Am I a Cry Baby????
Posted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 11:53 am
Folks, I need your take on Japanese hunting CVs on turn one. Basically I want to know if I’m a crybaby or have legitimate concerns over this concept. I recently started a game with JFB that I will not identify. As usual in getting the boundaries of the game set up I clearly indicated that I wanted a realistic game but would welcome non-historical concepts that are within the bounds of “realism”. Few house rules were set up but to me the understanding of realistic was foundational and I thought understood by my opponent. I never even mentioned CV hunting on the first turn as a no no, as I thought it was long established that the Japanese player could not do this unless the Allied player purposely sent his two CVs north west looking for trouble!
In my opening move I had the Lexington heading straight west (the predisposition of the Lex in the DDB scenario set up has her going northwest which I saw as tempting fate and not needed to “deliver” the marine squadron on her to Midway). The Lex was struck by at least a one CV and one CVL Japanese TF on hex 151.107, being hit by both torpedoes and 250 kg bombs (thus Vals were involved in the attack). Given that the Val range is at best 7 hexes and given that the first move is only half a move (day only) that means that my opponent would have to place the Jap TF east of Wake and well south of Midway. Further my opponent’s TF had to end up on the hex line of 100, which means it was two hexes SOUTH of the Wake hex line and NINE below Midway! I find this placement and outcome to be totally unrealistic. The only reason that the Japanese were able to sneak up on Pearl is that they came directly from the NORTH of Hawaii so as to remain under the weather front that obscured their movements until December 6th. How would a Jap TF get to a position east of Wake and south of Midway? Impossible without being detected from Midway! No it doesn't even remotely ring true.
My opponent counters that I too could be considered gamey in my move of the Lexington in that I had her going to Wake to rescue the Marine squadron there. Yet if I wanted to protect Wake, northwest is the way to go. I was simply getting out of dodge (and heading in the historical direction that it was intended to head on the actual day of the attack). The Japs thought the US CVs were at Pearl, there was no need or intention to protect Wake. I certainly understand A-Historical approaches but in terms of the first turn my opponent knows where my CVs are and that the logical move for them to steam is away from the action. Which is what they did. My opponent states that he was placing his TF units to "protect" his invasion of Wake, a tiny sideshow that would play out a few days in the future. This action was at the expense of diminishing his attack on Pearl (or any port for that matter). This in my view is not even close to realistic. Wake was a backwater and will always be such. The only reason it made the history books is that the Marines actually defeated the first invasion. How much does one hear about the first battle of Guam? Nothing as there was nothing of historical importance there in '41. This is an example of where history and the game have problems. The Japanese player knows where the US CVs are and sent a force in their direction when in reality there was absolutely no reason for such a move. Wake was and remains a speck in the ocean. Japan’s whole philosophy was to destroy the Pacific fleet, and yet my opponent sent part of the KB to protect an invasion that amounts to a mouse biting on an elephant! I can understand his desire to split the KB to hit another port, but not protecting Wake! In truth if I were the Japanese player I doubt I would invade it to begin with, it does nothing more than provide safe target practice for the US later in the war! I certainly have no problems loosing the Lady Lex, but I would prefer to do so under conditions that somewhat reflect possible actions.
Clearly at the start both players know too much. That's why the first turn has restrictions. It simply has to have that or there is no initial balance. In my view, taking unfair advantage of that knowledge though CV hunting by the Japs on the first turn is a no no. Break up the KB (even by one CV, or even a CVL from another important operation) to protect a third rate side show when the whole "raison detre" of that KB was to destroy the Pacific Fleet doesn't seem to even remotely reflect reality. Hitting Manila does, trying to get to Singapore does (if that is allowed), but not Wake.
For this move to be needed my opponent had to use pre-event knowledge that his Wake invasion was in trouble, which only can be known after the invasion failed and that is many days in the future. For the strike in question to take place it means that my opponent would have had to have the Jap TF east of Wake and well south of Midway at the outset to attack ships in hex 151,107.
My opponent sites the move of the PoW and Repulse away from Singapore as also taking advantage of pre-event knowledge. I don't agree at all. If one looks at the game's Dec 8th start AFTER the attack of Pearl, both ships are in Singapore with NO move planned. So if one starts from that date the Allied player has every right to avoid the stupid decision to risk those ships in a dash up the Malaysian coast, and it would NOT be considered taking advantage of "pre-knowledge" or gamey but taking into account the effectiveness of the Japanese as demonstrated on Dec. 8th and 9th. So on the degree of "gamey" scale I would see this as almost zero compared to having a Jap CV TF south of Midway and east of Wake.
