'pocket decoy' house rule?

[dasboot1960]

Anybody ever hear of this? Can you explain it to me? I'm beginning to think perhaps my IJ opponent is not as proficient in English as I first thought. Although we have no such house rule, he has characterized my play as a blockade of Palembang and the Molucca strait and a symptom of this house rule but is unable or unwilling to explain what it means. I'm playing the allies in DBB-C, it is Dec 22 or so 1941. I know I certainly am not blockading anything, he has a very effective blockade, he's no slouch as a player; I just can't make heads or tails of his comment. Any help?

[btd64]

Anybody ever hear of this? Can you explain it to me? I'm beginning to think perhaps my IJ opponent is not as proficient in English as I first thought. Although we have no such house rule, he has characterized my play as a blockade of Palembang and the Molucca strait and a symptom of this house rule but is unable or unwilling to explain what it means. I'm playing the allies in DBB-C, it is Dec 22 or so 1941. I know I certainly am not blockading anything, he has a very effective blockade, he's no slouch as a player; I just can't make heads or tails of his comment. Any help?

Never heard of this HR. Can you be clearer as to what you mean....GP

[dr.hal]

could he mean you are purposely putting out decoy ships to draw his fire? sacrificial lambs so to speak?

[btd64]

could he mean you are purposely putting out decoy ships to draw his fire? sacrificial lambs so to speak?

I put out picket ships on occasion....GP

[dr.hal]

could he mean you are purposely putting out decoy ships to draw his fire? sacrificial lambs so to speak?

I put out picket ships on occasion....GP

yes of course! It's historical, the Doolittle Raid launched early due to being sighted by picket fishing trawlers...

[btd64]

could he mean you are purposely putting out decoy ships to draw his fire? sacrificial lambs so to speak?

I put out picket ships on occasion....GP

yes of course! It's historical, the Doolittle Raid launched early due to being sighted by picket fishing trawlers...

Exactly....GP

[dasboot1960]

I don't know. I guess its most likely he thought I was using decoys, but in fact I was just trying to get out of Singapore and Palembang, but once I segregated by speed and best destination, there were several TF, and some more with attempts to get small units out of Singapore, and supply in. I told him to look at the combat reports, and its not a rule we have, but I try not to be gamey. I was just confused most by him talking about a 'blockade'. We are continuing. Given all the PT, MS, ML, barges, etc likely to be in a hot area, not sure how one could implement a decoy house rule anyway, subs, ASW. Even just pickets as someone said.

[RangerJoe]

In other words, your opponent does not like you saving units in Malaysia to either bring them to the DEI for a stronger defense or to remove them entirely from that theater of operations.

Personally, I break them down to TFs of the same speed and size of ships with an escort vessel. I have even broken down an evacuation into single ship TFs. Yes, those TFs still get attacked by air units.

[dr.hal]

not sure how one could implement a decoy house rule anyway, subs, ASW. Even just pickets as someone said.

I think the house rules around decoys resides in the spirit that the players bring to the game. If you believe that a decoy is really deployed as a suicide mission to "game" your opponent it should be ruled out. In other words sending a one victory point ship into port to absorb mines is not cricket, but sending the unit to the same place to resupply would be fine. Thus intent is key. How do you build a rule based on intent? TRUST in your opponent. For Jap players who are not Japanese, this might be tricky as there are cultural differences to consider. To go back to the Doolittle example, I for one would NOT want to be a crew member assigned to any of those picket trawlers as chances of surviving an encounter were zero, as they proved to be for the 2 trawlers that were encountered....

[Platoonist]

To go back to the Doolittle example, I for one would NOT want to be a crew member assigned to any of those picket trawlers as chances of surviving an encounter were zero, as they proved to be for the 2 trawlers that were encountered....

I wouldn't either. They usually had reservist crews augmented by regular naval commanding officers, gunners, and radio operators. Probably was miserable duty in the stormy North Pacific. Casualties among these pickets were high. At least 179 were sunk by U.S. forces. 28 or more by submarines and about 21 were lost by non-combat causes. Most of these ex-fishing trawlers are known or presumed to have been returned to their owners after the war.

[dr.hal]

To go back to the Doolittle example, I for one would NOT want to be a crew member assigned to any of those picket trawlers as chances of surviving an encounter were zero, as they proved to be for the 2 trawlers that were encountered....

