Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RHS Test 6A: Allied Tag Team vs Venividivichi

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 >> After Action Reports >> RHS Test 6A: Allied Tag Team vs Venividivichi Page: [1]
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RHS Test 6A: Allied Tag Team vs Venividivichi - 6/9/2012 11:16:56 AM   
el cid again


Posts: 16877
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
This is a heads up about a game presently working up to test the latest updates to RHS. It features a number of new units and aircraft and
devices. Test 6A is the first of Scenario 105 - the slightly Japan enhanced scenario. It represents only policy changes since the decision to mobilize
for war made in July, 1941. For the first time, I play on the Allied side, as a member of the Tag Team.

I hold Chair 2 of the three chair Allied tag team about to start Test 6A.

Chair 1 is (in brief) the US Chair. More properly, it is the US Army West Coast, US North Pacific, US Central Pacific and US South Pacific. To this add New Zealand Command, and all units on New Zealand Dependencies. To this in practical terms, French South Pacific territories may be operationally controlled by the US Chair - but technically belong to Chair 3 - so it is only as a practical matter and not in a dispute that this is the case. Another possible term for Chair 1 is the Eastern Chair - since it dominates the Eastern part of the map.

Chair 3 is (in brief) the UK chair. More properly it is the CBI chair, controlling China, India, Burma, Malaya, Ceylon, most islands in the Indian Ocean, Nepal etc. To this add Canada and Alaska Command. Note that Alaska has two different commands - North Pacific for naval units, Alaska for land and non-naval air units. This is historical. Canada regarded Alaska as its Western border and always sent more than the US did when a call for units was made: sometimes the US sent nothing at all; when it did, Canada sent more. As well the ALCAN links Canada and Alaska, as does the Yukon River - and another river system connects to the Arctic Ocean in fall - which requires passage around Alaska to reach. Wether for economic exploitation, or to deal with an enemy invasion, Canada cares about this route in a sense people focused on CONUS do not. To this add the French and Commonwealth forces (other than AUS and New Zealand). Free Thai forces are treated as CW forces. The French mostly fight in the Indian Ocean and CBI area - integrated with British forces. But technically some French territory and a few units are in the South Pacific. These nominally belong to Chair 2, but in general probably will be controlled by Chair 1, as outlined above. Another name for Chair 3 is the Western Chair - since it dominates the Western part of the map.

Chair 2 (my chair) is (in bried) the Russian Chair. But it ALSO includes NEI, USAFFE, Asiatic Fleet, Australia Command and (eventually) SW Pacific Command. This helps model the divide between MacArthur and Nimitz. Also the divide between UK and Australia. NZ is not part of this chair - nor the UK chair - because (a) it was not identical in policy and (b) it was closer to the US - and based many US units. This way it is not likely NZ will be stripped of defenses for use elsewhere. Russia is not at war at first - so initially Chair 2 is mostly concerned with the Japanese offensive into the SRA - and with the defense of Australia. To this add that Chair 2 controls communist units in China, Korea, Indochina and NEI (generally small guerilla battalions). Communist guerillas are anti-Japanese, and somewhat supply independent - and often cooperate with other Allied forces. This separation helps insure somewhat independent policy for them. Another name for Chair 2 is the Center Chair - since it dominates the Center of the map area.

I propose several different policies for the different Chair 2 commands.

1) For USAFFE - in keeping with MacArthur's attitude and how the Philippine Army was designed - and because evacuation is impractical - I proposed to fight for the Philippines. Luzon is on the enemy LOC and holding Manila unusable by Japan is important to disrupt his operations and divert offensive forces. As well, submarines, aircraft and surface vessels may use Philippine bases to hurt the enemy. Instead of a bastion defense I propose an offensive defensive - and will only evacuate units which might have some value elsewhere else and a realistic chance of getting somewhere else, often after they have engaged in combat. Instead of evacuation and bastion defense, I will adopt modern AUS policy - send as much forward as possible - to hurt the enemy as much as possible - before finally he can approach AUS itself.

2) For Asiatic Fleet - in keeping with Admiral King's dispersal of the fleet - and his superior intelligence that war was coming very soon (including orders to try to start it in December) - Asiatic Fleet's heavy units will attempt to fight with Allies over the NEI - based on Dutch bases - and in general will fight until there is little fight with. Again I propose to reinforce in order to fight early and delay the enemy, and to attrit his forces. Unopposed he can send landing forces many places at once. Opposed, he is forced to cover them and must only go a few places at any given time. However, minor units and submarines will join the USAFFE defense of the Philippines.

3) For NEI - in keeping with NEI being almost a nation whose entire territory is at risk -
I will adopt a policy similar to USAFFE - except it is to be aided by Asiatic Fleet's major surface units - and be the focus of Australian, British or American ships sent to reinforce in this area. It is intended NOT to lose all of NEI - but to use it and Northern Australia as bases to contain the enemy offensive - and never to allow the SRA to be fully exploited as a source of resources, rubber and oil. This again is consistent with historical and present day AUS policy.

4) For AUS - build defensive positions and forces at vital points - but send all possible land, naval and air forces North - to fight the enemy en route to Australia.

5) For Russia - build defensive positions and forces at vital points - and assemble offensive forces to complicate enemy operations from multiple directions. A Japanese offensive probably can be blunted by forcing the IJA to defend on other fronts. Manchuria is almost surrounded by Mongolia and Siberia - and it has a perimeter almost impossible to defend comprehensively. Russia can afford to have its LOC cut - doubly so if it has strong US naval support. Japanese invasion of Russian territory will be used to justify permitting US bases - at a minimum in the Komandorskie Islands - and probably also on Kamchatka and in the Kurils - places which do not threaten Siberia even if Americans wanted to do that. Russia will base its defense on the Chita/Lake Baikal mountain area, and the Amur Province area - permitting them to be separate if needs be. Kamchatka and far Eastern Siberia are isolated by geography anyway. They will depend on US support to be fed in a big fight - so cooperation in that context makes sense.

6) Chair 2 will NOT seek control of fleet carrier task forces EVEN IF they enter its command area. BOTH Chair 1 and Chair 3 CV forces may perform any mission, for any reason, with or without notice - even if it is in the Center area. Later in the war, if CVEs exist above operational requirements for Chair 1 or Chair 3, Chair 2 will accept them to augment its forces. But Chair 2 has ample land bases for aircraft and does not depend on carrier air as a primary asset.

7) Chair 2 defends the object of the Japanese offensive. As such it needs units. Also supplies and oil (especially after it isn't safe to ship oil from NEI any longer). To implement the proposal to fight an offensive defensive, every unit possible which is not vital to Chair 1 or Chair 3 is requested. In addition, we will trade long range submarines for short range ones. If you send an S boat, or some similar British one, and if we have a fleet boat, we will give up control of the fleet boat - for longer range operations by you. We want aircraft of all types - but even short range aircraft are of use to us. And we will send out long range transport ships - loaded with resources if possible - to help make up for ships sent into the theater. If transports appear in your area of operations, they are yours. But they are sent with the understanding they or some other ship will return laden with useful units or cargo, as soon as possible.

Post #: 1
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RHS Test 6A: Allied Tag Team vs Venividivichi 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