Monsoon Effects

[zuluhour]

IMO one big reason Burma is in the forefront in many games is that the Allies can't do much elsewhere in 1942, and they don't want to play 365 turns of moving logistics ships around and building air fields

Hey man! sssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[:D]

[Andy Mac]

I would ask a few questions

1. Is the mod based off of the patch 2 data updates that included monsoon effects ?? ie have the bases got supply caps
2. Did your opponent play it historically ??

The reason I ask is the main reason Burma was so tough for the allies was

1. lack of engineering assets committed to the theatre - has your opponent sent lots of seabees to India and Assam - if they have then the supply net will be significantly stronger than before
2. no real investment in Assam front until after places like Ceylon and Calcutta were developed
3. lack of committment or piecemeal destruction of modern forces e.g. 18th Brit Div lost in Malaya, Bur Corps mauled in the retreat, I Aus Corps sent to Australia, 14th Div attack mishandled badly by Irwin in 43

I could go on

But basically each of these things and others can be managed by a player to improve the situation.

1. Send 20 Seabees Bn's to India in 42 and suddenly Assam infrastructure looks a lot stronger ship in supply from East COast USA = plentiful supply
2. Prioritise CBI dont make it the Cinderella (unit across the whole war in contact with enemy longest = 17th Indian Div)
3. Dont lose basically a Corps in Malaya and Burma and divert troops and more importantly engineering assets

Suddenly you have a very different game position e.g. all weather airfields, good hospital and anti malaria facilities, clean water, pipelines for gas, better improved railways etc etc

None of this is a problem with the model its a problem with the politics - the US would never have committed the way most players (including me) do to Burma - its a fact that from day 1 most players CBI gets significantly more assets and rsources and especially the big CW Divs are not defeated piecemeal but are committed in a solid mass in a way that irwin failed to do in 43

Basically what I am saying is its less the logistics model thats the issue but the plitical one

[Andy Mac]

When 17th Indian Div retreated into Assam nothing had even started to be developed most players start on day 1

The allies never thought they would be fighting there remember so they lost art least a year when players know they are probably getting kicked out of Burma

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I have no problem with Burma at all. While what can happen there isn't historical, that matches the game most nearly anywhere. Both sides have roughly similar capabilities in Burma - unlike some other theaters - so it's an interesting place. If I was in a game in which an opponent demanded a reduction of activity in Burma, I'd demand concessions in China, where the sitaution can be very unhistoric and tough on the Allies.

To me, the game right now offeres an interesting and challenging balance of capabilities, problems, and opportunities. It's a fun mix, so I wouldn't tinker with balance in a major way at this point.

Hear hear! I found that it really just counterbalances the out of whack Chinese theater. Besides, to add layers of house rules just leads to misunderstanding and arguments. House rules should be kept at a bare minimum. They tend to ruin friendships.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Basically what I am saying is its less the logistics model thats the issue but the plitical one

Which no game that I know of is able to effectively model into an enjoyable game ...

And I share all of Andy's opinions on the Burma/Assam theatre (not that my opinion matters much). It's a case of 20/20 hindsight. Players know that these were all mistakes that are within their provence of correcting ... and they do. It would kinda boring to force them into the same errors ... just like as IJ I HATE to produce Nates and Oscars in 1945 even though historically they did. So I choose not to and always play PDU ON .... [;)]

[John 3rd]

Nice to see Andy Post on the Thread. THANKS!

CR and Pax are right. I have spent some serious time thinking about this topic over the last couple of days and really appreciate the commentary and perspective. It has helped me a bit. I hope it has enlightened others as well.

[Nemo121]

Just an idea but if you were going to HR it wouldn't the simplest HR simply be that NO US forces whatsoever ( air or ground ) could be based in India or Burma?

That could model a political refusal to send units there which would impact on engineer levels and leave you with only commonwealth replacement rates for troops and planes - which would slow that theatre hugely.

Of course applying such HRs to just one side and then allowing the Japanese to co-operate perfectly is just attempting to win the game through rules lawyering and pretty abhorrent behaviour but assuming similar rules were applied to Japan that might be the simplest, single HR which would have the widest impact in a moderately realistic manner.

[Andy Mac]

Also Ramree Island in all scens should (with 20/20 hindsight) have a supply cap of 50 applied

The lack of a supply cap at this base makes it to powerfull as a port as it can handle masses of supply and pass them on.

So Ramree Island when developed is to powerfull a logistics hub.

But when I did the patch 2 updates I missed it - if I was going to do anything differently it would have been to give that base a supply cap rating

[Andy Mac]

Nemo it would solve that issue you are correct but it would be IMO disproportionate.

I remember reading Slims book about the condition of the infrastructure BURCORPS arrived into in ASSAM - this was what in May or June 42 so 6 months into the war and not a sigle engineer Bn had deployed to ASSAM

How many players can say the same in a game.....I know I cannot

[Nemo121]

Andy,

What would the supply cap at Ramree be if you had to redo that? I'm currently in the process of building it up and using it to springboard a major thrust inland but would consider HRing a supply CAP if Damian wanted it since I think it is just such a crucial place for an imbalance to occur - its the logical gateway to Burma.

