US Naval War College Communications (Allied only)

[witpqs]

Harry,

I think you were too aggressive too early in terms of executing the march across the Pacific. I understand that the US military had various plans, which you followed for example in the case of Kwajelain, but I think those plans were wrong. They were too optimistic and did not anticipate the preparation and resources necessary for the venture. Consider the much later invasion of Tarawa and the lessons that were learned there.

I'm not certain that a limited war would have resulted from such an IJ strategy, and I'm not certain the early war would have taken a similar course.

[ADB123]

On the other hand, the I-3 sank all the American carriers and some other ships as they steamed towards Townsville, so it ended American naval operations in the South Pacific.

Huh? "I-3", as in the Japanese sub I-3? Or do you mean something else such as the KB?

If it was the sub, how did one sub sink all of the US CVs?

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: ADB123

On the other hand, the I-3 sank all the American carriers and some other ships as they steamed towards Townsville, so it ended American naval operations in the South Pacific.

Huh? "I-3", as in the Japanese sub I-3? Or do you mean something else such as the KB?

If it was the sub, how did one sub sink all of the US CVs?

It was a sub--targets like ducks in a row.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Harry,

I think you were too aggressive too early in terms of executing the march across the Pacific. I understand that the US military had various plans, which you followed for example in the case of Kwajelain, but I think those plans were wrong. They were too optimistic and did not anticipate the preparation and resources necessary for the venture. Consider the much later invasion of Tarawa and the lessons that were learned there.

I'm not certain that a limited war would have resulted from such an IJ strategy, and I'm not certain the early war would have taken a similar course.

Here are the rules:

If the Allied player has a sea line of communications (a continuous path with air superiority) between North America and a fleet base in the Philippines and from there to a forward base in the Ryukyus, Korea, or Japan by 31 January 1944, he wins a decisive victory. If this requirement is met by 30 April 1944, this is a regular Allied victory. By 31 July 1944, a marginal victory, by 31 October 1944, a draw, by 31 January 1945, a Japanese marginal victory, by 30 April 1945, a Japanese regular victory, and by 31 July 1945 or later, a decisive Japanese victory.

If at any time, the Japanese player attacks a hex in Alaska, Hawaii (excluding Midway), or continental North America, the Allied player has an additional two years (just so) to meet his requirements for a victory.

Historically, the base was Okinawa, resulting in a Japanese regular victory if they hadn't hit Pearl Harbor. Can an aggressive Allied player take Okinawa by 31 July 1944, supporting it with a sea line of communications?

[witpqs]

I read the rules earlier. My point is that the pre-war plans were wrong. Perhaps you followed them too closely to have a chance of success?

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I read the rules earlier. My point is that the pre-war plans were wrong. Perhaps you followed them too closely to have a chance of success?

Yes, and I was aware I needed to gain at least six months on history to win, so I was extra-aggressive. Both the Kwaj invasion and the current debacle were because I was trying to gain time.

[herwin]

We're restarting with the following victory conditions:

If the Allied player has a sea line of communications (a continuous path with air superiority where it might be challenged) between a national base in North America or a UK map-edge base and a fleet base in the Philippines or Taiwan and from there to a forward base in the Ryukyus, Korea, or Japan by 31 October 1944, he wins a decisive victory. If this requirement is met by 31 January 1945, this is a regular Allied victory. By 30 April 1945, a marginal Allied victory, by 31 July 1945, a draw, by 31 October 1945, a marginal Japanese victory, by 31 January 1946, a regular Japanese victory, and otherwise, a decisive Japanese victory. Note a draw is a strategic win for the Japanese Government, as it would have allowed Japan to retain its core conquests.

If at any time, the Japanese player attacks a hex in Alaska, Hawaii (excluding Midway), or continental North America, the Allied player has an additional year to meet his requirements for a victory. That would make the historical results (Okinawa captured in mid-June, 1945) a decisive Allied victory. Attacking is a port strike, airbase strike, air strike against a naval force in a port, strategic bombing, or landing. Submarine attacks of any sort and surface or air strikes against a force at sea are allowed.

We will be playing DaBabes, starting December 7th.

[herwin]

The house rules this play-through are:

"Ok, now onto house rules.

I had bought the 2nd Air Army HQ, but not moved the now unrestricted units outside of Manchuria.

It`s ok or I should left the HQ restricted (leaning towards the later)

Also, I operate under the assumption that the memorandum from Admiral Inouye in 1940 is taken partially in account.

(Armchair generals of the 2nd millenium can do this).

Do you have any problem of Japanese expanding the float plane program (It means that all the cruisers get one of their air groups disembarked to land, and resized to 24 planes).

Also I have did the same with IJN "trainer" land based units at Japan. Several got resized to 54 planes (starting 9 or 27) and set to train. Gamey or not ?

Last thing is as I had commented the problem of Japanese R&D. In my tests I could accelerate N1K1-J to 5/43 and Franks at 10/43.

Do you like the house rule of (year of avaliability- 1941) = maximum months of advancement for a plane (1942 = 1 month 1946 = 5 months).

Something that you want to add ?

--I suggested the 2nd Air Army not be bought out and wanted more details on the Inouye Plan. The rest were fine.

Then I will left the 2nd Air Army HQ in Manchuria.

The Inouye plan (as I understand it) is to concentrate on building ASW and escort forces for a maritime empire, also using the subs more aggresive than historical (and more aggresive than my previous game, only got the feeling of the sub-game in mid April).

He thought that the war would be long and protracted, so Japan had to plan for long war instead of short lighting war, the main attack force would be by air with support by carrier units to cripple the main USN battle fleet.

[Bliztk]

Just finished reading the AAR. I thought that I tend to over-analyze things, but Herwin is a worthy opponent.

For all the fans of the "Manila Opening" I plan to repeat the opening in our DaBigBabes rematch ! [:)]