ORIGINAL: topeverest
I think there is a strong argument for partial empire investment in Oz, as has been stated above and before. Allied launching northwest from Darwin certainly is one of the great early strategic threats to the empire. I also agree that assuming they are taken, the risks of continuning to hold major portions of Oz (excluding NW) into 1943 are great. In 43, the empire has the best chance for meaningful victory in the counterpulse at the point of allied invasion. Continental war against massed 4E and 2E is not a recipie for success, especially when the IJN can no longer realistically protect a withdrawl for Oz.
In this classic time and distance problem that is AE, there is no easy empire force allocation answer, but IMHO, Oz divestment needs to be planned if any meaningful subset of forces is to be saved.
I've always been unpersuaded of Darwin's value. In the old days when supplies flowed there freely there was an argument. Now that supply does not everything in Darwin has to be shipped anyway. As easy to tell the ships to continnue on to their invasion objectives without the interim stop.
That presupposes that I think the DEI is a proper place for the Allies to bash their heads. I don't, necessarily. It plays to all of Japan's in-game advantages in LBA. It's a bog. But if Darwin can be taken by Japan, fine. It's at the end of a long road. The Allies have other means to isolate it and starve it without use of ground troops better used elsewhere.
Your point about the risks of Japan holding major portions only into 1943 make my point again. Why take it if there is no way to hold it, if auto-victory is not achieved? Areas of Oz often taken by Japan are essentially worthless to the Allied player, either economically or strategically. The NW corner is a good example. What does Japan DO with that, except use up strength holding and supplying it? Unless Perth is a supply hub linked to CT, why does the Allied player care if Japan holds it? Even to the end of the war? It's a backwater to the essential Allied objective of closing on Japanese centers of gravity and burning them down.
Japanese players who take western or northern Oz knowing they will be ejected in 1943 compound the mistake. What's the point? The Allies do not have to engage there; they simply don't. Most do, for emotional reasons, but it's not mandatory. Certainly they don't have to until they can engage on their terms, with modern armor and very good 4Es. Why do Japanese players hang their chins out in 1942 and beg to have them broken? Because it's "fun"? Fun to kill understrength Allied LCUs and run rampant for a year, feeling powerful and mighty? Yep. No other reason. That combat power could be far better employed on the Japanese defensive perimeter when the Allies come to call in 1944. But since most Japanese players have never seen 1944 they don't realize that.
To my Allied friends let me just say: A Japanese attack does not necessarily deserve a response.
