Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Or maybe it just means a guy wearing loose pants at a "clothing optional" beach ....

I know that guy. One time I was running along the bluff at Black's Beach in La Jolla and there is a UCSD maint. dude in his UCSD uniform sitting in a lawn chair with a big telescope checked out from the Astronomy Department.

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Or maybe it just means a guy wearing loose pants at a "clothing optional" beach ....

I know that guy. One time I was running along the bluff at Black's Beach in La Jolla and there is a UCSD maint. dude in his UCSD uniform sitting in a lawn chair with a big telescope checked out from the Astronomy Department.

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

IWO is of limited use even later in the game. It's annoying, but just not big enough to base a significant number if heavy bombets. Also, not much of a port. The other options would provide better strategic support

ORIGINAL: poodlebrain

There are drawbacks to the Kuriles as an objective that give me pause. The first is the proximity to major Japanese bases. The IJN can recycle for combat so much faster than the USN. The effects of winter on base development and operations. The numbers of quality fighters are still low for establishing air superiority since defending against Kamikazes will also be a necessity.

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

ORIGINAL: poodlebrain

There are drawbacks to the Kuriles as an objective that give me pause. The first is the proximity to major Japanese bases. The IJN can recycle for combat so much faster than the USN. The effects of winter on base development and operations. The numbers of quality fighters are still low for establishing air superiority since defending against Kamikazes will also be a necessity.

Yes, but there aren't any kamikazes yet. [:)]

ORIGINAL: poodlebrain

Kamikazes are triggered when the Allies capture a base within 20 hexes, by sea, of Tokyo, Takao or Saigon. So only the inner Kuriles will trigger Kamikazes, and only on or after 1Jan1944.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Hello, Gents. I've been at the beach today, where we were under a "tropical storm warning" with sunshine and nearly calm seas. Okay.

Once, many years ago, I went for an early morning jog heading northeast towards the rising sun (not that rising sun!). Far in the distance I saw two young men walk onto the beach, strip off their clothes, and run into the ocean. Just my luck. Men.

I'll give one answer regarding Big Tent. NoPac was eliminated immediately. Operation Circus (the invasion of Hokkaido re-routed to the Aluetians) lit a fire under John's seat. For months afterwards, SigInt was lit up with troops diverting to the Aluetians, Hokkaido, etc. Hokkaido is a run target to hit, but only when the enemy isn't expecting it.

I've look at nearly every other possibility out there, from Sumatra to Oz to New Guinea to the Home Islands. I don't think there was a perfect target, but I came up with two the I looked at longest before finally selecting one. You guys are doing a decent job of discussing (and sometimes eliminating) places that are/were under consideration.

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

Kamikazes are not activated before Jan 1, 1944.

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Hmmmm. All this talk about kamikazes. For the record and prior experience I offer up that kamikazes are a threat and a nuisance but not a game changer. I would never eliminate a potential objective based on if it would or would not trigger kamikazes. If I think I can take the objective and think it would serve my purpose then I would do so, kamikaze or no. If you trigger them in 1943 it is because you are winning-not losing the campaign.

ORIGINAL: poodlebrain

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Hmmmm. All this talk about kamikazes. For the record and prior experience I offer up that kamikazes are a threat and a nuisance but not a game changer. I would never eliminate a potential objective based on if it would or would not trigger kamikazes. If I think I can take the objective and think it would serve my purpose then I would do so, kamikaze or no. If you trigger them in 1943 it is because you are winning-not losing the campaign.

Successful Kamikaze attacks are not devastating enough to be a serious threat to the Allies. When you combine that with game mechanics that reduce the chances for successful attacks, Kamikazes are little more than a nuisance to properly protected Allied TFs. My experience is that proper protection requires CVEs, and the more the merrier since this allows for the use of more TFs capable of operating indepently.

Barring unacceptably high losses, the Allies have enough CVEs in early 1944 to mount a single large integrated operation wherever they desire. But it is not until about mid-1944 that the CVEs are plentiful enough to mount such operations without delays between them to allow for ship recovery and TF reorganization. As such, the biggest impact from early triggering of Kamikazes is on the pace of Allied operations. But then the impact I notice is a function of my own playing habits and level of caution, and some might have issues with both.