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

[mogami]

ORIGINAL: Dutchgy2000

ORIGINAL: moses

ORIGINAL: Dutchgy2000

(and don´t even go there.. the whole attack on Pearl assumes the enemy is just sitting there

No here's where you're wrong. The PH raid does not assume that the U.S. will do nothing. It is a fully escorted attack. They were prepared for the possibility that they might be detected and had the force to prevent a disaster. They hoped and planned for complete surprise as well but they were not risking the easy destruction of their fleet.

Sending lightly escorted transports into enemy airspace is a pure gamble. The allies do not need a coordinated responce to destroy the whole force. They just need a couple combat vessels to get there and you have catastrophy.

Ok.. i see you wanna get technical.. so let´s be. Count the number of available warships you have available to intercept.. then count the number of warships available for escort. So yes one way around it would be to escort fleets of landingaparties with the heavies and they would be noticed... or spread everything out so that while you are busy chalking up kills the others land (i totally aggree that would be noticed also). None of which practical in game or irl terms... but on a small scale not impossible if someone is willing to risk it. Probem is with the rules it is all or nothing... i can land all over the place unopposed... or i can´t land anywhere i am not supposed to because thats ´gamey´ Makes ya think how they ever pulled of the original landings anyway and not got massacred by those ´highly organized defences´.

Hi, The number and timing of Japanese landings was a product of the available escort ships. (As opposed to number of transports)
The IJN first escorted the transports to malaya. Then it ran back and escorted landings on Luzon.
The IJN fought a number of surface actions defending Japanese trasnports. And if you recall the IJN sank more Japanese transports then Allied surface ships did.

When Perth and Houston attacked the landings on Borneo at Suda strait Mogami and Fubuki sank 6 Japanese transports. (Almost every torpedo they fired hit something.)
Perth and Houston didn't hit a single Japanese transport. Both were sank after being hit with long lance (and a dutch DD too I think)
There were other actions but no Japanese landing occured without both aircover and surface protection. The standard procedure was for paras to land to capture airfields while landings occured so that Japanese air could move forward.

I'd be embarreassed if I was caught sending unescorted transports out of my air cover.
The japanese do not need to do this. Once they take Kendari and Jolo they can run little TF all over in side them. Just keep adding airfields and enlarging the area you don't have to worry about.
Taking 1 size 4 airfield with a logical force results in a circle 21 hexes in all directions of air control. (15 for torpedo attacks) And LRCAP in 8 hexes in all directions.

So teleporting on turn 1 does not increase the speed Japan takes areas. It just exploits something that everyone knows should not be exploited. It is not being more clever then anyone.

By the way I don't pay attention to who these things get addressed to most of the time.
When I respond to a particular person I am either the next poster or I quote them but I have been up all night again. and vision...getting.....blurryyyyyyyyyzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Mr.Frag]

Count the number of available warships you have available to intercept

It doesn't work that way ...

Each and every single warship that exists within steaming range is a landing destroyed unless you have assigned enough protection to negate it.

The USN are capable of a TF of 1 CA, 2 CL, and 13 DD

The Brit's are capable of a TF of 2 BB, 4 CL, and 9 DD

The Dutch are capable of a TF of 3 CL & 7 DD

This is where you are thinking exploit turn #1 speed. "I can get the transports there before he can move these ships so I don't need escorts". *That* is pure exploitation. If you do not have a force capable of surviving against these 3 groups, you are gaming the system.

You will clearly see that all the *planned* landing have forces capable of dealing with these 3 forces should they want to get in the way.

[Dutchgy2000]

And talking about unrealistic... how realistic is it that the day after the initial landings the allies exactly know how to reorganize the whole pacific uner one command... bunching up navy/air/landforces from different countries what so ever... putting 90/90 leaders anywhere they will be needed instantly and planning way ahead already, know exactly what forces the japanese got from where and so what areas will not be treathened right away (if the japanese made changes that is) ... yes sure there were some plans.. but throw those out the window as soon as the war starts as it starts.

Now i know even with all that it doen´t make a big dfference.. but still... realism doesn´t really enter into it.

[mogami]

Hi, Excellent Mr Frag. I don't think anyone can fail to understand that.
If you have 3 TF and they are moving in range of the USN you need 3 TF capable of protecting yours. Because you don't know which TF the USN will attempt to intercept.
Turn 1 exploit is to avoid any intercept and thus the need for 3 TF and as a bonus rather then 1 base where you escorted and captured a airfield you now have 3 airfields operating by turn 3.

