When to throw in the towel - Advice needed

[comsolut]

Allied Player. June 42. Score Approx 22000 Japan 5500 Allies. 2 1/2 carriers sunk. Western Australia soon to be lost (Derby, Darwin etc). Noumea soon to go. Suva, Canton, Fiji, Baker Is. etc All Japan controlled. Troop losses considerable. So my question based on the experience of other Allied Players - can you come back from this or is it time to learn from mistakes and start over? Any thoughts appreciated.

[Brausepaul]

I haven't been in this situation but I think I will be there soon. If I was you I would go on (I know, it might be tough to keep up your motivation) because you can still learn a lot. It's easy to fight when you are winning and outnumber your opponent.

[LittleJoe]

Of course its still Physically possible for you to turn it around , but it can be pretty depressing watching your navy getting kicked around and destroyed.

Its really a case of whether you can be bothered to take a few more months of punishment and then attempt and painfully slow counterattack.

[wild_Willie2]

you can either be a nuisance for 2 years in game time befor going offensive again................ or trow in the towel and restart to learn from your mistakes. Where you so bad, or was your opponent so good??

[Mike Solli]

I like to play to the bitter end. The tide will turn. Look at it this way. It'll be more of a challenge for you longer. You'll have less time of simply applying massive Allied power to useless Japanese defenses. To me your current game is much more exciting.

[Tom Hunter]

Take a look at the History Repeats Itself AAR by Freeboy. He lost a lot but its 1944 and he is coming back strong. You can do it to if you have the patience.

You have to decide if this will be fun for you. There is no reason to play a game that is no fun for years and years. So yes its possible to recover and frankly your CV losses are not that bad to begin with. But if you won't enjoy it why continue?


Western Oz can go, its India and China that are really important.

[kaiser73]

ORIGINAL: comsolut

Allied Player. June 42. Score Approx 22000 Japan 5500 Allies. 2 1/2 carriers sunk. Western Australia soon to be lost (Derby, Darwin etc). Noumea soon to go. Suva, Canton, Fiji, Baker Is. etc All Japan controlled. Troop losses considerable. So my question based on the experience of other Allied Players - can you come back from this or is it time to learn from mistakes and start over? Any thoughts appreciated.

Well, i would pay to be able to play such a game as Allies. What more fun than fighting a better_than_historical Japan?
How's China and India going?

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: comsolut

Allied Player. June 42. Score Approx 22000 Japan 5500 Allies. 2 1/2 carriers sunk. Western Australia soon to be lost (Derby, Darwin etc). Noumea soon to go. Suva, Canton, Fiji, Baker Is. etc All Japan controlled. Troop losses considerable. So my question based on the experience of other Allied Players - can you come back from this or is it time to learn from mistakes and start over? Any thoughts appreciated.

Geez that's the Allied player Tojo must have dreamt of. You know, "lets slap them couple times and they will sue for peace" school of thought...

Continue!! And win. This is most certainly a winnable situation.

Fiji, Derby, Darwin.... they mean nothing to IJN in long term.

O.

[Bradley7735]

This question is one reason why I don't do PBEM. If you can't commit to your opponent to play the game to the end (IE March 46 or auto victory on points, whichever comes first), then don't start the game.

Just because your opponent is kicking your arse, or your plans don't go the way you want, don't quit. You gave your word that you'd play him the game. Who quits a game of chess just because you take one pawn and he takes your rook and knight? The game isn't over. Yeah, you're hurting more than him, but you committed to giving each other a full game.

I personally can't commit to a 4 year game. I wouldn't mind a short scenario, but the only two short ones are easy winners for Japan (Coral Sea) or allied (marianas). Neither have forces equal enough to be up in the air from the beginning. I think a September to October 42 scenario would be pretty good. (maybe)

Anyway, play your opponent until the end, or until both of you are bored to tears.

[Bill Durrant]

I'm in a similar situation as Allies againsty General Billy in August 42. I said that auto victory in 1943 seemed a foregone conclusion but we both agreed to fight to the bitter end for the experience. I think most would agree the game is played for the experience rather than to win or lose - that's my excuse for being rubbish anyway

[comsolut]

kaiser73, India Ok holding the Dacca Ledo line and Ceylon. Not sure of my opponents intentions but with the Australia push on it seems quiet and if he spreads himself to thin it invites local counterattacks which I attempt from time to time.

China is china - we both are struggling but he seems to be following the one large army approach for the most part moving along the railine.

The biggest struggle is getting supplies and manpower to critical bases from the West Coast. Escorted or unescorted the convoys run the real risk of complete disaster.

Thanks for your views.

[Nikademus]

Would agree with this if the player wants to quit meerly because he suffered a reverse. However given the game's length, especially if playing PBEM single day turns....if the situation is hopeless and the gameplay becomes boring through lack of one side being able to mount even a token defense/ofense....then a mutually agreed termination is not unreasonable.

