Matrix Games Forums

Gentlemen,

I have played ten serious PBEM games between WitP and AE over the last five years. (Everybody wants me to play the Japanese, so I still haven't had a chance to play the Allies.) Two went for more than three years and were a roaring good time. The rest ended within a couple of months - in some cases a couple of weeks. Why? Because Allied players simply can't sit still. They're like middle schoolers with ADD. Please, for the love of Pete, take note of the following:

1) DO NOT send your carriers raiding towards Wake or Midway or Kwajalein or wherever during Dec41. Are you nuts? Have Halsey spayed or drugged or locked up in the brig, whatever it takes to restrain yourself. 8 of 10 games I have sunk USN carriers within 30 days of Pearl Harbor. What are you thinking? STOP IT! You get your carriers sunk and then you want to quit. Knock it off.

2) Sing it with me, "Time is on my side, yes it is." Hum it to yourself when you sit down to take your turn. Engrave it on your forehead. Just relax and offer attritional resistance in the NEI for the first 6 months. Your fun will come later. No, you cannot hold Singapore against a competent opponent. Or Rangoon. Or Palembang. Or Rabaul. You are playing a human being now, not the AI. As the Jap I have only one hope - that you will send your carriers out for me to sink during the first 3-4 months of the game. So why do you happily oblige me over and over and over again? STOP IT!

I am so tired of Allied players wanting to quit after committing unbelievably bone-headed hyper-aggressive Worf-ish maneuvers in the first few months of the game. Why can't you sit still? Why can't you relax? Why can't you sit down and shut up for a few months? Bide your time, lay your plans, hoard your forces, then start kicking the daylights out of me! Why must you dash about like hyper-active children?

Okay ... I'm done ranting now.

From an Allied PBEM player, my best and longest PBEM (mid/late 44). I lost all 4 starter
CV's at canton .. yup it was a blow but made the game a lot more fun for both sides as
japan had a longer 'safe' period and allies had to think and plan.

I would encourage any allied PBEM players to carry on even if they lose thier CV's early.

It doesen't matter one iota to the outcome imo.

But as Grayhair (hope thats not a brand of shampoo where you come from [;)]) says, dont
expect a fair fight in the early game, its an unrealisitic expectation and you WILL lose
a lot of material and ships. Conversely Don't do a Sir Robin either, balance it and you
will have a challenging and ultimately fun game.

just my 2p

Fortunately you didn't read the thread where I sent my 4 initial CVs to raid the SRA in Jan 42 (and refuel in Soerabaja once). Otherwise I'd really be in trouble. <G>
&nbsp;
Yes, that was risky but I did have LBA searches covering the area the CVs were operating. What I was hoping to do, actually, was have the KB go out into the Indian Ocean, deplete their airgroups, then fight the KB when they returned. (The KB never showed. I don't know where they are but they aren't around Indonesia nor in the Indian Ocean).
&nbsp;
I figured the KB would be spotted but the Allied Air Combat group out of sight too far south for most air search from where the IJ had LBA at that time. I did get attacked once by 12 Bettys but splashed them.
&nbsp;
Actually I thought this, though risky, safer than having the CVs in the central Pacific. More allied bases to run to in the Indian Ocean or Oz and more allied air search/less IJ air search.
&nbsp;
(This isn't PBEM which I have never done. This is the Dec 8 scenario vs AI/Hard).
&nbsp;
&nbsp;

[:D][:D]DO NOT send your carriers raiding towards Wake or Midway or Kwajalein or wherever during Dec41. Are you nuts? Have Halsey spayed or drugged or locked up in the brig, whatever it takes to restrain yourself[:D][:D]

gravyhair, wise words !... I absolutely agree in several points that you explain in your post.
Regards

...unbelievably bone-headed hyper-aggressive Worf-ish maneuvers...

This brought tears to my eyes...

It only takes one "Midway" to start a trend

Luckily, that happened in real life (but rarely, if ever, in WITP!)

gravyhair but those are the best games - I have made a habit of taking over other folks games as the allies in those situations and trying to rescue them is incredible fun !!!

The Japanese offensive resembles a Tsunami, retire or defend until it starts to receed.

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

gravyhair but those are the best games - I have made a habit of taking over other folks games as the allies in those situations and trying to rescue them is incredible fun !!!

Ever taken over a Japanese disaster? I have. [:D]

It's rather like making a squirrel from roadkill.