[Dutchgy2000]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

ORIGINAL: Dutchgy2000

ORIGINAL: moses



No here's where you're wrong. The PH raid does not assume that the U.S. will do nothing. It is a fully escorted attack. They were prepared for the possibility that they might be detected and had the force to prevent a disaster. They hoped and planned for complete surprise as well but they were not risking the easy destruction of their fleet.

Sending lightly escorted transports into enemy airspace is a pure gamble. The allies do not need a coordinated responce to destroy the whole force. They just need a couple combat vessels to get there and you have catastrophy.

Ok.. i see you wanna get technical.. so let´s be. Count the number of available warships you have available to intercept.. then count the number of warships available for escort. So yes one way around it would be to escort fleets of landingaparties with the heavies and they would be noticed... or spread everything out so that while you are busy chalking up kills the others land (i totally aggree that would be noticed also). None of which practical in game or irl terms... but on a small scale not impossible if someone is willing to risk it. Probem is with the rules it is all or nothing... i can land all over the place unopposed... or i can´t land anywhere i am not supposed to because thats ´gamey´ Makes ya think how they ever pulled of the original landings anyway and not got massacred by those ´highly organized defences´.

Hi, The number and timing of Japanese landings was a product of the available escort ships. (As opposed to number of transports)
The IJN first escorted the transports to malaya. Then it ran back and escorted landings on Luzon.
The IJN fought a number of surface actions defending Japanese trasnports. And if you recall the IJN sank more Japanese transports then Allied surface ships did.

When Perth and Houston attacked the landings on Borneo at Suda strait Mogami and Fubuki sank 6 Japanese transports. (Almost every torpedo they fired hit something.)
Perth and Houston didn't hit a single Japanese transport. Both were sank after being hit with long lance (and a dutch DD too I think)
There were other actions but no Japanese landing occured without both aircover and surface protection. The standard procedure was for paras to land to capture airfields while landings occured so that Japanese air could move forward.

I'd be embarreassed if I was caught sending unescorted transports out of my air cover.
The japanese do not need to do this. Once they take Kendari and Jolo they can run little TF all over in side them. Just keep adding airfields and enlarging the area you don't have to worry about.
Taking 1 size 4 airfield with a logical force results in a circle 21 hexes in all directions of air control. (15 for torpedo attacks) And LRCAP in 8 hexes in all directions.

So teleporting on turn 1 does not increase the speed Japan takes areas. It just exploits something that everyone knows should not be exploited. It is not being more clever then anyone.

By the way I don't pay attention to who these things get addressed to most of the time.
When I respond to a particular person I am either the next poster or I quote them but I have been up all night again. and vision...getting.....blurryyyyyyyyyzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I agree completely.. if i follow original japanese protocol... but if i am gonna do that i might as well let the AI play, just because something didn´t happen doesn´t mean it couldn´t have... if someone is willing to take the risk. For the umpft time yes i am against exploiting the 1st turn.. but i am also against exploiting calling everything else gamey under the assumption it would have been stopped if only the allied side had been allowed to do something. If it worked that way ya don´t need to play the game.. ya can draw it all out of paper and be done with it.

[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"

[moses]

Japan can do whatever it wants after turn one. You can invade PH, Austrailia, India, Numia, west Coast whatever you want. Its not gamey. You can send two divisions unescorted to Melbourne if you want and I won't be upset at all. Really, I'll actually be pretty happy about it.

You just can't teleport there.

[Dutchgy2000]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Count the number of available warships you have available to intercept

It doesn't work that way ...

Each and every single warship that exists within steaming range is a landing destroyed unless you have assigned enough protection to negate it.

The USN are capable of a TF of 1 CA, 2 CL, and 13 DD

The Brit's are capable of a TF of 2 BB, 4 CL, and 9 DD

The Dutch are capable of a TF of 3 CL & 7 DD

This is where you are thinking exploit turn #1 speed. "I can get the transports there before he can move these ships so I don't need escorts". *That* is pure exploitation. If you do not have a force capable of surviving against these 3 groups, you are gaming the system.

You will clearly see that all the *planned* landing have forces capable of dealing with these 3 forces should they want to get in the way.

Nope you didn´t get it... sure that´s whats available.. and sure.. with 100% detection.. 100% coordination.. 100% engagement of forces.. and so on..and so on.. ya would be right. But how come while assuming that you get a 100% of everything and so tell me you can stop the whole operation the other side gets 0% chanche slipping by and forcing a suprise somewhere? And what happens if i do use everything i got for escort... forget pearl and everything.. your 3 Tf still going to show up and prevent any landing? Just because you know something is gonna happen doesn´t mean ya can do anything about it. Just like assuming the japanese side cant have 100% suprise turn one ya will also need to assume allies couldnt have had 100% succesrate and stop everything stonecold.