[comsolut]

Bill, thanks. I tend to agree but right now I tend to see the glass as half empty with little opportunity to reverse the current course of Japanese operations.

Just needed to have a reality check. The allied player's main flaw (at least mine) is viewing the game as a historical exercise which has trapped me into poor decisions when like any strategy game you need to assess your opponents assets, capabilities, and intentions then use that to guide your own strategy.

From a tactical point I have learned some excellent lessons.

Have discussed some of the above with my opponent (yes I am very sensitive to players backing out of games) and will struggle on for some more morale crushing defeats.

Thanks to everyone for your thoughts.

[doktorblood]

The Allies surrender? How embarassing. I would think that you have him right where you want him ... grossley overextended! Japan must be empty.

Do what you can to avoid auto victory, build up and mount a quick offensive down the Aeleutian chain for the win!

[Ron Saueracker]

I'll never give up on a game for these reasons. As Allied, I would hate to have weathered all the crap the game mechanics allow the Japanese to throw at me only to have the Japanese player "throw in the towel" because the shoe is now on the other foot. I'd like to try offensive operations at least once.[;)]

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: comsolut

Allied Player. June 42. Score Approx 22000 Japan 5500 Allies. 2 1/2 carriers sunk. Western Australia soon to be lost (Derby, Darwin etc). Noumea soon to go. Suva, Canton, Fiji, Baker Is. etc All Japan controlled. Troop losses considerable. So my question based on the experience of other Allied Players - can you come back from this or is it time to learn from mistakes and start over? Any thoughts appreciated.

Unless your opponant brought up the idea, you should continue playing. Would you want to play against a Japanese
player who suddenly quit in the middle of 1943 when the Allies started getting all their new toys? You owe it to him.
He may win on points in 1/43, which is fine. But to enter into a 1600 turn game with someone is a kind of contract
to continue trying until the game ends. If he offers to let you off that's fine. But for you do bail out just because you
aren't doing well is neither kosher nor honorable.

[BraveHome]

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

I personally can't commit to a 4 year game. I wouldn't mind a short scenario, but the only two short ones are easy winners for Japan (Coral Sea) or allied (marianas). Neither have forces equal enough to be up in the air from the beginning. I think a September to October 42 scenario would be pretty good. (maybe)

I agree on the difficulty of a 4 year commitment. I was curious if anyone had considered a 'beat the point spread' kind of mini-long campaign. I.e., select what appears to be an average point spread (from a number of AARs evaluated as average?), and see if withing 6 months or a year the Japanese or Allied can get a better ratio. The only problem with this is the Allied player doesn't really get cranking on his offense until '43/'44, so a mod would have to be made (and deemed a fair/average position) so players could choose from either a Dec '41 start or a '43/'44 start.

Thoughts?

[Gen.Hoepner]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: comsolut

Allied Player. June 42. Score Approx 22000 Japan 5500 Allies. 2 1/2 carriers sunk. Western Australia soon to be lost (Derby, Darwin etc). Noumea soon to go. Suva, Canton, Fiji, Baker Is. etc All Japan controlled. Troop losses considerable. So my question based on the experience of other Allied Players - can you come back from this or is it time to learn from mistakes and start over? Any thoughts appreciated.

Unless your opponant brought up the idea, you should continue playing. Would you want to play against a Japanese
player who suddenly quit in the middle of 1943 when the Allies started getting all their new toys? You owe it to him.
He may win on points in 1/43, which is fine. But to enter into a 1600 turn game with someone is a kind of contract
to continue trying until the game ends. If he offers to let you off that's fine. But for you do bail out just because you
aren't doing well is neither kosher nor honorable.

Agree. And i feel so sorry to have just dropped my main pbem game for similar reasons. Better to say that i feel the shame of dishonour. Luckly my opponent did agree without any big problem to my offer of ceasefire. [:(]

[AmiralLaurent]

In a so long game, it's a pity when one player stops playing for any reason, game-related or not.

One possibility is to search player(s) to replace him. Like in PzB vs Woobly game, where Dave replaced the disgusted Allied player.

Stepping in someone's shoes means probably that the situation is bad but on the other hand that the early months of the war have not to be repeated again.

My own experience was a UV long game where my successfull Allied opponent had to stop the game in Dec 1942 for family reasons. 3 players volunteered to replace him and I played the three of them well in 1943, starting from the same situation in Dec 1942. One went for NG first while the two other landed in Solomons, one crushing Jap bases one after the other while the other practiced island hopping.

So if you wan't to stop to play, you can do it but try to find another commander to replace you.

[panda124c]

Never give up, never surrender.

You've got him just where he wants you, all those troops in the South and nothing in the Central Pacific. [:D]