Wish for a new scenario Non Historic start but with limits.

[mogami]

Hi, I want it both ways. I want the Japanese player free to redeploy between his own bases but not free to make impossible landings. I don't care if the Japanese player loads transports in Japan on turn 1 and send s them to Midway because they are still 10 days away and in waters where the Allies would not have seen them.
I do care if the Japanese loads troops at Saigon and begins unloading them on Palembang the first turn. They would have triggered a reaction had the Allied player been allowed to form a TF at Singapore and set it to react. I hope everyone can see the difference.
I load ships at Taan on turn 1 and send them to Saigon. (Just set them to do not unload) Then on turn 2 they are free to go whereever the Japanese wish.

A lot of really good plans would require 10 or more days just to start putting them into action except for my being allowed to redeploy between my own bases. Of course in the grands scheme of things 10 days is nothing and the time is not wasted. I've made starts using the historic turn 1 and I weaken enemy air and secure the first of my advance bases while the shifts are going on. By mid Jan progress is about the same.

[mjk428]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

PFM=Pure Freakin Magic

And here I thought you meant:

Premiata Forneria Marconi


Italy's own Emerson, Lake & Palmer.


As to the topic, the bottom for me is: Either it's an historic first turn or both sides get the opportunity to give orders. I can't see much justification for allowing the Japanese to rewrite history while requiring Allied players to adhere to it.

If people want to have house rules for PBEM, that's up to the parties involved to determine. Although I wonder if people playing the Allies aren't allowing sympathy for the Japanese situation to get the better of good judgement. That Japanese player you felt so sorry for just might get an early auto victory on you. Remember: "It's the Victory Points, stupid".

If playing the AI and battering the Allies in the early going as the Japanese isn't as satisfying as you'd like, play both sides head to head. Don't move the Allies for a turn or two. Should be great fun; but why stop there? While you're at it scuttle a few ships and maybe load up some air groups and float them towards Tokyo! [8|]

[;)]

[Culiacan Mexico]

ORIGINAL: Mogami
Well there you go. Thats what I mean. The Japanese player is not under any historic restraints but the allied player must be because they were historicly.

What? Would you mind pointing out where I said “The Japanese player is not under any historic restraints”

ORIGINAL: Mogami
The Japanese did noit steal a 4 day march on the allies at the start of the war. And they could not have done so no matter how brilliant their planning.

Actually they did. Both the Pearl Harbor attack and the invasion of Malaya were launched well before December 7th as was the invasion of parts of the Philippines.

[Culiacan Mexico]

ORIGINAL: esteban
What if the movement of a troop convoy with cruiser escort through the DEI had triggered hostilities on December 5th or 6ht? They would have been concerned that this would cause the fleet at Pearl Harbor to sortie, or at least the carriers. You have to remember, the Japanese hoped and expected to find at least a couple carriers at Pearl.

I agree.

[Culiacan Mexico]

ORIGINAL: moses
Actually though I think we agree on most things.

I think so.

ORIGINAL: moses
You should read Mogami's post about the handcuffs in this thread. That is exactly my position.

Well let me take a different approach. Are we talking the game or history? If we can, let us talk history for a moment… pre-war.

I have pointed out that historically Force Z was tied to Singapore and that the Admiral Hart was under no illusion to the vulnerability of his ships to airpower. Historically, when the invasion force headed towards Malaya was sighted the Allies reaction was slow: Force Z took four days to get moving against objective it had the primary responsibility to defend, and 57th Destroyer Division took the longer, but much safer route to get to Singapore and didn’t arrive in time. Agree or disagree?

Historically, a single SNLF, with supporting task forces, left Palau well before December 7th and landed in the Philippines. I have speculated that if this force had headed west the Allied response would have been no more forceful or organized than what was shown regarding the Malaya invasion force. Force Z is still tied to Singapore, Admiral Hart is not going to commit his fleet against a larger one backed by aircraft carriers, the Dutch were neither prepared nor willing to commit their modest fleet outside the protection of their aerodromes in Java.

The only major naval action I can recall (outside the Java region) was Task Force 5 (the Light Cruisers Boise and Marblehead and Destroyer Division 59: Parrott, Pope, John D. Ford, and Paul Jones., which attacked the Japanese during the invasion of Balikpapan.

In therefore see no reason the Allies would respond either quickly or forcefully to a Japanese fleet movement as I have described. Agree or Disagree?

ORIGINAL: moses
I have no objection whatsoever with players launching invasions of Kendari or any other location. I simply object to players to be able to close on these objectives using the first term rules to negate any possibility of reaction and then to claim that surprise is still in effect.

Historically, the Japanese achieve ‘surprise’ in Malaya even though the British knew it was coming, but I do agree there is a limit as to how far they can push it… and Kendari is well beyond pushing it.

