Somewhat ironically, given the previous post, yesterday’s play-test between two friends of mine saw the Japanese actually coming close to pulling off a victory in military terms during the first half of the game. Indeed, in my view as a spectator, it was this stunning success which led to their eventual downfall.

It also has to be said that the Japanese enjoyed a more than their share of good fortune, particularly during 1942 and 1943 both with regard to the play of random event cards and the roll of the dice.

At the start of the game the Japanese get kind of a “free” Turn: in effect, they can attack at will and the CVs of many of the Allied forces are reduced (reflecting the element of surprise). The Japanese player opted to launch three campaigns [see post 1877, para 8]: attacking the American fleet at Pearl, attempting to wrest Rangoon from the British, and striking south towards Australia.

All of the units designated for each campaigned arrived on cue with the result that the American fleet (including one of the carriers) was badly mauled, and both Hollandia and Port Moresby were taken. The only set-back was at Rangoon where the Japanese failed to win the combat by a sufficient margin to force the British to withdraw. Troops from both sides remained on the hex with the combat automatically set to continue during the following Turn.

Such an impressive start for the Japanese is better than par for the course, but by no means unheard of. It soon got even better.

On Turn 2 the Allies made a significant mistake. They withdrew troops and air units from Manila and Leyte (which had hitherto been untouched by the Japanese) with the aim of reinforcing Northern Australia.

A major problem for the Japanese, which begins to bite as early as Turns 3 or 4 (Autumn/Winter 1942) if they adopt an aggressive expansionist strategy, is attempting to keep their far flung units in supply in the face of Allied air attacks from land bases [see post 1899] disrupting their lines of communication.

So, although prima facia a sensible move, the effect of withdrawing from the bases at Manila and Leyte was to remove the threat of Allied air-power disrupting Japanese communications/supplies in the South China Sea. This was critical because once these had been abandoned the Allied bases in India and South East Asia, as well as the oilfields in the Java Sea, were protected by little in the way of air cover.

Indeed, from memory, at that stage the only air unit in the vicinity was located at Singapore, and this would not be located there for very long. Thinking better of attacking the now reinforced Northern Australian coast – although they did take time out to bomb Darwin and launch a midget submarine raid on Sydney Habour - the Japanese thrust south swung westward and began attacking the Allied basis in Indonesia en route to India.

Meanwhile, in the west Allied reinforcements were arriving in ever increasing numbers, but their effective use was hampered by a run of bad “Random Event Cards” [REC]. In particular, they lost an important naval engagement near Wake because the Japanese player laid the “Faulty Aerial Torpedoes” card.

Things continued in the same vein during the first half of 1943. The Japanese had still not suffered a significant defeat and by Turn 6 or 7 (Spring/Summer 1943) they had taken Ceylon and Cochin. The Allied player was having to divert troops to India to try to stave off the Japanese and to quell anti-British riots which had broken out in parts of the country.

In the west, the Allies attempts to thrust towards Japan itself by occupying the Marshalls and Truk had been repulsed (indeed, at one point the Japanese even managed to occupy the Gilberts); and, because the Japanese still held bases in the south (Port Moresby and, from memory, Guadalcanal) the threat to Australia meant that the Allies had to deploy significant numbers of troops there.

And then three events happened on Turns 8 and 9 (Autumn and Winter 1943) which saw the Japanese tide begin to recede.

The first saw the Allied player lay a “killer card”: “Operation Vengeance”, reflecting the shooting down of Admiral Yamamoto. In game terms, the effect is to preclude the Japanese player from moving any naval units for the Turn. The Allied player took full advantage, transporting land units to occupy three poorly defended Japanese bases (Saipan was one, I think) in the knowledge that the INJ would be unable to impede these attacks.

The second was an exceptionally skilful campaign mounted by the Allied player. By this stage in the game the Allies had a substantial advantage in terms of resource points. This enabled them to mount a diversionary campaign to take Hollandia, drawing Japanese naval units to that hex in an attempt to prevent a successful Allied landing. The Japanese had little choice but to respond as a successful attack on the base would cut the supply lines of the Japanese land units at Port Moresby and Guadalcanal.

As it happened the Japanese lost badly in the naval engagement which followed, and the landings went ahead as planned.

Worse was to come. The Allied player had retained sufficient resource points to launch a successful attack upon Manila. This was the Allies’ main objective as it enabled them to re-establish an air base ideally situated to disrupt the movement of Japanese men and material towards India.

The third was a disastrous attack by the Japanese in China, the losses from which necessitated the movement of troops defending island bases to the Chinese mainland.