[Mr.Frag]

Dutch, I am not talking about them all getting together into one massive defence. That is why I listed the 3 separate groups of ships that could be brought to bear against Japan action.

They are certainly not top notch ships by any means and the skill levels of the crews are not very high for the most part and you don't have time to send them to port to pick up superstar leaders ... but ...

As the Japan planners, they *had* to factor them into the forces used for landings. This is *why* Japan had BB's involved despite the risk to them from air attacks.

If you look at the preplanned Japanese forces:

You will see BB's in case the Brits responded in Malaya.

You will see multiple CA forces brought into the PI area capable of giving the USN a good slapdown.

You will see that due to this, most of Japan's naval forces are rather busy. They had perhaps enough to do 1 extra landing somewhere, but then reality sets in ... as a planner, one leaves a reserve in case something goes wrong.

[mlees]

lol... this whole tread started out with me agreeing... so yes i agree with all those points! What i don´t agree with is assuming there will be no suprise anywhere.

OK. The turn 1 surprise hardcoded effects means that the Japanese will achieve surprise everywhere. That is not possible IRL with invasions planned for south of the PI. Your latest argument, seems to me, to be: "Well the game let's me do it, so it should be OK."
Ok. I can't blame you for using the game system as best you can, but be aware that the turn 1 surprise toggle was designed mainly to help the designers to simulate the PH raid, IMO, not unopposed invasions all over the western Pacific on turn 1.

as if i would know that there is 90% risk would sometimes (very rarely) not stop any irl operation because the 10% pay off might be worth it.

If you think that a 10% success chance in "risky" operations is a long shot worth taking, I don't know what to say. IRL, those types of risky operations were done only because the commanders involved had NO other choice, other than total capitulation. The successfull commanders always shamelessly stacked the deck in their favor.

I guess it's just a matter of playing style. I'm more conservative, and I'm guessing your not. Play the game how you want, it won't get mad.

[:D]I'm not hot under the collar, just confused.[:D]

[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.

[Mr.Frag]

your 3 Tf still going to show up and prevent any landing?

No, they are not going to prevent any landing. You are thinking tatically. Think strategically.

You *plan* your landings as Japan against what you expect could be there.

These 3 forces *could* be there so you have to plan accordingly.

You can't plan to ship 200,000 men to a location and say ... "sorry guys, you don't need a DD escort because I think the Allies are all wimps and they wouldn't dare sail there."

You look at what *could* happen and say ... hmm, I think I need to have a surface group in the area that can handle this group if they happen to show up until the transports have unloaded, then the are free for other duties.

[Dutchgy2000]

ORIGINAL: mlees

lol... this whole tread started out with me agreeing... so yes i agree with all those points! What i don´t agree with is assuming there will be no suprise anywhere.

OK. The turn 1 surprise hardcoded effects means that the Japanese will achieve surprise everywhere. That is not possible IRL with invasions planned for south of the PI. Your latest argument, seems to me, to be: "Well the game let's me do it, so it should be OK."
Ok. I can't blame you for using the game system as best you can, but be aware that the turn 1 surprise toggle was designed mainly to help the designers to simulate the PH raid, IMO, not unopposed invasions all over the western Pacific on turn 1.

as if i would know that there is 90% risk would sometimes (very rarely) not stop any irl operation because the 10% pay off might be worth it.

If you think that a 10% success chance in "risky" operations is a long shot worth taking, I don't know what to say. IRL, those types of risky operations were done only because the commanders involved had NO other choice, other than total capitulation. The successfull commanders always shamelessly stacked the deck in their favor.

I guess it's just a matter of playing style. I'm more conservative, and I'm guessing your not. Play the game how you want, it won't get mad.

[:D]I'm not hot under the collar, just confused.[:D]

|sigh* .. no i am not saying the game lets me do it so i will do it... i don´t even do it! All i am saying is ya can´t stop everything by saying ´oh.. but i would have noticed´.. thats assuming just as much as me assuming you wouldn´t have noticed.

And about the 10%.. yes it´s risky.. yes its for desperate times.. but the point is.. they are not impossible blocked choises irl!

[mogami]

Hi, And it does not matter if 100 percent of Japanese TF are not detected.
If 1 out of 20 TF were detected it blows everything because the war starts right there. The other 19 undetected TF are now in enemy waters and the enemy is not asleep. They are still undetected but the enemy is moving.
This cannot happen of course if you teleport but it is why the Japanese did not cross the line. They could not teleport.
If I had teleport Transports I would use them. I know I don't have them. It appears if I exploit the system that I have teleporting transports.

