Bill Brings Banzai

[btd64]

If you're looking for victory points, pearl harbor. But from an allied perspective I feel that a Manila strike is crippling with KB positioned just right, you can sink every ship in port or trying to leave....GP

[USSAmerica]

As an Allied player with no game yet making it into 1943 (that will change with Mike and I) I think losing the bulk of the subs at Manila would be more damaging to the Allied effort. Sure, you would get more VP's if you manage to sink a BB or 3 at Pearl, but we all know those older Battle Wagons just aren't very useful for the first 6 - 12 months. The subs can go where BB's can't and actually get to your shipping. Even with an 80% dud rate, that can still mean a lot of sunk ships via subs at the end of '42.

[BillBrown]

I was thinking that a Manila strike I would set my Kates to use bombs on turn 1, no need to use up torpedoes on ships that a 250kg bomb or two can sink.
I would also use all the Netties available.

[Zorch]

The AAR title: 'Bill Bombards Bataan'!

[Bif1961]

Each has it's pros and cons. Pros for PH is you get to sink some old BBs that he uses to great affect later when using them for bombardment purposes. Manila you get to sink or cripple up to 40ish subs and be on hand for a quick resolution in PI freeing up those troops sooner for a rapid invasion of DEI and the oilfields. Also with the KB in PI waters the mini-KB can go support the Malaya operations potentially speeding those up as well and sinking more early war allied vessels and garnering an equal number of VPs that you wouldn't get from not attacking PH. However by not attacking PH you lose the opportunity you just had to track down and sink 3 American fleet carriers.Therefore by having all your carriers from PI west you give the Americans free hand in SW, S and C PAC, to reinforced his exposed bases before you return with the KB to foster landings in enemy waters. My Japanese opponent went for Manila this time and I still lost 2 BBs attacking one of his Islands when the KB did return from PI waters. However his expansion in the Solomons didn't get Beyond Tulagi but he did take PM and Horn Island. So the question is do you want to give him a free hand to reinforce his isolated Pac garrisons while you bludgeon and hopefully speed up the PI, Malaya and DEI invasions?

[JoV]

My own experience is that a first turn heavy port strike on Manilla, coming in at 2000ft or so, by LBA based on Formosa can deliver some pretty reasonable results. I think I sank or crippled around a dozen subs that way in my current game. Altho obviously it is heavily reliant on the numbers falling your way, and conversely can be a bit of a non-event if they don't...

Nevertheless I personally prefer having the KB hit Pearl. Firstly you get the opportunity to sink shipping other than the BBs, which I consider as useful as putting the battlewagons out of action. You get an opportunity to bludgeon the Catalina's in particular on the airfield at Pearl. And your CV are afterwards well placed to support landings at Wake, as well as intervene in the Marshalls if your opponent tries anything crafty there with his own carriers.

[Uncivil Engineer]

Another advantage to hitting Manila on turn 1 is you are close enough to Singapore to support a big landing at Mersing on turn 3. With warp moves on turn 1 some of the BBs that start in the home islands should also be in the South China Sea, which means you should have at least 8 BBs available (2 that start at Singora/Patani, 2 with KB, and 4 from HI).

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: USSAmerica

As an Allied player with no game yet making it into 1943 (that will change with Mike and I) I think losing the bulk of the subs at Manila would be more damaging to the Allied effort. Sure, you would get more VP's if you manage to sink a BB or 3 at Pearl, but we all know those older Battle Wagons just aren't very useful for the first 6 - 12 months. The subs can go where BB's can't and actually get to your shipping. Even with an 80% dud rate, that can still mean a lot of sunk ships via subs at the end of '42.

In my former game with Joseph (SqzMyLemon), I sank 25 subs at Manila on turn one. In my current game (FOW of course), I sank 24. Through May 1942, he's lost 35 submarines. The Manila strike expedited their demise and damaged submarines going to Soerbaja or Singapore to repair initial damage sustained at Manila were also bombed or mined in port. There's also several tankers, a handful of destroyers, two good AS, one AV IIRC and numerous other support ships for the taking.

So the main advantage IMO is to eliminate resistance in a rapid sweep into the DEI and the Phillipines. KBs punching weight can aid in clearing the way. KB can be on site every day of the first week of hostilities versus attacking one day and spending the next 6 sailing back to rearm/refuel.

Drawbacks: AV-point-wise, PH is the probable short-term winner for attack rationale. And, as others have pointed out, KB would not be in a position to deliver a knockout blow to ill-positioned Allied CVs in the first week of the war.

Thirdly, PBY availability for the Allies will be greater in the first 6 months of the war if they are not destroyed on the ground at Hickham / Ford Island. These are very useful to Allies as their eyes and ears and can spoil any Japanese surprise moves deep in the Pacific.

[USSAmerica]

The potential PBY damage and destruction from a Pearl attack are a significant factor that I left out! It's a point in favor of a Pearl attack, but I still think as the Allied player I'd welcome a Pearl opening attack vs losing the bulk of the subs that start at Manila. (Assuming I'm able to keep my CV's safely out of the path of the KB) [;)]

[HansBolter]

Something to consider.

