What's the Sir Robin strategy?

[AHFlattop]

I think its great that we're having this discussion, even if its old to some.  With IJ Auto victory on Jan 1 1943 requiring (I think) only 4X the Allies points, at some point in the 1/2 half of '42, the Allies should make some kind of stand or ambush, somewhere.
 
If IJ is careful with airplane and ship losses and the Allies doing a full Sir Robin Stategy, I would think it won't be too difficult to achieve an IJ Auto-victory.  It seems that the IJ KB death star rampades over everything while the Allies patiently wait until their own death star is formed.  Are IJ auto-victories common?

[ny59giants]

I'm at the end of 4/42 and must say that the "Sir Robin" strategy in CHS is a must for certain units. I take out the  large BF's, engineers, large aviation regiments, and Naval HQ's from the SRA/PI. I feel there is a shortage of aviation support in scenario 158c (Nik Mod). I built major siege places at Singapore, Soerabaja, and Manila. The last 2 did not fall until the middle of 4/42. [:D]   I feel that the Allies must delay, when it is cost effective. Some places I did not, because I would just be throwinh LCU's away.
The most important thing is the way your Japanese opoonent plays and finding a way to counter it. I image my next opponent will try something diferent. [;)]

[wneumann]

I'd have to say I've been playing "Sir Robin" in my PBEM, both by choice and otherwise...

"Sir Robin" was a deliberate plan for me in the Philippines, Malaya, DEI, and Burma. These are areas where "Sir Robin" is a very feasible if not the most feasible course of action. However, "Sir Robin" is not a suitable course everywhere...

In the case of the South Pacific area, I ended up resorting (involuntarily) to "Sir Robin" once it became too late for me to sufficiently reinforce the major bases in this region. Once Pillager captured Canton Is (and began the process of cutting off the U.S. from Down Under), it became extremely difficult and eventually impossible to reinforce South Pacific bases that remained in Allied control.

From Canton, Pillager moved south and west to Pago Pago, then Suva, then Fiji, then Noumea. Once the dominoes started falling, "Sir Robin" became the only Allied option in the South Pacific.

AHFlattop makes a good point... which almost perfectly describes the situation in my PBEM. As an Allied strategy "Sir Robin" can be played (deliberately or otherwise) beyond the tipping point.

Once the tipping point is crossed, the Japanese can stop their advance along an outer perimeter that will be very difficult for an Allied player to penetrate. Pillager has effectively done that in our PBEM. Even with my forces practically intact, an Allied counterattack is going to be very, very difficult.

Not to mention a very good chance at a Jap Auto Victory.

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: Panther Bait

When I noticed that my Betty/Nells were concentrated in the South China Sea area and that the KB was down near Borneo supporting the invasion of Balikpapan and Tarakan, I sent Lexington, Enterprise and Saratoga for a Jan 1942 visit to Truk (via a northern hop around Kwajalein since he skipped the Wake Island invasion in December).  I was sweating bullets the whole way in (especially when Kates and Vals starting hitting Rabaul from the Mini-KB, I think), but he had no idea they were there until the bombs started falling, and I was able to bang up/sink a bunch of CLs and DDs for no losses other than a few planes.  He was stunned for 3 days, and I think it has made him at least reconsider a bit where the KB is patrolling. 

Now that Yorktown is in the Pacific as well, I need to think up more ways to use my CVs to administer annoying hits here and there, rather than rust in port at PH until 1943.

In addition to Truk, Wake, Kwajalein & even Marcus can be approached carefully and given a few hits. It might force the japanese to send mini-KB after you, or maybe splitting up KN which makes it more vulnerable. Plus killing every Betty/Nell you can steadily erodes his strike forces. Maybe a BB/CA raid on Paramushiro may attract his attention. (Even if you only force him to relocate his Bettys means a few more OP losses)

[Commander Stormwolf]

Among the more effective doctrines is Sir Robin in combination with Sir Lancellot -->

--------------

Sir Lancellot ~

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPXG4pdP ... re=related

-------------

Fighting the battles on my terms and causing favourable ratios of attrittion.

Similar to a poker player who plays tight-aggressive -- fold every hand and then
raise / trap when the opponent believes they possess the better hand, when in reality
they are about to lose the full buy-in with a pair of kings against my set of Tens.

Aka. the real pacific war December 1941 - June 1942 = Sir Robin (run and hide your CVs, maybe annoy the enemy (Kwajelein raid / Doolittle Raid)

June 1944 - August 1945 = Sir Lancellot (use your CVs to hack and smash eveything in the entire pacific ocean (Truk Raid, Battle of Phippline Sea, Battle of Leyte Gulf)

Essentially the question in warfare is always to preserve ones strategic initiative or to reclaim the initiative by denying battle until favourable circumstances are obtained whereby such a battle would yield a mathematically viable outcome.

One could imagine if the IJN would have ignored pearl harbour and used their full assets to subdue the SRA in a more expedient fashion.

