not sure how many sea zones are between the US and Japan, but aren't you penalized quite a lot for invasions over one zone???

[carnifex]

I realize you need one island to invade from but why liberate the Phillipines

Why liberate the Phillipines? Well, to keep an egotistical promise. Otherwise you can skip em.

[James Ward]

I'm not sure how many sea zones are between the US and Japan, but aren't you penalized quite a lot for invasions over one zone???

Yeah if you invade directly from the USA there are a lot of penalties but if you just snag a single island in an area next to Japan you can load it up with as many units as you like and invade from there.

[Grotius]

Against a good Japanese player in PBEM, island-hopping may be pretty important. It's hard to tell because none of us have played that many PBEM games yet, I suspect.

In my own PBEM game as Japan, I made a naval/air fortress around the Home Islands, the Bonins, and the Marianas. I probably should've taken Wake too. With those islands heavily garrisoned with op-firing air and artillery, the WAllies can't just land directly on the Home Islands. At the very least, they have to take out the Bonins, and to do that, they need Wake or the Marianas. Yes, they can reduce perhaps one or two sets of garrisons with CAGs, but Japan can bring lots of land-based fighters, flak, and its own carriers to attrit the WAllies CAGs. Without CAG or land-based air (on islands), the WAllies are going to have a lot of trouble getting ashore.

It's easier for Japan to do all this near the Home Islands than in the island-hopping area in the South Pacific. The Japanese fleet can defend the Central Pacific without expending that much supply. It can't do that in the South Pacific.

Also, it's easier for the WAllies to reduce the Japanese if the Wallies seize the Southern Resource Area. Every single resource is absolutely precious to Japan, vital to its survival. If you let Japan retain 24-25 production, it can crank out a half-dozen flak or infantry a turn, plus some research. And if you don't boot Japan out of the Solomons and New Guinea, a good Japanese player will threaten New Caledonia or Australia, each of which can provide a resource or two.

Finally, remember that historically, the Allies argued about whether island-hopping was necessary. Some wanted to focus on the South Pacific islands through the Philippines; others wanted to advance more directly across the Central Pacific. There may have been political reasons for the emphasis on the SoPac: MacArthur's pledge to return to the Philippines, not to mention the defense of Australia. Perhaps GGWaW could model these political factors somehow. But militarily, I'm not sure the model is broken -- at least, not yet. If the distant-invasion and op-fire rules work, those do serve to encourage island-hopping.

[Toby42]

I would suppose the reason not let Japanese held islands in your rear, would be to guard your supply lines... especially if they had supply and air assets available. Doubly so if there was one with a port.

[James Ward]

Finally, remember that historically, the Allies argued about whether island-hopping was necessary.

I think it was necessary from a logistical point of view. Even if you could launch an invasion of the Phillipines from the USA you would be hard pressed to support it if it was successful.
Certainly the scale of the game makes repeating history in detail unlikely but to me there is no reason to go to the Solomons, the Phillipines, New Guinea or anywhere other than dircetly towards Japan as the WA or to garrison them in strength as Japan. I find it odd that the actual strategy tried by Japan is pretty pointless to pursue in the game.

[Grotius]

In my current PBEM, I followed Japan's historical strategy and it worked nicely for me. Grabbing the Southern Resource Area is the central facet of that strategy, along with closing the Burma Road and extending the defensive perimeter east (to Wake) and southeast (to the Solomons). Japan most certainly must island-hop. Either that, or attack Russia.

As for the US, I still think that against a good Japanese player in PBEM, you'll also have to island-hop. A good Japanese player won't leave the road to the Home Islands open; that player will build up the Bonins, Marianas, and Wake Island to disrupt deployment of WAllies transports.

Heck, I even island-hop against the AI -- as either side. I find it works best for me.

[Uncle_Joe]

I think Grotius hit on it pretty well. Against a good Japanese player, you'll need to take at least some of those islands IMO. A few reasons:

1) A long range invasion of Japan will not work unless you have a HUGE amount of transports. You'd need at least doubled transports in every step of the chain plus about 7-10 in the Japanese home island's zone as well. If you are waiting around for that, Japan will be building a HUGE force to defend (or wiping out India, or Russia, or Australia or all of the above).

2) Those islands protect the valuable (and vulnerable) resource islands. A few planes stationed on those islands and the Allies cant just waltz past them. Currently there is a bug that prevents supplies being moved through such zones from being OP fired on. The next patch will address that. But even aside from that, you can't afford to be moving past the islands and leaving transports exposed to constant air attack.

Keep in mind that the AI is not a very good Japanese player. It doesnt execute hit and run attacks on vulnerable transports all that well. Human players will do so and the need to pursue their forces will drag you past those little islands. As stated above, even ungarrisoned, each one passed in one turn will add a +1/-1 Interdiction Point swing for your units. That can mean the difference between victory or defeate in a surface or air battle. How many times have seen a unit barely get hit or missed? A LOT! Adding +1 or 2 to all your rolls and -1 or 2 to all opponent's rolls can really turn the tide.

So in summary, you cant directly invade Japan vs a good player. You have to have an intermediate (close by) base from which to do so. Having that base means SUPPLYING that base. Its pretty hard to do that without coming into range of some of those island bases. The best way to reduced Japan's defenses is to deprive her of resources. And the best way to do that is to take away the SRA. Unfortunately, there are a lot of little island bases out there that can make that difficult and costly.

I dont think you ever have to take all the island bases....not even close. But, IMO, you will have to take some of them to open a clear way into the SRA.

[Grotius]

What Joe said. One other thing: historically, the Allies did bypass some island bases, such as Truk and Rabaul. The Allied player will do so too in GGWaW. But you can't bypass 'em all.

Glad to hear that supply-opfire bug is being fixed, by the way.

[sveint]

You don't need to take the SRA... 5 or 10 teched-up subs will do.

[James Ward]

You don't need to take the SRA... 5 or 10 teched-up subs will do.

And they don't even have to be real tech'ed up. 3 evasion and 3 torp will do quite nicely. So will 3 range tac based in Siam or French Indo-China.

[Grotius]

And in fact historically, the Allies didn't take the SRA, and instead relied on subs and aircraft just as you suggest. So again I see no major disconnect between GGWaW and historical reality. Likewise, the fact that Japan will normally be in dire straits in GGWaW by 1944 is consistent with history.

Many people at the time questioned why the Allies island-hopped in the first place: the Central Pacific strategy was as viable then as it is in the game, and there aren't as many islands to hop in the Central Pacific. I play "War in the Pacific," and in that game too, one can forego SoPac in favor of CentPac. But in WITP or GGWaW, if Japan defends the CentPac route heavily, it may not be optimal. It also depends on whether the Allies follow a "Europe first" strategy.