Do you think the "old rules" will still apply with all the changes?

I had a long PBEM game as the allieds and I was more than happy to run and hide, but got cornered and lost a couple of carriers around mid 42.

I have what I think is a pretty good early strategy for the allieds down.

I would like to play Japan in a PBEM campaign game, but I haven't gotten my hands around the early moves and production.

Hi. I'm "one of those people." [:D]

I'm a bit aggressive as the Allies in the early months. And yes I've lost CVs, but no I haven't quit in my allied games. I've actually had a bit of success with raiding the KB's Oilers in the opening days (and then racing away to Dutch and then East and South along the coast back to Seattle), especially if the KB sticks around to hammer Pearl more than a day. Hard for the KB to chase you if they have no gas and are a long way from home. I've also had success breaking up small island invasions early on, or at least sinking their transports and escorts in the SoPac area between Canton and Lunga. And lastly, yes, I've used them in WitP in the DEI, though it's much tougher there due to LBA. I usually lose my CVs trying to block some invasion in the SRA like PM. And in the DEI, I have a lot of surface groups trying to tear unescorted invasion forces to shreds. I will almost always lose all of the Dutch Navy, and likely all of the USN and British ships that start the game there, in the process... plus a few extra British surface ships (mostly CLs and a couple slow BBs) I send down there. And I will sometimes lose the British CVs should the mini-KB or some other Jap AC group of 2 CVs or less moves into the IO close to Ceylon... but then again, when they send only the CVLs or CVEs... I almost always sink them, and yes even when my CVs are only carrying fulmars and swordfish.

Regarding those cities, no, I don't try to hold them more than normal, unless you count trying to botteneck in the jungle/river hex east of Rangoon in WiTP. And yes, I've kept Rangoon through the whole war in a PBEM. For the most part, I think some players see that some guy did it in an AAR, or saw a post by some guy claiming they did it once, so they try to do it too. I agree with you in that trying to keep Rabaul or Singapore is madness

It also happens from the Japanese side... I've had a Japanese opponent attempt an invasion of Pearl because he read that one famous AAR where it happened, and he ended up losing 2 CVs from the KB in late Jan 42. He then followed it up with 2 failed invasions of Midway where he lost a 3rd CV... this is in addition to the tons of shipping, escorts and LCUs he lost.

Lastly, I've had a game vs. a good japanese opponent where I lost 4 CVs in the first 3 months. He ended up taking from PM, to Noumea, to Suva, to Canton. I was forced to go into build-up mode until mid 43. I was ok with that, but we ended up having a lot of turns where nothing was happening (mostly because very little actually could). The result: HE got bored and quit.

So ya, it cuts both ways [:'(]

ORIGINAL: Laxplayer
I'm a bit aggressive as the Allies in the early months. And yes I've lost CVs, but no I haven't quit in my allied games.

THIS is the key to the whole thing. Play the game any way you want..., but be willing to live and play with the results of your choices! People who play "fast and loose" (with either side) and then quit because their "hair in the butt schemes" fail are the bane of PBEM. I wish there was a place to "report" them to other players so they could be ignored by serious players....

I will almost always lose all of the Dutch Navy, and likely all of the USN and British ships that start the game there, in the process... plus a few extra British surface ships

One thing that seems different here, either AE vs WITP or because of Andy's AI is that there are more small surface actions and as a result more losses on both sides. The surface battles are not one side wipes out the other, but both lose some ships.

So I have lost a number of Dutch and Brit CLs and DDs in the region but cost the IJ some ships (and troops in transports) as well.

Surface combat seems _less_ risky in that regard and the CLs and DDs I have lost have been in part to LBA due to overstaying my welcome.

Beezle: I think, at least in AE, that it's a lot more viable in part because search patterns aren't as overpowered as in WitP (they miss a lot more) and because betties/nells aren't quite as deadly, though they've still got a serious bite. In WitP, you'd be detected as soon as you entered the search circle of the nearest emily/mavis and you'd lose all your ships as soon as you entered a squadron of betty/nells range. In AE, you can play a lot more cat and mouse vs. lightly escorted or unescorted transport TFs in the DEI because of this. Obviously, bringing in heavy CV forces will send my surface tfs scurrying back to base, but that's about the only thing that will... and if it's a small CVtf.. I might even charge forward [:D]

