The Power of Inexperience / GreyJoy(A)-Rader(J)

[Crackaces]

Here is the overriding theme that has now projected itself into the tech Forum.

Rader uses overwhelming force to run over Greyjoy == brillant play
Greyjoy uses cunning and wit to pull of something most of us would not dare and moves hence forth destroying the IJ == Bug in the system ..

I have the conplete context in which to interpret the rationalizations of a scenrario #2 and ahistoric allied moves ...[8D]

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

Here is the overriding theme that has now projected itself into the tech Forum.

Rader uses overwhelming force to run over Greyjoy == brillant play
Greyjoy uses cunning and wit to pull of something most of us would not dare and moves hence forth destroying the IJ == Bug in the system ..

I have the conplete context in which to interpret the rationalizations of a scenrario #2 and ahistoric allied moves ...[8D]

I don't understand your point mate[&:]...sorry but it's not always easy to read between the lines when english is your mother-language

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: House Stark

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

I was off for work, came back, peeked into the thread and read something about Kamikaze carriers......made my day.

Good yer stepped back from that one or I would have posted this

Who ever said i am Theon? Couldn't i be Victarion greyjoy? [;)]

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/images/a/a3/ ... reyjoy.jpg

You're too clever to be Victarion. And considering that your bold plans meet with success you're clearly not Theon. So that leaves you as Asha, or quite probably Euron.

And dumphair? [:D]

[Xxzard]

Thats "damphair"...

unless you meant "dumphair"...

which you might have...

[:D][:D][:D]

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

Here is the overriding theme that has now projected itself into the tech Forum.

Rader uses overwhelming force to run over Greyjoy == brillant play
Greyjoy uses cunning and wit to pull of something most of us would not dare and moves hence forth destroying the IJ == Bug in the system ..

I have the conplete context in which to interpret the rationalizations of a scenrario #2 and ahistoric allied moves ...[8D]

I don't understand your point mate[&:]...sorry but it's not always easy to read between the lines when english is your mother-language

Sorry .. I was just pointing out when you have come up with a masterful play its ahistorical, gamey, or a bug in the game from the perspective of the IJFB's yet you endured being run over by the ahistorical scenario and used your resources to beat em back ..despite all the home rules!

I am in awe ...[&o]

[Cap Mandrake]

Still, you have to admit, putting Soviet troops on US Navy ships would be tantalizingly close to "co-location".[;)]

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson II

Its an interesting idea from Alfred. In historical realism this would be an absolute no-no. In 1945 in Europe there was very serious concern that the Soviets would just blitz us as well, such was the level of apprehension about Stalin's motives.

On the other hand I have to question at which point this scenario departed from historical anyway........ it is debatable that the 7th December was the starting point........

Ho hum.

Roger

Roger,

I understand fully your POV but let me put forward a few historical facts which makes the idea historically realistic. Certainly no less than the twaddle we get from the other side.

1. Britain and the Soviet Union both cooperated in occupying and administering Persia.

2. Lend Lease was largely delivered on non Soviet ships to Soviet ports.

3. The entire Soviet capability to maintain mobile land operations was heavily dependent on the use of American trucks, foreign oil lubricants etc. In other words Soviet logistics was dependent on the provision of equipment by others. Think of the provision of the American landing craft as just another logistical assistance provided, similar to that of American trucks.

Alfred, (honorary Soviet consular official tasked with furthering comradely relations with the peace loving peoples of the world)

[Xxzard]

If the US stood any chance of winning against Japan without Soviet help they wouldn't ask for it. There wasn't much that could be done about Eastern Europe, but Churchill and Truman certainly strove to prevent any partition of Japan along Capitalist/Communist lines.

Quite frequently the issue of the threat from the Soviet Union comes into debates about the necessity of using the atom bomb. As in, if the US did not end the war quickly, the USSR might swoop in to enlarge its sphere of influence in the area. Thus necessitating use of the bomb. The worst case scenario for the US would be if the USSR gained a legitimate (or semi-legitimate) claim on part of mainland Japan. Then there would be no getting rid of them.

If you ask me, from a historical perspective Greyjoy has already won. He has taken a pretty much unassailable position in Hokkaido. If Japan did not sue for peace after such a decisive loss, then it would only be a matter of time until the bombing campaign and eventual atom bombs force Japan to surrender. After all, some AAR games are played with house "victory conditions" that define the level of victory based on the number of Allied airbases in proximity to Japan. By that standard Greyjoy would certainly win, and in very impressive time.