China features in the game only insofar as the Japanese must keep troops there and launch periodic attacks upon the Chinese. Essentially, they can either make a serious attempt to knock the Chinese out of the game (thereby releasing the troops tied up there) by taking Congquin; or mount desultory attacks aimed at keeping losses to a minimum. Yesterday, the Japanese player realising that the strategic situation in South East Asia had suddenly taken a turn for the worse launched a massive attack on the Chinese capital only to see his troops repulsed with staggering losses.

Suddenly, the complexion of the game had changed. The initiative now rested firmly with the Allies. The Japanese were victims of their own success during the early stages of the war. As a consequence, their units were scattered widely across the Pacific and South East Asia, and by this stage in the game the resource points available to them are so few each Turn, it was difficult to re-group to mount a successful defence of the homeland. Despite these disadvantages they hung on throughout 1944 and only lost early in 1945 (Turn 14 out of a possible 16).

Mike has asked me to provide some AARs based upon the play-testing of WIP.

Before doing so, I thought it might be an idea to provide a fairly detailed account of a single turn as this will give an idea of how the game mechanics work in practice. I hope that this will enable me to confine the AARs to the cut and thrust of the campaign with little further explanation of the Rules.

If you are interested in WIP you might also want to read post 1877 which sets out an overview of the game and the attached play-test map. This is not quite the final version – a few amendments/additions are still needed - but it’s not far off.

The following acronyms will be used throughout the AARs.

A1 = Land-based Aircraft C1 = Aircraft Carrier N1 = Other Naval Unit L1 = Combat Troops CV = Combat Value REC = Random Event Card Resource points = used to create depots (necessary to supply air and land units), undertake campaigns, and restore weakened units to full strength.

The Plan

It is the beginning Turn 3 (Summer 1942). The Japanese are planning to invade Manila. The island is often an objective at some stage early in the game as an Allied A1 on the island is a real nuisance, hampering the supply of land forces advancing towards India.

The Japanese player is holding REC 2 (Japanese midget submarines attack Sydney Harbour). The Allied player is holding REC 5 (Inexperienced Allied Troops) [Rule 5.2].

The Japanese player draws REC 3 (Sanso Gyorai), the Allied player draws REC 10 (Doolittle Raid) [Rule 5.3].

As this is before Turn 9, the Allied player is the first to lay a card [Rule 5.3]. He chooses REC 10 and secures two (2) additional resource points. The Japanese player then lays REC 3 and launches a successful torpedo attack against an Allied N1 stationed at Leyte [Rule 5.5].

The Japanese player decided to remove the N1 at Leyte to reduce the Allied assets available to support the nearby American base at Manila. This is occupied by an Allied A1 and L1.

The Allies have the most resource points and so are the first to move [Rule 8.1]. They launch a minor campaign (not described here) to re-capture Rabaul which, together with establishing/maintaining depots [Rules 6.5 and 8.7], costs five (5) resource points out of the thirteen (13) available for the Turn, leaving eight {8}. However, they gained a further two (2) on laying REC 10 so now have ten (10) remaining.

The Japanese expended four (4) resource points establishing/maintaining depots, leaving eight {8} available [Rules 6.5 and 8.1].

The units which feature in the Manila campaign/combat are as follows. They are all at full strength [Rule 2.4]:

Japanese: Kure (C1, N2, and L1); Palau (A1, C1, N2, L1, and depot); Formosa (A1, N2, and L1); and, Saigon (A1).

Allies: Manila (A1 and L1); Leyte (depot only, a N1 having already been removed when the Japanese player laid REC 3); Singapore (A1, N1, L1); and, Port Moresby (N1, L1).

The Campaign

After the Allied campaign to capture Rabaul, it is the Japanese turn to move.

The Japanese campaign involves moving a C1, N2, and L1 from Kure, together with a C1, N2, and L1 from Palau and a N2, L1 from Formosa. Note: (a) air units (As) cannot move during the campaign phase [exception Rule 9.17]; (b) there are sufficient Ns in each Japanese stack to transport the Ls [Rule 8.5], and (c) there are also a sufficient number of Ns for each C to be accompanied, thereby increasing the CVs of the latter to four (4) [Rule 9.2].

The total cost of these moves is as follows:

Kure stack - one (1) for activation, three (3) for hexes moved, and one (1) for entering a hex adjacent to the Allied A1 on Manila; a total of five (5).

The stacks on Palau and Formosa each incur a cost of two (2); one (1) for activation and one (1) to move. A total of four (4).

