Matrix Games Forums

I know that for some, the question of where the Japanese land their first "surprise" blow has been discussed however I've looked for a dedicated thread on this topic and didn't find it. So my question to old and, for their edification, new players, what is the best move for the Japanese, to hit Pearl as they actually did or to hit a more "at home" target, Manila (notice I don't include Singapore here, as I believe that a "surprise" attack there would not be possible given the war footing the British were on and thus no surprise would be possible). I've long been of the opinion that hitting Manila would be the more lucrative option for a number of reasons. Those subs need to go (yes even with their piss poor torps, getting them out of the picture in the long run is healthy). Also it keeps the Japanese CVs "in theater" so they can support a more aggressive drive on Singapore on turn 3 or 4. It also keeps the CVs closer to their rearming bases thus a far greater turn around time. As a final thought, it allows the US to venture forth with their BBs with a HOST of Japanese subs waiting for them. If they take substantial damage at sea, they SINK, not in the mud of Pearl but in the deep blue sea, a far better and more decisive end than the year or two of repairs needed at Pearl or the West Coast. Just some basic points to start the discussion. I'd be interested in alternative views! Thanks.

From my point of view and experience, hitting the base at Manila and losing a bunch of subs sucks. The torpedoes may not work well but there loss delays the blockade of Japan. Slow Battleships can be sunk by aircraft later on. My two cents....GP

Differing opinions abound.

For all of my PBEMs (where I had control that is), I've opted to blast Manila instead of PH.

Advantages:

1. Liquidate USN Far East command, including submarines. I can usually get all or near all the subs in Manila in the opening day. That's 25 of 'em for you keeping track at home. In my current game versus AcePylut, the Allies are down 32 subs (FOW of course) in August 1942. That effectively removes enemy submarines' direct action in the DEI, limiting their ability to reconnoiter, resupply, interfere with landings in the DEI and take direct action.

2. Puts KB in a position to either support additional actions in the DEI *or* escort Guam, Rabaul and SoPac landings immediately. KB's 'mispositioning' at PH will cost another 2 weeks before they can lend similar support.

3. Eliminates any possibility of damage to scarce fleet oilers in the Pacific (the ones supporting the PH raid) or to a 'Hail Mary' PH surface sortie against KB. Also reduces normal KB plane losses from flying into a dense AAA port attack like PH.

4. Allows for air wing reinforcement of KB immediately. KB is low on fighters at war start. I'll frequently reinforce them from 'carrier capable' air units from Formosa or the Home Islands.

5. More predictable damage wrought on the target port in question. Manila is reduced 100% of the time with a KB-infused strike there. I've seen some PH attacks where *no* BBs were sunk in exchange for the usual wear and tear on the KB. What a disappointment that would be!

Disadvantages:

1. PH is 'open for business' on day one. No port damage to slow it down for a few months. No big ships clogging its repair yards. Odds are that the Japanese will *never* reduce it. For a "Hawaii takedown" Japanese approach, *not* striking PH is a non-starter.

2. Assuming a historical number of BBs sunk in game terms (2), the VPs wrought from an average PH strike are probably higher than a Manila strike. But not overwhelmingly so, IMO.

3. (The biggy IMO) American aircraft at Pearl are not wiped out like they were historically. This allows American PBY and fighter pools-with woefully deficient replacement pools-to hold up and perform better than historically the first 6 months of the war. Subsequent deep raids by the KB are less likely to be surprises due to NavSearch detection.

I still like PH. For many of the reasons listed above. If though, the KB is split and does a bit of both, that could be an interesting option. I do like the support some of the KB can offer to the SRA invasions. I've seen just Kaga have a big effect in terms of limited and hitting Allied responses to the SRA campaign, speeding everything up.

So I guess I'd say ideally, a bit of both!

Could you imagine a TMTSNBN named "Manila" instead of "Pearl Harbor"? "Manila" just doesn't cut it...

Hitting Manila might in fact be the more lucrative option, but it smells a bit of "taking full advantage of hindsight".

Now, if you are a "anything goes" type of player, go ahead.

If you tend to be the "historic" type, you may still prefer hitting Pearl just because historically the war started there (well, actually it started with the landings on the the Thai and Malay coast).

Note that in a PBEM, no Allied player worth his salt will venture forth with his BBs as long as the Japanese subs are hanging around PH.

And the Allied subs at Manila are not that important - subs are nerfed in AE due to the inability to fire a spread at multiple targets in the same attack. Plus the old boats at Manila will be retired anyway and replaced by scores of Gatos and Balaos by the time the torps do work.

Finally, KB could be useful to cover in turn the landings at Wake, the Gilberts, Rabaul, Port Moresby and Darwin against enterprising Allied CVs and SAGs - establishing a defensive perimeter is as important as taking Singers IMO.

The subs in Manila, in my experience, don't seem to be that effective with the historical USN torpedoes, so killing them only eliminates a nuisance. A typical strike on Pearl Harbor takes most of the battleships off the board until 1943 if not sunk outright and cripples the fighter/patrol strength for the USA in the opening months. Having the KB available to support faster action in SE Asia seems to me to the big plus.

