Island defense tips for Japan

[BLurking]

Dave,

I've made it to late '43 as the Japanese in a PBEM, and things are finally starting to turn around for the Allies. In fact, there is no place where I can oppose them where they decide to apply force. My biggest problem isn't with the game engine, per se - it's the fact that the 'sweet spot' where both forces are at approximately equal terms is so short.

IRL, the Allies and Japanese were fighting a battle of attrition from late '42 to '43, when the Japanese finally started to collapse. In the game it seems that when the Allies finally get their feet under them, the players amass their forces and a huge battle results. Losses are incurred in days that would have taken months in real life to occurs. One side ends up broken, and it's free-fall from there. The quality of the Japanese play only serves to dictate when this clash will occur - but it inevitably does.

The most fun to be had in the game is when both sides are struggling, and that time is lamentably short...

Goes back to the comments about the pace of operations that everyone harps about, I guess.

My two cents,

Brian

[ADavidB]

ORIGINAL: BLurking

Dave,

I've made it to late '43 as the Japanese in a PBEM, and things are finally starting to turn around for the Allies. In fact, there is no place where I can oppose them where they decide to apply force. My biggest problem isn't with the game engine, per se - it's the fact that the 'sweet spot' where both forces are at approximately equal terms is so short.

IRL, the Allies and Japanese were fighting a battle of attrition from late '42 to '43, when the Japanese finally started to collapse. In the game it seems that when the Allies finally get their feet under them, the players amass their forces and a huge battle results. Losses are incurred in days that would have taken months in real life to occurs. One side ends up broken, and it's free-fall from there. The quality of the Japanese play only serves to dictate when this clash will occur - but it inevitably does.

The most fun to be had in the game is when both sides are struggling, and that time is lamentably short...

Goes back to the comments about the pace of operations that everyone harps about, I guess.

My two cents,

Brian

Okay, those are useful comments! Thanks!

So, what you are saying is that with the current Game design it is in the Allied player's best interest to simply build up for the first 24 months or so of the Game and then try for an "Apocalyptic" victory of sorts (in the hopes, of course, that the "apocalypse" will hit Japan and not the Allies. [;)] )

BTW - as things stand in your game, does either side have a reasonable shot at a victory by points?

Thanks again -

Dave Baranyi

[Nomad]

A part of the problem lies in the ability to transfer assests with little or no regard to HQ assignments. I can just see Big Mac letting a division or two loose to fight in the Marshal Islands or sending 3 or 4 groups of aircraft to the Central Pacific. If there were some real penalties for this then the roughly equal time would be much longer. As it is now, we can willy nilly move units all over the board with no political repercussions at all.

[Dereck]

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

Forts, forts and more forts! The allies have enough LCUs post-1942 to take any island they put their mind to. The trick is to make it expensive for the allied player to invade. You're playing a delaying game here with island and atolls. Atolls have an advantage in that an invading force has to shock attack the turn it lands so if the allied player invades piecemeal it can hurt him. 200-300 assualt points behind strong forts is enough to stave off rapid defeat but in the the end, if he wants it bad enough, it will be his regardless. Don't commit division size forces to outlaying island defence, use your NLFs and SNLFs for that. Commit divisions only to those areas that are vital to Japan's survival. That means the SRA and any bases within heavy bomber range of Japan.

Keep your islands well supplied with sufficient airpower on nearby airfields to help. If you are in range of his heavies, the gig is up as you won't be able to stop them from tearing up the defences. If you still have strong naval forces, especially carriers, you can try to interdict his supply lines to the target but if he has planned it right, you could be the one getting hurt.

Just my thoughts.

Chez

Actually, I've found that it shock attacks every turn until it captures the base. I can agree with the first turn but once ashore I don't see why it has to keep shock attacking.

[BLurking]

Dave,

From day 1 my objective wasn't to win on points, it was to outlast the historical Japanese. So I went for the South Pacific route - establish L4 airbases, and cut off the US from the rest of the world. So, no - I don't think anyone's going to win on points in my game. And our 'Apocolypse' hasn't happened yet - I've still got all the IJN carriers. They're more a threat than anything else, however - any real action just results in my pilots hitting a wall of Allied airpower and disintegrating [;)]...

Such is life, I'm looking more for an enjoyable 'game' experience rather than just notching up Allied bases on my belt. It's just a shame that a game that we all put so much time into can really be resolved in just a few game weeks. All the rest is just doing time...

Brian

[Dereck]

ORIGINAL: BLurking

Dave,

I've made it to late '43 as the Japanese in a PBEM, and things are finally starting to turn around for the Allies. In fact, there is no place where I can oppose them where they decide to apply force. My biggest problem isn't with the game engine, per se - it's the fact that the 'sweet spot' where both forces are at approximately equal terms is so short.

