Matrix Games Forums

Command Ops gets a Massive Update!Lost Battles AAR: Smolensk 41War in the East: Lost Battles is here!Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! Let's Play videoLost Battles Scenario Manual excerpts available!A sneak peek from Allied Corps!Harpoon 3 ANWs Free Ultimate Update!All good Deals always come in threesDistant Worlds: Shadows Approaches!Lost Battles AAR: Moscow 41		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist

 
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 >> The War Room >> Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/21/2012 5:29:32 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 9057
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: online 		Over in the Modding Area we have been talking about Admiral Richardson's January 1941 Plan to move a Carrier TF to Manila. The idea was to move 1 CV, 4 CA, 1 DL, 8 DD, 1 AO, and 4 DM to buttress the Asiatic Fleet. My guess would be that Enterprise might have gotten the assignment.

Here is the question: If this had happened and you, as the Japanese player, are allowed only one Port Strike, where to you attack?

Do you attack PH and go after the Battle Fleet leaving a CV to cause trouble in the Philippines and DEI

OR

Do you throw everything you have at Manila to get that CV, the CAs, and SS but leave the entire Pacific Fleet undamaged at Pearl?

Have FUN!

_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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

Post #: 1
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/21/2012 5:36:20 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 456
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		I think anyone would give up a lot for a shot at one CV. All the SSs in Manila would be a bonus.

I've found projecting those battlewagons around without setting up a good fuel network might make them moot for awhile anyway.

Ed-

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 2
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/21/2012 5:37:00 PM   
Commander Stormwolf

 

Posts: 1531
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
Even without the CV there,

Dec 1941 would have gone after Singapore (2xBB), Manila (27xSS), and Hong Kong (DD and PT)

the Sing/Manila/HK operation probably had a 90% chance of surprise... PH was 50/50 at best and was a stupid gamble..
would have been funny if KB was ambushed and sunk on Dec 7

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/21/2012 5:38:58 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4714
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline 		Manila. CV and many subs + the KB is immediatly available where the other action is.

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)
Post #: 4
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/21/2012 5:40:31 PM   
Commander Stormwolf

 

Posts: 1531
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
If you can overrun the DEI in 2 months, February 1942 is the start date for *second phase operations*

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 5
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/21/2012 6:20:03 PM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline 		I'd go for Manila.

Excuse my ignorance, what is a DL?

_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)
Post #: 6
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/21/2012 6:20:55 PM   
USS America


Posts: 15066
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Raleigh, NC, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: nate25

I'd go for Manila.

Excuse my ignorance, what is a DL?


Pretty sure it was a typo, meant to be "CL".

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me


Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to nate25)
Post #: 7
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/21/2012 6:37:55 PM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline 		Got it, thanks USS America.

Manila's just too juicy. 1 CV, 4 CAs, 1 CL, what, 18 DDs with those already present, 27 SSs, support ships, a decent amt. of merchies, plus a much better chance of getting CL Boise and CA Houston in the general area?

A JFB wet dream.

_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to USS America)
Post #: 8
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/21/2012 6:58:46 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 14789
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Do you throw everything you have at Manila to get that CV, the CAs, and SS but leave the entire Pacific Fleet undamaged at Pearl?


I typically will opt for a Manila strike with KB and company on day one *anyways*. This additional bounty just would cement my decision.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 9
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/21/2012 8:34:18 PM   
jeffk3510


Posts: 3379
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline 		Neither...let us use our WWI tooooooys!

_____________________________

Follow our WiTPAE team game against bilbow and hartwig.modrow http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2965846&mpage=1&key=?

Follow my Rising Sun game against Schanilec. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3294296&mpage=1&key=�

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 10
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/21/2012 9:36:58 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 6184
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		With only about 25 wildcat fighters on the E I would think my Betties and Nells could neutralize her if not sink her outright. I think I would still go ahead and hammer Pearl.

I just don't think one lone American carrier can do much harm at that stage.

_____________________________

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." Godwin's Law

(in reply to jeffk3510)
Post #: 11
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/21/2012 10:22:11 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 39882
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		"DL" means "Destroyer Leader", either a large destroyer or a light cruiser. And I'd totally pound on Manilla.

_____________________________

There is no version of this where you come out on top - Tony Stark


(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 12
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/22/2012 1:14:37 PM   
Shellshock


Posts: 180
Joined: 12/31/2010
From: U.S.
Status: offline 		I wouuld almost think the Japanese hand would be forced into attacking Manila if one US CV was parked there. Should this US carrier be only lightly damaged or missed, she's free to wreak havoc among the myraid tranport fleets in the area...or pounce on the Ryujo.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 13
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/22/2012 2:04:23 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 6142
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Over in the Modding Area we have been talking about Admiral Richardson's January 1941 Plan to move a Carrier TF to Manila. The idea was to move 1 CV, 4 CA, 1 DL, 8 DD, 1 AO, and 4 DM to buttress the Asiatic Fleet. My guess would be that Enterprise might have gotten the assignment.

Here is the question: If this had happened and you, as the Japanese player, are allowed only one Port Strike, where to you attack?

Do you attack PH and go after the Battle Fleet leaving a CV to cause trouble in the Philippines and DEI

OR

Do you throw everything you have at Manila to get that CV, the CAs, and SS but leave the entire Pacific Fleet undamaged at Pearl?

Have FUN!


The only thing a CV group in Manila in 1941 is going to accomplish is a couple hundred victory points for the Japanese player. I've tried that little scenario, and if it does anything to stay in Betty range, its done for. The 1941 air groups on the carriers just are not up to the task of stopping a major raid by Bettys/Nells.

