Matrix Games Forums

Space Program Manager Launch Contest Announced!Battle Academy 2 is out now on iPad!A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions

 
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 >> Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 1:31:50 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 5560
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: online
Dan (Canoerebel) had an AAR with an excellent example of how a "Fortress Palembang" strategy can cause fits for the Allies. I am playing a couple early games, and so this problem has come up on both sides, as well as thoughts around solutions. Against PzHortlund, I nearly made a critical mistake around Palembang by delaying too long, and so I think a discussion around timetables and solutions is important.

First, if the Allies want to make a fortress Palembang, I think they can do it no later than December 21st, if the Japanese do not take countermeasures before then. By the 21st, the Allies can do several things to boost the garrison:

1. Land 44th and 45th Indian Brigades at Oosthaven, and rail them to Palembang. Their TF can get to Oosthaven by the 20th, and from there it's just a 1-day train ride. This is why the 21st is most critical.

2. Move units from Malaya; this depends on availability of the sea lanes b/w Singapore and Palembang. By the 20th, you should be able to rail-down to Singapore, load-up, and move anything you want to to Palembang.

3. Using the Dutch Transport unit and Flying Boats, you can move a couple KNIL Bns for free via air; the Riouw Bn is an easy choice, and maybe the guys at Singakawang. Also, almost everyone marches over the Bn at Bengkolen.

4. If the Allies spend PPs, you can also move a Regt from Batavia pretty easily

5. It's also very easy to make Palembang torp-capable; either move ABDA command from Batavia, or pick-up an RAF HQ unit at Singapore. Either will work.

So, it's very possible to make a fortress by the 21st of December. By then, the Allies can also pull together quite alot of cruisers, not to mention Force Z. Because Palembang is a swamp, you would need something like 5 divisions to dislodge those Indian Bdes if they are enhanced by Dutch. A siege is not practical, because Palembang is a supply source, which means it would take a very long time to erode supplies.


So, what can the Japanese do about this?

Here is what I would do, but would welcome other's thoughts:

1. Land at Kuching or Singkawang no later than the 10th. Maybe both. You can use some magic TFs to get there Turn 1 or Turn 3, (Singkawang is probably not kosher Turn 1), but either way you can get there quick. You will need the KONGOS to cover this. You also want to load-up the Air HQ at Saigon on T1, and have that moving to Kuching, along with an JAAF Bn for air support. This will get Kuching torp-capable by the 11th or 12th at the latest.

The Allies can counter with Force Z to break-up the Kuching landing, but that's not a terrible thing. Force Z is likely to sustain damage from an encounter with the KONGOS, so very likely to be forced to retire from DEI regardless of outcome. Attacking Kuching, Force Z is also exposed to NELLS from Saigon if it takes damage and lingers there off the coast, very possible if PoW or REPULSE has eaten a Long Lance.

Kuching and Singkawang will each fall to the smallest combat unit you have, so don't use alot of infantry for this

2. Interdict the sea lane from Palembang to Singapore with Torp Bombers, via Kuching. NETTIES here will stop traffic between those two points. A small Zero cap is sufficient to protect Kuching from the few crap bombers the Allies have. Make sure you escort the Zeros. You can also use surface raiders to nail any transports you see.

You should also move the AIR HQ at Kompong Trach to Kota Bharu ASAP. This will put another NETTIE base within range of Singers, though typically you want to use this base to bomb Singers instead of attack shipping.

The Allies can still move an RAF HQ before you shut this down, but there isn't really infantry available before the 12th without a PP expenditure.

3. Use a "Magic TF" for Palembang; divert one of the ones ticketed for Malaya, preferably one that includes some AV Support. I think 3 Regts is sufficient, IF you land before the 20th.

Doing this, I don't think, will delay the advance on Singapore. Northern Malaya can be cleared by lesser forces, and you can land these guys later and have them catch-up via rail on the march to Singapore.

Doing all of this, though is a reaction to Allied strategy, also pays dividends, in that Palembang is a very nice airbase within range of Batavia. You can use it to support a landing on Java easily.