I like your reasoning Chickenboy! I agree with much of what you say. However, in terms of wiping out aircraft, one thing I've noticed in my opening moves using the PH option is that the air attacks on Manila do NOT wipe out Mac's air force, as it is somewhat spread out. It takes a while, so I don't think you gain that much from hitting Pearl aircraft wise. But I could be wrong here. Just based upon my own experience.

Engineer, once the subs at Manila escape and get upgraded with radar, even with ineffective torpedoes they DO constitute an effective set of eyes on Japanese movements especially in choke points.

in my current first turn. My enemy launched a first day amphibious assault on Singapore, Palembang, Balikpapan, Rabaul, midway and Bataan. He cleared some mines the hard way, but losses were overall very light. All these bases fell to the empire on 8th december. KB also struck Manila. wiping out a lot including all the subs. Also, all damaged ships were lost in Manila when Bataan fell. He lost some shipping, msotly AK's but overall his losses were surprsingly light. Knew about the Mersing Gambit, but the Singapore/Palembang gambit is a new one for me.

Its a sound plan.
My problem is without the attack on Pearl there is no war.

ORIGINAL: jagsdomain
My problem is without the attack on Pearl there is no war.

I'm not sure I understand the statement. I suspect an attack on a US fleet instillation anywhere in the world would have been seen as an attack on the USA. Certainly due to timing and other things, the surprise at Pearl exacerbated the impact of the attack, but I would suspect that an attack on Manila would be seen as an act of war even back in 1941! So there would be a war. In the game, such a move by the Japanese player starts the game and thus the war! Or am I missing something (many folk would say I'm missing a lot, but that's a different thread)? Do you mean the USA would NOT see it as a hostile act or that it would not be hostile enough to precipitate an immediate declaration of war?

Kill pigboats whenever you can ….. plus keeps your flat tops local for other ops ….

PH would only be a good target if I could order the flyboys to ignore the oil guzzling battlewagons and focus on the fuel farms and drydocks …..

Interesting discussion. In my current PBEM I split off the Kaga to join the CVLs from Babeldaob and Hiroshima near Singapore so I only hit PH with 5 CVs. Only got 1 BB. But i did pool all my Nells/Betties for a Manila strike that eliminated 12 subs. Kinda 1/2 and 1/2. Fog of war though.

ORIGINAL: scout1

PH would only be a good target if I could order the flyboys to ignore the oil guzzling battlewagons and focus on the fuel farms and drydocks …..

Is there the additional for air units to strike infrastructure ? ie, not naval strike, not airfield strike ….. I want the fuel farms …. the drydocks …. the machine shops ….

For AE non Pearl Harbor first turn strikes, read these threads:
 
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4155947&mpage=1&key=Pearl&#4156482
 
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3893160&mpage=1&key=Pearl
 
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2272554&mpage=1&key=Pearl
 
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2363907&mpage=1&key=Pearl&#2364072
 
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2198291&mpage=1&key=Manila&#2199538
 
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3065045&mpage=1&key=Manila&#3065660
 
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2748999&mpage=1&key=Manila&#2751544
 
 
Some of these threads are very big.
 
Alfred

For some reason I thought the Japanese Player was limited to one port attack on the 1st Turn. I'm mistaken? Maybe that was a house rule?

ORIGINAL: spence

For some reason I thought the Japanese Player was limited to one port attack on the 1st Turn. I'm mistaken? Maybe that was a house rule?

House rule, and I have mostly seen it as only one CV based port attack.

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Some of these threads are very big.

Alfred

As is the topic! Nice to see your post Alfred, hope all is well down under!

My opinion.


To me Manila is a no-brain over PH.


Now, if you start thinking at the entire opening on PH you have that:
1) You sink few BBs.
2) In mid-43 damaged BBs will be back online.
3) Undamaged BBs are not a threat in the first months.
4) KB is very far from DEI.


Manila:
1) The Allies receive almost 300 subs over the war (282 if I am not wrong).
2) US subs have faulty torpedoes but those torpedoes will become efficient at certain point
3) Even with faulty torpedoes, it's possible to make US subs work somehow: plenty of day/night NavS, close supply bases, very good positioning.
4) A strike on Manila kills most of the stuff there. No "wounded" ships: they get killed outright.
5) KB is immediately in the most important and delicate theater of operations.


Let's say you kill outright in Manila 25 subs. And you total 5 more in the first weeks (easily achievable) killing pesky dutch boats and co.
You arrive at 01/01/1942 with 30 subs killed with not much effort. If you approximate the total amount of allied subs in the war to 300 and you estimate you need to kill half of them to substantially eliminate the threat, you have already killed 20% of your target before even seeing 1942. Not bad at all.
It's a lot of fuel you can save through more direct routes and less escorts. Over the time, it's a great advantage, especially if you consider that many IJN escort ships are awfully fuel-inefficient.
And you have KB there ready to smash DEI, secure key positions and then free to go in the Pacific.



Now consider the disadvantages... Those BBs in PH won't be much useful before 1943 since their primary role is in naval bombardament. They are slow, consuming a lot of fuel. Not much use for them in the beginning.
When they'll come back online, they'll be a threat of course. And here it's the entire point: they would be online in any case even with PH since it's generally hard to sink many of them (2-3 seems the average).

To summarize, you trade 20% of your war ASW effort (with good KB positioning) for 2-3 old BBs sunk (with bad KB positioning). Again, Manila is quite a straightforward choice.