IRL, the Allies and Japanese were fighting a battle of attrition from late '42 to '43, when the Japanese finally started to collapse. In the game it seems that when the Allies finally get their feet under them, the players amass their forces and a huge battle results. Losses are incurred in days that would have taken months in real life to occurs. One side ends up broken, and it's free-fall from there. The quality of the Japanese play only serves to dictate when this clash will occur - but it inevitably does.

The most fun to be had in the game is when both sides are struggling, and that time is lamentably short...

Goes back to the comments about the pace of operations that everyone harps about, I guess.

My two cents,

Brian

That is pretty much historical. If the allied had decided on one big thrust it would have gone that way. Also with Japanese bases spread around - especially in the Central Pacific the Americans could, and did, simply isolate their target and land as they please. This overwhelming force was okay in 1941-1942 when the Japanese were launching their attacks but it isn't when the tide has turned?

I guess I more than agree with the sentiment Dave Baranyi stated:

I guess that my point is that it appears that most Japanese players would rather enjoy the time period of the Game when they can have the most fun, rather than spend 18 or 24 months of "misery" as Allied players have to do in a 1941 start...

[BLurking]

dereck,

Don't get me wrong - I definitely don't object to a little 'sauce for the gander'. The Japanese can run whole-hog over the Pacific in the early stages of the game, and there's no reason why the Allies shouldn't be given the same license. I'm objecting to the fact that both sides can do it. I've committed to playing my game out as long as my opponent wants, I had my time - now he gets his. I just wish that there was a period 'in-between' where we were both duking it out on roughly equal terms. That hasn't really happened, except in Burma - where the Brits have been beating on the doorstep for roughly a year now.

I just wish the rest of the Pacific had been like that. There are few nail-biters. Whenever the superior force (IJN or US) has made their move, it happens.

Guess I'm with the 'slow the pace down' crowd.

Lest I sound too much the critic - for the record I'm a huge fan of the game. It's a blast. Improvements are always welcome, however [:)]

[Dereck]

ORIGINAL: BLurking

dereck,

Don't get me wrong - I definitely don't object to a little 'sauce for the gander'. The Japanese can run whole-hog over the Pacific in the early stages of the game, and there's no reason why the Allies shouldn't be given the same license. I'm objecting to the fact that both sides can do it. I've committed to playing my game out as long as my opponent wants, I had my time - now he gets his. I just wish that there was a period 'in-between' where we were both duking it out on roughly equal terms. That hasn't really happened, except in Burma - where the Brits have been beating on the doorstep for roughly a year now.

I just wish the rest of the Pacific had been like that. There are few nail-biters. Whenever the superior force (IJN or US) has made their move, it happens.

Guess I'm with the 'slow the pace down' crowd.

Lest I sound too much the critic - for the record I'm a huge fan of the game. It's a blast. Improvements are always welcome, however [:)]

The only way to "slow the pace down" is not with code or game changes but with play style changes. The real war went a bit slower for the simple fact that the admirals and generals on BOTH sides were rather conservative in what they did. They didn't have the luxury of starting a new "war" if they made some mistake.

In the early part of the war the Japanese player runs hog-wild because, due to hind-site, knows where Allied forces are and what forces they have. Something his real life counterpart didn't enjoy to such a degree. The American knows the Japanese will run hog-wild so simply stays out of the way.

The Japanese player also tries to win militarily - something his real-life counterpart never even considered since they knew they couldn't. They were content to establish a perimeter and then dig in. It's ironic that the two times they went outside their initially planned perimeter (Coral Sea and Midway) they got spanked by the US.

The Japanese player doesn't fear/respect the American carriers since he knows he has the massive KB, the Zero bonus and "strike coordination" and can simply overpower the American ships. I won't get into any of those three though you can obviously tell I'm not keen on the way it is (since I'd only be shouted down anyways).

The American player on the other hand won't try to put up a fight for the most part because he knows he won't be able to in the first part of the game. This is despite the fact that neither side feared the other's carriers. Respected yes, but they didn't fear them. Neither side would turn down fights they thought they had a decent chance of coming out of. That decent chance, however, really doesn't exist for the American player for a long time in this game.

In short, instead of seeing piecemail reinforcements of an area such as Guadalcanal like in real life neither side will commit to any battle unless they have super-overpowering forces simply because of some of the points I've pointed out. In the early part of the game the Japanese player can run willy-nilly because he has no reason to fear or respect the power of the Allied player and later in the war the Allied player can do the same, which although they were able historically to go wherever they wanted, they STILL respected their Japanese opponent.

Before I take flak from people who say I have no right commenting because I only play the AI I do read these forums, know history and can comprehend what's going on.

[BLurking]

I understand your position completely - and have no problem w/ AI players making constructive comments [:)]...