The total cost is therefore, nine (9) (five (5) + four (4)).

The Japanese only have eight {8} resource points remaining and wish to retain three (3) in anticipation of restoring weakened units to full strength at the end of the Turn [Rule 10.7] so only allocate five (5) to the campaign.

The Japanese player rolls 1xd6 [Rule 8.8]. The result is a three (3) [Rule 8.9], giving a total of eight {8} (five (5) + three (3)), one (1) short of the number required.

This means that the Japanese have to reduce the resource cost of the campaign. In other words, at least one (1) stack will not be able to participate. The Japanese decide to leave the Formosa stack in situ, reducing the cost of the campaign to seven (7) resource points which is now within the total of eight {8} [Rule 8.9].

So, the Japanese now have C2, 4N and L2 on the ocean approaching Manila.

The Allies only have A1 and L1 on Manila, but because of its strategic importance decide to use all ten (10) resource points they have available to reinforce the island.

They launch a campaign involving the movement of a N1 and L1 from Singapore and a N1 and L1 from Port Moresby [Rule 8.5].

The total cost of these moves is as follows:

Singapore stack - one (1) for activation, three (3) for hexes moved - it cannot move through Saigon because of the Japanese unit on that hex so has to travel via Brunei and Leyte [Rule 8.2] - and, a further two (2) because two (2) of the hexes it enters are adjacent to a hex containing a Japanese A1. This cost is negated for the Manila hex by the presence of an Allied A1 on the island. [Rule 8.6]. This gives a total of six (6).

Port Moresby stack - one (1) for activation, four (4) for hexes moved and a further two (2) for entering hexes adjacent to Japanese A1 (again this cost is negated for the Manila hex). This gives a total of seven (7).

The overall cost of the campaign is therefore, thirteen (13) (six (6) + seven (7)) against which ten (10) resource points have been allocated. The Allies roll 1xd6. [Rule 8.8]. For the campaign to succeed as planned they need to roll a three, four, five or six (3 - 6). The Gods are with them and they score a six (6).

So, the Allies are able to land L2 on Manila to reinforce the A1 and L1 already there [Rule 8.5], leaving a very vulnerable N2 to face the approaching Japanese invasion fleet. (Gulp!)

Combat

Neither side wish to undertake any further campaigns, indeed the Allies are unable to as they have used all their resource points for the Turn [Rule 8.7], so the combat phase begins.

Manila is the only hex containing units from both sides – the single Japanese A1 at Rabaul having been forced to evacuate [Rule 9.17] - so the order in which combats are to be undertaken is not an issue [Rule 9.1]. The first action is a naval battle off the coast of Manila [Rule 9.1, bp 3].

The aggregate CV of the Japanese forces is as follows: four (4) for each of the two (2) Cs (because they are each supported by Ns), and one (1) each for the four (4) Ns [Rule 9.2]. In addition, they can call upon land-based air support from A1s on Palau and Saigon each with a CV of two (2). This gives an aggregate CV of sixteen (16) (eight {8} + four (4) + four (4)).

The aggregate CV of the Allied forces comprises one (1) each for the two (2) naval units, plus two (2) for air support provided by the A1 on Manila. A total of four (4).

Both sides roll 1xd6. The Japanese score four (4), increasing the total CVs to twenty (20), the Allies roll a five (5) giving a corresponding result of nine (9) [Rule 9.3]. The difference between the two scores, eleven (11), equates to the number of hits which the Japanese inflict upon the Allies [Rule 9.4].

Each Allied naval unit can only absorb two (2) hits [Rule 9.5] so both are eliminated.

In theory, the Allies inflict five (5) hits upon the Japanese, being half of eleven (11) with fractions rounded down. However, this is limited to two (2) being the number of Allied naval units involved in the combat [Rule 9.4].

The Japanese elect to allocate one (1) hit to each of two (2) naval units, weakening both [Rule 9.5].

In addition, because the Allies rolled a five (5) one (1) Japanese A1 suffers a hit – allocated to the air unit on Palau - and this becomes weakened [Rule 9.6].

Because the Japanese won the naval engagement the amphibious landing goes ahead as planned [Rule 9.12].

The Japanese forces comprise L2 each with a CV of one (1), supported by aircraft from C2 each with a CV of one (1) and land-based aircraft on Formosa (but, not the weakened A1 on Palau) with a CV of two (2) [Rule 9.13]. The A1 on Formosa may provide support even though it took part in the naval engagement which preceded the landing [Rule 9.17].

This gives an aggregate CV of six (6) (two (2) + two (2) + two (2)).