In the event that Force Z defeats the Kongos, you can counter this by, Turn 1, starting the BBs in Japan toward this area. They will arrive about the 18th or so in force. So, even if the Kongos are gone, and Force Z lives, you can still muscle your way to Palembang. Pull together lots of CAs too, since they can actually reach Palembang. I also like moving ZUIHO and HOSHO here to provide extra CAP support as a counter to Torp Bombers.

The Allied torp bombers are a problem; just make sure you CAP everything, (LR CAP from Kuching). It doesn't take many Zeros though to really savage the Torp Bombers so that helps. It's only Un-Capped TFs that are in real danger.

Hope that helps, would love ot hear other's thoughts on how to solve this problem as Japan.
Post #: 1
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 1:49:52 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4717
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline
Damn triple post...

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 7/8/2012 1:52:02 PM >


_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 2
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 1:50:47 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4717
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline
see below

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 7/8/2012 1:51:29 PM >


_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 3
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 1:51:15 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4717
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Because Palembang is a swamp, you would need something like 5 divisions to dislodge those Indian Bdes if they are enhanced by Dutch. A siege is not practical, because Palembang is a supply source, which means it would take a very long time to erode supplies.


All good points Q-Ball -
On this point though, I'd not play with OilRef producing supply these days. Economic mods are slowly coming out, JuanG, Treespider and some others including myself are changing this dynamic...The official scenario's will always have this now unfortunately.

Also - I move those Air HQ's out of Takao pretty quickly too. As well as some free PP Div's in Japan.

Singapore almost becomes a secondary sprint when compared to Palembang esp. with a good Allied player. But leapfrogging down the Penninsula is important overall to gain the objective of Palembang.

[edit] Lastly the one AKE in Japan needs to be routed quickly to the region.


_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 4
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 1:54:10 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 5560
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Because Palembang is a swamp, you would need something like 5 divisions to dislodge those Indian Bdes if they are enhanced by Dutch. A siege is not practical, because Palembang is a supply source, which means it would take a very long time to erode supplies.


All good points Q-Ball -
On this point though, I'd not play with OilRef producing supply these days. Economic mods are slowly coming out, JuanG, Treespider and some others including myself are changing this dynamic...The official scenario's will always have this now unfortunately.

Also - I move those Air HQ's out of Takao pretty quickly too. As well as some free PP Div's in Japan.

Singapore almost becomes a secondary sprint when compared to Palembang esp. with a good Allied player. But leapfrogging down the Penninsula is important overall to gain the objective of Palembang.


I am glad that's coming out, because Supplies should not come from Oil Refineries. I understand why they did that (Avgas), but it's a distortion.

I would actually restrict supply generation solely to real industrial centers, and turn off most of the Light Industry too. That's just me, but I think "Supplies" should really be ammo production and large-scale food production.

But, as it stands, Palembang is a supply source, so my question is how to deal with that. But good points for down the road

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 5
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 2:06:43 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4717
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball


quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Because Palembang is a swamp, you would need something like 5 divisions to dislodge those Indian Bdes if they are enhanced by Dutch. A siege is not practical, because Palembang is a supply source, which means it would take a very long time to erode supplies.


All good points Q-Ball -
On this point though, I'd not play with OilRef producing supply these days. Economic mods are slowly coming out, JuanG, Treespider and some others including myself are changing this dynamic...The official scenario's will always have this now unfortunately.

Also - I move those Air HQ's out of Takao pretty quickly too. As well as some free PP Div's in Japan.

Singapore almost becomes a secondary sprint when compared to Palembang esp. with a good Allied player. But leapfrogging down the Penninsula is important overall to gain the objective of Palembang.


I am glad that's coming out, because Supplies should not come from Oil Refineries. I understand why they did that (Avgas), but it's a distortion.

I would actually restrict supply generation solely to real industrial centers, and turn off most of the Light Industry too. That's just me, but I think "Supplies" should really be ammo production and large-scale food production.

But, as it stands, Palembang is a supply source, so my question is how to deal with that. But good points for down the road

Maybe, you're thinking otherwise but you can't turn off Light Industry with the new patch. I apologise if you're talking about modding it that way though.

Also you missed my last point about the AKE - which is very important to get into the theatre as you can't reload those BB's without it.