ORIGINAL: moses
When 2ndACR talks about his day 6 invasion of Kendari I think great, that's perfectly legitimate. And if he supports it with 3 mini-carriers and a BB as he posted I may very well head for the hills and let him have the base. If I sight 60 invasion TF's on day 2 moving to arrive at their destinations in the next 2-10 days I think its perfectly OK. I only object to abuse of the first turn move rule.

The Japanese historically had a lot of options, and used the first turn rule (movement of combat fleets well before the start of war) to attack Pearl Harbor, Malaya, Thailand, and the Southern Philippines; and each of them tried to stay as far from British and American bases as possible… at least until the war started. I think there was a good reason for using that approach as too bold of an operation could have caused unknown consequences, especially regarding the Pearl Harbor Operation. I personally don’t use the first turn rule to make deep penetrations into the DEI (all plans are based on staying three hexes from all allied bases).

I got involved in this thread for a number of reasons and this was one of them: “Operations such as taking Kandari in the first couple days are wildy, insanely unrealistic and would never have been even considered.” If the Japanese had planned and executed this operation with the forces available, what would have been the Allied response when it was sighted on 2-3 December? I believe based on the historical actions of the men at that time regarding the Malaya invasion force…the answer is very little.

[moses]

Test-- two staight long posts of mine fail to work-now my test works. Guess I'm not supposed to respond any more. This can be deleted if anyone knows how.

[mogami]

Hi, It's saying things like "Force Z was tied to Singapore" And then not tieing the Japanese TF to their historic missions we are talking about

[Culiacan Mexico]

ORIGINAL: Mogami
Hi, It's saying things like "Force Z was tied to Singapore" And then not tieing the Japanese TF to their historic missions we are talking about

We are just talking history here. From what I have read, Force Z was tied to Singapore.

In the game my forces are 250 miles east of Ambonia, even after first turn movement. The Kure 1st SNLF left Papua well before that start of the war and head north before invading the Philippines, but keep their distance from American bases until the last day or so. I do the same when moving west.

I keep the same restraints just different targets. I do not conduct the historic land in the Philippines: I do not land a Vigan, but at Laoag; and I change the Malaya by switching the Khota Bharu landing to Bandou. Should the Allied player be given free reign because of that? I don’t see why, because the fall within the same historical context.

Obviously an invasion force headed towards Johore Bharu is a different matter, as it posses a number of new variables so Force Z would likely act, but headed toward Bandou? Why if Force Z didn’t act pre-war on an invasion forced headed toward Khota Bharu would the act on an invasion site further away? In my opinion they wouldn’t, and thus it is a legitimate move by the Japanese… pre-war. The same holds true of switching invasion sites in the Philippines from Vigan to Laoag, would the pre-war allies have done something different? I see no reason to think so.

If the Lepaspi force doesn’t land there but at Tacloban why should the Allied player be allowed to unlock all of their units. In a historic context what would have been so different between these two sites that it would have changed the historic response… the Allies would have made major moves pre-war?

An invasion of Kendari on turn one alters the balance enough to change things, but changing invasion sites from Vigan to Laoag?

[mdiehl]

What an amazing thread. I have to agree with Mogami. It is illogical to demand that the Japanese be given complete freedom of movement in an ahistorical opening move and to tie the Allies to their historical dispositions on the grounds that "history demands it." When you begin with the premise that the opening move is AHISTORICAL you lose a lot of logical consistency and cache in demanding that the Allies follow the historical path.

And no, the Japanese did not really steal a march in the larger sense, historically. Kido Butai took a horrid route to get to the HI with a compact strike force in order to avoid being detected on the theory that detection would result in an immediate recognition of the imminent attack and put the Wallies on full combat ready alert across from San Francisco to the Bay of Bengal. Thus their historical first efforts were limited in scope and dedicated to targets that they deemed of utmost strategic importance -- crippling the PacFleet in PH and seizing Malaya.

This sort of phenomenon occurs regularly in alt-history consim games -- emphasis is given to strategic flexibility to the Axis while more or less (to varying degree) constraining the Allies to historical moves, including the blunders. It's why I refer to one of the more famous recent WW2 grand strategy boardgames as "A World At War: Global Conflict on Planet Xenon."

[moses]

In response to Calcuna Mexico

OK I'll try to post a third time as the last two posts had some problem with the server.

The reason the allies did not fight a naval battle in the vicinity of Kendari and numerous other areas was very simple. The Japanese had completed the task of establishing air superiority in these areas. Once they do this it is very difficult to operate in that area with naval forces. It was not sluggishness on the part of the allies that they did not fight more navel actions in the defence of the DEI. It was that the Japanese never left their envelope of air superiority during the entire conquest.

