Jump to content


Photo

Pulling it Altogether for the Allies in DTMB


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 696 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 16 December 2024 - 02:41 AM

Pulling It All Together in DTMB for the Allies

First, let me stipulate that this is not the only possible winning strategy for the Allies, and it does not guarantee victory as there are simply too many variables that change from turn to turn as to weather, engagement set up die rolls, theater events, Intel, or lack thereof to mention a few.

 

If I seem focused on the Allied POV, it is because I am. I do not identify with our enemies; present or in the past when it comes to warfare (land or sea) in the 20th Century. I do look at strategies for our opponents, but only to figure out a way to thwart them as best I can.

 

The Allies in DTMB without a capital ship start option (as even as the campaign can be) must focus on their cruisers. If that seems like I’m ignoring destroyers; I’m not. But the reality of the limitations of the majority of Allied destroyers versus Japanese destroyers compels this POV IMHO. HMS Jupiter is the single Allied DD at the start that is at least equal to the 48 IJN DDs. The 3 E class and 7 Admiralen class DDs need rapid fire to even out their smaller gun armament (4 vs 5/6 guns) versus the IJN DDs. Yes, you take (and should) the 3 N class on turn 3 but that new total of 11 versus 48 still does not inspire a sense of an even-handed situation. The base cause of this is the 4-inch MB armament of the remaining 18 Allied DDs that give them half damage versus a DD target. Their rapid fire (if they have it) will not make up for this fault.

 

On the other hand, the Allies start with 16 cruisers and can acquire 2 more through CD reinforcement giving 18. The Japanese start with 10 of the Mogami, Myoko and Takeo classes and can acquire the remaining 2 through CD reinforcement. What about the IJN light cruisers present? They start with 2 and can through regular and CD reinforcement acquire 4 more. But these are all 5,000 tonners with 5.5” guns that makes them half damage against cruiser armor and they are non-rapid firing. They will not stand up to the worst of Allied light cruisers and therefore cannot replace the Japanese heavies when lost.

 

The Japanese are divided into two theaters, the WAF (versus the West side of Borneo, Malaya, Sumatra and Batavia) while the EAF goes against the last of the Philippines, East side of Borneo, Celebes, Ceram, Timor and Surabaya. Both IJN Forces must take all of their objectives (12 and 13 respectively) by the end of GT6, or the Japanese lose.

 

The Allies also start divided into four bases (Singapore-RN, Batavia-RNN, Surabaya-USN & Darwin-ANZACs). They may not combine forces in a sortie (there are some exceptions for US DDs) or transfer their CDs (1 per base) until the ABDA forms on GT3. In addition, theater events (primarily convoy escort requirements, a 1-5 on GT 1&2 and 1-3 on GT 3&4) can take up to 3 cruisers and 6 DDs per base every time they come up. Singapore is expected to fall at the end of GT4 and that goes away. But, until it does, it can throw a real monkey wrench into your ability to concentrate your naval forces for full strength sweeps.

 

Concentration of cruisers for sortieing sweeps is my primary Allied tactic for thwarting the Japanese. A full-strength sortie has 6 cruisers. Obviously, that only exists in Darwin and not until GT2. Not all will agree with my POV that piecemeal (less than 6 cruisers) cruiser sorties are a bad idea, period. But the ability to thwart the combat power of the Japanese heavies (absent capital ships) only comes from sufficient Allied cruisers being present to contest their passage IMHO. The soonest that be brought off is against the EAF (the weaker sister) in the Eastern Axis from Darwin (ANZACs) on GT2 and only if Vampire has been transferred there from Singapore on GT1. The US can try it against either the Central or Eastern Axis on GT3 if the Dutch transferred to Surabaya on GT2 to concentrate with the Yanks. The EAF can try to avoid the ANZACs by only sortieing in the Central Axis, but this will only work once.

 

Saving Singapore without a capital ship option; not going to happen unless you a series of the die rolls that allows for a night torpedo ambush against the masters that you actually pull off.

Let’s look at your best chance on GT3. First, you roll a 7 on a D12 for TE and get HMS Emerald for 1 GT. Second, you avoid being pounded by LBA. Third, you roll a 10, 11 or 12 on a D12 for the Watch Roll and get a night engagement against a convoy. Four, you get weather rolls that has a calm sea (does not degrade torp performance) and provides for a new moon state (either directly or by cloud cover). Five, you get good radar contact die rolls (Exeter & Mauritius are – SW & the J/E class are =SW) that allows you to contact the Japanese before they acquire you with enough leave way to maneuver undetected within 8,200 yards before illuminating with star-shell (an acquisition die roll of 1 would actually acquire but just how much luck are you counting on). You fire off everything (1x5, 5x4, 8x3 & 8x2 TT) at 6 IJN Heavies, make smoke and turn away. If you pull off just getting to this point, you have probably won the campaign given your odds of hitting. But this is as good as it gets and look at how many die rolls (several requiring a single result on a D12) that have to go your way in a roll during a single series of rolls. I’ve seen it happen twice, and it is spectacular, but I would not bet the farm on it. Oh, and I’ve yet to see Prince of Wales when not coupled with a successful torpedo ambush save Singapore.