The Allies have L3 on Manila each with a CV of two (2), because they are defending an amphibious assault*, supported by an A1 on the island with a CV of two (2) [Rule 9.13].

This gives an aggregate CV of eight {8} (six (6) + two (2)).

(*Allied Ls don’t benefit from this enhanced CV on turn 1 as they are deemed to have been taken by surprise.)

So the weakening of the Japanese A1 on Palau has tipped the odds in favour of the defending Allies. If the die rolls of the two sides governing the landing itself are similar [Rule 9.14] the Japanese will be thrown back into the sea [Rule 9.16]. This would mean that the sacrifice of the N2 from Singapore and Port Moresby in the naval engagement which preceded the landing would have not been in vein.

However, luck favours the Japanese. They roll six (6) against the Allied score of one (1). Unlike naval combats, only half of die roll is added to the CV so these results increase the Japanese CV by three (3), bringing it up to nine (9), but have no effect (0) upon the Allied CV leaving it at eight {8} [Rule 9.14].

The Japanese are therefore victorious [Rule 9.14]. The difference between the two scores is one (1) (nine (9) minus eight {8}) which equates to the number of hits which the Japanese inflict upon the Allied troops. One (1) L1 is therefore weakened. Half of one (1), rounded down, is zero (0) so the Allies do not inflict any hits and the Japanese units remain at full strength [Rule 9.9]. In addition, because the Japanese rolled a six (6) the Allied A1 on Manila is eliminated [Rules 9.15/9.11].

However, because the difference between the two results is two (2) or less, the combat troops on both sides remain in situ [Rule 9.8].

Re-deployment

Moving onto the Re-deployment phase of the turn, the Japanese fleet will have to return to a naval base. Even though Manila is itself a naval base, because Allied land units remain on the island the hex is not “occupied” by the Japanese so their fleet cannot remain there [Rule 1.1, bp 11].

If they wish to expend the two (2) of the three (3) resource points remaining to effect repairs to the two (2) damaged Ns they will have to dock at a friendly naval base (not an unfriendly one occupied by a Japanese land unit(s)) [Rule 10.7].

The land units on Manila are locked in combat so are unable to re-deploy [Rule 10.4]. Combat will automatically continue during the following Turn [Rule 9.1]. Both sides had a chance to move As and/or Ls to reinforce their units on the island during this phase. If memory serves, I think the Allies took advantage of this opportunity to move As onto or adjacent to Manila and so held the Japanese at bay for a further turn, before being dislodged.

Anyway, please don’t hesitate to address any favourable comments or easy questions to me; and, critical or difficult ones to Mike.

A friend of mine has just pointed out the previous post makes scant reference to depots, one of the key features of the game.

Briefly then.

Depots are required to keep As and Ls in supply. At the point in each turn that the supply status of units is checked, each A and L must be separated from a depot by no more than one hex.

Depots can be established on a friendly base, or an unfriendly one occupied by a friendly L, which is linked by a chain of other depots to a USS. There can be no more than two hexes between each depot in the chain.

Here's the rub. Depots cost resource points to create. So, the more depots, the less scope a player has for undertaking campaigns and restoring damaged units to good order. The idea, of course, is to replicate the relationship between lengthening lines of communication and reducing strategic/logistical options.

The system has worked really well in play-testing. Whilst the respective navies are relatively unfettered and free to go where they will, ultimately the game can only be won by occupying terra firma; and, the requirement to establish depots in order for As and Ls to do this means that creating an efficient supply chain is intrinsic to any successful strategy.

Set up

Japanese: Formosa – A1, L1 Hainan – N2, L2 Hakodate – C1, N1, A1, L1 Kure – C1, N1, A1, L1 Marsahalls – N2, A1, L1 Okinawa – L1 Palau – C1, N2, A1, L1 Paramushiro – A1 Saigon – A1, L1 Saipan – L1 Truk – N2, L1 Yokosuka – C2, N2, A1

In China: Harbin – L1 Peking – L1 Seoul – L1 Shanghai – L2

American: Anchorage – A1, L1 Dutch Harbor – N1 Leyte – N1 Manila – A1, L1 Midway – A1 Panama – C1, N1, A1, L1 Pearl Harbor – C1, N3, A1, L2 Samoa – N1 San Francisco – L2 Seattle – A1, L1 Wake – A1

British: Bombay – L1 Brisbane – N1, L1 Ceylon – N1, L1 Calcutta – L1 Port Moresby – N1, L1 Rangoon – L1 Singapore – N1, A1, L1 South Africa – C1 Sydney – L1

Chinese: On Congquin and on each of the two hexes immediately to the east of the city – L3

The initial deployment as the Rules stand currently is set out above. There may be one or two minor changes as the number of counters required (including reinforcements and markers) is slightly more than the 176 included on a sheet; but, taken together with the map posted at 1905 this gives a good idea of what the game will look like at the start of turn 1.

