Malaya Map

[marcuswatney]

Brilliant map!
 
'Ploesti' etc is fine, but I don't think there's much point putting names on the map that will be unfamiliar to players.  Better I think would be to note what type of resource is being represented.  It may not have any effect on play, but it gives a nice touch of flavour.  So 'tin' for the northern Malayan resource and 'rubber' to the south.
 
What does a factory in red signify, and how does the use of oil differ from the use of resources?  Where do Build Points and oil coming up the Burma Road have to reach to be useable?

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

IOC codes: These are anachronistic. 'Mas' stands for Malaysia which did not exist in the forties. Malaysia was the name adopted at independence when Malaya, Sarawak and North Borneo united. That's why the code changed from 'Mal' to 'Mas'.

I agree we should use MAL instead of MAS, for the same reason as you say. MAS is for MAlaSia, which was called MALaya during WWII.

Ok.

[marcuswatney]

The Singapore fortress: can a Japanese task force creep along the east (or west) coast of Malaya and invade Singapore across the northeast (or northwest) hexside, thus avoiding the guns of the fortress?

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

The Singapore fortress: can a Japanese task force creep along the east (or west) coast of Malaya and invade Singapore across the northeast (or northwest) hexside, thus avoiding the guns of the fortress?

Yes.

Sevastopol is the reverse, with the fortifications facing the land and the sea sides open to attack - via invasions.

If the Commonwealth decides to, it could build two more fortifications (1 hexside each), but those would be weaker: attacker 1/2 instead of 1/3.

[marcuswatney]

Actually, I think the answer is no.  Reading the second paragraph of 11.14 very carefully, an invasion must come across an all-sea hexside, and the only valid all-sea hexside is the one southeast of Singapore ... which is protected by guns.  I believe it is not permissible to sidle down the coast.

But that second paragraph of 11.14 creates a new problem.  According to the RAW, Singapore cannot be invaded from the Bay of Bengal, because there happens to be no Singaporean all-sea hexside even partly on the Bay of Bengal front.  Is this intentional?  The Strait of Malacca is one of the busiest seaways in the world.

Perhaps given the acknowledged difficulty Japan has defending the Malay Barrier, this is an acceptable play-balance device. Indeed, looking at the WiF FE maps, I see the problem was even more acute there. In spite of Operation Zipper, no invasion of Malaya's west coast was possible at all in that edition.

I have also noticed that the southern shore of Sumatra is now much easier for the Allies to invade. Every single coastal hex can be invaded, whereas in WiF FE some were protected by the off-shore islands. Those islands are between 75km and 120km from the shore, so some could be re-drawn to intrude into the new all-sea hexes and so protect some of Sumatra as was done in WiF FE.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

Actually, I think the answer is no.  Reading the second paragraph of 11.14 very carefully, an invasion must come across an all-sea hexside, and the only valid all-sea hexside is the one southeast of Singapore ... which is protected by guns.  I believe it is not permissible to sidle down the coast.

But that second paragraph of 11.14 creates a new problem.  According to the RAW, Singapore cannot be invaded from the Bay of Bengal, because there happens to be no Singaporean all-sea hexside even partly on the Bay of Bengal front.  Is this intentional?  The Strait of Malacca is one of the busiest seaways in the world.

Perhaps given the acknowledged difficulty Japan has defending the Malay Barrier, this is an acceptable play-balance device. Indeed, looking at the WiF FE maps, I see the problem was even more acute there. In spite of Operation Zipper, no invasion of Malaya's west coast was possible at all in that edition.

I have also noticed that the southern shore of Sumatra is now much easier for the Allies to invade. Every single coastal hex can be invaded, whereas in WiF FE some were protected by the off-shore islands. Those islands are between 75km and 120km from the shore, so some could be re-drawn to intrude into the new all-sea hexes and so protect some of Sumatra as was done in WiF FE.

The typical attack on Singapore by the Japanese is to invade the hex to its NE, then move into the hex NW of Singapore if a two hex attack is desired. Shore bombardment is always available, so the attack can be made by two full hexes of units, Japanese units getting a benefit fighting in jungle, and the navy doubles the combat factors. Air support can be made available too if necessary, though the Japanese tactical air factors are universally poor.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
But that second paragraph of 11.14 creates a new problem.  According to the RAW, Singapore cannot be invaded from the Bay of Bengal, because there happens to be no Singaporean all-sea hexside even partly on the Bay of Bengal front.  Is this intentional?  The Strait of Malacca is one of the busiest seaways in the world.

The Western hexside of Singapore is an all sea hexside and is in the Bay of Bengal. So Singapore can be invaded from there.

Perhaps given the acknowledged difficulty Japan has defending the Malay Barrier, this is an acceptable play-balance device. Indeed, looking at the WiF FE maps, I see the problem was even more acute there. In spite of Operation Zipper, no invasion of Malaya's west coast was possible at all in that edition.

