First Turn, Pearl vs. Manila

[John 3rd]

I like to PUNCH Pearl simply because of History. Taking a swipe at Manila is always fun but THE BIG SHOW is at PH.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

Some really good discussion on the pros and cons....but ultimately, this is exactly why I prefer the 8 Dec start!

Don't POW and Repulse get Nettied to death on December 8th start? Ahistoric too. There's no getting away from it! [:D]

[spence]

The game allows either or to a limited degree both.

Not so sure you are correct. I have sand-boxed 4 times (today) the attack on Pearl Harbor when a non-historic 1st turn was chosen with 1st Turn Surprise turned off at Head-to-Head. Previously I had tried the same sandbox many times however I think I always used Japanese Computer mode Essentially it makes very little difference.

In today's run thrus all Japanese planes were assigned to port attack or airfield attack except for the 10% of the fighters assigned to CAP (on each of 6 carriers). Roughly 80% of the available US fighters at Pearl Harbor were assigned as a stacked CAP at 70% each. The maximum number of Japanese aircraft destroyed by 50+ American fighters was 11 (4 fighters). Meanwhile for reasons unknown the Enterprise Air Group which attacked the KB (with all fighters assigned to Escort) encountered 65 IJN fighters. They got wiped out and scored no hits. Further they attacked before any land based a/c which attacked subsequently, lost heavily and scored no hits even though they attacked at 2000 ft. When the US Fleet sortied it did so in two surface action TFs (one with no slow BBs). The BB Kirishima was sunk once along with 1 DD. And although some of the IJN carriers suffered as many as 6 hits and were left on fire the initial raid on PH was not reduced by a single bomber. No Japanese carriers were sunk in any of the 4 run thrus.

[IdahoNYer]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

Some really good discussion on the pros and cons....but ultimately, this is exactly why I prefer the 8 Dec start!

Don't POW and Repulse get Nettied to death on December 8th start? Ahistoric too. There's no getting away from it! [:D]

Only if you do the historical turn option - why would they get crushed with the Ahistorical? Unless of course the Allied player decides to run up the Malayan coast....not likely!

[geofflambert]

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I know that for some, the question of where the Japanese land their first "surprise" blow has been discussed however I've looked for a dedicated thread on this topic and didn't find it. So my question to old and, for their edification, new players, what is the best move for the Japanese, to hit Pearl as they actually did or to hit a more "at home" target, Manila (notice I don't include Singapore here, as I believe that a "surprise" attack there would not be possible given the war footing the British were on and thus no surprise would be possible). I've long been of the opinion that hitting Manila would be the more lucrative option for a number of reasons. Those subs need to go (yes even with their piss poor torps, getting them out of the picture in the long run is healthy). Also it keeps the Japanese CVs "in theater" so they can support a more aggressive drive on Singapore on turn 3 or 4. It also keeps the CVs closer to their rearming bases thus a far greater turn around time. As a final thought, it allows the US to venture forth with their BBs with a HOST of Japanese subs waiting for them. If they take substantial damage at sea, they SINK, not in the mud of Pearl but in the deep blue sea, a far better and more decisive end than the year or two of repairs needed at Pearl or the West Coast. Just some basic points to start the discussion. I'd be interested in alternative views! Thanks.

I did it at Singapore. Force Z didn't escape.

And I captured the oil fields at Palembang intact.

[Encircled]

I think what is more important to be honest is that the starting knowledge that the Japanese have

- They know that China can be taken out completely

- They know how weak the Allies are in certain sectors

- They have the invasion bonus till April 1st

Those are massive advantages that a vaguely competent Japanese player (ie me!) can go way further than what was possible

So you do need to have some house rules to counter balance that (IMHO of course)

Basically though that should be restricted to No carrier hunting, allowing existing TFs to move and no unrealistic invasions (the post above in which the Japanese invaded Singapore on Turn 0 is a case in point. That just wasn't going to happen under any circumstances without the allies getting at least a couple of days warning)

But just want to echo what has been said above.