As for how it stands - I'd just echo what you are saying and take Kuantan very early, Singkawang before or after Miri (If you need air support) and then Mersing. I've even landed Engineers at Muntok with Fast Transport DD's/CL's after Singkawang to get the airfield up and running quickly.

In my present game with Floyd, I came late to the rush as I've not played a full PBEM for a while. In the next go - I'll take your advice and be all over it within the first 10 days. Fast Transports into Palembang in the first week could help

I have to War game it out and see what both sides could do better.

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 6
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 2:33:00 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 7204
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
Since you stated that you can use the 'warp speed TF' and will probably play a non-historical first turn, then there is a good chance that a CV from KB will be sent to the Malaya area. I like to send Kaga just because she is the slowest of the CVs within KB.

When you re-organize the massive number of TFs at Samah, you can place the two Naval Guards TF (original destinations were Ternate area) into one with the bonus move TF. These can end up somewhere south of Saigon after the bonus move. Have the Naval Guards at CamRahn Bay that was to head for Singora "Meet and Merge" with this TF. If you need added punch, rearrange the three 'warp speed' TFs at Saigon that usually head over to land together to take Victoria Point quickly into one (full inf rgt). Use the extra two 'warp speed' that you have to load the Air HQ (without supply) and a BF or two. These can all meet up south of Saigon somewhere.

So three Naval Guards, an inf rgt, plus support units end up turn 1 south of Saigon somewhere (the point will be how far south you feel is appropriate and not gamey). Then, you decide if Singkawang and/or Palembang is their destination in the next week.

_____________________________


(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 7
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 2:44:57 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11244
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
It is my MOST IMPORTANT landing of the DEI Campaign. Qball is dead right. With how the game functions, the Japanese have to get there fast with a lot and smash through before the Allied player makes it certain the refineries will be destroyed.



_____________________________



Member: Reluctant Admiral and Perfect War Mod Team.

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


(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 8
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 3:13:14 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7164
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
You can significantly shorten the game as Allies if you do this...in that some players will not continue if Palembang is completely destroyed. It is a very unfortunate thing that one base is the make or break of the entire game.

I sometimes think that the Palembang refineries and oil should have been split up and placed in several dot bases surrounding the actual base location. You know, something like you have an 'Palembang Oilfield North, Palembang Oilfield West, etc' just due to how much importance is placed on that 1 location.

The strategy listed here is perfectly viable, just realize that it could turn into a game-breaker in some circumstances.

And taking it too early as Japan leaves the refineries and oilfields open to destruction by Allied bomber raids.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 9
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 3:27:43 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 867
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poznan, Poland
Status: offline
One solution is to play a DaBigBabes game, as BigBabes disabled supply generation by refineries.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 10
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 3:32:48 PM   
Olorin


Posts: 633
Joined: 4/22/2008
From: Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Since you stated that you can use the 'warp speed TF' and will probably play a non-historical first turn, then there is a good chance that a CV from KB will be sent to the Malaya area. I like to send Kaga just because she is the slowest of the CVs within KB.

When you re-organize the massive number of TFs at Samah, you can place the two Naval Guards TF (original destinations were Ternate area) into one with the bonus move TF. These can end up somewhere south of Saigon after the bonus move. Have the Naval Guards at CamRahn Bay that was to head for Singora "Meet and Merge" with this TF. If you need added punch, rearrange the three 'warp speed' TFs at Saigon that usually head over to land together to take Victoria Point quickly into one (full inf rgt). Use the extra two 'warp speed' that you have to load the Air HQ (without supply) and a BF or two. These can all meet up south of Saigon somewhere.

So three Naval Guards, an inf rgt, plus support units end up turn 1 south of Saigon somewhere (the point will be how far south you feel is appropriate and not gamey). Then, you decide if Singkawang and/or Palembang is their destination in the next week.


That was roughly my early DEI strategy in our game.
I moved Kaga, the CVLs and a couple of BBs from the HI to southwest of Saigon. It can be done by manipulation and merging of various TFs.
By having a mini KB there, you can land in NW Borneo, go for Mersing on the 8th and counter Force Z, all with one move.

You can also bring the 56th Div by merging the TF that carries it with a "magic TF" from the HI. That is a nice reserve force to have early in the region. You can decide to commit it in Malaya or Sumatra.

