Taking the West Coast

[BossGnome]

Has anyone done it? Has anyone attempted it? If so, how?

I remember that the old WITP immediately advanced everything on the US production line something like 6 months if the Japanese invaded. Is this still the case in AE? What about Canada? Or at the very least, Anchorage? How badly does this affect the Japanese drive south? (I'm guessing, very badly!) Are there any AARs on this topic?

[crsutton]

Have not heard of it in an email game. The Americans get three full armored divisions that are stuck on the West Coast plus a lot of other units. Then there are the units that get released. It is hard enough to take Pearl. Considering the supply lines, the Japanese player would have to kill the Allied carriers first and then I imagine it would still be pretty hard to do.

[BossGnome]

I remember that in the old WITP Mogami attempted this and even wrote an AAR about it (IIRC called "Beer made me do it"). The Japanese thrust into North America ended with a massive battle in the ruins of what had been San Francisco with massive amounts of airplanes and bodies littering the ground.


I remember several players commenting on the near-impossibility of taking Pearl in AE - so I would be guessing that any Japanese player attempting to take the W. coast would have to do so through Alaska, and then through Canada...

Are any US/Canadian troops released when Anchorage or Victoria/Vancouver are taken?

[Empire101]

Being a fairly seasoned JFB, just even planning for it, let alone implementing a strategy on that scale makes me blanche.

The logistical problems would be an even greater task than planning your assaults.[X(]

And even if you get your hands on Pearl ( and I shudder to think how much blood and treasure would be expended in that endeavour alone, and against an experienced Allied player you can forget it anyway ),
there is alot of blue water between that front (ie West Coast ops ) and your repair shipyards

[LoBaron]

In WitP AE there are a couple of "how tos" for losing the war as early as ´43 when
playing Japanese.

A couple of them are:
- attacking SU
- attacking WC
- attacking PH

High chance to be open as a barndoor on every single other front. And in PBEM this is deadly.

Although Ironman it just might be possible...

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

In WitP AE there are a couple of "how tos" for losing the war as early as ´43 when
playing Japanese.

A couple of them are:
- attacking SU
- attacking WC
- attacking PH

High chance to be open as a barndoor on every single other front. And in PBEM this is deadly.

Although Ironman it just might be possible...

1eyedjacks is currently attempting to do this in my PBEM. It's fun for me, but I also guess it's fun for him (only so far though...[:D]).

[janh]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron
In WitP AE there are a couple of "how tos" for losing the war as early as ´43 when
playing Japanese.

A couple of them are:
- attacking SU
- attacking WC
- attacking PH

High chance to be open as a barndoor on every single other front. And in PBEM this is deadly.

Although Ironman it just might be possible...

That sums it up I guess. Although I still believe PH is doable, but only under the right circumstances, i.e. if the Allied player (or AI for that matter) "collaborates" prior. It is high risk, but if an IJ player succeeds, the fruits must be correspondingly huge (delays duie to threat to the sea lines to WC, need for costly counterinvasion or lack of any large, close Naval yard except Sydney etc.).

I have been toying with the idea of an invasion on the West Coast against AI, but the available toys (esp. in Scen. 1) would cause everything else to be cut short, and even then I guess I could hardly generate more than a huge and costly raid. Has anybody succeeded with a WC invasion in AE, any scenario? And proven some staying power?

The "Beer made me do it" was a real classic, one of my favorite reads back those days, and certainly added to my interest in WiTP and AE...

[BossGnome]

Well, the question of attacking the WC or even PH seriously begs another follow up question; is attacking the Philippines in the beginning really necessary? It seems to me that an attack on the DEI from French Indo china and Palau, coupled with a bombing campaign from taiwan could reduce the islands chain to basically a large, isolated and poorly supplied american prison camp.

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

In WitP "Admiral Lauren" took (and held for long time) Hawaii in PBEM but he never attempted taking West Coast... it was epic AAR and one of the most loved ones! [:)]


Leo "Apollo11"

[LoBaron]

Agreed, PH might just be doable with certain prerequisites.