Turn 1 is unusual. The impetus lies entirely with the Japanese player. In effect, he can chose where to strike the strike and does so with the advantage of surprise. The Allies are unable to move, other than as a consequence of combat, until the Redeployment and Restoration phase at the end of the Turn.

In most play-tests the Japanese player has exploited this by adopting a very aggressive strategy - there are a number of potentially devastating options - although, on occasion, he/she has conducted only two or three minor campaigns on Turn 1 intended to bolster the Empire’s defensive parameter.

One of the aggressive strategies is to actually reprise the attack on Pearl Harbor.

This is not as silly at it might first appear. The game pre-ordained that war between the Allies and Japanese will break out so there is no point in the Japanese holding back; and, because Pearl has the largest concentration of Allied naval forces in the theatre an attack has the greatest potential in terms of inflicting damage.

To be successful, such an attack has to be mounted on turn 1 because, as explained above, the American fleet has no option but to stay put.

There are a number of opening gambits involving an attack on Pearl. The main consideration for the Japanese player is “what else do I wish to achieve with the resources available?” If he/she also wants to strike west towards India and/or the oil fields of the Java Sea, or south towards Australia, any attack on Pearl has to be limited. If not, there is an outside chance that an all-out attack on Pearl could result in a successful invasions by Japanese ground forces. For reasons I explain below, the odds are very much against this happening; and, even if it is pulled off, it would not necessarily be a sound strategy in terms of winning the game.

A limited attack on Pearl often produces a result not dissimilar from the historical outcome. It usually plays something like this.

Some of those who have played the game begin with a limited campaign, sending a N1 and L1 from Truk to eject the Allied A1 from Midway. The A1 obliges the main carrier strike force from Japan to reach Pearl via a long route to the north of Midway which increases the resource cost of the campaign. Against this, the A1 is able to retreat to Pearl which, of course, increases the Allied defensive capability to confront the main attack.

For this reason, most play-testers who “go for Pearl” eschew the preliminary limited campaign and launch the main Japanese fleet straight for the Allied jugular, as it were.

On turn 1, the Japanese have 19 resource points. Typically, three (3) of these are extended to establish depots to service their As and Ls, leaving sixteen (16). RECs are not laid on turn 1.

The Japanese campaign comprises a C2, accompanied by a N2, sailing from Yokosuka to attack Pearl. Giving Midway a wide birth in order not to pay the additional cost of moving next to an Allied A1, the total cost of the move is nine (9) resource points. Because it is such a crucial move, typically they will allocate eight {8} resource points to the campaign, leaving (say) eight {8} to “finance” campaigns elsewhere.

The ensuring combat is therefore involves C2, each with a CV of four (4) as they are accompanied by N2, each of which has a CV of one (1). This gives an aggregate CV of ten (10). Against this, the Americans have C1, and N3, together with an A1. On turn 1 Allied Cs only have a CV of two (2), even if accompanied by a N, so the total CV is seven (7) (two (2) + one (1) + one (1) plus two (2) for the A1).

The difference between the two CVs is, therefore, three (3), before they are each adjusted by d6x1. Assuming that the Gods of Luck are even handed, the Japanese will inflict three (3) hits upon the American fleet. Typically, the Allied player will allocate one (1) of these to each of his/her three (3) Ns, damaging each.

The similarity between this result – significant damage inflicted upon the American fleet, but the all important carriers escaping unscathed - and the historical outcome was one of the first things which struck play-testers.

Whilst superficially appealing, in game terms an all-out attack on Pearl is likely to be less effective in the long run. It usually involves allocating a second carrier force to the campaign; generally the one at Hakodate or Kure. This is very risky move because the resource cost is ten (10) which added to the nine (9) required to move the units from Yokosuka gives a total of nineteen (19). This is three (3) more than the resources available so the Japanese player has to roll at least that number on a d6x1 or one of the two forces will not even reach Pearl.

If the gamble pays off, the likely outcome is to increase the difference between the Japanese and Allied CVs from three (3) to eight {8}. This would have the effect of eliminating the Allied C as well as the three Ns; although four (4) (half of eight {8}) of the Japanese units would also suffer hits which would mean a C1, as well as three Ns sustaining damage.