I have also noticed that the southern shore of Sumatra is now much easier for the Allies to invade. Every single coastal hex can be invaded, whereas in WiF FE some were protected by the off-shore islands. Those islands are between 75km and 120km from the shore, so some could be re-drawn to intrude into the new all-sea hexes and so protect some of Sumatra as was done in WiF FE.

Marcus, you are confused between all sea hexsides and coastal hexsides that are adjacents to sea hexsides.
To invade, you DON'T NEED to have the invaded hex be adjacent to a sea hex. You only need all sea hexside. An all sea hexside is an hexside that has only sea on it, no land. Hexsides between Singapore and all 4 southern hexes are all sea hexsides.

[Froonp]

For your information Marcus :

[Froonp]

To add to what I showed in the previous post, on this screenshot all coastal hexes are invadable except one. Bangkok.
All the other have all sea hexsides around them.
Singapore has 4, 4 of them are in the South China Sea, and 1 is both in the South China Sea and the Bay of Bengal, thus Singapore is invadable from both Sea Areas.

I think that you are confused by an old optional rule that said that you could only invade if the hex was adjacent to a sea hex, but this rule is no more part of WiF since ages ago. IIRC it was called the Sea Mines Optional Rule.

[marcuswatney]

Thanks for the clarification.  I interpreted "all-sea hexside" to mean a hexside that is part of an all-sea hex.
 
Responding to Steve, I would say it was very wrong to allow Japanese shore bombardment in support of an overland attack on Singapore.  The shore batteries may not have been able to bear on ground units infiltrating from the interior, but they could certainly engage a hostile task force shelling Singapore Island and force it to keep its distance.  After all, that's what they were there for.
 

[Norman42]

You are quite right. The Japanese didn't dare to bring naval assets within range of Singapore's Naval Artillery Batteries, many of which were battleship guns from WW1 battleships that were scrapped. These 11-15 inch guns were mounted in massive casemates on hilltops that gave them exceptional range and fields of fire...towards the sea only. They were unable to rotate to bring most of them to bear on the landward side. Even had they been able to, these guns were not very viable in this role, they had armor piercing shells and were very large calibre, not very suitable for anti infantry use.

That being said, a few 15 inch shells landing on the Japanese assualt would likely have given them some pause.

There are no Naval Artillery rules in WifFE other then the basic Naval Movement Restrictions on narrow areas that were historically heavily covered by Naval Guns and mines (Gibraltar, Dover, Copenhagen, Singapore) making enemy passage suicidal.

So, allowing Japanese Shore Bombardment to support a landward attack on Singapore is allowed. Is this realistic? No, not really, the IJN would have been hammered if they tried, but it is allowable in RAW.

[Norman42]

If we want to be *really* accurate on Singapore's defences there should be a "Lord Percival Rule". If the Japanese assault the city, roll a die, on a 1 to 8 Lord Percival surrenders his 100,000 troops and 400 guns without a fight. On a 9 or 10 fight the combat normally.

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

[marcuswatney]

ORIGINAL: Norman42

If we want to be *really* accurate on Singapore's defences there should be a "Lord Percival Rule". If the Japanese assault the city, roll a die, on a 1 to 8 Lord Percival surrenders his 100,000 troops and 400 guns without a fight. On a 9 or 10 fight the combat normally.

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

Oi! Percival did fight. He surrendered because the Japanese had captured all the reservoirs on Singapore Island. He knew the Japanese could just dug-in in their existing positions and wait for thirst to do its work.

The brutal reality is all the Allied nations were totally outclassed by the Japanese in 1941 (except the Soviets), and the cause of that was principally a form of racism that pre-war grossly underestimated Japanese military prowess.

But the real tragedy is that in fact Yamashita was himself desperately short of supplies. If the Commonwealth had held on, Singapore could have stalled the Japanese in the same way Bataan did.

[brian brian]

so Yamashita rolled well then.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: marcuswatney

ORIGINAL: Norman42

If we want to be *really* accurate on Singapore's defences there should be a "Lord Percival Rule". If the Japanese assault the city, roll a die, on a 1 to 8 Lord Percival surrenders his 100,000 troops and 400 guns without a fight. On a 9 or 10 fight the combat normally.

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

Oi! Percival did fight. He surrendered because the Japanese had captured all the reservoirs on Singapore Island. He knew the Japanese could just dug-in in their existing positions and wait for thirst to do its work.

The brutal reality is all the Allied nations were totally outclassed by the Japanese in 1941 (except the Soviets), and the cause of that was principally a form of racism that pre-war grossly underestimated Japanese military prowess.

But the real tragedy is that in fact Yamashita was himself desperately short of supplies. If the Commonwealth had held on, Singapore could have stalled the Japanese in the same way Bataan did.

It is difficult to hold on without water.

I am sure that the Japanese also had it easier to get supply by sea at that time.