As long as you are clear at the start about what sort of game you want to play, then you should have no problem finding an opponent that shares your view.

[Trugrit]

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

ORIGINAL: Trugrit

I say also lets pretend that, as the Allies, I had a whole bunch of moves that were not historical,
towards New Zealand with all my carriers, battleships and subs prior to the start of the game
because I had inside information that the Japanese were going to start a fight.

Are you fine with that as well?

Hi Trugrit, I trust that your yard is doing well.

As for the above suggestion, I don't agree with it. I'm not trying to be contrary, however I do believe that any mod of the original moves should be within the realm of consideration by the actual planning participants in 1941. Moving the US fleet to NZ or Auz is simply not in the cards as the infrastructure to support such a move was not there and would not be for years (late '43 or so). But of course as you say, given that it's a game, one can do anything.

However what I was driving at was to allow those options that were actually "on the table" at the planning stages of the actual war. If there is anything the US fleet can do, it would be to return to the West Coast, as that was always under consideration given some folks thoughts concerning the vulnerability of Pearl AND the fact that the earlier move to Pearl could be viewed as aggressive by Japan (which it was) and thus to defuse a tense situation, planners considered moving the fleet back. The reason I don't believe the Japanese can consider a first strike against Singapore is a reflection of British readiness (they were already tracking the troop convoys headed to the Malaysian Peninsular) and sighting 6 CVs headed toward their eastern Gibraltar would certainly have raised lots of red flags. So, in short, I was suggesting that any mods would have to be within a relatively narrow band of reality given the actual tactical and strategic situation in early December 1941. Thus my limits placed in my first post to this thread concerning the Japanese attacking Manila rather than Pearl.... but not any other place. I trust this helps you makes sense of the intent for this thread.

I'm back again but I may be in and out.
My wife said something to me about trimming a tree.

I don't know which one she had in mind but I think
it is the one in our house this time of year.

I agree with you 99.9%. I would never do this.

I would discourage players not to go down this path.
Manila may be fine but there are other dark gamey things
that are down the path of the special first turn move.

I was thinking that I might show new players something they may have
never have seen before but now I wondering if that is a good idea.

My definition of gamey may be different from most.

My definition is not just about the game mechanics but
what I think a player should never do to another player.

[ITAKLinus]

Still, I cannot really grasp, for my limits for sure, what's the difference on acting on hindsight on 7-Dec and the hindsight we have for the threst of the war.

Moreover, I do not see why striking Manila instead of PH is ok, but, for example, avoiding the certain death of Force Z is not.



There are many, many terrible moves Japan can do with hindsight on 7-dec. Manila is, among the many, one of the most probable and justifiable. I mean, I had people landing in Singapore in day-1. Or in Tulagi & co. Etcetc.

Also, I would agree on the importance of PH if there wuld be a modification in the game which has a die roll for the presence of US CVs in PH. But, I suspect, most of the Allied players would simply prefer to skip this possibility (me included).



I think we can only accept the fact that we act with hindsight because we live in 2019 and we also know how the game works, while in reality there was a much much higher level of uncertainty over most of the war's elements.
And the entire possibility of acting with hindisght has a stronger magnitude on the game than just PH-vs-Manila dilemma.


Finally, would be ok to land in, just to make an example, Noumea with a strong force on 8-DEC instead of the 7th? Just using the magic movement to reach 1 hex out of the place and then land the day after.

[BBfanboy]

The first turn magic move is not unlimited. I once tried to move KB south of PH on turn one and it could only go a few hexes south, not even full strike range. I can't think of any invasion convoys with the magic move that could make one hex from Noumea on turn one. There are only five or six TFs that get the magic move. KB and its AOs take up two of the them.

[ITAKLinus]

Ground combat at Noumea (115,160)
Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 5990 troops, 51 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 180
Defending force 774 troops, 17 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 28

Japanese adjusted assault: 200
Allied adjusted defense: 10
Japanese assault odds: 20 to 1 (fort level 0)
Japanese forces CAPTURE Noumea !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(-), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+)


Japanese ground losses:
101 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 20 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Allied ground losses:
341 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 13 disabled
Non Combat: 5 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 9 (7 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Units retreated 1

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!