In our game, I landed at Palembang with 220 AV on the 14th, iirc. I used 3-4 SNFL units from Cam Ranch Bay an Samah. They were enough to take the base intact.


_____________________________

"Drang nach Osten"
--A TOAWIII AAR--

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 11
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 5:58:58 PM   
denisonh


Posts: 2186
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Northern Virginia
Status: offline
The key to Palembang is Oosthaven and once Sinkawang is taken and flying Netties (add in some naval search, recon and mines), Oosthaven is difficult to use as a port. Sinkawang is the most important landing IMHO becuase it provides a base for LBA to start bombing Palembang, controls the northern Java seas limiting Allied movement, and makes Batavia untenable as a basing option for the Allies. Add Muntok and the isloation/reduction of Palembang can start before landing forces.

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Olorin)
Post #: 12
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/8/2012 6:03:14 PM   
AW1Steve


Posts: 12918
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: ME-FL-DC-GM-WA-NE-IL ?
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

It is my MOST IMPORTANT landing of the DEI Campaign. Qball is dead right. With how the game functions, the Japanese have to get there fast with a lot and smash through before the Allied player makes it certain the refineries will be destroyed.




EXACTLY! Or as was once said "Get there firstust with the mostest"!

Fortress Palemburg , or the Gambit is simply a race. And the allied player needs to consolidate his forces by marching overland.

_____________________________

"Geezerhood is a state of mind, attained by being largely out of yours". AW1Steve

"Quit whining and play the game. Or go home". My 7th grade baseball coach. It applies well to WITP AE players.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 13
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 1:58:54 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9786
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
Play DBB ver. C with stacking limits.....or alternatively my my mod when I finally get around to finishing it.

No Oil Center Supply production in either scenario.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to AW1Steve)
Post #: 14
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 7:47:03 AM   
JeffK


Posts: 5195
Joined: 1/26/2005
From: Back in the Office, Can I get my tin hut back!
Status: offline
Hopefully, while the JFB is charging down to Palembang, the AFB is using this time to create other roadblocks to be stumbled upon.

I think a lot of effort is going into countering a gambit which really only is of value against a JFB who isnt well organised or against the AI.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 15
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 10:05:51 AM   
Historiker


Posts: 4738
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline
Either play a scenario where refinerey don't produce supplies or introduce a HR that the Allied player has to turn off Palembang's refinery on turn one.
When the supplies have to be shipped in, the Jap player doesn't have to worry at all.

< Message edited by Historiker -- 7/9/2012 10:54:08 AM >


_____________________________

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 JeffK)
Post #: 16
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 10:26:32 AM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6291
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Either play a scenario where refinerey don't produce oil or introduce a HR that the Allied player has to turn off Palembang's refinery on turn one.
When the supplies have to be shipped in, the Jap player doesn't have to worry at all.


Well, as far as i know, a stiff defence at Pelembang (which means the allies manage to place there 2 more infantry Bdes) enanches the chances that, during the upcoming battle, more oil pumps get damaged... So it's always a good exchange - in the long run - for the allies to try to defend Palembang as long and as stiff as they can. 200 oil industries damaged means a lot for the Japanese economy in the long run

(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 17
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 10:47:47 AM   
mike scholl 1

 

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline
Wouldn't the simplest solution be a "Gentlemen's Agreement" to stick to reality? No way the British were going to reinforce Dutch territory when Malaya and Burma were both vulnerable. In return, there was no way the Japanese were going to go thundering off after Australian holdings in the Bismarcks, Solomans, or New Guinea until they had achieved there more important goals in East Asia (ie. before January). Reasonable is always the best solution.

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 18
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 10:56:28 AM   
Historiker


Posts: 4738
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

You can significantly shorten the game as Allies if you do this...in that some players will not continue if Palembang is completely destroyed. It is a very unfortunate thing that one base is the make or break of the entire game.

I sometimes think that the Palembang refineries and oil should have been split up and placed in several dot bases surrounding the actual base location. You know, something like you have an 'Palembang Oilfield North, Palembang Oilfield West, etc' just due to how much importance is placed on that 1 location.

The strategy listed here is perfectly viable, just realize that it could turn into a game-breaker in some circumstances.

