The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: paullus99

@GJ - because he feels compelled to constantly add to his "ship sunk" list. He feels that if he isn't doing something offensively, he should at least be laying traps to try to get the allies to counter-attack into his prepared defensive positions (which is probably why he's hitting the Aleutians and New Caledonia - he thinks CR will be compelled to take them back - which isn't the case).

Japan should look at 1944/1945 status of its Empire, not to the sunk list. The Allies get so many ships that you cannot really hurt them enough, even if you get extremely lucky.

I've lost nearly all my allied BB/CAs against Radar and still i was able to land in Hokkaido by march 1944.

John should really start thinking about setting up his defences....ASAP...or this game is lost for him

[Canoerebel]

Here's a question:  In most scenarios of AE, the navy (especially capital ships) is Japan's Achillee's heel. 
 
So what is the Achillee's heel for the Allies?  Ground troops?  Political points?  Low aircraft replacement pools? 

[MateDow]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Here's a question:  In most scenarios of AE, the navy (especially capital ships) is Japan's Achillee's heel. 

So what is the Achillee's heel for the Allies?  Ground troops?  Political points?  Low aircraft replacement pools? 

I would have to say that it is the low aircraft pools. In games where the Japanese player can build thousands of aircraft more than history, the US player has to disband units to provide airframes.

But given the sheer number of troops and ships, it is fairly well balanced out long term.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
So what is the Achillee's heel for the Allies?  Ground troops?  Political points?  Low aircraft replacement pools? 

Feckless leadership. [:'(]

[MateDow]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Why is he always raiding some stupid xAKs around the globe?!

Just wait until he gets the new Japanese battlecruisers (Kawachi in this scenario?). You'll find them between Pearl and SF once they arrive.

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
So what is the Achillee's heel for the Allies?  Ground troops?  Political points?  Low aircraft replacement pools? 

Feckless leadership. [:'(]

There's alot of truth to that! A great deal. In fact, that's probably the correct answer.

I have another nomination to add: losing a lopsided carrier battle in '42. That often slows down the Allies quite a bit. So, the nominations thus far for possible Allied Achillee's heel:

1. Ground troops
2. Political points
3. Low aircraft replacement pools
4. Feckless allied leadership
5. Losing a lopsided carrier battle in '42

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: MateDow
Just wait until he gets the new Japanese battlecruisers (Kawachi in this scenario?). You'll find them between Pearl and SF once they arrive.

New Japanese battlecruisers won't be of much help to him in Burma, Thailand and Vietnam!

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
So what is the Achillee's heel for the Allies?  Ground troops?  Political points?  Low aircraft replacement pools? 

Feckless leadership. [:'(]

There's alot of truth to that! A great deal. In fact, that's probably the correct answer.

I have another nomination to add: losing a lopsided carrier battle in '42. That often slows down the Allies quite a bit. So, the nominations thus far for possible Allied Achillee's heel:

1. Ground troops
2. Political points
3. Low aircraft replacement pools
4. Feckless allied leadership
5. Losing a lopsided carrier battle in '42

I don't think the Allies have an Achilles heel. Achilles heel would be defined as some weakness that if properly exploited would be fatal. There are some weak points to the Allies in 42 but I do not think they can be termed as potentially fatal weak points. Losing the Allied carriers early on is a mistake but not an Achilles heel because it is a mistake that can be avoided. However, that said, I have always said that just about the only way for an Allied player to lose the war is to lose his carriers early on. Any other mistake can be dealt with.

Japan's Achilles heel is not it's fleet or air force but oil. Take out the oil early enough and Japan is doomed. That would be my definition of an Achilles heel. In the real war, Japan's Achilles heel was her merchant sea lanes. But that is not the case in AE.

[Canoerebel]

No, oil isn't the Achillees heel.  I've never seen a game in which oil seriously affected Japan's ability to fight.  Partly, that's because in any game in which Japan has serious problems holding or protecting its oil in '42 and '43, that usually is just one symptom of a much broader and bigger problem.  Those games usually end with an IJ surrender before the oil becomes a real issue.  But in games that I've played into '45, I haven't seen oil truly hamper Japan's abilities - such as they are - to defend themselves.

Moreover, Japan can usually take adequate measures to protect oil until pretty late in teh game.

However, I have seen games in which excessive early losses of Japanese CAs, BBs or CVs seriously affected Japan's ability to wage war effectively. And this can become an issue for Japan early in the game.

[Cribtop]

The allies are not limited in many areas, but they are "less unlimited" in three, IMHO:

CVs until late 43
Airframes
Assault shipping

These should be Japan's targets for attrition, ideally using Japan's huge airframe capacity as the instrument, since Japan can afford those losses.

[paullus99]

Crib - seems as though John has done a terrible job in promoting real attrition of CR's assets. If anything, he's going to find himself in a worse position later on, since he'll always have one eye behind his back trying to prevent things from coming apart in Burma.....