Assaulting units:
Kimura Det
Kure 1st SNLF
II/81st Naval Guard Unit
2nd JNAF Coy
5th JNAF Coy
1st JNAF Coy
1st Naval Construction Battalion

Defending units:
New Caledonia Det



Happened on 9th Dec. I landed on 8th Dec.


It can be done... [:D]

[BBfanboy]

Wow, I am surprised that is possible. Where did the Amphib convoy originate from? The Marshalls? Truk?

[ITAKLinus]

The allied was surprised as well... [:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]

I do not remember from where, to be honest.



Ok. Just checked. Babeldaob.

[GetAssista]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
here are only five or six TFs that get the magic move. KB and its AOs take up two of the them.

There are about a dozen actually. In stock GC it is any TF with a * in the name. Some of them are DDs that you can use to give a lift to BBs starting in HI, but most are your mundane amphib invasions into insignificant places like east coast of Malacca. Reaching Noumea is possible - for this you need to pick the right ships into a particular TF, relatively fast and fully loaded at start so that they not waste their magic action points in the port

[dr.hal]

I hate to throw cold water on all these hot romps by Japanese forces to such places as McHale's Navy, however to refocus the thread, I was interested in options that were actually considered by the planners in '41 not the players in '19! Was it really possible for the Japanese to invade Noumea in '41, was it even in the wildest dreams of anyone back then? I know some things are possible given the wide latitude of the game mechanics, but I was trying to explore the "realistic" alternatives to Pearl, not the outlandish or offworldish possibles thanks to the game mechanics! I do think it would be interesting to see "what if" the US CVs were caught at Pearl, which is certainly possible if the Japanese had delayed a day or two, or a week.... Again, this is within the realm of "possible" as are many other things.... Simply put, I'm just trying to throw back into the mix a bit of realistic probability rather than simply expanding the envelope due to wide ranging game mechanics.

[ITAKLinus]

To reply:

I do not know whether Manila instead of PH has ever been thought by Japanese leadership.


But it would have been much more feasible than PH itself.

Same goes with my usual "skipping the Philippines". It would have been quite difficoult for the Allies to transform them in a proper threat to Japanese forces. Also, it would have been quite a reasonable option given the Japanese strategy of a decisive battle with the US Navy approaching Philippines to bring relief.

US Navy itself planned that, also.


Therefore, there is little possibility to say that striking Manila would have been impossible or unrealistic. Under many points of view, it is somehow closely linked to the entire Japanese strategic approach of forcing a defensive decisive battle with US Navy.



Now, we know that US Navy wouldn't have sent their entire fleet across the Pacific to bring relief to Philippines forces under siege, but, again, we are reasoning with hindsight because we know that the leadership on the other side, in Washington, knows that it would be suicidal and doesn't do that. So it's a double hindsight: on one side US leadership does know, and therefore doesn't want to, cross the Pacific to bring relief to Philippines.
On the other side, Japanese players perfectly know that the americans know. Therefore, not a single Japanese would think that skipping Philippines and focussing on them would force (or even invite) US to try to move toward them.


Funnily enough, I have just sent a little relief force from PH to Philippines which have been skipped by my enemy (who, also, landed quite massively on Mersing with everything on day-1 and took Tulagi as well immediately).




Now, if you think under the "feasability" constraint, you have that Manila is perfectly possible.
Under the strategic point of view, somehow yes as well (including skipping Philippines altogether and getting them few months later).
If you speak about gameplay, it's up to you and your adversary. To be honest, I wouldn't play against somebody who gets bothered if things take a very different path than they did in history. As mentioned above, I've never found somebody willing to be under those constraints as well when they do bring some disadvantage to them.




Noumea or Tulagi on 7-dec and so on are totally wild and unfeasible. Still, I do not see a major problem in that (note that in one of my two PBEM I am on the receiving end of having had Noumea attacked in the first few days of war). I think that, on the mid- and long-run, things naturally flow in a somehow historical direction. Some operations are inherently nasty, but I consistently found that over time they do not really matter.