And taking it too early as Japan leaves the refineries and oilfields open to destruction by Allied bomber raids.

Is it still possible to add a device several times to one base? I had seen (and experienced it) this problem in witp times. A simle workaround was to set 5 or more oilwells into one base, with the combined output of the single well that was in stock. In even of damage, one was able to repair x (= number of oilwells) times faster than in stock.

_____________________________

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 Shark7)
Post #: 19
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 10:57:19 AM   
Historiker


Posts: 4738
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

Wouldn't the simplest solution be a "Gentlemen's Agreement" to stick to reality? No way the British were going to reinforce Dutch territory when Malaya and Burma were both vulnerable. In return, there was no way the Japanese were going to go thundering off after Australian holdings in the Bismarcks, Solomans, or New Guinea until they had achieved there more important goals in East Asia (ie. before January). Reasonable is always the best solution.

My opponent has my offer to evacuate Palembang or redo the turn if my defense totally destroys the oil. I want to have a good game, not one that is as short as possible.

_____________________________

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 mike scholl 1)
Post #: 20
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 11:40:47 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4717
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

You can significantly shorten the game as Allies if you do this...in that some players will not continue if Palembang is completely destroyed. It is a very unfortunate thing that one base is the make or break of the entire game.

I sometimes think that the Palembang refineries and oil should have been split up and placed in several dot bases surrounding the actual base location. You know, something like you have an 'Palembang Oilfield North, Palembang Oilfield West, etc' just due to how much importance is placed on that 1 location.

The strategy listed here is perfectly viable, just realize that it could turn into a game-breaker in some circumstances.

And taking it too early as Japan leaves the refineries and oilfields open to destruction by Allied bomber raids.

Is it still possible to add a device several times to one base? I had seen (and experienced it) this problem in witp times. A simle workaround was to set 5 or more oilwells into one base, with the combined output of the single well that was in stock. In even of damage, one was able to repair x (= number of oilwells) times faster than in stock.

I've thought about this for my Options_88 mod. The mod is non-historical in terms of shipping and aircraft and yet I wanted to make it an economic mod that was harder - so I'm at a crossroads with no clear answers. Whether to keep it as is, cause it did take a long time for the Japanese to repair it historically or to double it or x? and make it easier to repair.

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 21
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 12:28:37 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12272
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

Wouldn't the simplest solution be a "Gentlemen's Agreement" to stick to reality? No way the British were going to reinforce Dutch territory when Malaya and Burma were both vulnerable. In return, there was no way the Japanese were going to go thundering off after Australian holdings in the Bismarcks, Solomans, or New Guinea until they had achieved there more important goals in East Asia (ie. before January). Reasonable is always the best solution.



absolutely! If ppl wouldn't come up with most unrealistic - ridicoulos in terms of real life - strategies we would not discuss these things. The game isn't forcing you into realistic strategies and tactics but will play out a hundred times better if you stick to realistic approaches. If someone takes whole India because his initial landing was six IJA divs at Karachi with the next major IJN port being Saigon he will be applauded instead of being told what a ridicoulos approach. You can never be 100% realistic but a more realistic approach to the game sure helps for a better game experience, especially if you want to play it for more than a couple of months game time which is something only very few ppl are willing to try lately, at least that is my impression when reading the forum and my experience of my last three of four PBEMs.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 7/9/2012 12:33:45 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to mike scholl 1)
Post #: 22
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 2:13:21 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7164
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

You can significantly shorten the game as Allies if you do this...in that some players will not continue if Palembang is completely destroyed. It is a very unfortunate thing that one base is the make or break of the entire game.

I sometimes think that the Palembang refineries and oil should have been split up and placed in several dot bases surrounding the actual base location. You know, something like you have an 'Palembang Oilfield North, Palembang Oilfield West, etc' just due to how much importance is placed on that 1 location.

The strategy listed here is perfectly viable, just realize that it could turn into a game-breaker in some circumstances.

And taking it too early as Japan leaves the refineries and oilfields open to destruction by Allied bomber raids.

Is it still possible to add a device several times to one base? I had seen (and experienced it) this problem in witp times. A simle workaround was to set 5 or more oilwells into one base, with the combined output of the single well that was in stock. In even of damage, one was able to repair x (= number of oilwells) times faster than in stock.