Though, even if it succeeds:

- It binds KB to one specific long time mission, resulting in good intel for the opponent.
- It requires LCUs usually assigned to the China, Burma, or DEI TOO.
- It reduces surface combatant availability for the most important theatre for Japan - DEI/Burma for oil/ressources -
and so increases windows of opportunity there for the toughest naval opponent of Japan in ´42: the RN.
- At the same time it consumes huge ammounts of fuel without securing required oil/ressource locations.
- It potentially reduces IJ air supremacy in every other theatre, resulting in a much worse kill/loss ratio there.

I don´t think I covered every aspect, but the above already opints out the drawbacks of such an op.

Mind you, I would be VERY interested to try this stunt myself some time in the far future, but I am also aware that this will
most probably reduce my chances to see late war, except if Fortuna is really really unfair to the Allied player.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: BossGnome

Well, the question of attacking the WC or even PH seriously begs another follow up question; is attacking the Philippines in the beginning really necessary? It seems to me that an attack on the DEI from French Indo china and Palau, coupled with a bombing campaign from taiwan could reduce the islands chain to basically a large, isolated and poorly supplied american prison camp.

Prison camps tend to require prison guards. You can advance into the DEIs without impacting PI ops.
At best you have operational Allied sub base in your rear, Manila is a good harbor, at worst you have an
opponent getting creative in an area where you absolutely don´t want him to.

The limited factor for the Allied PI defense is supplies anyway. The best way to make them use it up fast
is to keep the pressure up. Units in combat have a much higher supply consumption.

I´d say, yes this is possible to standoff in the PI, but why would you want to do it?


EDIT: Ah ok, you mean assign PI units to attack PH instead.[;)]

Its an option, but I´d say it leads to the same power vacuum in an area where you´d
like to avoid it, as when using LCUs from Manchuria for example.

Sorry for being slow...

[EUBanana]

If a Jap player goes for PH then surely that is something that has to happen quite early, and as soon as the Allied player works out whats up then Operation Festung Palembang will get the green light, if its not already.

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: castor troy
1eyedjacks is currently attempting to do this in my PBEM. It's fun for me, but I also guess it's fun for him (only so far though...[:D]).

But no AAR of it?

[:-] [:'(]

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: castor troy
1eyedjacks is currently attempting to do this in my PBEM. It's fun for me, but I also guess it's fun for him (only so far though...[:D]).

But no AAR of it?

[:-] [:'(]

you would have to ask 1eyedjacks about it, he has started an AAR that is restricted to me, guess he hasn't updated it lately. We're only in 2/42 as we're terrible slow and the IJ is building up on the islands around Pearl Harbour while they haven't dared to attack PH yet. It sure would be a good read I think, not that many AARs around that show an attack on Hawaii. Like I've said, you would have to ask 1eyedjacks about it, I am more than busy doing the AAR for my faster paced game against bluebook.

[witpqs]

Pearl Harbor has been taken by the IJ in AE.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Agreed, PH might just be doable with certain prerequisites.

Though, even if it succeeds:

- It binds KB to one specific long time mission, resulting in good intel for the opponent.
- It requires LCUs usually assigned to the China, Burma, or DEI TOO.
- It reduces surface combatant availability for the most important theatre for Japan - DEI/Burma for oil/ressources -
and so increases windows of opportunity there for the toughest naval opponent of Japan in ´42: the RN.
- At the same time it consumes huge ammounts of fuel without securing required oil/ressource locations.
- It potentially reduces IJ air supremacy in every other theatre, resulting in a much worse kill/loss ratio there.

I don´t think I covered every aspect, but the above already opints out the drawbacks of such an op.

Mind you, I would be VERY interested to try this stunt myself some time in the far future, but I am also aware that this will
most probably reduce my chances to see late war, except if Fortuna is really really unfair to the Allied player.

Unless you commit to it Dec 7, 1941, the prospects of success are very low. In game, yes it can be done, I've taken PH in early 1943 (gratned against the AI), but you have to commit the entire IJN to the task. You can't take and hold PH and still get the more important DEI on schedule if you try it in 1941....or rather it is not something I would attempt.

However, if you can take and build up the chain of islands along the way to Hawaii...then there are possibilities. But you need Midway and Johnston Islands to cover the SLOCs to keep an invasion force supplied. The French Frigate Shoal would also be good to build up for this reason.

In the end, can it be done...definitely yes. Is it a wise decision? I'm undecided on that one.