The reason we call them teleporting is because they move from where they start to their targets without any interference of the intervening distance. Poof they are unloading.
Now whether they were detected or not they still could not do this. They are in a hex while you make your orders. 24 hours later they are unloading on Kendari or Jpohnson Island or Canton Island. that is teleporting.
The reason you do this is because even though you know there are 2 USN CV steaming range of Johnson Island before you move is you know the USN CV cannot move because you won't let them. So you take Johnson Island for free dump in a few Betty's and own that portion of the Pacific.
If you allowed Allied orders and did not teleport. You also would likely not even load the unit onto the transport.

If this is what stops you then you are correct. You should only play against the AI.

[Dutchgy2000]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

your 3 Tf still going to show up and prevent any landing?

No, they are not going to prevent any landing. You are thinking tatically. Think strategically.

You *plan* your landings as Japan against what you expect could be there.

These 3 forces *could* be there so you have to plan accordingly.

You can't plan to ship 200,000 men to a location and say ... "sorry guys, you don't need a DD escort because I think the Allies are all wimps and they wouldn't dare sail there."

You look at what *could* happen and say ... hmm, I think I need to have a surface group in the area that can handle this group if they happen to show up until the transports have unloaded, then the are free for other duties.

Well i guess there we differ.. yes you could make that evaluation that the allies won´t show up and take the risk.. point is ya won´t let me because you assume i ONLY do it because i know there is no risk not because i might be willing to actually take the risk even if you would react.. I might do the same a week later with the same evaluation and think it´s worth the risk again.

But lets be honest.. i am sure on the japanese side i can scrape toghether a few warships to satisfy your needs for protection.. that still doesn´t alter the fact that if i wanted to take advantage of turn one they would still be where i wanted them to be so it is kinda besides the point.. although interesting to see how differnt people evaluate risk.

[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"

[moses]

Certain things just aren't done. You don't ever put yourself in a position where you are completly defenceless unless you have no other option. Maybe you can land 10 transports at Numea without any escort but no commander would do this. The thought of a whole division being sunk by a single destroyer rules it out.

Now in the game you are free to do these things if you want. But its just not right that you can get there with no chance of detection or no chance of interception.

[Dutchgy2000]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, And it does not matter if 100 percent of Japanese TF are not detected.
If 1 out of 20 TF were detected it blows everything because the war starts right there. The other 19 undetected TF are now in enemy waters and the enemy is not asleep. They are still undetected but the enemy is moving.
This cannot happen of course if you teleport but it is why the Japanese did not cross the line. They could not teleport.
If I had teleport Transports I would use them. I know I don't have them. It appears if I exploit the system that I have teleporting transports.

The reason we call them teleporting is because they move from where they start to their targets without any interference of the intervening distance. Poof they are unloading.
Now whether they were detected or not they still could not do this. They are in a hex while you make your orders. 24 hours later they are unloading on Kendari or Jpohnson Island or Canton Island. that is teleporting.
The reason you do this is because even though you know there are 2 USN CV steaming range of Johnson Island before you move is you know the USN CV cannot move because you won't let them. So you take Johnson Island for free dump in a few Betty's and own that portion of the Pacific.
If you allowed Allied orders and did not teleport. You also would likely not even load the unit onto the transport.

If this is what stops you then you are correct. You should only play against the AI.

All I am sying is that it´s all nice and well telling me i cant do this and that because i cant assume i wont be bothered... but somehow you can tell me you assume you would have been able to do anything about it if you had been allowed to. It is supposed to work both ways.

[mogami]

Hi, Think of it like this. Plan your turn 1 moves like it is Nov 14th and you only get normal moves and if the enemy sees you he attacks you.

[Dutchgy2000]

ORIGINAL: moses

Certain things just aren't done. You don't ever put yourself in a position where you are completly defenceless unless you have no other option. Maybe you can land 10 transports at Numea without any escort but no commander would do this. The thought of a whole division being sunk by a single destroyer rules it out.

Now in the game you are free to do these things if you want. But its just not right that you can get there with no chance of detection or no chance of interception.

I have never landed in Numea... i never had any inclination to ever land in Numea and i probably never will... but theoretically i could have send some ships (not 10 obviously) of into the midle of the pacific.. tell them to be where i want them on a certain date..and take it from there... just because at game start they happen to sit in some japanese harbour and thus ´seem to´magically transport themselves withing striking range doesn´t mean that´s the actual case (see KB). I COMPLETELY AGREE YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE SHOT AT THEM... all i am saying is don´t say it´s impossible because it didnt happen.. like i keep saying..for every reason ya give why it couldnt have happened someone can come up with some reason it might have.. sure some are longshots.. but none are impossible. 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-