As the Japanese would have used all of their resource points for turn 1, these units could not be restored to full strength until the end of turn 2 at the earliest.

If the Japanese had been even more audacious and transported a L1 to Pearl from Hakodate or Kure they might be obliged to allocate two (2) hits to a N1 (thus eliminating it) so that the N1 carrying the troops was not damaged. This would allow an amphibious assault to be attempted.

Without boring everyone with even more figures, in these circumstances the Japanese chances of gaining a foothold on Pearl are about 40% and of staying there for more than a turn or two considerably less. Because the Allies will still have a L1 (possibly two) supported by an A1 at Pearl the Japanese naval units will have to return to a friendly port. On turn 2 the lone Japanese L1 will probably be eliminated by virtue of being out of supply; but, even if the Japanese did manage to construct an (expensive) chain of depots to support it, the out-numbered unit would almost certainly be destroyed by the Allied air and ground forces still on the island.

And, of course, by concentrating all their resource points upon attacking Pearl the Japanese will not have been able to disrupt the Allies elsewhere in the theatre.

In terms of the game, replicating the importance of Australia to the historical campaign is not straight-forward. We wanted to ensure that it was a worthwhile objective for the Japanese player in order to increase his/her strategic options whilst, at the same time, oblige the Allies to defend the country. The difficulty, however, was how to simulate the consequences of a Japanese invasion when many of these would have been felt outside the Pacific theatre.

In the end, we opted for simplicity. On any turn that the Japanese occupy a base in Australia the resource points available to the Allies are reduced by three (-3). However, a special Rule prevents the Japanese attacking Australia on Turn 1.

So, what then, are the chances of the Japanese being able to invade Australia? Prima facia, a look at the initial deployment (post 1905) suggests that they are very good. There is precious little in terms of Allied units between the significant Japanese forces at the Marshals, Palau and Truk.

The problem for the Japanese is, essentially, logistical.

On turn 1 it is easy enough to transport land forces to occupy the undefended Allied bases close to Australia, such as New Caledonia and Timor. However, if the invasion is succeed a good deal of planning is required. During the Redeployment and Restoration phase at the end of the turn the Allies are sure to rush air and land reinforcements to the country and to place air units on friendly bases so as to make it difficult for the Japanese player to establish depots to keep the prospective invasion force in supply.

Some of the greatest moments of frustration during play-testing have been experienced by Japanese players, poised to invade Australia with overwhelming force, when the realisation dawns that the clever deployment of a couple of Allied air units has cut the chain of depots from Japan and rendered impotent the land units ear-marked to lead the invasion.

In addition to Pearl and Australia [posts 1907 and 1908] a Japanese player adopting an aggressive opening gambit will often strike towards India. Like Pearl, such a strike is very much in line with historical events and, indeed, is often combined with a limited attack on the American fleet [post 1907].

A look at the play-test map and initial disposition of units [posts 1905 and 1907] reveals the weakness of the European forces (designated as “British” for the purposes of the game). A substantive strike against India is certainly a tempting option for the Japanese player. In game terms, the Allies lose three (-3) resources points for each turn that the Japanese retain a foothold on the Sub-continent.

Logistical problems are less acute than those which need to be overcome in attacking Australia because the Japanese have friendly bases along the coast of South East Asia: an uninterrupted chain from Japan to Bangkok. There is also the inducement of gaining additional resource points by occupying the oilfields of the Java Sea – Brunei, Palembang and Surabaya - en route.

This said, advancing through jungle is a slow business (or, rather, an “expensive” one in terms of resource points and depots); and, lengthening lines of communication are likely to be vulnerable to attack. The Japanese player is sometimes tempted to try to avoid these problems by mounting a seaborne campaign. The following is a brief account of the opening of a recent game when the Japanese opted to do just that. The plan was to take Singapore and use it as a base to which land forces could be transported.

One obvious advantage of this approach is that it does not require the removal of the Allied A1 on Manila which tends to disrupt the (primarily) overland reinforcements/supply routes from Japan [see post 1905]. The disadvantage is that it carries a greater risk of failure.

As explained in previous posts, Turn 1 is unusual. The impetus lies entirely with the Japanese player. In effect, he can chose where to strike and does so with the advantage of surprise (as reflected in reduced CVs for the Allies). Moreover, the Allies are unable to move, other than as a consequence of combat, until the Redeployment and Restoration phase at the end of the Turn.