Had they done so they would have placed themselves in great danger especially in the restricted waters NE of Kendari. The allied air force can be very dangerous if unopposed. Imagine the demorilizing effect to the TF to have allied patrol aircraft circling the task force for hours on end knowing that the allied forces know exactly where you are and you have no idea where they are.

There is no reason to think the Dutch would have allowed the JP TF's to sail observed for 2-4 days right into Kendari port. It is easy to establish hostile intent. Just send a fighter and have it flit about the fleet a bit and then fire a few shots across the bow. If they pull up you send a patrol craft over to have a chat. If they keep going you've done all you need to do. Bombs and torpedoes away.

[Williamb]

I thought the whole reason to let the Japanese run wild on turn one was to offset the Allies overwhelming advantage later in the war. (ie massive amounts of ships and the A BOMB)

This turn one is to give the Japanese some chance to seriously hurt the allies before things turn against them.

Have to think of it this way. the Japanese run around blowing things up for about 2 to 3 years then its the allies turn to run around blowing things up.

So might take time but eventually the allies get to romp. So take the first punch and remember you dad is bigger than his dad and will be home from work soon.

[mogami]

Hi, The Japanese run around for 6 months more or less. (If they can do it for 2 or 3 years they will win the game (It will end on 1 Jan 1943 via autovictory)

The Japanese don't need any help at all to run circles around the allies in the SRA.
However making it too easy allows them to go OUTSIDE the SRA long before it was actaully possible.
As Japan I bend every effort towards reducing the time the SRA operation ties up my Army, Navy and Airforces. The days I save can make the difference later. However I think it is a mistake to just "grant" the SRA to the Japanese.
Using the turn 1 extended move is replacing planning with magic. By this I mean there is no need for the Japanese to plan an Operation

Normally before a player (either side) captures an enemy base he has to first gain air superiorty and then he has to make sure he provides support to his landings against enemy surface forces. By "teleporting" on turn 1 he is landing before the enemy gets to form the reaction TF and before enemy air can intervene. Using normal movement his forces would have been exposed to attack and reaction for several days. It does not matter how effective you feel Allied actions might have been. The Japanese are circumventing them entirely and to add insult to injury the Japanese then turn around and use the bases they aquire by magic to base their bombers and attack the forces that were prevented from interfering with him. Not only are the Allies not allowed to defend themselves they are then attacked with advantage. It's hitting the Allied player twice for the price of one exploit. (and to really rub salt into the wounds the Japanese airgroups that move into these bases are set to attack that same day. Through some miracle the Japanese appear at a base capture it and by day 3 are operating bombers.

Don't feel sorry for the Japanese or the Japanese player. He wants to do better then history. OK but magic is not the answer. He has to deal with all the problems the Japanese faced and he has to solve them. Make him work. In the famous phrase used after you knock someone out...

"He asked for it"

There are 3 periods of the historic war.
Japanese adavntage (The SRA)
Equality
Allied advantage (brought about by production and attrition)

The Japanese are trying to use phase 1 to avoid phase 3. But the really fun part of the game is when the sides are equal and a mistake by either side can win the war for the other. The Japanese do not need any help in phase 1. It is up to them to win in phase 2 thats the reason they choose Japan.




*** I never fly a group the turn I transfer it but I don't impose this restriction on my opponenets***

[Williamb]

I can see your point.

The whole thing though has its problems in that what do we allow pre war ?

Clearly the Japanese are allowed more in the game then they were in history. they question is then "is this a real problem ?"

To me the answer is no. I know the allies are gonna take hits. I know the allies will come roaring back.

I guess Im thinking strategically. The japanese main hope in my eyes is for protracted war. the more territory they conquer early on the greater the chances of protracted war.

Oddly Im a Allied fan. I guess I just want to retake all those bloody islands back from the Japanese one by one. Hard yes but to me more fun. giving Japan the sra to me is just more targets for me to go BOMB against.

[mogami]

Hi, I allow great freedom to the Japanese on turn 1.

I understand a great many players wish they could redeploy their forces before starting a game. While not allowing complete freedom I've found the turn 1 extended move excellent for this. I do a major reshuffle on turn 1 and then on turn 2 I'm ready to go just as if I'd redeployed my forces (which in fact I've done) This does not harm the Allied player (I'm sure he wished he could do the same but this is the only favor the Japanese get)

Both sides are very interesting to me. I don't want to give either side any abilty it did not possess. Remember the long Campaign only ends two ways. By running the full distance or one side gains enough of a VP lead for auto victory. This is a game not a war. The Allied player can lose the game while he retains the force on map to eventually win the war. The Japanesewill finish the SRA very near to having the required points. He only has 2 problems to solve to win the game.

Find where those points are and hold them till 1943.