So, with history out the window, (since I believe Greyjoy has already won historically) arguments pertaining to the historical use of Soviet forces are somewhat null and void. That's why by this point of the game, I'd say just about anything should be fair game.

[pat.casey]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson II

Its an interesting idea from Alfred. In historical realism this would be an absolute no-no. In 1945 in Europe there was very serious concern that the Soviets would just blitz us as well, such was the level of apprehension about Stalin's motives.

On the other hand I have to question at which point this scenario departed from historical anyway........ it is debatable that the 7th December was the starting point........

Ho hum.

Roger

Roger,

I understand fully your POV but let me put forward a few historical facts which makes the idea historically realistic. Certainly no less than the twaddle we get from the other side.

1. Britain and the Soviet Union both cooperated in occupying and administering Persia.

2. Lend Lease was largely delivered on non Soviet ships to Soviet ports.

3. The entire Soviet capability to maintain mobile land operations was heavily dependent on the use of American trucks, foreign oil lubricants etc. In other words Soviet logistics was dependent on the provision of equipment by others. Think of the provision of the American landing craft as just another logistical assistance provided, similar to that of American trucks.

Alfred, (honorary Soviet consular official tasked with furthering comradely relations with the peace loving peoples of the world)

I think it pretty much depends on whether or not the US thought it needed soviet troops.
The US government pretty clearly preferred to unilaterally control Japan (no postwar sphere for the soviets like Germany for example), but objectively speaking the same thing was likely true of germany and we ended up partitioning that. Difference was that historically, the US couldn't take German w/o soviet help, whereas historically the US could, and did, defeat mainland Japan w/o needing soviet help (since there was no invasion).

Historical invasion plans for the mainland like Coronet envisioned using largely US troops with a smattering of commonwealth ground formations and a large mixed naval presence. There were no historical provisions to bring in soviet troops because, again the US didn't think it necessary and for policy reasons we're rather not partition Japan.

All that said, different facts on the ground would have produced a different policy decision. If the US had *needed* soviet troops to invade the mainland, we'd have partitioned Japan with the soviets and used US naval forces and or lend/lease equipment to facilitate a soviet landing.

[terje439]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

CV LexII
CV HornetII

What?! no CV House Stark, House GreyJoy etc??? [X(]

Terje

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: terje439

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

CV LexII
CV HornetII

What?! no CV House Stark, House GreyJoy etc??? [X(]

Terje

[:D] Have to admit that i thought a lot about renaming them...but everytime i tried to do so i felt guilty of ruining the athmosphere of the game...so in the end i simply left the original name...

Lexington II would have become "Lady-Brienne"
Saratoga II the "DawnSword"
Hornet II the "Iron Victory" and so on....[:)]

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: Xxzard

Thats "damphair"...

unless you meant "dumphair"...

which you might have...

[:D][:D][:D]

Oh...LOL [:D][:D]

[GreyJoy]

Ok guys...Rader is back...tonight we're gonna have our beloved turn...
 
I'm gonna have a busy working day so i won't be able to get back to you since 24:00 GMT....
 
Have a good day!

[Roger Neilson II]

LOl, like your new job title Alfred.

Was not having a go at your idea, merely using it to point out the Star Wars in the Pacific scenario's absurdities.

However, I'd just point out that 2 and 3 are both essentially 'giving' stuff to Stalin to use as he sees fit. And its mechanical kit that doesn't have any proletarian or bourgeois aspects to it its simply kit. Lots of very questionable regimes are happy to receive kit from other states, they are not happy to have even an 'adviser' on their territory.


Personally as an avid reader of this thread I'd like to see the Russkies do this, but it ain't 20th Century history.

Beam me up Scotty........

Roger

[CaptBeefheart]

Well, our friend GJ has certainly won a moral victory for overcoming some naively accepted HRs and taking Japan's northern island by mid-44 after utter and complete humiliation in China and the subcontinent (well, not complete humiliation in India). From here it certainly would be good to see a no-holds-barred contest using the game's mechanics to utmost advantage, especially considering as the playing field has been leveled somewhat by IJ's uber-fighters appearing ahead of their time and the untimely parking of a good chunk of Allied flattop tonnage in Davey Jones's locker.

Cheers,
CC

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson II

LOl, like your new job title Alfred.

Was not having a go at your idea, merely using it to point out the Star Wars in the Pacific scenario's absurdities.

However, I'd just point out that 2 and 3 are both essentially 'giving' stuff to Stalin to use as he sees fit. And its mechanical kit that doesn't have any proletarian or bourgeois aspects to it its simply kit. Lots of very questionable regimes are happy to receive kit from other states, they are not happy to have even an 'adviser' on their territory.