RECs are not laid on turn 1. The Japanese have 19 resource points. Three (3) of these were expended to establish depots to service their As and Ls, and a further five (5) in transporting land units from Kure and the Marshals to remove the Allied A1s on Wake and Midway, leaving eleven (11). (This is a ploy used by some players to extend/strengthen the Japanese eastern parameter without launching an attack on Pearl. During the Redeployment and Restoration phase at the end of the Turn the Japanese player will, typically, reinforce these island with further units, including A1s.)

As explained above, the Japanese planned to seize Singapore as a prelude to striking at India. This would entail removing the Allied force (A1, N1, L1) at Singapore. The Japanese player chose to do this by means of a campaign combining forces from Palau (C1, N2, L1) and Truk (N2, L1). The cost of these moves comprised six (6) and seven (7) resource points, respectively; a total of thirteen (13).

This was two (2) more than the eleven (11) available (see above) so the Japanese player needed to roll at least that number on a 1xd6 in order for the campaign to go ahead as planned. This he/she duly did.

The resulting naval combat was a one-sided affair. Even with the support of an A1, the CV of the Allied naval force (N1) was only three (3) against a Japanese CV of ten (10) including an A1 at Saigon. The Allied A1 was eliminated and one (1) Japanese N1 was damaged.

More importantly from the Japanese perspective, however, he rolled a five (5) which meant that the Allied A1 was damaged. This made – or should have made (see below) - the second phase of combat, the amphibious assault on Singapore itself, a much more straight-forward affair. The Japanese CV was five (5) (L2 supported by carrier aircraft and A1 at Saigon) against an Allied CV of only one (1). Had the A1 not been damaged the contest would have been more even at three (3) against five (5), and the invasion would have been repulsed (see next para).

As it was, the Allied player rolled four (4) more on a 1xd6 than the Japanese player so the final CV scores were tied. This meant that the landing went ahead but, both the Allied L1 and one of the Japanese L1s received a hit, becoming damaged. Because the Allied player rolled a six (6) the Japanese A1 at Saigon was eliminated.

The fact that an Allied L1, albeit damaged, had managed to survive was absolutely crucial to the campaign. Singapore was not (yet) occupied by the Japanese so the naval force was obliged to retreat to the safety of Palau during the re-deployment and restoration phase.

In fact, the failure to secure Singapore as a naval base was a disaster for the Japanese plan. It meant that during the re-deployment and restoration phase land units could not be transported there in preparation for an advance towards India. The Allied A1 on Manila prevented reinforcements arriving by land. Moreover, during the same phase the Allies were able to strengthen Rangoon with the Ls in India and an A1 from one of the American bases, and move the C from South Africa to join the N at Ceylon.

The luck changed sides on turn 2. The Japanese player was able to lay REC 1 (Inexperienced Allied pilots) which neutralised the A1 at Manila. This led, more or less directly, to the capture of Manila and Leyte. As far as the plan to invade was concerned, it was too little too late. Turn 3 (Summer 1942) sees the balance in terms of resource points and reinforcements tip in favour of the Allies and the Japanese could never* quite gather sufficient forces in the region to invade the Sub-continent. They did, however, attain their secondary objective of holding bases in the oil-rich Java Sea for a couple of turns, thereby augmenting the resource points available to them.

The game ended on Turn 10 (Spring 1944) as the Allied player had to leave. By that time, the Japanese were on the retreat on all fronts; but, they still had a chance of holding on to claim victory (in terms of the game). The players shook hands on a draw.

WIP looks like an awesome concept -- any place to find more pics?

Robert,

Many thanks for your interest. I'm not sure I would go as far as to describe the game as "awesome" (very kind of you to say so, though); but, we like to think that it plays quite well and, above all, is fun.

I attach (at least I hope that I have) a photo of the current play-test counters.

It is difficult to provide photos of AARs because we are still tinkering with a few things so are playing on a scruffy hand-drawn map with even scruffier counters. Neither does much to "sell" the game.

Essentially, the "few things" comprise the precise number of combat units (counters) that should be deployed, and refining the Rules relating to Japan's war in China. In fact, both boil down to the issue of game-balance. One of the interesting points which has emerged during play-testing is the profound effect upon balance brought about by apparently minor changes to the game.

Regards, and thanks again,





Steve 22.1.16

1. Thanks for the counters from War in the Pacific -- can I assume the map sample is only half the map?

2. I hear White Dog have picked up Dave Kershaw's IRISH FREEDOM. Hope this is the case; I have always wanted to see that design get a more professional treatment. I love the dynamic where the Irish player hesitates to build his really good units, knowing that Dev will lead them against him when the Civil War begins! A great design feature. Really looking forward to this one.