[zuluhour]

PP question. I assume that in order for me to "buy" a US division for use in southeast asia, the furthest I could stage such a unit without cost prior to the actual "activation" would be the east coast, is that the norm? Cape Town? I ask because I have a similar concern over Malayan Bdes I chose to withdraw to Cape Town via Ceylon in my last game. I did not pay for the "withdrawl" but only their eventual reassignment to India. I assume national boundries are in fact land locked.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
So what is the Achillee's heel for the Allies?  Ground troops?  Political points?  Low aircraft replacement pools? 

Feckless leadership. [:'(]

OK - I've seen the word before but have no idea what that looks like. Ghormley? Blackjack Fletcher? Percival?[:(]

And if they were feckless, who are the leaders who were well and truly fecked? [X(]
And what would that look like? And can you even describe it on this forum? [:-]

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
So what is the Achillee's heel for the Allies?  Ground troops?  Political points?  Low aircraft replacement pools? 

Feckless leadership. [:'(]

There's alot of truth to that! A great deal. In fact, that's probably the correct answer.

I have another nomination to add: losing a lopsided carrier battle in '42. That often slows down the Allies quite a bit. So, the nominations thus far for possible Allied Achillee's heel:

1. Ground troops
2. Political points
3. Low aircraft replacement pools
4. Feckless allied leadership
5. Losing a lopsided carrier battle in '42

I'll buy that list, with an adjunct to #3: a suicidal Japanese invasion of Seattle, LA, and any other aircraft manufacturing city within two days reach of a surprise landing. Take the city, destroy the industry [by switching it to R&D of something unimportant, like transports], and bug out if possible or dig in and sell their lives dearly for the greater glory of the emperor.

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

PP question. I assume that in order for me to "buy" a US division for use in southeast asia, the furthest I could stage such a unit without cost prior to the actual "activation" would be the east coast, is that the norm? Cape Town? I ask because I have a similar concern over Malayan Bdes I chose to withdraw to Cape Town via Ceylon in my last game. I did not pay for the "withdrawl" but only their eventual reassignment to India. I assume national boundries are in fact land locked.

Restricted American units can go from East Coast to Capetown.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

No, oil isn't the Achillees heel.  I've never seen a game in which oil seriously affected Japan's ability to fight.  Partly, that's because in any game in which Japan has serious problems holding or protecting its oil in '42 and '43, that usually is just one symptom of a much broader and bigger problem.  Those games usually end with an IJ surrender before the oil becomes a real issue.  But in games that I've played into '45, I haven't seen oil truly hamper Japan's abilities - such as they are - to defend themselves.

Moreover, Japan can usually take adequate measures to protect oil until pretty late in teh game.

Don't you usually play with HRs about strat bombing the DEI?

There is a fair amount of oil in Burma too. You can take that away from him.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
So what is the Achillee's heel for the Allies?  Ground troops?  Political points?  Low aircraft replacement pools? 

Feckless leadership. [:'(]

OK - I've seen the word before but have no idea what that looks like. Ghormley? Blackjack Fletcher? Percival?[:(]

And if they were feckless, who are the leaders who were well and truly fecked? [X(]
And what would that look like? And can you even describe it on this forum? [:-]

feckless (adj.) 1590s, from feck, "effect, value, vigor" (late 15c.), Scottish shortened form of effect, + -less. Popularized by Carlyle, who left its opposite, feckful, in dialectal obscurity. Related: Fecklessly; fecklessness.

[witpqs]

I have nightmares about dialectal obscurity. What a way to go! [:D]

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

I'll buy that list, with an adjunct to #3: a suicidal Japanese invasion of Seattle, LA, and any other aircraft manufacturing city within two days reach of a surprise landing. Take the city, destroy the industry [by switching it to R&D of something unimportant, like transports], and bug out if possible or dig in and sell their lives dearly for the greater glory of the emperor.

I've never been clear on this point, and the manual LOOKS clear, but I'm not sure the writer didn't convert into talking about Japan only and didn't note that. This section here:

13.6 CAPTURING INDUSTRY
When the enemy captures specialty (i.e., non-Heavy Industry) Industry hexes, a check is made
to see if any damage occurs to the facilities before capture. If defending engineers were present
in the hex, the chance and severity of damage is increased with the number of engineers that
were present. This damage impacts Resources, Oil, and other factory types. Otherwise:
»» Captured Manpower Centers are divided by 10. For example, if you
capture an 30 point enemy Manpower Center, it will be worth 3 to you.
»» Captured Japanese Naval or Merchant Shipyards by
the Allies convert to Repair Shipyards.
»» Captured Aircraft Factories convert to Vehicle Factories

On the previous page, in 13.3.2, it says "Note: Allied factories may NOT expand or convert."

So does this mean a Japanese take of Seattle converts all the aircraft factories to Vehicles instantly, and if the Allied player takes the city back he can't re-convert them to planes? Looks that way.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I have nightmares about dialectal obscurity. What a way to go! [:D]

Bestill your heart, my good man. To be detailed to D.O. (as we like to call it) the word in the dock must be judged obscure by a powerful, famous English author. Preferably one with a castle.