The game in which I got Philippines skipped and Singapore directly invaded at day-1, ended before 1942 just to make an example.

The one in which I got Noumea attacked early (I think 10th dec but I might be few days wrong), it's going on and it's still at the beginning. But I just sank Hosho, trapped 1,000AV in Java and hit multiple times the whole 2ndKB (Akagi/Kaga/2xCVL/2xCVE) with no major losses (few DDs).

So, also in the short-run, some wild initiatives can happen but the whole balance doesn't really change.





Just to make another example of wild Japanese moves to much allied horror. I landed on 28th Jan with 3 divisions coming from Java in... Port Augusta. I did a roughly 150hex trip with 3 embarked Divs plus support units and attacked Port Augusta from South.
Now it's few months later and the last Allied base in the area, Sidney, is falling.

It's not only 7-dec which can go wild.

[BBfanboy]

As I understand it, the U.S. did not take control or French Islands in SOPAC (through the Free French) until early 1942, so at game start the Vichy French would have been in charge at Noumea. There would certainly have been no resistance to the Japanese there.
Then the question becomes one of logistics and tactical exposure. The Japanese were confident in their army being superior to the Allies, but protecting their LOC would be up to the navy, and Yamamoto had a much more realistic view of what was prudent. I doubt he would have gone along with it.
Even in the Gilberts/Marshalls, the Japanese halted their expansion at Tarawa.

[Trugrit]

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I hate to throw cold water on all these hot romps by Japanese forces to such places as McHale's Navy, however to refocus the thread, I was interested in options that were actually considered by the planners in '41 not the players in '19! Was it really possible for the Japanese to invade Noumea in '41, was it even in the wildest dreams of anyone back then? I know some things are possible given the wide latitude of the game mechanics, but I was trying to explore the "realistic" alternatives to Pearl, not the outlandish or offworldish possibles thanks to the game mechanics! I do think it would be interesting to see "what if" the US CVs were caught at Pearl, which is certainly possible if the Japanese had delayed a day or two, or a week.... Again, this is within the realm of "possible" as are many other things.... Simply put, I'm just trying to throw back into the mix a bit of realistic probability rather than simply expanding the envelope due to wide ranging game mechanics.

dr.hal,

I think you are too late.

The Japanese have discovered that they have a magic Sea Dragon
that can carry them very far over the water.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: dr.hal
I was interested in options that were actually considered by the planners in '41

IIRC, IJ capture of Samoa and New Caledonia were very much considered by the planners in 1941-1942. Obviously, Port Moresby was a fixture of their planning until mid-1942. Occupation of parts of Australia was also considered, but shelved because of infeasibility by the IJA.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Those are massive advantages that a vaguely competent Japanese player (ie me!) can go way further than what was possible

So you do need to have some house rules to counter balance that (IMHO of course)

In my last couple PBEMs, I have started this discussion before December 7 first turn. My most frequent 'suggestion' involves foreswearing the 'magic move' in exchange for foreswearing funky game mechanics. Example: I vow not to land on Palembang and Java on turn one with a division and a half of troops if the Allies vow to not pack Palembang full of British infantry and live off of the oil field / refinery supply production. I've yet to hear any resistance to this congenial like-minded exchange.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: dr.hal
I was interested in options that were actually considered by the planners in '41

IIRC, IJ capture of Samoa and New Caledonia were very much considered by the planners in 1941-1942. Obviously, Port Moresby was a fixture of their planning until mid-1942. Occupation of parts of Australia was also considered, but shelved because of infeasibility by the IJA.

The IJA may have had such plans, but I read somewhere that the IJN was much less sure it could support them. Yamamoto was not happy about being forced to go as far as Port Moresby since he could not get all of his fleet ready in time. So Shoho, Shokaku and Zuikaku went to Coral Sea, got whacked and were not available for the Midway operation that Yamamoto did want to support.