Anzac question!

Meaning something like a Dutch DD off each island until America enters the war?  Similar rules to that of the US Pre-war navy where you restrict them to their starting SZ?

This G40 game is just begging for lots of house rules, I know that!  :-)

@Spendo02:

Meaning something like a Dutch DD off each island until America enters the war?Â

I haven’t really given it a lot of thought, but maybe someting even smaller-scale than this, since Holland’s forces in the DEI were pretty weak.  Let’s say just one Dutch destroyer for the whole DEI region, and one Dutch infantry unit on each of the three Dutch territories that have an IPC value – Java, Sumatra and Celebes.  None could be replaced when lost, so they’d have the same kind of status as China’s Flying Tiger unit.  The idea would be to give the Dutch a token combat-unit presence in the DEI without unbalancing the game, but I’m not sure if 1 destroyer and 3 infantry would be the right blend of units to achive this.

I agree with you CWO Marc. There should be a small Dutch presence on the DEI Islands. The way it is now, if Japan attacks early or for some reason India and ANZAC doesn’t take the Dutch islands, Japan can get those expensive islands with no fight. That isn’t right. Granted, the Japanese attacks were so sudden and quick that they overwhelmed what defense there was, but it was still a fight. So there should be something there for them to fight, even if it is a single Dutch infantry.
As for the sea zones around them, I really don’t have a clue as to what would be proper.

@knp7765:

I agree with you CWO Marc. There should be a small Dutch presence on the DEI Islands. The way it is now, if Japan attacks early or for some reason India and ANZAC doesn’t take the Dutch islands, Japan can get those expensive islands with no fight. That isn’t right. Granted, the Japanese attacks were so sudden and quick that they overwhelmed what defense there was, but it was still a fight. So there should be something there for them to fight, even if it is a single Dutch infantry. As for the sea zones around them, I really don’t have a clue as to what would be proper.

From a quick check, it looks like Holland’s naval forces in the DEI area at the time of the Japanese invasion consisted primarily of the light cruisers De Ruyter, Java and Tromp and of the destroyers Van Ghent, Evertsen, Kortenaer, Piet Hein, Witte de With, Banckert, and Van Nes.  By March 1942, all but Tromp had been sunk in combat or scuttled after sustaining heavy damage.

So on the naval side of the game, I’d say that Holland should indeed have some naval presence in the DEI area.  The minimum I’d give it would be one ship (either one cruiser or one destroyer), the maximum I’d give it would be three ships (one cruiser plus two destroyers), and my feeling is that the best combination would be the middle-ground option of two ships (one cruiser and one destroyer).  This would reflect the modest size of Holland’s WWII navy and the types of ships that the Dutch actually had on duty in the DEI in 1941 (notwithstanding Holland’s grandiose pre-war ambitions to build three battlecruisers for its DEI fleet).  A force of just one cruiser and one destroyer probably wouldn’t drastically unbalance the situation on the Pacific 1940 side of the game – but at the same time, as you noted, it would prevent Japan from simply walking unopposed into the IPC-wealthy DEI.  On land, the same approach could be used: a mimimum of one infantry unit and a maximum of three, with two being perhaps the optimal number.

There could even be an elastic element to this house rule option.  The Allied player who is picked to control the token Dutch forces could be given some limited options for choosing a set-up at the start of the game.  For instance, there could be a prescribed minimum of one infantry unit, one cruiser and one destroyer, and the player could then choose to add either a) two more infantry; or b) two more destroyers; or c) one infantry and one destroyer, for a total of five units in each case.  If this is considered too powerful, the ceiling could be four units: one infantry, one cruiser and one destroyer, plus either one extra infantry or one extra destroyer depending on what the Dutch player would prefer to have.