_____________________________

aka- Akula

Larry Bond's Harpoon - Commander's Edition

Development Team Member

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 14
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/22/2012 2:44:19 PM   
seille

 

Posts: 2011
Joined: 6/19/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline 		Manila

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 15
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/22/2012 4:39:45 PM   
Commander Stormwolf

 

Posts: 1531
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
the only reason you would want to sent carriers to manila in 1941.. would be to plan
a first strike against the IJN at truk (or home islands)


Rogue Admiral scenario

.. with RAF captain mandrake and General Jack D Ripper Macarthur




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to seille)
Post #: 16
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/22/2012 9:17:03 PM   
DOCUP


Posts: 1707
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline 		Take what I say for granted.  I don't have the knowlege of you guys.  I would think that with the time difference the CV TF would be putting out to sea or be out to sea on Dec 7th.  All fighters would be up and maybe some LBAs would help cover the withdraw of this TF.

my 2 cents

(in reply to Commander Stormwolf)
Post #: 17
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 3:13:10 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 6142
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Take what I say for granted.  I don't have the knowlege of you guys.  I would think that with the time difference the CV TF would be putting out to sea or be out to sea on Dec 7th.  All fighters would be up and maybe some LBAs would help cover the withdraw of this TF.

my 2 cents


Still too much air power out of Formosa. The carrier group would have to immediately move south, if it stays to close to Formosa, then it simply gets over-whelmed with pure numbers of Betty/Nell attacks.

_____________________________

aka- Akula

Larry Bond's Harpoon - Commander's Edition

Development Team Member

(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 18
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 3:20:48 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 39882
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Definitely. Base it at Davao, maybe?

_____________________________

There is no version of this where you come out on top - Tony Stark


(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 19
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 4:18:37 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 6142
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Definitely. Base it at Davao, maybe?


That would work. Just remember its going to run into the Ryujo group out of Palau though, likely to have a carrier battle there with one of 4 outcomes: Sunk Ryujo, Sunk Enterprise, both sunk or neither sunk. I think sunk Ryujo is the most plausible with neither sunk running a close second.

_____________________________

aka- Akula

Larry Bond's Harpoon - Commander's Edition

Development Team Member

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 20
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 4:19:43 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 39882
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Ryujo carries Claudes and Kates. My money is on Enterprise.

_____________________________

There is no version of this where you come out on top - Tony Stark


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 21
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 4:21:48 PM   
Commander Stormwolf

 

Posts: 1531
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
Ryujo and Zuiho should have served as dedicated CAP carriers, as part of KB
(another of the IJN mistakes of 1942)

_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 22
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 4:54:12 PM   
Puhis


Posts: 1627
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Definitely. Base it at Davao, maybe?


That would work. Just remember its going to run into the Ryujo group out of Palau though, likely to have a carrier battle there with one of 4 outcomes: Sunk Ryujo, Sunk Enterprise, both sunk or neither sunk. I think sunk Ryujo is the most plausible with neither sunk running a close second.


Ryujo alone is dead meat for sure. But if we are talking about alternative history, how about Ryujo and Zuiho together? Zuiho is doing nothing in Japan.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 23
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 5:08:51 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4714
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline 		Yamamoto surely would have taken the US CV into account and tried to allocate the needed ressources to handle this threat.
Propably just four CVs against PH while one Carrier-Division hunts the stronger Asian fleet.

< Message edited by Historiker -- 3/23/2012 5:44:53 PM >

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to Puhis)
Post #: 24
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 5:45:39 PM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline 		Or maybe no PH strike at all?

Would US CVs based that close to home have changed his objectives somewhat?

_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 25
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 5:47:24 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 9057
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: online 		Can count that a US CV moving to the Philippines would be well known (think Force Z). Could easily see Yamamoto change planes by placing Zuiho with Ryujo (46 Fighters and 30 Kates is a sizeable strike force). Past that...who knows.

Concur that the time differential would allow the TF to formed up and moving.

This would be a lot of fun to play as an Alt Scen!


_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 26
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 6:18:12 PM   
aphrochine


Posts: 187
Joined: 3/24/2008
From: Phoenix, AZ
Status: offline 		The attack on Pearl Harbor and crippling the US fleet there was the core of the Japanese strategy which was to be followed by a heavily defended perimeter. I dont see a major change away from that. The attack was still commenced without the US CV's at PH, even with the potential threat of them in range to attack the KB while at PH. 1 CV at Manilla would have made for different plans for those operations, as mentioned above but I do not see a wholesale abandonment of the PH strike with 1 CV at Manila.

In game, without any way to change the IJ disposition I'd still hit PH with the KB and task more forces against the Asiatic Fleet. As of now, what little I've played the opening months as JFB the effort is just to sink as much fleeing Asiatic Fleet as possible with a focus of forces on protecting various landings. With the 'E' out of Manila, the priority of forces would be to defeat the E first, maybe limit some of the small ops to allow more concentration on bigger ops and do more hunting.

_____________________________

VMF-422 fanboy
Grog Virgin fanboy

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 27
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 6:33:43 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4714
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline 		I've never done any serious research about Yamamoto. What I've read is, that he was disappointed not to have caught a CV in PH.
If that is true, it seems perfectly logical that he would try to make sure he'll get the one he can defenitly get.

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to aphrochine)
Post #: 28
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 6:59:06 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 39882
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Why wouldn't he be disappointed?

_____________________________

There is no version of this where you come out on top - Tony Stark


(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 29
RE: Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist - 3/23/2012 7:00:38 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4714
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline 		Because BBs were the target of choice.
By voicing his disappointment, he obviously saw CVs as the main target. Consequently, he shouldn't risk anything in the PI to get one of them.

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> Pearl vs Manila: Alt Hist Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
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

0.207