Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Occupation of Oil Fields

 
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 >> Occupation of Oil Fields Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 3:15:20 AM   
Xargun

 

Posts: 3505
Joined: 2/14/2004
Status: offline
In my current PBeM I am playing the Japanese side again RRoberson. It is mid January 42, and I am marching down Malaya towards Singapore and just took Port Swettenham. I also control Port Dickson. The allies still control Malacca and according to recon have several units there. The turn just processed (In which I took Port Swettenham) and the computer decided I should capture Bengkalis as well. Now normally I don't say anything about what the computer gives and how, but this base is across the Straits of Malacca completely isolated from me but even worse it has a size 40 oil field at it. Now 40 isn't huge, but its still a nice oil field.

I have no way I can think of to get men or aircraft there to protect the base before Rob can pound the oilfields into nothingness. We currently have no house rules and when I brought this up we thought we would bring it to the forum to see what every one thinks. I am asking for a rule so he cannot target bases like this that are handed to the Japanese player with no idea its coming and I'm not in a position to actually place defenses there. I have never had this happen before and we are wondering what the community thinks.

I think he shouldn't bomb it flat until I get men there - then its a fair target.

His concern is I could never put men there and still enjoy the benefits of the oil. This could be true in later game, but there is no way to support this base until Singapore is knocked out. By then the oilfield will be completely destroyed. I'm not against his bombing my oil but I would like a fair chance to defend it.

What says the community ? Here is a map.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Xargun -- 9/9/2013 3:16:10 AM >
Post #: 1
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 3:24:42 AM   
rroberson

 

Posts: 2050
Joined: 5/25/2004
From: Arizona
Status: offline
Legit target .

That being said, I can certainly see an opponent asking for this house rule then never actually occupying it and in that sense forcing me to defend the captured hex from me.

Not that Xarg would do that.

But to me this is a legit target and I should be able to level it if I feel the need. (I haven't, and frankly wasn't since I have bigger fish to fry )

_____________________________


(in reply to Xargun)
Post #: 2
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 4:33:33 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 1937
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline
To me, although I don't like HRs much, it doesn't seem right for your opponent to pound a base you had no intention of taking yet. Maybe say two or three days after Singapore falls it becomes fair game. That would give you time to ship base forces and/or AA there if you really want to protect it.

Of course, as rroberson says, maybe he's got other targets more worthy of his bombers.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to rroberson)
Post #: 3
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 4:37:37 AM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Normally all oil fields are fair game in my book. But this is an exception and he should not bomb you.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 4
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 7:17:29 AM   
Feltan


Posts: 1150
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
If it is producing oil for the Empire, I would think it is a legit target.

Since this came into your control "by accident," one could rationalize the Dutch using demolitions on it to prevent its capture.

Regards,
Feltan

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 5
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 7:41:53 AM   
btbw

 

Posts: 379
Joined: 11/1/2011
Status: offline
Kuala Lumprur or so + Landing Barges
Air transport some troops and engineers/air supp


< Message edited by btbw -- 9/9/2013 7:42:05 AM >

(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 6
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 8:16:32 AM   
SBD

 

Posts: 64
Joined: 2/18/2010
Status: offline

No bombing until the end of January, then let him bomb it.

(in reply to btbw)
Post #: 7
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 9:58:24 AM   
kjnoel

 

Posts: 104
Joined: 3/10/2011
Status: offline
The local population have decided to join the Japanese Empire before any troops appear, so are actively working against the Allied war effort which is already in trouble in these dark days...... legitimate target

(in reply to SBD)
Post #: 8
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 11:20:17 AM   
jmalter

 

Posts: 1665
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline
No bombing until it joins the Empire, then let him bomb it.

Wait, is Rober supposed to allow you the time to set up an adequate defense of Bengkalis before he attacks it?
Are your operations limited by a similar 'unspoken agreement between gentlemen' - "I won't pound on you 'til you're ready for it"?

Rober is free to ruin those oil-points at his leisure, you're welcome to defend them if you can.


(in reply to kjnoel)
Post #: 9
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 2:45:16 PM   
cdnice


Posts: 135
Joined: 5/7/2009
From: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kjnoel

The local population have decided to join the Japanese Empire before any troops appear, so are actively working against the Allied war effort which is already in trouble in these dark days...... legitimate target


I agree, legit target. Pretty routine for forces to destroy resources and equipment to avoid them falling into enemy hands as quoted above, population switches sides then they are fair game imho.

_____________________________



(in reply to kjnoel)
Post #: 10
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 3:22:49 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 8860
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
At least it's not Magwe or Palembang...

(in reply to cdnice)
Post #: 11
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 3:49:05 PM   
pontiouspilot


Posts: 1051
Joined: 7/27/2012
Status: offline
Scorched earth makes it fair game in my book! I have never understood how Dutch and Brits let so much servicable infastructure fall to the Japenese.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 12
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 3:51:10 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 8860
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
I wonder if they figured they'd just get it right back.

(in reply to pontiouspilot)
Post #: 13
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 4:40:35 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24640
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
Both arguments are reasonable. What does your opponent think?

