From: Alberta, Canada
That being said if you can hold the timeline without KB Iīll stand corrected!
A lot can happen yet Jocke. Japan doesn't need KB to sink Force Z either. If it runs, it runs, but if its committed to the DEI there are enough Japanese threats besides KB that can sink her. I think you are kind of missing my point about KB and the Pearl Harbor strike. Using KB in the DEI screams out "Hey, I need this wrapped up as quickly as possible so I can move against Australia or India" in traditional Phase II type operations. If I was an Allied player faced with KB in the DEI, I'd be looking at securing and reinforcing both Australia and India as quickly as possible. I don't want this, I want to encourage an Allied forward defence with a slower paced advance in the DEI coordinated with a Phase I invasion of Australia.
Sometimes I think we get caught up in VP's and applying the most optimum strategies and lose focus on other aspects of playing a war game. I'm looking at things in terms of how can I possibly lead my opponent into doing what I want him to do, all the while setting things up on my end to do something unexpected. I've noticed many of the games follow the same script now, Japan does this, the Allies counter with this. It's all becoming rather vanilla. I'm not saying my planned invasion of Australia is original either, but it's tackling some of the same issues in a different way than the norm. Francois's a smart guy, he'll read standard play a mile away. I honestly think I need to stray from the accepted course if I'm going to catch him off guard. It's like poker, sometimes you just have to play your opponent and not the cards.
Your points are well taken, but I'm following a different path this time around to make the game more interesting for me.
< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 11/2/2015 7:24:59 PM >
Luck is the residue of design - John Milton
Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)