I wouldn't either. They usually had reservist crews augmented by regular naval commanding officers, gunners, and radio operators. Probably was miserable duty in the stormy North Pacific. Casualties among these pickets were high. At least 179 were sunk by U.S. forces. 28 or more by submarines and about 21 were lost by non-combat causes. Most of these ex-fishing trawlers are known or presumed to have been returned to their owners after the war.

interesting!! where did you get this information from?????

[PaxMondo]

not sure how one could implement a decoy house rule anyway, subs, ASW. Even just pickets as someone said.

I think the house rules around decoys resides in the spirit that the players bring to the game. If you believe that a decoy is really deployed as a suicide mission to "game" your opponent it should be ruled out. In other words sending a one victory point ship into port to absorb mines is not cricket, but sending the unit to the same place to resupply would be fine. Thus intent is key. How do you build a rule based on intent? TRUST in your opponent. For Jap players who are not Japanese, this might be tricky as there are cultural differences to consider. To go back to the Doolittle example, I for one would NOT want to be a crew member assigned to any of those picket trawlers as chances of surviving an encounter were zero, as they proved to be for the 2 trawlers that were encountered....

Well, Picket duty by both nature and design is extremely hazardous. The goal is to alert your mates to an attack prior to you being overrun. So, either on land or at sea, the loss of a picket is the alarm ...

[Platoonist]

interesting!! where did you get this information from?????

Here's the full article from the Naval Submarine League. Those pesky, plucky picket boats. Part I of III by CDR John D. Alden, USN(Ret)

https://archive.navalsubleague.org/2011 ... t-i-of-iii

[RangerJoe]

Sending small PBs out to patrol is one thing but sending xAKs and xAKLs is something that I would not tolerate.

[bradfordkay]

Sending small PBs out to patrol is one thing but sending xAKs and xAKLs is something that I would not tolerate.

Agreed. To me, putting Naval Reservists and officers on those craft turned them into PBs for this game system.

[dr.hal]

interesting!! where did you get this information from?????

Here's the full article from the Naval Submarine League. Those pesky, plucky picket boats. Part I of III by CDR John D. Alden, USN(Ret)

https://archive.navalsubleague.org/2011 ... t-i-of-iii

THANKS Platoonist....

[Chris21wen]

Sending small PBs out to patrol is one thing but sending xAKs and xAKLs is something that I would not tolerate.

It happen, so why not?

[dasboot1960]

Thanks for all the input! I was confident in my play anyway, but as a long-time gamer I hate the notion of my opponent thinking I'm playing under the table. If I use a Decoy, it's a DECOY; even the AI is making some value judgement as to what to pursue and with what. The only time I even consider a victory point value is in passing after a sinking. In my board-game days there was a term 'soak-off' attack, which, depending on the game (particularly if adjacent combat was mandatory) could be a requirement or an abhorrence. Holding attacks and probes are one thing, and I suppose penal battalions have their uses. I'm sure over the years many a fighting man hated their leaders for using 'gamey' tactics. Some old fashions never go out of style; ships are built for a purpose, minesweepers for sweeping mines. Well, intentionally at least...

[RangerJoe]

Sending small PBs out to patrol is one thing but sending xAKs and xAKLs is something that I would not tolerate.

It happen, so why not?

Because the PBs are military vessels with military crews and the xAKs and xAKLs are civilian vessels even if they are armed with military gun crews the crew running the ship are civilians. The military should protect the civilians and not hide behind them.

[Lobster]

If a fishing trawler is manned by non civilians than can a cargo vessel be manned by non civilians also? Just wondering where the difference in a simulation breaks. Especially since a cargo vessel is much more valuable than a fishing boat.

The DEW line was extended using ships with radar. These were converted Liberty ships that could detect large aircraft such as bombers up to 220 nautical miles (410 km; 250 mi) away.

There were a total of sixteen ships—eight on the East Coast and eight on the West Coast. They were based out of Newport, Rhode Island (later Davisville, Rhode Island) and Treasure Island, California. They patrolled between 400 and 500 miles off of the U.S. coast.

So even though they were radar capable they were clearly cargo vessels manned by naval personnel used as pickets.