Personally, were I playing Allies I would stay my hand for a few turns. Even if I was able to destroy the infrastructure, the nonsensical switchover to the Japanese seems a game engine effect and is unrealistic. Realistically, though, what can you do about it anyways? It's probably not worth LRCAPing against B-17s, so I'm not sure what 3-5 days of 'mercy' will get you anyways.

As an aside, since you're playing with NO HRs, I trust you've emptied Kwangtung of all support, artillery, armor and (most of) your LCUs? China oughta be interesting.

_____________________________


(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 14
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 7:47:35 PM   
rroberson

 

Posts: 2050
Joined: 5/25/2004
From: Arizona
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Both arguments are reasonable. What does your opponent think?

Personally, were I playing Allies I would stay my hand for a few turns. Even if I was able to destroy the infrastructure, the nonsensical switchover to the Japanese seems a game engine effect and is unrealistic. Realistically, though, what can you do about it anyways? It's probably not worth LRCAPing against B-17s, so I'm not sure what 3-5 days of 'mercy' will get you anyways.

As an aside, since you're playing with NO HRs, I trust you've emptied Kwangtung of all support, artillery, armor and (most of) your LCUs? China oughta be interesting.



Legit target. For whatever reason that region had decided to join the Japanese Co-Prosperity Sphere. I wish them well, but like any part of the empire's ill-gotten gains they should expect the whistle of death falling out of the sky.

(We aren't playing sans HRs, we have been playing each other for around a decade now and avoid that gamey crap that games can/have devolved into taking advantage of the computer's weakness at simulation of the Pacific War. (Like emptying Kwangtung without paying full PPs) It was my suggestion we put this to the forum and let you guys decide because if it's gamey I'm not interested in doing it. As I said earlier my bombers have juicer targets to hit, so mostly this is just a question should this pop up in the future at a target I would expend my bombers to hit).

< Message edited by rroberson -- 9/9/2013 7:48:20 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 15
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 7:54:08 PM   
MateDow


Posts: 217
Joined: 8/6/2002
Status: offline
Historically, the Dutch didn't have trouble bombing rebelleous citzens. They bombed naval vessels that were mutinous, so why not an oil field that goes over to the enemy?

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 16
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 8:00:34 PM   
catwhoorg


Posts: 719
Joined: 9/27/2012
From: Uk expat lving near Atlanta
Status: offline
I'd not have a big issue with the bombing of it.

That aside, doesn't an allied unit start there ?and isn't there a garrision requirement (presumably for both sides). Maybe the partisans will do plenty of damage on their own.

(in reply to MateDow)
Post #: 17
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/9/2013 9:42:25 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24640
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

@rroberson: I trust you understand my confusion. See the note from Xargun in his initial post.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xargun
We currently have no house rules and when I brought this up we thought we would bring it to the forum to see what every one thinks.


Practically speaking, I can't envision another "accidental" long-distance oil center falling like this one, so this has the smell of a "one-off" issue rather than a trendsetter.

Anyways, you guys playing each other for a decade relegates this small question to the back burner for me. It shouldn't be an issue. Forget about it, move on. If the game makes it Japanese held and you get to bomb it (in accordance with your HRs, whatever those may or may not be), then long life and happiness to you both. It won't make a difference in the game, Xargun, and it's unlikely to happen again in any case.


_____________________________


(in reply to Xargun)
Post #: 18
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/12/2013 7:56:19 AM   
rroberson

 

Posts: 2050
Joined: 5/25/2004
From: Arizona
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


@rroberson: I trust you understand my confusion. See the note from Xargun in his initial post.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xargun
We currently have no house rules and when I brought this up we thought we would bring it to the forum to see what every one thinks.


Practically speaking, I can't envision another "accidental" long-distance oil center falling like this one, so this has the smell of a "one-off" issue rather than a trendsetter.

Anyways, you guys playing each other for a decade relegates this small question to the back burner for me. It shouldn't be an issue. Forget about it, move on. If the game makes it Japanese held and you get to bomb it (in accordance with your HRs, whatever those may or may not be), then long life and happiness to you both. It won't make a difference in the game, Xargun, and it's unlikely to happen again in any case.




Yup I can see that.

As far as this bombing thing goes, it really wasn't that big of a deal to me. To me if it's red it's dead ;-). But Xarg is still smarting from the last time we played where I leveled Palm after he took it while my B-17 forces were still located in the region.

I hadn't intended to bomb it and frankly wouldn't of thought to if he hadn't brought it up.

_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 19
RE: Occupation of Oil Fields - 9/12/2013 2:26:07 PM   
Uncivil Engineer

 

Posts: 584
Joined: 2/22/2012
From: Florida, USA
Status: offline
What would the Dutch have done if a band of partisans occupied an oil facility and turned it over to the Japanese? Isn't that essentially what happened? Re-capturing it with ground forces would be an option, but only if the Allies needed that oil. Otherwise, to deny it's use to Japan, they would bomb the crap out of it to put it out of commission.

How can one reasonably say that a "gift" should not be bombed by your opponent just because you haven't occupied it?

(in reply to rroberson)
Post #: 20
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Occupation of Oil Fields 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

0.164