 

So, as always, I return to getting 18 Allied cruisers concentrated in front of Surabaya on GT 5&6 as that has failed only once.

 

Ship repair; it probably will not save you. It certainly is not going to save the Japanese. Ship repair in DTMB starts the GT after the damage is done because the GT are only 15-16 days long. Singapore is the only full dockyard available to the Allies and she is subject to being bombed. The Japanese on the other hand are primarily relying on 2 repair ships. Other than in Singapore both sides are very limited in the hull damage they can repair. According to Dave Franklin (the rules author) even that is too generous, but it’s a game. So, you start an action. You roll poorly and your opponent gets hot. If you stick around waiting for the dice to change you will lose ships to repair that you will never see again. Make smoke, turn away and live to fight another day (or not as you see fit). It’s not over until it’s over.

 

I think about this campaign all the time and I just have not thought of a better way for the Allies given a standard start. This is my all-time favorite campaign; it never gets old.

 

Being Seeing You in the Java Sea

 

WMC

 


  • Mark Hinds likes this

#2 Mark Hinds

Mark Hinds

    Private

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • LocationChicago area, USA

Posted 24 December 2024 - 05:51 PM

Interesting summary.  Reminds me of the "Death of Colonel Tomb" scenario in SPI's Air War, which IMHO had a lot of replay value.  Hoping yours will motivate me to finish my ships.  MH



#3 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 696 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 26 December 2024 - 10:06 PM

Allied capital ship options (especially the Dutch ones) seriously degrade the Japanese chances for 2 primary reasons.

1. They give the Allies the ability to have a reasonable chance of a successful surface daylight engagement almost right from the start in both the WAF and EAF areas instead of being limited to the EAF and coming no sooner than GT2 or 3.

2. The Allied capital ships do not need to eliminate the IJN capital ships as they go away by rule when the Allied capital ships do. That allows them to target and kill IJN heavy cruisers if they are in the open.

Then there is increased and better radar and other attributes also.

 

So, selecting those options should be accompanied by some thought to play balance. That is why I substitute the French Force X for the ANZAC Squadron to lessen the impact of the non-Brit capital ship options on the EAF where the IJN is weakest to start with.

 

WMC



#4 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 825 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 09 January 2025 - 10:33 AM

Interesting summary.  Reminds me of the "Death of Colonel Tomb" scenario in SPI's Air War, which IMHO had a lot of replay value.  Hoping yours will motivate me to finish my ships.  MH

Wow, haven't heard that game mentioned in a very long time; played it endlessly back in the Seventies, even developing some campaign scenarios. Everyone loved the F-4, but I always thought the F-8 was a superior dogfighter. "Beware the Fishbed in the sun" was a well-preached mantra.

 

I recall reading a lot of stuff regarding the mythology around "Colonel Tomb", specifically whether the guy ever existed, or was he a composite character created by the North Vietnamese (or possibly by the Americans). It would be interesting to go look now, some fifty years later. 

 

Apologies for the thread-drift.



#5 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 696 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 10 January 2025 - 06:05 PM

I too was a lifetime subscriber to SPI's S&T and Moves mags. I was deep into board games before I went to Germany in 77. Then Jim O'Neil got hold of me and introduced me to naval miniatures gaming in the Pacific and I've never gone back. I don't really do land gaming in the Pacific. It seems to me that it always goes one way or the other. Before the Canal it's all Japanese and after its all American (even though the 82nd ID is not present). But it can go either way with naval up to mid 43 and that is what I do.

 

As for thread drift, it is kind of like spindrift, and no one controls that.

 

WMC



#6 Mark Hinds

Mark Hinds

    Private

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • LocationChicago area, USA

Posted 12 January 2025 - 07:27 PM

WRT "Colonel Tomb", start with the Wikipedia article.

 

@WMC, concentrating one one area is probably not a bad idea.  In contrast, I dabble in multiple areas, many of which will never complete.  :-)

 

MH



#7 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 696 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 12 January 2025 - 11:07 PM

Quite right.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users