Are the Japanese now TOO powerful??

[mdiehl]

The Japanese war economy was as rampped up as it could ever be, with almost half (IIRC) of Japanese GDP in war industry by 1940. Securing the SRA fast, slow, or not at all would have had no effect on their production capacity in the 5 years of WW2. Other than perhaps to have a critical lack of fuel shut everything down.

The argument that somehow the Allies should be forced or encouraged to pursue a flawed strategy defending the SRA in dispersed, isolated locations or else face a SuperJapan is illogical. It posits a false dichotomy: force the Allies to follow the "historical strategy" or else face a Japan with a capability that it could never have had even with 10 years to develop the resources and NO damage to refineries or other capacity. There was no capability for substantial growth in the Japanese economy in 1941-1945 without first ENDING the war in China and withdrawing.

[BlackVoid]

The Allies did not have a totally unified command either. Think McArthur... European theater..., different opinions of US/GB/AUS/NZ, etc...

There were political problems and considerations on the Allied side as well.

[6971grunt]

ORIGINAL: skrewball

About the Japanese pilot training...

This game is about "WHAT WOULD YOU DO" if you were in command. I can tell you that if I was in command of the Japanese, I would have implemented a strict training regime. Of course this isn't modelled propery in game, so you use the base attacks. Why would you want to hold on to the "historic" method of play? Historically, the Japanese got their asses handed to them without much material loss to the Allies (towards the end of the war). What fun is that?

I believe the allies should have some sort of production control. However, there should be some random negative modifier depending on the war in Europe.

I agree with skrewball here, what fun and enjoyment would there be if we were confined to strict historical parameters?[&:] The Japanese were destined to lose because of the strategic choices they made during the war, as history teaches. Why play a game with a known outcome?

I'll take a flight of Marine Corsairs over 12 Zero's any day - alot of buring Japs at the end of the day.

[AmiralLaurent]

I think the simple way to simulate the war economy is to ask for political points for any increase in size of a factory, or unlogical upgrade. I would say a political point for each factory center. Any factory upgrade to an AC being the successor of the current production will be judged logical and so be free (in PP, not in HI and supplies). All other changes will cost 1 PP per center.

Why political points ?

From a simulation POV, a new industry will need manpower, energy, space, transportation, fuel and spare parts that may have been used by someone else, so it needs some king of "decision power" for the order to be made. That is for the increase of size of any factory (or shipyard).
Unlogical upgrades (converting a B-26 unit to B-24, or Jake to Zero) will also require some political pressure, as you basically ask a firm to stop building its scrap AC to build the concurrent's.

From a game POV, that will both reduce the flux of Japanese troops liberated from fixed command and/or the industry increase, but will still enable the Japanese player to increase factory capacity by 50 per days if he wants.
The same option should be open to the Allied player IMOO but to simulate the 'Hitler First' principle such changes will need twice the price asked (2 PP for each factory center), at least until May 1945. By the way AFAIK most Allied players have no PP to spare before 1943.

On the other hand, Allied side will have no more extra production, but all production will be on map.... This will need to include 'closed areas' to set some Soviet and British factories out of range of Japan (like external AF are considered in TOAW if you see what I mean), and so that some old models will no more be produced (most Chinese and Dutch AC among them).

Comments welcome.

[mdiehl]

I think it would be better with a random positive modifier for the war in Europe if one believes that the Allies could have done substantially better in Europe than they did (esp with the Battle of the Atlantic).

[Sardonic]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

The Japanese war economy was as rampped up as it could ever be, with almost half (IIRC) of Japanese GDP in war industry by 1940. Securing the SRA fast, slow, or not at all would have had no effect on their production capacity in the 5 years of WW2. Other than perhaps to have a critical lack of fuel shut everything down.

The argument that somehow the Allies should be forced or encouraged to pursue a flawed strategy defending the SRA in dispersed, isolated locations or else face a SuperJapan is illogical. It posits a false dichotomy: force the Allies to follow the "historical strategy" or else face a Japan with a capability that it could never have had even with 10 years to develop the resources and NO damage to refineries or other capacity. There was no capability for substantial growth in the Japanese economy in 1941-1945 without first ENDING the war in China and withdrawing.

I surely dont agree with this assessment.
A modern economy is dynamic, not static.
Capable of change.

Things can be reallocated if needed.

It would seem to me that the problem is that the Allied player has no control of his production.
NOT, that Japan does.

