"Gamey-ness" ? NO TLKIILERICH (Thomas) please

[treespider]

Guess it's too late...but you could always ask your opponent his thoughts.

Historically not all of the B-17's were destroyed at Clark Field... substantial numbers 20ish or more IIRC (at the office and can't recall the exact numbers)... were availble throughout the campaign.

Again I do not recall if the Dutch or the Americans ever employed their bombers in the first six months of the war bombing the refineries....and if they did it was perhaps a one-off mission rather than a sustained day after day campaign.... the powers that be at the time during the campaign felt the most effective use of the aircraft were attacking enemy shipping at sea and in port.

[Nikademus]

Project "X" (the trans-continental ferry route set up to reinforce the Pacific with heavy bombers) eventually totaled 39 x B-17's and 12 x LB-30's in addition to the survivors from the PI's. However on average servicability hovered around 50% and wear and tear were constantly erroding the planes that were operational.

There were no immediate strategic bombing attacks on captured oil facilties because the handfuls of operational 4E's were already up to their eyeballs in missions trying to stem the Japanese tide. This included airfield attacks, port attacks and even ground attacks on advancing Japanese troops/those that were still disembarking. There was even one ultra long range shuttle mission hitting the Japanese in the PI's which took them by suprise.

Why no SB? Hindsight mainly. Despite the challenges the Allies fought with the conviction and goal of trying to halt the oncoming tide. In the game the tendancy is "I can't win because historically the task was hopeless, so as soon as Player One captures an important target i'll divert some/all of my best resources (like 4E's) into bombing resources looking at 'the long game' ". In real life, the battle wasn't declared over till the fat ABDA sang so the idea of diverting the few precious 4E's from trying to bomb military targets that were still converging on Java in order to bomb friendly (but now occupied) oil targets is silly.

That said.......its not 'gamey' but if the goal is to play a "historical" style game i'd discuss it with your opponent and put the question this way...."Do you think such scorched earth tactics in the middle of an ongoing battle is historically accurate?" This is a seperate question from the Dutch (who owned the refinaries) setting fire to them as the Japanese advanced. Blowing up refinaries with dynamite doesn't divert B-17's from attacking enemy convoys or beachheads after all.

Finally....from a pure game level...a discussion is necessary with your opponent because SB in general tends to be overpowerful, unless a strong CAP can be placed over the target which depending on circumstances is easier said than done. Having a wrecked base and airfield, newly captured for example and have it be blitzed next turn by max #'s of 4E's might be seen as not cricket......but in the end its up to the players to decide what's fair and realistic.

Me....personally....i would not exploit the detail control of units by switching them instantly to SB, esp knowing how effective it is.

[vettim89]

I think Nikademus hit the nail on the head here. Diverting the few 4Es to SB was not considered because they were tasked with tactical missions. Once the DEI fell, the Allies lacked the bases to hit the Oil/Refinery Centers. They did try an extreme long range attack on Balikpapan but that did not bear much fruit. The RN hit Palembang in 1945 with Avengers and did quite a bit of damage.

As to SB being too effective, I think that might be true for HI and Factories but not Refineries and oil centers. Those facilities are pretty fragile. There are two large refineries in my home town. I think even one or two well placed 500 lb bombs would put them out of action for months.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: vettim89

I think Nikademus hit the nail on the head here. Diverting the few 4Es to SB was not considered because they were tasked with tactical missions. Once the DEI fell, the Allies lacked the bases to hit the Oil/Refinery Centers. They did try an extreme long range attack on Balikpapan but that did not bear much fruit. The RN hit Palembang in 1945 with Avengers and did quite a bit of damage.

As to SB being too effective, I think that might be true for HI and Factories but not Refineries and oil centers. Those facilities are pretty fragile. There are two large refineries in my home town. I think even one or two well placed 500 lb bombs would put them out of action for months.

As for the B-17s, my own PBM experience is pretty much historical. Strat bombing in the early DEI works but not so great (often not at all), and doing that means you aren't bombing something else. No need for a house rule or for any angst over doing it or not doing it.

[USSAmerica]

In my mind, if I'm going to try to invade and capture a base that contains one of the resources most important to my ability to stay in the fight, I'm damned well gonna defend it with everything I can. If I'm the Allied player, even though I know my early war 4EB replacement rate is pitiful, I'll spend them to hit a strategic target if my opponent does not adequately defend it. These bases and resources are the entire reason Japan went to war in the first place! They should be critical targets/defended bases.