The Allies get lots and lots of subs. So many that I am having trouble finding things for them to do.

The PBY production/replacement rate is abysmal. I have many squadrons in late 45 that are under strength.


Reducing the Allies submarine inventory is a minor speed bump that will not be keenly felt.

Reducing the PBY inventory WILL be keenly felt and will keep the American side from ever getting full use of this asset.

[BillBrown]

I must be more careful of mine, here is a screen shot from August 1943. All my squadrons are full with 4 extra sirframes.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter
Reducing the Allies submarine inventory is a minor speed bump that will not be keenly felt.

I'm not sure I agree with this. From the perspective of late 1945, you've got more submarines than targets-like IRL. But this isn't about a ledger at the end of 1945. This is about submarines that can act as your eyes and ears and take direct action in 1941-1942. Such a complete loss defangs any Allied reconnaisance / interdiction during the time of Japanese expansion in the DEI/Philippines.

A Manila strike guts the US Asiatic Fleet at a stroke and causes the DEI defense to implode quickly. And the Allies are in a much worse position to forestall Philippines landings, investment of Java and Sumatra and so forth. To me, that's a powerful argument that's probably worth a few hundred VPs left 'on the table'.

But...and it's a big but: It's up the Japanese player to maximize the benefits of the Manila strike with follow-on shock and awe. They've got to be in a position to accelerate the historical timetable because the opposition is on its heels. If they don't or they can't, then the opportunity has been (partially) squandered.

[durnedwolf]

Hi Bill,

I want to extend my congratulations on your naval success; good show.

Using Scenario 2, I like the PI strikes against Manila also. Another added feature to having KB near Manila at the open of the game is that it's a fairly quick jog west to support operations against Singapore.

[BillBrown]

OK. I might be a fool, but we are going to restart. I do not expect him to leave his CVs hanging out this game.

So, I will do Manila as opposed to Pearl Harbor. How best to do that? KB in one group to the West of Manila?
Split KB with half East and half West? Must think about this.

[Anachro]

There is no reason this game needs to be restarted. First, you are both learning your respective sides and whatever successes you have had early on and failures for him will be made up by failures and successes elsewhere over the course of the game, not including the difficulty of managing the Japanese economy for the first time. Moreover, the Allies can still very much fight early on, even with the carrier losses sustained, given that they pick and choose their battles. It's not like your opponent doesn't get additional carriers prior to the arrival of the Essex's in '43, he does, and then beyond that his material production will more than make up for any losses taken. The only carriers you get until your Unryu's, etc. arrive in later '43 or '44 are the Hiyo-class "carriers." This is by no means a lost cause.

In the mean time, this game will be a great learning opportunity for him because of his earlier failures, probably more than it would have been if he had not taken such losses. He'll have to focus on his ground combat, his LoC, his LBA cover, etc - these are all great places to learn. The allies don't need their carriers to win. Beyond that, there's the harm done to his reputation were he to give up so easily, which it'd be better to avoid.

[BillBrown]

Well, I gave him the choices and I have to abide by his choice. I agree with you Anachro that he could learn a lot from fighting out of a hole, but I have agreed.

[Anachro]

Sudden Carrier Loss Syndrome is a terrible thing and often these decisions are made in the heat of the moment by the one that suffers from it. [:(] Shame for us as the situation presented is more interesting than your standard game.

[Mike Solli]

Personally, I prefer hitting Pearl with KB. I look at it from the Allied fighter perspective (which is what I want to destroy). The Air Forces in the DEI are doomed. There's just too much excellent land based Japanese air power there. I want to put a dent in the US Air Force stationed at Pearl. If you go for Manila, the Hawaiian Air Force is untouched.

In addition, with no Japanese carriers in the Pacific, the US carriers (even with their woefully unprepared pilots) can stop just about anything the Japanese try. Wake will not fall. The Japanese will have a difficult time just reinforcing the possessions they have at the beginning of the war.

[jdsrae]

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Personally, I prefer hitting Pearl with KB. I look at it from the Allied fighter perspective (which is what I want to destroy). The Air Forces in the DEI are doomed. There's just too much excellent land based Japanese air power there. I want to put a dent in the US Air Force stationed at Pearl. If you go for Manila, the Hawaiian Air Force is untouched.

In addition, with no Japanese carriers in the Pacific, the US carriers (even with their woefully unprepared pilots) can stop just about anything the Japanese try. Wake will not fall. The Japanese will have a difficult time just reinforcing the possessions they have at the beginning of the war.

I agree, but...
Even when Bill’s opponent sees the KB in the Phillipines do you think he will risk his CVs west of PH again?!
Will be interesting to see what he does with them in v2 but I’m tipping his focus will be on trying not to lose them.

Congrats on your first win as Japan Bill.

[mind_messing]

Manila is absolutely not worth it IMO.

A concentrated air campaign using the KB against PH from day 1 can (and does) cause a deep dent in Allied assets in the early war.

It's not just ships either: fighters, bombers and patrol planes can all be damaged severely at Pearl.

I'd look into follow-on strikes for Dec 8th and 9th as well, TBH.