For PBEM purposes, however, it would be nice if there were consequences to just 'dumping' 4+ divisions on a target for an invasion without proper preparation. Other than house rules, which I have a dim view of, it's just a matter of mutually assured destruction. As it stands, unless the target is properly defended - both sides (when they have the upper hand) can have an 'invasion death star'. Scooping up bases, wash, rinse, repeat. If there were more dire consequences for such action, perhaps players would think twice.

Historically, there were a few bases of any real value - and both sides pretty much knew where they were. In WITP, any base that can be built up to L4 airbase is worth taking, and can dominate the region.

[ADavidB]

ORIGINAL: Nomad

A part of the problem lies in the ability to transfer assests with little or no regard to HQ assignments. I can just see Big Mac letting a division or two loose to fight in the Marshal Islands or sending 3 or 4 groups of aircraft to the Central Pacific. If there were some real penalties for this then the roughly equal time would be much longer. As it is now, we can willy nilly move units all over the board with no political repercussions at all.

Not only that, but the ability to move air assets anyway in a day. Air units stayed in place for weeks or months unless they were being overrun by the enemy. Right now we all move air units around "instantly" as if the pilots don't have any personal items, or their commanders and support staff are interchangable, etc.

If air units had to stay at bases for some fixed minimum period of time and had to prepare to move and get set up again, and if the support units were tied to the air units, then we would have a situation much closer to what was found in reality. As it is, we have a "video game" air unit placement capability.

Thanks -

Dave Baranyi

[ADavidB]

It's just a shame that a game that we all put so much time into can really be resolved in just a few game weeks. All the rest is just doing time...

That's what disappoints me the most too. As Allied player one has to put in a huge commitment of "doing time" before you can get some hope to stop the Japanese player from "outlasting the historical Japanese". And I'm still not certain that one really can.

Maybe we shouldn't be playing the campaign games...maybe we should only be playing the limited scenarios...I don't know, but I certainly am not getting a lot of satisfaction from playing WitP as it stands.

Thanks -

Dave Baranyi

[Andy Mac]

Hmmmm I think the game is a lot more even than anyone gives credit for.

Any atoll with 30k troops and level 9 forts is a hard nut to crack and the allies have to wait for assault shipping.

In my game with PZB I messed up my Maloep invasion by not using assault transport which led to a shock attack 3 days in a row wrecking the division.

So although the allies have the strength hard points like Truk or Kwal or other islands can be fortified to be very very tough as the allies dont get assault transport sufficient to dump 4 divisions onto an atoill until late 43 early 44.

[BLurking]

True - but you're facing an opponent who has conquered all of Asia.

Most Japanese players are fighting on more than one front. You've got the toughest job of any Allied player out there right now. If you aren't having a tough time in '43, then something is seriously wrong.

Oh, and best of luck - I still think you can pull it off...

[bradfordkay]

Dave,

It seems to me that from what I have read (Fire in the Sky, Bloody Shambles both come to mind) that shuffling squadrons around was fairly prevalent in the Pacific theatre - at least in SoPac, SWPac, ABDA, SEAC areas (not so sure about CenPac and NoPac areas). Doing so in game increases the fatigue level of the unit, so it is not done without penalty. Playing against the AI, I have personal rules on keeping the transfer a/c procedure from being too gamey: long distance transfers require squadron to be stood down, unless the target could be consdiered a shuttle bombing run, or squadron can make the whole transfer in under four hours.

[1275psi]

Just a few comments

There are 2 post Midway scenarios -one is the Guadacanal is just about to happen, and the other the Allies are about halfway up the solomon chain

In the 1st one -japans position is a disaster -no forts anywhere, and few troops, and still just 12 usuable divisions.
The airforce is still experienced, 4 CVs are available, but no way in PBEM are you going to stop the allies -although it may give a very nice "sweet spot" as the allies are really stretched too.

Funny enough, the other scenario -mid 43 is quite interesting as Japan.
Forts and bases everywhere , AND ABOUT 20 DIVISIONS available to deploy, and a lot more troops.
problems though, cannot convert chitose or chiyoda -CVs are never going to come in time -and planes need at least 2 months training -but there are a lot of them
For a game against the AI as Japan -this one is highly enjoyable, (i had fun last night -the imperial battle line vs 4 fast allied BBs)but although tempting for PBEM -not quite tempting enough.
Wonder if anyone has given these a go?

[Mynok]

That's interesting...is China a part of that scenario so the Japanese can train their aircraft? It doesn't take all that long to get them in the 70 range. They'll still get waxed by Corsairs, but F-16's would get waxed by Corsairs.