At the Dutch player’s discretion, the naval units could initially be placed (in any combination) in sea zones 41 and/or 42 and /or 44 (and perhaps even in SZ 45, though I don’t see much point in doing so).  The infantry could initially be placed (in any combination) on Sumatra and/or Java and/or Celebes (and perhaps even in Dutch New Guinea, though this too would be rather pointless).  The house rule could state that Dutch naval forces are prohibited from operating in sea zea zones other than 41, 42, 44 and 45 (similarly to the restrictions that China has on the territories it can enter).  China does get a limited entry dispensation with regard to Burma and Kwantung, so perhaps the Dutch player could get a limited dispensation to enter SZ 43 (since in real life part of the island of Borneo was Dutch).  The house rule could also state that Dutch infantry units must remain on the Dutch territories to which they were initially assigned, with perhaps their being allowed, at most, to travel by naval transport from one DEI territory to another.

Good research Marc.
I think giving CR/DD would be just right. (Not sure off which Island I would put them.) Adding Inf to the islands would make them too difficult to capture. Remember Japan starts with just 3 TTs. Japan starts with too much Air, so having to destroy another 2 ships would compensate somewhat.

Something to think about is if the Allies decide to stack on Java.

If you let the DEI player stack 1 DD, 1 CR, and 2 Inf on Java, Japan would observe the following:

1 BB (UK)
3 CR (UK/ANZAC/DEI)
3 DD (UK/ANZAC/DEI)
2 TT (UK/ANZAC)

2 Ftr (ANZAC)
6 Inf (UK/ANZAC/DEI)

Thats a bit of a dilemma for Japan to consider a DOW on that stack and having to fully commit at least 5, maybe 6 loaded TT to simply take the DEI stronghold.

This is why I think I’d suggest not allowing stacking of DEI units in one place.

My revision would be to give the Allies 4 Dutch units (use the French units for it).  2 Inf, 1 DD, 1 CR.  
You can place one unit at each SZ/Territory of your choosing on the DEI to include Borneo.  
They are restricted to their starting location until a DOW by Japan and defend with allied units against axis attacks.
They are considered neutral until a Japanese DOW.
They move on the French turn.

Yes, that’s a good point about stacking you both made.  The 1 cruiser + 1 destroyer + 2 dispersed infantry approach does indeed sound like the best option.

That is sounding pretty good. I was thinking any Dutch units would not move but basically just be there for defense, similar to the standing armies on neutral territories. As for the naval units, I think having them remain in place until a Japanese DOW is probably okay. A couple of extra Allied ships wouldn’t be too overpowering but still make Japan commit resources.
If we only give the Dutch 2 infantry, I would say one on Sumatra and one on Java with Celebes remaining open. Actually, I always thought there should be a UK infantry on Borneo at setup. I know the British presence out there was pretty weak in 1940, but having a 4 IPC territory with no defense at all just doesn’t seem right to me.

As for stacking, I don’t think the Dutch infantry should be allowed to move from whichever island they start at. They are there to defend that particular island and that is that.

Here is a question: If the UK or ANZAC move land troops to one of the Dutch islands to get the IPCs from them, do the Dutch infantry change to UK or ANZAC? Or do they remain Dutch?

I’d probably simply leave them as Dutch (considering the area was under Dutch Command anyways).

Otherwise you might as well just change the DEI on the board map to Pro-Allied territories like other neutrals?

Yes, I’d let them remain Dutch too.  One of the points of this house rule idea is to give the Dutch their own units, to rectify their rather odd status of having their own map roundel but no actual combat forces – so if the Dutch units were converted into plain old UK or ANZAC units when one of those countries lands in the DEI, it would spoil the fun.  And from a historical point of view, it’s likewise accurate to keep them Dutch: the Dutch components of ABDACOM remained Dutch during the DEI campaign, even though they were part of a coalition.

I also agree that the Dutch infantry units should gallantly fight and die where they stand.  As Marshall Mac Mahon famously said at Sevastopol in 1855, “J’y suis, j’y reste!” – here I am and here I will stay.