To me this move by my opponent is CV hunting. Am I being a first turn sore looser or is my objection realistic given my open desire to have a historical game with realistic a-historical moves as a possibility? I look forward to your views. Thanks. Hal
In my opening move I had the Lexington heading straight west (the predisposition of the Lex in the DDB scenario set up has her going northwest which I saw as tempting fate and not needed to “deliver” the marine squadron on her to Midway). The Lex was struck by at least a one CV and one CVL Japanese TF on hex 151.107, being hit by both torpedoes and 250 kg bombs (thus Vals were involved in the attack). Given that the Val range is at best 7 hexes and given that the first move is only half a move (day only) that means that my opponent would have to place the Jap TF east of Wake and well south of Midway. Further my opponent’s TF had to end up on the hex line of 100, which means it was two hexes SOUTH of the Wake hex line and NINE below Midway! I find this placement and outcome to be totally unrealistic. The only reason that the Japanese were able to sneak up on Pearl is that they came directly from the NORTH of Hawaii so as to remain under the weather front that obscured their movements until December 6th. How would a Jap TF get to a position east of Wake and south of Midway? Impossible without being detected from Midway! No it doesn't even remotely ring true.
My opponent counters that I too could be considered gamey in my move of the Lexington in that I had her going to Wake to rescue the Marine squadron there. Yet if I wanted to protect Wake, northwest is the way to go. I was simply getting out of dodge (and heading in the historical direction that it was intended to head on the actual day of the attack). The Japs thought the US CVs were at Pearl, there was no need or intention to protect Wake. I certainly understand A-Historical approaches but in terms of the first turn my opponent knows where my CVs are and that the logical move for them to steam is away from the action. Which is what they did. My opponent states that he was placing his TF units to "protect" his invasion of Wake, a tiny sideshow that would play out a few days in the future. This action was at the expense of diminishing his attack on Pearl (or any port for that matter). This in my view is not even close to realistic. Wake was a backwater and will always be such. The only reason it made the history books is that the Marines actually defeated the first invasion. How much does one hear about the first battle of Guam? Nothing as there was nothing of historical importance there in '41. This is an example of where history and the game have problems. The Japanese player knows where the US CVs are and sent a force in their direction when in reality there was absolutely no reason for such a move. Wake was and remains a speck in the ocean. Japan’s whole philosophy was to destroy the Pacific fleet, and yet my opponent sent part of the KB to protect an invasion that amounts to a mouse biting on an elephant! I can understand his desire to split the KB to hit another port, but not protecting Wake! In truth if I were the Japanese player I doubt I would invade it to begin with, it does nothing more than provide safe target practice for the US later in the war! I certainly have no problems loosing the Lady Lex, but I would prefer to do so under conditions that somewhat reflect possible actions.
Clearly at the start both players know too much. That's why the first turn has restrictions. It simply has to have that or there is no initial balance. In my view, taking unfair advantage of that knowledge though CV hunting by the Japs on the first turn is a no no. Break up the KB (even by one CV, or even a CVL from another important operation) to protect a third rate side show when the whole "raison detre" of that KB was to destroy the Pacific Fleet doesn't seem to even remotely reflect reality. Hitting Manila does, trying to get to Singapore does (if that is allowed), but not Wake.
For this move to be needed my opponent had to use pre-event knowledge that his Wake invasion was in trouble, which only can be known after the invasion failed and that is many days in the future. For the strike in question to take place it means that my opponent would have had to have the Jap TF east of Wake and well south of Midway at the outset to attack ships in hex 151,107.
My opponent sites the move of the PoW and Repulse away from Singapore as also taking advantage of pre-event knowledge. I don't agree at all. If one looks at the game's Dec 8th start AFTER the attack of Pearl, both ships are in Singapore with NO move planned. So if one starts from that date the Allied player has every right to avoid the stupid decision to risk those ships in a dash up the Malaysian coast, and it would NOT be considered taking advantage of "pre-knowledge" or gamey but taking into account the effectiveness of the Japanese as demonstrated on Dec. 8th and 9th. So on the degree of "gamey" scale I would see this as almost zero compared to having a Jap CV TF south of Midway and east of Wake.
To me this move by my opponent is CV hunting. Am I being a first turn sore looser or is my objection realistic given my open desire to have a historical game with realistic a-historical moves as a possibility? I look forward to your views. Thanks. Hal
and like we say in Distant Worlds, pass the Romulian Ale.[:D]