That is an excellent solution, and yes it will work.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 23
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 2:15:55 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7164
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477


quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

You can significantly shorten the game as Allies if you do this...in that some players will not continue if Palembang is completely destroyed. It is a very unfortunate thing that one base is the make or break of the entire game.

I sometimes think that the Palembang refineries and oil should have been split up and placed in several dot bases surrounding the actual base location. You know, something like you have an 'Palembang Oilfield North, Palembang Oilfield West, etc' just due to how much importance is placed on that 1 location.

The strategy listed here is perfectly viable, just realize that it could turn into a game-breaker in some circumstances.

And taking it too early as Japan leaves the refineries and oilfields open to destruction by Allied bomber raids.

Is it still possible to add a device several times to one base? I had seen (and experienced it) this problem in witp times. A simle workaround was to set 5 or more oilwells into one base, with the combined output of the single well that was in stock. In even of damage, one was able to repair x (= number of oilwells) times faster than in stock.

I've thought about this for my Options_88 mod. The mod is non-historical in terms of shipping and aircraft and yet I wanted to make it an economic mod that was harder - so I'm at a crossroads with no clear answers. Whether to keep it as is, cause it did take a long time for the Japanese to repair it historically or to double it or x? and make it easier to repair.


From what I recall...

1. The oilfields and refineries were barely damaged at all. The demolition charges failed in some cases, or the fields were taken very quickly in others.
2. The Japanese had specially trained oilfield engineer units that repaired the oilfields far faster than the Allies had predicted they could.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 24
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 2:40:52 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4738
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

Wouldn't the simplest solution be a "Gentlemen's Agreement" to stick to reality? No way the British were going to reinforce Dutch territory when Malaya and Burma were both vulnerable. In return, there was no way the Japanese were going to go thundering off after Australian holdings in the Bismarcks, Solomans, or New Guinea until they had achieved there more important goals in East Asia (ie. before January). Reasonable is always the best solution.



absolutely! If ppl wouldn't come up with most unrealistic - ridicoulos in terms of real life - strategies we would not discuss these things. The game isn't forcing you into realistic strategies and tactics but will play out a hundred times better if you stick to realistic approaches. If someone takes whole India because his initial landing was six IJA divs at Karachi with the next major IJN port being Saigon he will be applauded instead of being told what a ridicoulos approach. You can never be 100% realistic but a more realistic approach to the game sure helps for a better game experience, especially if you want to play it for more than a couple of months game time which is something only very few ppl are willing to try lately, at least that is my impression when reading the forum and my experience of my last three of four PBEMs.

Yep.
The whole idea of "Fortress Palembang" is ridicoulus. Evacuate Java and Malaya to send thousands of combat troops into the swamps at Palembang to let them eat petrol, shoot oil and replace fallen soliders with avgas.

< Message edited by Historiker -- 7/9/2012 2:41:16 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 castor troy)
Post #: 25
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 2:42:58 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4738
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7


quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

You can significantly shorten the game as Allies if you do this...in that some players will not continue if Palembang is completely destroyed. It is a very unfortunate thing that one base is the make or break of the entire game.

I sometimes think that the Palembang refineries and oil should have been split up and placed in several dot bases surrounding the actual base location. You know, something like you have an 'Palembang Oilfield North, Palembang Oilfield West, etc' just due to how much importance is placed on that 1 location.

The strategy listed here is perfectly viable, just realize that it could turn into a game-breaker in some circumstances.

And taking it too early as Japan leaves the refineries and oilfields open to destruction by Allied bomber raids.

Is it still possible to add a device several times to one base? I had seen (and experienced it) this problem in witp times. A simle workaround was to set 5 or more oilwells into one base, with the combined output of the single well that was in stock. In even of damage, one was able to repair x (= number of oilwells) times faster than in stock.


That is an excellent solution, and yes it will work.

It will still be difficult enough. Just imagine 10 oilwells with 100 each. All are damaged 50%, so they could be working within two months.
Now have fun getting 500.000 supplies there and unload them in time...

_____________________________

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 Shark7)
Post #: 26
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 2:43:37 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2110
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline
Of course every game has it's own set of rules.