Personally as an avid reader of this thread I'd like to see the Russkies do this, but it ain't 20th Century history.

Beam me up Scotty........

Roger

If the US stood any chance of winning against Japan without Soviet help they wouldn't ask for it. There wasn't much that could be done about Eastern Europe, but Churchill and Truman certainly strove to prevent any partition of Japan along Capitalist/Communist lines.

I think you hit the point Roger .. The real key from my understanding, was thatroosevelt wanted a "why can't we just get along strategy" the same strategy that limited our ship building before the war. The opposition argued for a new Post WWII strategy of going back to carrying a big stick and projecting power. The Soviets took full advantage of the former readily accepting US sent supplies and BTW alllowed us to station bombers on thier soil ..until it was no longer advantagious ... the latter is justified in Western history books ..

One thing I note . a Western interpretation of of history post WWII .. Alfred explains a few facts that lays the groundwork for understanding ..[;)]

[MateDow]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

MateDow, thanks for popping up and finding the time to drop your suggestions. They are most welcome, wise and logical. And i thank you for being here! feel free to keep on giving suggestions, thoughts...or just to pop up and slap my face when i do stupid things[:)]

thanks for joining

Sorry I came across as slapping your face, that wasn't my intention. Although reading it again, I did come off that way, so I apologize.

I am in awe at your attention to detail that you have demonstrated in planning and analyzing the intelligence that you receive. I don't have the patience for that, and that is the reason that I stick to playing the AI. Never had the bravery to pit myself against a real person.

[Alchenar]

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

Here is the overriding theme that has now projected itself into the tech Forum.

Rader uses overwhelming force to run over Greyjoy == brillant play
Greyjoy uses cunning and wit to pull of something most of us would not dare and moves hence forth destroying the IJ == Bug in the system ..

I have to say, myself and some other people are reading this AAR from... somewhere else and this is the universal opinion. For a veteran player like Rader to play Scenario 2 against a complete newbie like GreyJoy and still demand new House Rules every time Grey does something that works comes across as incredibly unsportsmanlike.

Rader is playing dirty as hell and it certainly comes across that his conception of balance isn't to make the game fair but to tie Grey down with Houserules until it's literally impossible for the US to create any kind of dominant force parity. Which is why Rader is running about with planes a year before he should have them and Grey is HR'd out of being able to do anything close to historical strategic bombing despite having Airbases on mainland Japan.

[jeffk3510]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

ORIGINAL: Alfred



But maybe no rule against Soviets operating out of Western Allied bases?

If no such rule exists, you could use the limited Soviet navy to slowly transfer a lot of the Soviet army to Hokkadio where it could be reloaded on the much more plentiful American landing craft to be unloaded in a single day on Honshu and blow through the Japanese defenses.

Under no circumstances hint you might do this nor agree to any rule which would prevent you from doing so.

Alfred

"Russian and other allied units cannot be co-located or occupy each other's bases. "

Well, this is the HR Rader requested. My understanding is that it covers up almost every kind of coordinated fighting effort between the russians and the western allies.
An HR is like a contract. Its interpretation can always be stretched to some degrees. I could, for example, use 99 american/british APA, and 1 Russian cruiser to create an amphib convoy under the USSR Navy flag and land a russian army in Honsu, interpretating it as an extension of the Land Lease act... it's an interpretation that obviously tries to elude or evade the inner meaning of the HR which is clear: Russian and Western allies are two separate forces both enemy of Japan but that operate separated.

Will for sure be a subject to be discussed, but i will not feel particularly strong in arguing the right of my interpretation of the rule

"

GreyJoy,

I have largely refrained from commenting on your opponent's approach and I won't fully unleash now, but he has always treated you, and the rest of the forum as fools. Nothing he puts forward to justify his actions has any validity, he misuses historical data, he misrepresents how the game operates, he misrepresents how he suffers from game mechanics. He might be a lovely individual in real life but he is not the saint you depict him as a player.

There is a very easy "legal" loophole around that "contract". Part of it you have already identified as sailing under a Soviet flag. The other leg is that you transport the Soviet army to a base on Hokkaido and the first day you land the first Soviet troops you change the base to Soviet command and move out all non-soviet forces.

GreyJoy, there is an old Spanish saying which is very applicable to you. He who makes himself of sugar, gets eaten by flies.

Alfred

I have been saying this from day one. Alfred, as always [:)], words it far better than ever.

[Grfin Zeppelin]

Game of thrones rpg

So funny. Only interesting if you have read the books.