[geofflambert]

Back to the west coast question, here's a quote from me on a Michael Beschloss fan site:


Geoff Lambert

Since there are so few members here, perhaps Michael has time every year or so to look in and read the comments. With that in mind, I'll address this to him.
Exemplary fellow,
I read your piece on "Pacific Crucible" in the NYT book review section 11/27/11 and Toll's quote "Midway eliminated the risk of a Japenese attack [invasion I presume] on Hawaii or the west coast of North America." Again I presume he meant invasion of the West Coast of the US 48 states. While many have said things like this and many still do, I feel the reality was otherwise. An invasion of Oahu was a real danger, but would have been a bit of a stretch for Japan. An invasion of the 48 however was virtually impossible. The Japanese simply did not have enough oilers to sustain a fleet so far from Japan or her captured oil sources in Indonesia. Furthermore, if she had the requisite oilers, the extravagant consumption of said oil by said fleet would have substantially reduced her industrial output, weakening her for little potential return. She also would've gotten her butt whooped. Such an attempted invasion would have been a much greater calamity for Japan than the Battle of Midway itself.

end of quote

In any case, America was protected by:

[PaxMondo]

I'm with LoBaron's assessment on this: PH can be taken, but you'll leave yourself wide open everywhere else and you will prolly not get the DEI secured.  WC?  I think the IJ could land at either SF or LA/SD area and trash the local area  But I don't think you would be able to expand too far and then its the same as PH.  Either way, I think you shorten the war considerably.

[wdolson]

If the Japanese could take Los Angeles, he would have enough fuel to last forever.  However, that's an iffy proposition.  I think any serious operation on the West Coast would require landing to the north and marching south.  Pulling an invasion fleet in around SF or LA would leave the northern flank wide open.  The US not only has a lot of inland bases where counter attacks on the landing fleet could be mounted, but also has a lot of coastal bases north of those targets from which to launch attacks and pummel an invasion force. 

A carrier only has so many offensive sorties before it's out of bombs and torpedoes.  It's very tough to pull off an amphibious operations when there are other bases in the neighborhood with active air units.  I think it's virtually impossible to pull off such an operation with carriers that can't quickly be resupplied at sea and no land air support.  The Japanese can pull this off in the SRA because the air power there is fairly weak and finite.  Dutch air replacements are few and far between and while the British get a bit more in air replacements, their supply line doesn't really get going until after the Japanese are well established on their territory.

The bulk of US air power in early 42 is locked in the US.  They are poorly trained, but they can throw a heck of a lot more aircraft at the Japanese than the Japanese can throw up to defend.  Torpedo carrying PBYs are one of the most potent aerial threat the US has in early 42.  The losses would be high, but they would probably score a lot of hits too.

I remember an AAR back in the WitP days where one of the expert Japanese players (I think it was Mogami) tried to invade the West Coast.  I think he did it on a bet.  He got ashore in Canada and got down about as far as Portland I think.  The individual US forces were weak, but the Japanese were out numbered and they succumbed to the weight of US forces.

An invasion of the US would probably set back the US counter offensive for a while, but when it did come, it would be from a much further forward position than historically because the Japanese blunted their sword attacking the US and didn't take most of the areas they should have.

If the Philippines were just neutralized rather than knocked out, that leaves them there are potential bases for the counter attack.  When they get enough forces to go on the offensive, All the Allied player  needs to do is open one shipping lane into the PI, move in a bunch of supply and units, build up the place, and fly in a bunch of air assets once the bases are back up and running.  The PI is now a fully operational air center in the middle of Japan's most critical resource route.  It would nullify any gains in the SRA.

That's the most critical reason Japan knew they needed to attack the US.  If they left the US as neutral and attacked the Dutch and British, it would leave a potential fortress in their rear area that would be impossible to neutralize if the US started war with Japan on their own timeline. 

Bill

[derp]

To my mind there's (conceptually) nothing to be gained by the Japanese trying to make it a permanent occupation - in fact it might be best to consider any land units and merchant ships sent to be on a one-way trip. Land, capture as many significant points (Seattle, Los Angeles & San Diego to take out on-map aircraft production; LA, Portland, Alameda, Seattle and Tacoma to take out ships under construction) as possible, then immediately remove whatever can be removed and don't faff about trying to do anything cute. Now, to what extent it's a good idea, or how many of those points the Japanese can actually take...who knows.