[catwhoorg]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Just an idea but if you were going to HR it wouldn't the simplest HR simply be that NO US forces whatsoever ( air or ground ) could be based in India or Burma?

Thats pretty ahistorical.


Lots of planes (fighter, bomber and transport) and some ground troops. (not many true, but Merriels Marauders had some impact)

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Nemo it would solve that issue you are correct but it would be IMO disproportionate.

I remember reading Slims book about the condition of the infrastructure BURCORPS arrived into in ASSAM - this was what in May or June 42 so 6 months into the war and not a sigle engineer Bn had deployed to ASSAM

How many players can say the same in a game.....I know I cannot

That is an interesting and fairly easy idea to use...

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: catwhoorg

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Just an idea but if you were going to HR it wouldn't the simplest HR simply be that NO US forces whatsoever ( air or ground ) could be based in India or Burma?

Thats pretty ahistorical.


Lots of planes (fighter, bomber and transport) and some ground troops. (not many true, but Merriels Marauders had some impact)

you don't even need a hr. I never sent anything else to the India/Burma theatre than what arrives at Aden or already is in India (to be honest, some Aussie divs arriving in Aden didn't even go to India/Burma) and have never had any problems. Squadrons just go there as they arrive.

I have posted tracker screenshots about supply moving into Burma and from Burma to China again and again in my AARs, using the official patch, players must bork the system (no idea how they do it) to have supply NOT moving through the jungle in huge masses. Again, this is with the latest official patch, both in vanilla and babeslite.

And supply means fighting, no matter if monsoon season or not.

The supply system got a huge problem and that is that if a base got a supply Cap or not only matters for base to base transfer of supply but bases that don't have a supply Cap can still shift in hundreds of thousands of tons of supply which is why supply flows en masse from India to Burma and from Burma to China (where you got nothing but supply capped bases and supply still flows - through jungle and mountain hexes off the road). See my screenshots if this is in doubt.

[Nemo121]

Yeah but you can't just slap that limit on the Allies and soup up Japan crazily and still call it a fair game. There would have to be a major quid pro quo for such an HR to be acceptable.

[Andy Mac]

Nemo in a game in progress its almost impossible to resolve.

Ramree was an island with a crocodile infested swamp between it and a mountain range - I should have given it a min cap of 50 tonnes per day per level of development i.e. 50 x (AF+Port+Fort/3)

I missed it but the mod you are using may have done so.

If I had to try and account for my error in a game in progress I woudl do the following

1. Never use the supply draw mechanism to draw overland supply to Ramree
2. HR that the amount of supply I am allowed to unload at Ramree beyond the bases own requirements is limited to say 200 x the number of active Barges or LCT's at the port to reflect the need to traverse the Swamp - so 30 active barges would allow 9000 supply to be dumped for onward distribution etc etc

Basically dont allow the base to have huge supply surplus as it WILL give any surplus to troops nearby.

But this is after the horse has bolted most players as Japan should simply make sure the place is defended as its more important than Akyab

Andy

[Andy Mac]

Personally if I was going to HR Burma (AND I AM NOT IN FAVOUR OF IT - as both sides need the benefit of hindsight and that the biggest single thing that impacts on Burma)

It would be

1. No Allied Units enter Burma without paying PP's (i.e. the Indian restricted Divs)
2. No USN LCU's to be transferred to CBI (so no Seabees) until after 2nd Monsoon season (arbitrary limit so Oct 43)
3. USAAF Base forces and construction Bns can be sent to CBI but may not enter Assam/Burma until after the 1st monsoon season e.g October 42

So USAAF forces can be sent to the theatre but are retstricted to India until after the end on the first Monsoon.

If I had to do it thats how I would restrict it but as I said I am not a fan as hindsight goes both ways

[bigred]

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

The ground combat in Burma had alot to do with infiltration, something very difficult to recreate on brigade scale with such large hexes and stringent hex side control. The allied air supply effort is not portrayed well either as the RAF and later USAF were very precise and reliable suppling forward units. 2 cents from the peanut gallery.

interesting--solution would be to increase to supply load capacity.

[bigred]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Grow up JIII, stop whining and use the power that the game, and your mod in particular gives to the JFB.

[:-] a little over the top

[CowboyRonin]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Personally if I was going to HR Burma (AND I AM NOT IN FAVOUR OF IT - as both sides need the benefit of hindsight and that the biggest single thing that impacts on Burma)

It would be

1. No Allied Units enter Burma without paying PP's (i.e. the Indian restricted Divs)
2. No USN LCU's to be transferred to CBI (so no Seabees) until after 2nd Monsoon season (arbitrary limit so Oct 43)
3. USAAF Base forces and construction Bns can be sent to CBI but may not enter Assam/Burma until after the 1st monsoon season e.g October 42

So USAAF forces can be sent to the theatre but are retstricted to India until after the end on the first Monsoon.

If I had to do it thats how I would restrict it but as I said I am not a fan as hindsight goes both ways

+1 My thoughts exactly.

[inqistor]

Not quite about monsoon, but more about supply movement:

I find it interesting, that there is actual bottleneck in moving supply in Northern Australia. What have to be changed to get similar result in Northern Burma? Getting rid of most bases there?