Also I have asked several times and gotten no answer. Where does Japan get all this supply
to change his industry? It isnt there. Even a modest usage is a severe drain.

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent
but will still enable the Japanese player to increase factory capacity by 50 per days if he wants.

This is the whole crux of the arguments. In the real world, there was simply no physical possibility of Japan doing this or any significant increase of their production capability.

I remember reading some time back that the design intent behind allowing the Japanese players as much control over production as they have was so that they could try to adjust to the damage done by Allied bombing, not so they could ramp it up to ridiculous levels.

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: Sardonic
I surely dont agree with this assessment.
A modern economy is dynamic, not static.
Capable of change.

Japan didn't have a modern economy, even by 1940's standards. They had some schools and factories tacked on to a medieval society.

[Sardonic]

ORIGINAL: dtravel

ORIGINAL: Sardonic
I surely dont agree with this assessment.
A modern economy is dynamic, not static.
Capable of change.

Japan didn't have a modern economy, even by 1940's standards. They had some schools and factories tacked on to a medieval society.

And that sounds like something that you WANT to believe.
Sixty years after the facts. Japan did some amazing things in 1945, while they tried to compensate for the bombing damage. I wonder if the USA could have done as well.

Compared to industry NOW, the USSR didnt have a modern economy either. But they still won.

[mdiehl]

surely dont agree with this assessment.
A modern economy is dynamic, not static.
Capable of change.

Things can be reallocated if needed.

That is true. I am pessimistic about the Japanese ability to radically change their economy in the time frame of WW2 (1940-1946 for argument's sake), however, for a number of reasons:

1. Increasing output from war factories that make complex devices like aircraft parts and engines (not to speak of, say, marine engines, marine drydocks and repair yards, artillery, tanks and vehicles, etc) requires increasing output in a whole bunch of other kinds of production and in infrastructure.

2. Working backward you need for more aircraft engines (for example), more foundries, more good metallurgists, and more machine tools. Having an infinite supply of raw material does not change your production unless you have the capacity to turn the raw materials into goods. Japan did not have that capacity domestically. She was trying (badly) to develop that capacity in North Korea (in part because so MANY young men in Japan were being recruited into the war in China and in part because the remaineder were needed to keep food production going).

3. That in turn means you need more factories that can make the machine tools that make the engine parts etc. So you need more men for the machine tool factories too. And your extant machine tools might be diverted from making engines (or whatever) to making more machine tools so you can make more factories that might make engines (so in the long run increasing a.c. produciton might well require a substantial interval of reduced a.c. production).

4. These also require more roads and more rails (and more locomotives and machine tools to make the locomotives and rails) to transport the machine tools, engine machines, engines &c.

In 1940 the Japanese economy was maxxed out in war production owing to shortage of capacity and shortage of men and materials to develop new capacity. They could have obtained the men if (a) their occupation policies weren't so barbaric and thoroughly dishonorable or if (b) they had withdrawn from China and put the IJA troops back into the civilian economy as machinists, founderers, fishermen and farmers.

And it still would have taken them 10-20 years just to catch up to US idled capacity before the war even began, assuming that they could have had free and easy access to the Southern Resource Area with all facilities intact and assuming they could have withdrawn from China or radically altered occupation policies.

In short, they could have had everything they wanted (except for honor earned at the point of a gun and humiliation heaped on the US and UK) had they actually done that which FDR most wanted them to do (give up China and engage in normal civil economic activity in the Pacific Rim). But that of course would in turn have required that Japan not be an expansionist military state.

Anyhow that is how I see it.

[mdiehl]

Sixty years after the facts. Japan did some amazing things in 1945, while they tried to compensate for the bombing damage.

I'll bite. Name one "amazing" industrial feat that Japan achieved during the war that the US did not exceed during the war.

Compared to industry NOW, the USSR didnt have a modern economy either. But they still won.

That is true and when you consider some of the reasons WHY then you can see why I at least think Japan could not. For one thing, the USSR benefitted substantially from US domestic production. I'm not talking about .50cal, tanks, fighter planes, and Studebaker trucks (all of which helped the USSR weather the worst of the German onslaught and develop in 1944 and 1945 a mobile force capability that was far superior to German mobility). I'm talking about machine tools (the famous Red Barricades Factory, for example, was largely built in 1941 from parts imported to Russia made by Martin Electro-Furnace Company).

