ORIGINAL: Revthought
If those chits are real humans - withdrawing those chits to Australia is "Saving lives" not throwing them away with inadequate training, weapons, supply.
Semantics, man! I don't think we disagree at all. Like I said, when I play I do these things for the reasons you just stated; however, I also make my decisions, as best I can, based on the real political and ideological constraints that were involved in the war.
For example, it would have been politically
and personally impossible for Churchill to completely abandon Singapore, for more reasons than is worth discussing. To me this means recognizing the inevitable and acting accordingly.
So, for example, I stop any reinforcements from going into Singapore. Evacuate resources and some key units that I need to form an Australian division. I do not pull everyone out because I am looking at the chits as military units I have to make the hard decision to sacrifice to show that the British put up a fight. I do not view them as game pieces worth X points for later use.
What you may be inferring is "defense" of as many positions as possible/logical/ unexposed is "defending real civilians and economic infrastructure" in support of National wishes. i.e Singapore.
Sir Winston ordered the troops to fight to the death!
That is a political imperative.
Percival is the first to go (and I don't even switch him back into command the day before sings falls!) So I live up to that in some sense, precisely because it is a political imperative. That does not, in my mind, mean that I cannot also recognize that the commitment of further reinforcement to the peninsula, or the piecemeal commitment to sub-units of an important Aussie division are not bad ideas.
One look at the strategic situation on December 8th tells you that Singapore and Hong Kong are foregone conclusions; however, as you point out, for political and ideological reasons it is absolutely impossible to just declare them "open cities." I must make the Japanese fight for them, but I do not need to throw away men and material unnecessarily.
I would suggest you are roleplaying the political imperative of the war - not the strategic or tactical.
Of course! Well not of course, it's just what I do. I play with both in mind. That's why I'm going to lose a bunch of ships challenging the Japanese landings in the DEI, not evacuating everything not tied down in the Philippines, etc.
Then again, I can also read the writing on the wall. I'm not going to leave units isolated to starve, or throw ships away without any regard for my chances of success.
The "Sir Robin TACTIC" is as valid as any tactic a player chooses. I would think that many Japanese players may object and so ultimately it comes down to a question of player compatibility.
I agree. I judge nobody for using this tactic in game, it's just not how I want to play the game... and I don't mean that in a pejorative sense. It just wouldn't be that much fun
for me
1) IJN / IJA antagonism
2) IJA faction "China focus" that held sway over Imperial Policy and prevented
3) Imperial cancellation / hesitation of plans to invade Ceylon / Northern Australia / Pearl Harbor
I do
not go this far, but every game I play the only house rules I insist on are:
Keep things as historical as possible in the opening months of the war in the following sense: no ahistorical warp invasions of Hawaii, the West Coast, Australia, etc. Keep it to what the Japanese military would realistically have been restricted to; however, once you've cleared NG and the DEI, then Northern Australia is fair game. Take Midway, and clear out and establish a real strategic presence that for East, then try for Hawaii if that's what you want to do.
So, while I don't insist on the Japanese player not invading here or there because the IJN and the IJA didn't agree, I do insist that the Japanese player do the things that would have been necessary for them to agree on that step. The IJA isn't going to land in Darwin or Hawaii when all of the approaches are still owned by the Allies. Just could never have happened.
If I am being honest the only
really far fetched thing I do not think a Japanese player could ever "build up to" in a believable is West Coast North America stuff I occasionally see; however, I wouldn't complain if my opponent managed to wrest Midway, Hawaii and the Alaskan approaches from me. Luckily, that's never happened. [:D]