Since scenario 2 is more of a free for all my opinion would be the Allied player could reinforce at anytime. However in scenario 1 I'm a believer some restraint should be in order since ABDA wasn't agreed upon until late 12/41 and the command didn't become active until 1/15/42.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 27
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 4:34:56 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18244
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

Wouldn't the simplest solution be a "Gentlemen's Agreement" to stick to reality? No way the British were going to reinforce Dutch territory when Malaya and Burma were both vulnerable. In return, there was no way the Japanese were going to go thundering off after Australian holdings in the Bismarcks, Solomans, or New Guinea until they had achieved there more important goals in East Asia (ie. before January). Reasonable is always the best solution.



absolutely! If ppl wouldn't come up with most unrealistic - ridicoulos in terms of real life - strategies we would not discuss these things. The game isn't forcing you into realistic strategies and tactics but will play out a hundred times better if you stick to realistic approaches. If someone takes whole India because his initial landing was six IJA divs at Karachi with the next major IJN port being Saigon he will be applauded instead of being told what a ridicoulos approach. You can never be 100% realistic but a more realistic approach to the game sure helps for a better game experience, especially if you want to play it for more than a couple of months game time which is something only very few ppl are willing to try lately, at least that is my impression when reading the forum and my experience of my last three of four PBEMs.

Yep.
The whole idea of "Fortress Palembang" is ridicoulus. Evacuate Java and Malaya to send thousands of combat troops into the swamps at Palembang to let them eat petrol, shoot oil and replace fallen soliders with avgas.


I agree with the sentiment posed by the three posters quoted here.

To Q-ball's initial query about how to unwind a 'Fortress Palembang' position-that approach looks like it will be tactically sufficient.

I would be disappointed if my Allied opponent pulled this other worldly stunt. I would consider this prima faciae evidence that he never intended to stick close to historical reality (one of the central tenets that I seek in PBEM opponents) and was breaking with it so soon into the start of the war.

At least your opponent could tell you their ideas about implementing a "Fortress Palembang" approach before game start. If they're going to pull that sort of thing then you can:

1. Honor their tendencies towards ahistoric play and use your magic movement TFs to fast transport 6 IJA IDs to Karachi in December 1941.
2. Prepare for this eventuality (as per Q-ball's protocol) to liquidate the Allied Palembang position.
3. Scrap all other "gentleman's agreements" that affect gameplay.
4. Reconsider whether this opponent is REALLY what you're looking for in a PBEM for the long run.
5. All of the above.

_____________________________


(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 28
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 4:41:56 PM   
Lomri

 

Posts: 227
Joined: 2/6/2009
Status: offline

The argument against a totally a-historic Allied gambit at the start of the game is especially valid when talking making an enjoyable gaming experience for everyone. But if Japan takes too long to get to Palembang then all bets are off. Q-Ball's 21st deadline is for someone pushing for this move from day one. But give the Allies enough room in this region and Be It On Your Head if they create a strong defensive bastion.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 29
RE: Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions - 7/9/2012 6:12:18 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25309
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

It is my MOST IMPORTANT landing of the DEI Campaign. Qball is dead right. With how the game functions, the Japanese have to get there fast with a lot and smash through before the Allied player makes it certain the refineries will be destroyed.





Yes...this is a major problem. In my last PBEM with a partner (vs. 2 very very good Allied players) we got all tangled up in that. This is why i hated the introduction of the "convoys" with reinforcement brigades historically meant for other areas (and politically influenced) that later fell to the Japanese. To a man, these powerful units are immediately diverted to better areas where they act as serious trip wires to the pace of Player one SRA offensive. Combine that with the free supply generated by places like Palembang and your only recourse as Player one is to "rush", including the use of reverse tactics.

Player one is essentially forced to think outside the box to counter it, including the use of what is often accused as "ahistorical" tactics. But there's little other way to do it. IIRC, "Nemo" said that if he was allowed to implement such a move he was essentially impregnible and it would styme Player one into a early defeat. lol. Dec 21st. The Japanese were nowhere near ready to invade Sumata in December historically.



< Message edited by Nikademus -- 7/9/2012 6:13:25 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Fortress Palembang: Problems and Solutions Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   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

0.137