Robert,

The map posted at 1905 is the entire board for WIP. You'll notice, of course, a few deliberate errors. These will be corrected on the final version (l hope!).

Regards,

Steve 22.1.16

MASTER AND COMMANDER White Dog Games Designed by: Michael W. Kennedy Reviewed by Dr. Robert G. Smith, LTC (Ret) Armor for Panzer Digest

When the White Dog Games email hit my inbox advertising VON MOLTKE'S TRIUMPH Fall of the Second Empire 1870, I was excited. But then I saw Master and Commander (M & C). All thoughts of Von Moltke the elder disappeared. M & C is perhaps Miss Katie's favorite movie, so with that, I asked Michael Kennedy about it. I had never got into any of the same themes games such as Wooden Ships & Iron Men. Never looked at them. Never played them. Never owned one. But considering Peter Schultze was involved with it, and the last White Dog Game I got was such a blast and I never had dipped my toes in this aspect of the gaming waters, I said why not? After playing a number of scenarios...I'm still happily afloat!

Components M & C comes in a thin attractive and sturdy box case style box. The cover states “Quick Play Naploeonic Naval Combat”, and they're right! Within the box you will find two counter sheets, one of the two opposing sides ships, rendered in either blue or green. They are quite attractive. In addition you have the other game markers that add more flavor to the game such as coppered bottoms, Marines, crew quality and other aspects. The two maps are simply clear white hexes. I do wonder why they didn't chose to make them some shading of blue however? In addition, the edition I received was the American War of Independence Edition with over 20 pages worth of additional combat scenarios. I would strongly suggest purchasing that in conjunction with the game.

The Rules Fifteen minutes. I repeat fifteen minutes, that's all you will need to capture the essence of how to play. It's a lower end game as far as rules. The rules were clean enough that I had no questions whatsoever.

Game Play It was different for me to play this game for I hadn't a lot of experience to go with it. Sadly, I had my knowledge from watching the movie “Master and Commander” than any game experience. So I thought about it from the stand point of Jack Aubrey - what would Jack do? I came to the conclusion the first lesson is if I'm superior to the other ship or fleet stay away and if inferior, move close in to equalize the disparity. It should not have been, but this was a slight gaming revelation to me, truly putting myself in the way of a broadside (shudder).

Ships are rated from 1st to 6th. Think of the 1st being a dreadnought, as it has a firepower of 10 but it is the slowest at a rate of between two to five. I was unaware of such a disparity in the value of these ships. The Fire Combat Table is pretty simple to use. It is the ship's rated firepower minus the distance to the target. The fire combat coverage illustration neatly defines and answers any possible questions. A hit leads to a step loss. Each turn you can fire from both the port and starboard side during your phasing or moving phase and then again when not phasing.

I came to realize that in a fleet action (the self generated scenarios) I would choose to lead with a ship of lesser value. However, what was hardest for me to get was understanding the importance of the wind gauge and how to play it to your advantage. It costs 2 movement Points (MPs) to move into the wind, but only 1 MP to move with it or to move obliquely to the wind. I suspect you will not want a collision either, which means staying abreast of your movement points. It would seem to me if that event happens you would foul your entire line.

I then learned to analyze the strengths of the two sides in a fleet type action. Sheer numbers are often simply that. That's where the game's aspect of crew quality matters so much in terms of impacting game play. There are five different crew types, ranging from elite to the sum of the earth dragooned from somewhere poor, that possibly modify an individual ship's firepower and movement rate. That elite crew with a +1 modifier to both movement and firepower is a huge impact.

Often I look at scenarios in terms of their greater training value, what can you learn from it? The Battle of Lissa is one such scenario. Upon first glance, you have to wonder about inclusion of such a disparity of forces: three 5th rate veteran British ships and one 6th rate and six French & Venetian 5th rate, with either poor or green crews. It's simply a nightmare for the French Player because in order to win they must have the only ships on the map.

Conclusion Light, fluffy, fun and addictive of the where you say, ah, you know, we have enough time to set up and bang out a small scenario. Lot of value here with M&C in terms of sheer number of solid scenarios and some very fun if perhaps unbalanced ones. Surprisingly, for such a "light" game, it captures and well reflects the key tangible lessons of sea combat of the Napoleonic period. It's the first sea warfare game of this period of naval warfare I have played and I cannot think of any better introduction, says this experienced gamer who has now got his feet "wet". Recommended.

Ben Madison is shown here at the San Carlos Museum located on the Falklands. Ben traveled there in part to research Mrs Thatcher's War.

Tax Deductions!