The events would have been as follows:

1) IJN declares war and strikes the phillipines
2) Imbeciles at pre-war US Navy keep their positions and send battleships
to relieve the phillipines (as prescribed by War Plan Orange)
3) Carriers used to screen the battleships are sunk by land-based aircraft (G3M/G4M) flying out of Wake Island / Marianas / Etc. (pre-war doctrine demanded that carriers opearate in a spread-out fashion and provide reconnaisance to the battleship line)
4) US Navy is stunned and decides whether to retreat
5) IJN sends carrier force and sinks US Navy Battleships

Final US Losses : 85% of navy assets, 125,000 personnell.
Final Outcome: Peace deal obtained


As history indicates, the replacement staff (Nimitz, Spruance, etc) saved the western worldfrom a serious disaster with the discipline and logic to implement the Fabian (aka Sir Robin) strategy of withdrawl and harrassment that would eventually place friendly forces in a position to reclaim (and uphold) the strategic initiative in the Pacific theater.
Additional credit to Roosevelt for suggesting to build the Independence Class of Carriers.

[Nemo121]

Hmm, a lot of people seem to be lauding Sir Robin as reasonable when what they are, in fact, talking about is a fairly reasonable fighting withdrawal.

The Sir Robin as I understand it is all about running away and fighting almost nowhere on the basis that one is "too weak" to fight effectively. I think that if your opponent identifies 5 basic areas in which the Japanese are going to advance and decides to concentrate his strength in 1 or 2 of those area then he isn't playing a Sir Robin at all. Sir Robin would concentrate his strength in Aden or CONUSA and leave all 5 of these areas to be over-run should the Japanese player push hard enough.
 
Not fighting where you don't actually have a chance in order to concentrate force elsewhere isn't really what I understand by Sir Robin. FWIW I think Sir Robin is a very sub-optimal strategic choice. It neither slows the Japanese sufficiently nor, when combined with the additional territory which must be recaptured if the Japanese player is competent, saves sufficient force or time to succeed as a strategic choice. Its only real benefit is that it helps players who lack confidence and ability as they never have to try to do "more with less" and can, instead, just sit back until they have sufficient force that even their lack of confidence in their abilities no longer holds them back.

Even if ability is a problem I would suggest that the goal of gaming shouldn't be to win but should, instead, be to play as good a game as you can and the way to get better is to undertake those kinds of operations which you are poor at, suffer disaster and then analyse what you did wrong so you don't repeat that error. Rinse and repeat until you are good enough to fight the Japanese for every base from Day 1.

[AirGriff]

Well said, Nemo.  Of course, in this game, one rinse and repeat cycle takes about 3 years!

[Hawspipe]

He who runs away, lives to run away again another day.

[AW1Steve]

And he who defends all, defends nothing....

[Cathartes]

Sir Robin Hybrid. As a PBEM Allied player I organized and fought a delaying action at a few key locations knowing full well that I would ultimately lose it, but further knowing that fighting long and well in location A was going to have consequences in location B.

Loction C, D, E, F were worth clearing out as fast as possible and consolidating in location G IN CASE the enemy came knocking on that door which you definitely didn't want them to enter. The dance of points, delay, and trap-setting. Savvy?
.
.
.
.
Ironically, I'm seeing my PBEM player do the same thing to me now that the Allies begin hitting back in late '43.

[Commander Stormwolf]

At the cash game table,

Sir Robin wins more than he loses - and that is ultimately what matters most.
The desperate players panic and send all their $ into the middle with the losing hand.

One must remember that the purpose of cash games is to make money with mathematically favourable odds - just as in warfare the objective is to destroy the opposing force with minimal loss to self. Such is the doctrine of the professionals (aka Nimitz). --> those who play for action and excitement follow the doctrine of the fish - playing unfavourable odds - and lose (aka Yamamoto).

Excitability is the primary flaw of any commander (case in point Goering in 1940 sending Luftwaffe against london) Causing the enemy to react to oneself is a measure of competence (case in point RAF commanders 1940 destroying luftwaffe planes in mathematically favourable ratios)

Effectively such is the primary psychological difference between the Allies and Axis - with the latter emphasizing shock tactics to compensate for serious strategic defficiencies.
The type A personality of the Axis is ever self-consuming as evidenced by history.

For the same reasons why the axis shall never win a war is the same reason why a fish can never generate a profit. Devoid of logic and reason, and the discipline to fold losing hands, all temporary gains will be lost and the final outcome shall be total irremediable defeat.

The IJN would have been far better for not having started the pacific war (mainland china was in civil war, waiting 10 years and picking up the pieces would have been strategically correct). It was not possible however, as the barbarians sought an adventure *officially called the China Adventure* and unleashed a grotesque orgy of destruction, an orgy that lasted until the morning of August, 1945 and ended in the only conceivable manner (see pic below) Such is the fate of all gamblers. If one is destined to lose at the cash table, it is best not to place your money in the first place.

The Sir Robins at CinPac, after building an armada of cheap 25,000 Ton Essex Carriers
whilst the barbarians at the IJN argued and wasted time building 75,000 ton Shinano carriers, emerged with a profit. The last years of the war simply saw the US carrier fleet curshing all in its path with impunity.

The end result is always the same. Sir Robin laughs last, but laughs loudest.