[ADavidB]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Dave,

It seems to me that from what I have read (Fire in the Sky, Bloody Shambles both come to mind) that shuffling squadrons around was fairly prevalent in the Pacific theatre - at least in SoPac, SWPac, ABDA, SEAC areas (not so sure about CenPac and NoPac areas). Doing so in game increases the fatigue level of the unit, so it is not done without penalty. Playing against the AI, I have personal rules on keeping the transfer a/c procedure from being too gamey: long distance transfers require squadron to be stood down, unless the target could be consdiered a shuttle bombing run, or squadron can make the whole transfer in under four hours.

True, shuffling squadrons was common, but not on a daily basis. And the fighter pilots couldn't usually take their kits with them...our pilots are ready to go instantly anywhere.

Sure, it's an abstraction, but its an abstraction that allows the players to group hundreds of planes at a single base in a day, then move them to another base in another day, etc. That's why we don't see planes spread around in small units all over the map as in real life - the players don't have to do so.

Thanks -

Dave Baranyi

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: dereck

Actually, I've found that it shock attacks every turn until it captures the base. I can agree with the first turn but once ashore I don't see why it has to keep shock attacking.

I seem to remember that units have to shock attack every turn they are *landing* troops on atoll. Even though due to bloody nature of shock attacks/atoll combat, it is usually same thing as shock attacking until capture...[;)]

[Speedysteve]

ORIGINAL: ADavidB
We're still waiting to see how true this is in an actual PBEM campaign game. There have been few reported games starting in 1943 or 1944 for anyone to see how well the Game system works in a later historic start. The 1941/42 Game campaigns change things so dramatically that by the time an Allied player gets to mid-1943 and can start to seriously think of coming back the situation is nothing at all like historical.

So while it seems that "everyone" has been assuming that the Japanese have "no chance" from mid-1943 onwards, we have had so many suprises in this game that I wouldn't be very surprised again to find that play is much more "balanced" than anyone expects. The various strategies suggested to you in the other posts will be very helpful to you for defense in a long PBEM campaign, particularly if you also use the 1941/42 strategies to build up Japanese air strength that most Japanese players use.

Hi Dave,

I think you're right in that many PBEM's and AAR's are still 42. The sheer time factor invovled to get from 42 to 43 means many of us are not there yet. Coupled with that is that people do unfortunately give up or 'fall off the face of the Earth'.

FWIW, Fabetong and I have a 42A campaign going which = no huge deviation from history since the historical Japanese conquests have occured. As such I believe we have had a fairly realistic first 8 months of War (apart from China).

We are in January 43 now and are having a kind of shoestring/Guadalcanal type battle in the Aleutians.

I'm intrigued (as playing the Allies) to see how this year goes since i'm now starting to receive some 'decent' reinforcements with regard to planes and ships.

Regards,

Steven

[Hoplosternum]

ORIGINAL: BLurking

Dave,

I've made it to late '43 as the Japanese in a PBEM, and things are finally starting to turn around for the Allies. In fact, there is no place where I can oppose them where they decide to apply force. My biggest problem isn't with the game engine, per se - it's the fact that the 'sweet spot' where both forces are at approximately equal terms is so short.

IRL, the Allies and Japanese were fighting a battle of attrition from late '42 to '43, when the Japanese finally started to collapse. In the game it seems that when the Allies finally get their feet under them, the players amass their forces and a huge battle results. Losses are incurred in days that would have taken months in real life to occurs. One side ends up broken, and it's free-fall from there. The quality of the Japanese play only serves to dictate when this clash will occur - but it inevitably does.

The most fun to be had in the game is when both sides are struggling, and that time is lamentably short...

Goes back to the comments about the pace of operations that everyone harps about, I guess.

My two cents,

Brian

I completely agree with this.

I too am a big fan of the game but I have always been disappointed with the short period of parity. It is the most interesting part of the game. Instead the game appears to come down to one or two key fights and even worse with both players essentially (at different times) trying to avoid that fight and the inevitable long slow defeat if they lose it - or big delay to their eventual victory if playing the allies [;)]

Many of us will have wanted to fight Guadalcanal style campaigns even if they occur in a different geographical area and at a different time. But the game rarely allows that. If you can support one Daitai of Betty's at Rabaul to fend off landings at Lunga then why not send four or eight? If you think your invasion of PM may be interfered with by US CVs then why send two CVs rather than the whole of KB?

Now there are many who think that this is highly realistic and the Japanese would have been far better to have adopted such strategies. But the game system IMHO makes it too easy to mass force and does not throw up enough obstacles to this. It is not good play that puts 4+ Betty Daitai's on Rabaul but only poor or inexperience play that does not - although if you are trying to defend the Solomons with Betty's from Rabaul you're probably not using the best strategy anyway [:D]

The pace of operations is part of this but it is the ease in which players can mass forces and the benefits of this which lies at the heart of many of the games problems.

Still I do love the game and spend far too many hours playing it as it is. Probably just as well it has it's faults [:D]



Just trying out a new 'Feinder - lite' sig line….