ORIGINAL: Laxplayer

Beezle: I think, at least in AE, that it's a lot more viable in part because search patterns aren't as overpowered as in WitP (they miss a lot more) and because betties/nells aren't quite as deadly, though they've still got a serious bite. In WitP, you'd be detected as soon as you entered the search circle of the nearest emily/mavis and you'd lose all your ships as soon as you entered a squadron of betty/nells range. In AE, you can play a lot more cat and mouse vs. lightly escorted or unescorted transport TFs in the DEI because of this. Obviously, bringing in heavy CV forces will send my surface tfs scurrying back to base, but that's about the only thing that will... and if it's a small CVtf.. I might even charge forward [:D]

I agree searches are so much more realistic and play balanced. The next thing is full speed eats up your fuel and you can only do one turn without risking put in a poor position without having to refuel in case a CV battle occurs.

This spells in CV v CV, always a chance to miss during search but more important as allies you are now given the opportunity to actually spot KB before they get in strike range. Before a smart Jap player would sit 13 hexes off any player search range (catalina) use their superior range mavis/emily knowing allied location and then sprint in for surprise attack and allies would be shocked.

Knowing the KB location is crucial, once you do you can play a little risk with allied CV's esp now that betty is toned down a lot [:D][:D][:D][:D]

I think, at least in AE, that it's a lot more viable in part because search patterns aren't as overpowered as in WitP (they miss a lot more) and because betties/nells aren't quite as deadly

I make a _lot_ of use of the graphic display of search patterns in the AE Sy=taff to help me with search patterns. One thing I am having to decide here, unlike in WITP is how may planes to commit to seach. Just a few may not be enough any more (too many and you have nothing to strike with).

Of course he who lives by the clever search patterns pointing in the direction the IJ are supposed to come from dies by the IJ who come from the wrong side <G>

Add me to the list then. The only PBEM game I tried in WITP went quite well for myself and my opponent until... my opponent locked down a marine division on Tarawa and used the KB as overwatch to protect a number of the infamous nuclear bombardment fleets which did nothing but bombard the island around the clock.

I did not commit my carriers to intervene even though they were in the area, the results of the bombardments made me realise that WITP was a flawed vessel and frankly wasnt worth further investment of my time UNLESS issues such as the above were fixed, and clearly in AE some steps have been taken to fix ahistorical results bordering on the insane, and ahistorical use, although this is still a issue to a degree in AE as well.

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: Laxplayer
I'm a bit aggressive as the Allies in the early months. And yes I've lost CVs, but no I haven't quit in my allied games.

THIS is the key to the whole thing. Play the game any way you want..., but be willing to live and play with the results of your choices! People who play "fast and loose" (with either side) and then quit because their "hair in the butt schemes" fail are the bane of PBEM. I wish there was a place to "report" them to other players so they could be ignored by serious players....

Don't know why someone would quits after losing a few carriers. In my PBEM game I lost 3-4 carriers and a boatload of CA, CL, and DD's to KB before late 42. By 43 I managed to take and lose Wake and had an entire division and a bunch of other units march off into captivity.

Yet I never felt it was a hopeless cause. The allieds get so much stuff you can easily continue to fight on. I marched up the DEI onto Japan-losing a bunch of ships and units in the process. Sure I may have lost, but it was still fun and worth playing till 45.

I prefer reliable players.

I have played 20 Uncommon Valor games, 5 WITP games and so far 0 AE games.

Of the 5 WITP Games, 4 of them lasted until after 1945, and I lost 3 of them as Japan late 45 due to Nukes and massive bombing over and over... ect and when approaching September +/- 1945 we agreed Japan would surrendered by now... I won 1 Game as the Allies once, and 1 Game ended as my opponent quit in mid 43.

This said, I don't claim to be any expert, nor any special in any way, just a interested and dedicated WITP player.


However, I always hate to start a game (don't misunderstand, I love the game) but I hate the fear of playing with someone I don't know, who might or might not be a reliable player... who might or might not quit... ect.. And then be dedicating a lot of time, calculations, paper charts and so on to the game without knowing if the other man stays in the game or not..

I feel I have been lucky with my opponents, but I have been a bit careful I guess about who I start a game with, and I have encouraged that we take a talk on the phone or something as the game goes on, I feel that communication is beneficial to the game, to discuss any issues or potential HR changes ect or whatever that might occur.


I just felt for presenting my perspective on things in this post I guess..



Relieble players is what I personally value the most.