Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Allied Player Seeks Intermediate or Better Opponent

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Opponents Wanted >> Allied Player Seeks Intermediate or Better Opponent Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Allied Player Seeks Intermediate or Better Opponent - 10/1/2011 12:25:10 AM   
princep01

 

Posts: 939
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
Senario 1, ahistorical start, giving Jap maximum flexiblity to determine objectives.
One day turns.
Would like an IJ player that has handled Japanese production previously.
Pace: 3-5 turns a week.
Currently running last official patch, but willing to use current BETA patch if desired.

Start date: immediate. I will be on furlough from my job for 2 months and can do 5+ turns a week if desired during that time. However, I'm happy with a slower pace if it suits your schedule as long as we do 3 a week minimum.

House rules (negotiable):

1. Japanese (if they choose to attack PH) get one port attack. No second strike of any type, until the KB has returned to a major port (size 4 or larger). After that, they may raid PH at will. The Japanese get a free ride to hit PH without any risk of detection, so that first raid is limited to the historical strike. The Nagumo rule:).

2. Allied 4 engine bombers may make naval attacks, but only at 8K+ feet.

3. No merchant ships as picket ships. Picket ships may be used, but only if PC, PB, DE, DD, APD or similar armed vessels.

4. Neither side may employe excessively gamey actions like a sub landing of a partial unit right behind a unit/units to cut a retreat path just before an attack on those units.

5. Paradrops can be dropped right behind the units, but the drop must be a full battalion+ drop. (That is, no very small sliver of the unit can be dropped to cut the retreat as the retreating units would roll right by them in real life).

6. Allies may not move (R) units overland or by air trans out of India or China into SE Asia without paying political point costs. They cannot be moved out by sea without paying anyway.

7. The Japanese first turn invasions cannot land at spots that would have been easily spotted by Allied air recon on their run in. For example: The initial landings could not be made at Jolo, Tarakan, Java or Palembang. An invasion fleet that was spotted going to those locations would have made surprise elsewhere practically impossible.

8. Many argue the height advantage in air combat is too strong in the current version. I agree. I suggest that air on CAP must be no higher than 5K feet over their best performance band. IE. Best band for a plane type is 15-20K feet, then CAP for that aircraft type can be no higher than 25K. Escorts must be no higher than 5K over the bombers they are escorting.

9. No strategic bombing of Chinese bases until 1943, unless the Allies commence strategic bombing of any target outside the Japanese Home Islands before that date. The Japanese are free to strat bomb Australian, Indian, Canadian, US targets before 43, just not Chinese (they wanted those idustries)

Variable reinforcements...ON; No reliable Allied torpedo ...ON; Sub doctrine...OFF; Weather ..ON: Allied Damage Control ....ON; rest self explanatory.

E-mail: princep01@yahoo.com for any questions or comments. Looking forward to a good game.
Post #: 1
RE: Allied Player Seeks Intermediate or Better Opponent - 10/3/2011 4:52:59 PM   
princep01

 

Posts: 939
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
I am beginning to feel like a leper. Are there no JFBs left that dare chase the Iron Admiral around the Pacific for a year or so? Has Scenario One completely lost its challenge and luster for the Sons of the Rising Sun?

(in reply to princep01)
Post #: 2
RE: Allied Player Seeks Intermediate or Better Opponent - 10/3/2011 11:33:13 PM   
kbullard

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 5/27/2002
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
I'm not sure if I qualify as a JFB, but I'm entering 1943 as the Japanese in reasonably good condition with almost everything above except ahistorical set up. I've handled Japanese production, too. Ahistorical setup is much work and I don't have one ready to go. How important is that versus historic 7 Dec? And what about PDU? Would also consider Scenario 2 or Reluctant Admiral. Kurt

(in reply to princep01)
Post #: 3
RE: Allied Player Seeks Intermediate or Better Opponent - 10/4/2011 12:49:53 AM   
princep01

 

Posts: 939
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
Hi Kurt....don't stand too close...you know, the leperosy and all:).

I am not married to a ahistorical start. I offerred it as to allow the IJ player as much latitude as desired. The only other drawback is that P of Wales and Repulse do their stupid move under a historical start. But, it is no problem to me if you would prefer a historical start.

I prefer PDU ....ON. Again, it is just a matter of allowing some flexibility. To be precise, on the Realism Options I like to use all of them "on" except USN torps and no unit withdrawals "off".

However, I am not interested in a Senario 2 game. It just doesn't have any appeal to me on "realism" grounds. I'm not sure what Reluctant Admiral is. I've seen the term tossed about, but would need to know more before opting for it.

Are you Beta loaded or running the last official patch? I have the last official patch but would consider the Beat if that is what you are currently playing.

Thanks for the response. Let me know what you think.

Allen

(in reply to kbullard)
Post #: 4
RE: Allied Player Seeks Intermediate or Better Opponent - 10/4/2011 1:34:00 AM   
kbullard

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 5/27/2002
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
You can read about Reluctant Admiral here: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2856822. It has an interesting guiding premise and I read somewhere that it fits "between" scenario #1 and #2.

That being said, I can make this work. PDU on is nice complement to my existing game. I'm running the latest official patch, and would prefer to leave it there for compatibility.

I'll send an email to the above address to confirm everything and, with luck, you can close this thread. Kurt

(in reply to princep01)
Post #: 5
RE: Allied Player Seeks Intermediate or Better Opponent - 10/4/2011 2:36:01 AM   
princep01

 

Posts: 939
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
Good. Game on.

Closed.

(in reply to kbullard)
Post #: 6
RE: Allied Player Seeks Intermediate or Better Opponent - 10/26/2011 6:49:50 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11380
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
If you choose to play RA and have questions just PM me or FatR. We'll be glad to help or answer questions if wanted.

Have a great game!


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to princep01)
Post #: 7
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Opponents Wanted >> Allied Player Seeks Intermediate or Better Opponent Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.070