From Wikipedia, US Lend-Lease (not including UK Lend Lease) through April 1945:

Aircraft.............................14,795
Tanks.................................7,056
Jeeps................................51,503
Trucks..............................375,883
Motorcycles..........................35,170
Tractors..............................8,071
Guns..................................8,218
Machine guns........................131,633
Explosives..........................345,735 tons
Building equipment valued.......$10,910,000
Railroad freight cars................11,155
Locomotives...........................1,981
Cargo ships..............................90
Submarine hunters.......................105
Torpedo boats...........................197
Ship engines..........................7,784
Food supplies.....................4,478,000 tons
Machines and equipment.......$1,078,965,000
Non-ferrous metals..................802,000 tons
Petroleum products................2,670,000 tons
Chemicals...........................842,000 tons
Cotton..........................106,893,000 tons
Leather..............................49,860 tons
Tires.............................3,786,000
Army boots.......................15,417,000 pairs

[pauk]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

um not true 2 are still on west coast in dry dock after 12 months admittedly just about out of it but still

You missed to point that i didn't sink any of your BBs at PH (this is usual result of PH strike) and that these two BBs are only ones which were heavily damaged....

[pauk]

ORIGINAL: spence

ok... in my game against Andy (you may find it in AAR section) all American battleships from PH are ready for service at the start of the 43... and he is using them.

1. PH attack 95% is too inefficient
2. Ship repairs are too fast for both sides.....

um not true 2 are still on west coast in dry dock after 12 months admittedly just about out of it but still

Historically about right...3: maryland, Pennsylvania and Tennessee back in action by Jue 42, 1: Nevada by early 43, and 2: West Virginia and California by early-mid 44.
(Plus 1 sunk: Arizona and one deemed not worth repair: Oklahoma)

so , that makes it two sunk (de fact) BBs at PH.....

And the Andy have only two BBs in repair yards - those two which should be sunk. I would say that your maths sucks or you are demagogue... sorry but that's the way it is....

[Honda]

Tough luck. I can get 6 [:D]

[pauk]

ORIGINAL: spence

#1. Japan is allowed to do limited changes in their war industry to simulate that Japan could turn their production to the total war production

The Japanese military runs the country for 10 years or so, starts a war which they don't win (against China), decide the only way to win that one is start another one with the rest of the world, and then and only then decide to ramp up the economy to full war production?  Huh?

Seems to me they started the war with the West just to keep what was already going going.  Little enough production was available for conversion to a war footing in 1941...significant expansion was beyond their capability though they could tweak things a bit.

there we go again. Ok, they were stupid... and they are stupid even today[:'(]

Japan industry capabilities were set on 0 in the 1946 but they managed to expand their industry and become real industrial superpower.... how they managed to expand their industry beyond their capabilities?

[pauk]

ORIGINAL: BlackVoid

With PDU on the japanese are stronger than historical.

not a 100 % true. Japan IS stronger than historical in 1942 thanks to ability to upgrade useless Nates to Tojos and Tonies, but once when Allies start to reciving P-47s, P-38J and Corsairs then Allies becomes stronger than historical.

But PDU is a candyland and have nothing with history....

[pauk]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

I think it would be better with a random positive modifier for the war in Europe if one believes that the Allies could have done substantially better in Europe than they did (esp with the Battle of the Atlantic).

they couldn't do better than it was in RL - thanks to poor decisions of WWI soldier who believed that he is a greatest strategiest in the world of all times......

[pauk]

ORIGINAL: Sardonic

Also I have asked several times and gotten no answer. Where does Japan get all this supply
to change his industry? It isnt there. Even a modest usage is a severe drain.

Japan have HI. HI produces supply. Also you can bring supply from SRA to Japan to expand industry. You have to be patient and lucky to capture oil and resources intact. Brave Sir Robin helps to that. Over.[;)]

[pauk]

ORIGINAL: dtravel

ORIGINAL: Sardonic
I surely dont agree with this assessment.
A modern economy is dynamic, not static.
Capable of change.

Japan didn't have a modern economy, even by 1940's standards. They had some schools and factories tacked on to a medieval society.

But imagine that they hire MacArthur in 1940 and offer him a Japan citizenships and lots of geyshas (sp?)[;)][:D]

[pauk]

ORIGINAL: Honda

Tough luck. I can get 6 [:D]

yeah, tough luck in 10 PBEM starts. You didn't mentioned that most of them (if not all went down after the 2nd day strike).....[:D]