RHS Game Start Planning for Japan

[herwin]

I'm playing RHS (Combo-Mod) as Japan in a PBEM. Is there a short list of the planning decisions that should be made at the start of the game?

[el cid again]

There should be a long list.

The first turn is critical for Japan. Take your time. Consider everything.

A dictim of Joe applies here: paraphrased "Japan can do almost anything. But Japan cannot do everything."

So decide what you really must do, and allocate assets to that end, and then what you think is second priority, and so on, until you run out of assets.

In my view, the entire point of the war is summed up by this question:

Can Japan establish an autarky (self sufficient economic zone) and then defend it?

IF the answer is yes, Japan will win, de facto, whatever victory points say. And they probably will say it won too.

So I don't play for victory points: I play to see how well I can set up a productive Japanese economy, and then how long and well I can defend it.

From that follows a lot of detail strategy and policy. You need to capture oilfields in particular, and also resources, and to a lesser degree sources of supply and manufacturing. You need to get resources and supplies moving between vital points - by rail or by ship - and defend those lines of communciation. To the degree you succeed, you need to stockpile oil and resources in Japan (and other manufacturing centers you control), and supplies and fuel in places vital to your strategic defense. That means you can continue to function even after vital things are taken or lines of communication are severed - run out the clock as it were. I think it is realistic - an undefeated Japan eventually wins by default. Certainly FDR and Gen Marshall worried about high casualties and long strings of defeats causing political crisis - and it is alleged there were times they came close to not funding operations even without such problems on a large scale.

Below this level, you need to decide how you will fight? That decides what you build, and your operational methods.
There are many options. They are not at all the same. Pick a plan and stick to it for the duration. [If you don't need this kind of ship, suspend it and don't commit HI points to completing that kind at all.] It also decides what you try to capture - and what you do when you do capture it? Defend it strong? Defend it light? Build it up? Do NOT build it up? Abandon it?
Lots of choices.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

There should be a long list.

The first turn is critical for Japan. Take your time. Consider everything.

A dictim of Joe applies here: paraphrased "Japan can do almost anything. But Japan cannot do everything."

So decide what you really must do, and allocate assets to that end, and then what you think is second priority, and so on, until you run out of assets.

In my view, the entire point of the war is summed up by this question:

Can Japan establish an autarky (self sufficient economic zone) and then defend it?

IF the answer is yes, Japan will win, de facto, whatever victory points say. And they probably will say it won too.

So I don't play for victory points: I play to see how well I can set up a productive Japanese economy, and then how long and well I can defend it.

From that follows a lot of detail strategy and policy. You need to capture oilfields in particular, and also resources, and to a lesser degree sources of supply and manufacturing. You need to get resources and supplies moving between vital points - by rail or by ship - and defend those lines of communciation. To the degree you succeed, you need to stockpile oil and resources in Japan (and other manufacturing centers you control), and supplies and fuel in places vital to your strategic defense. That means you can continue to function even after vital things are taken or lines of communication are severed - run out the clock as it were. I think it is realistic - an undefeated Japan eventually wins by default. Certainly FDR and Gen Marshall worried about high casualties and long strings of defeats causing political crisis - and it is alleged there were times they came close to not funding operations even without such problems on a large scale.

Below this level, you need to decide how you will fight? That decides what you build, and your operational methods.
There are many options. They are not at all the same. Pick a plan and stick to it for the duration. [If you don't need this kind of ship, suspend it and don't commit HI points to completing that kind at all.] It also decides what you try to capture - and what you do when you do capture it? Defend it strong? Defend it light? Build it up? Do NOT build it up? Abandon it?
Lots of choices.

We're playing War Plan Orange rules, and Yamamoto has been overriden about the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. My strategic goal as Prime Minister is to capture the Southern Resource Area, establish autarky, and stall the American counter attack for long enough to be able to keep some of those resources in the peace treaty. Victory points are not at issue unless I decide to go to total war by attacking Hawaii, Alaska, or the continental US. (I can raid trade routes, American island bases, and Panama without triggering total war.) Given the standard starting position, that means the KB (TF1 and TF2) will not close with Hawaii, but rather will be redeployed for operations elsewhere.

The operations to capture the SRA were very well-planned, and I doubt they need to be revised much from the starting position. The main operational questions to be addressed on turn one are Wake versus Rabaul, and what to do about China. The strategic issues have to do with production in Japan. Is RHS sensible, or do I need to make adjustments similar to those in stock?

[el cid again]

I am confused.

How do you play "using War Plan Orange Rules"?

RHS is the very first attempt to get production "sensible" - and stock (and everything based on it) seems to completely contradict the foundation of the WITP system: it should be "move resources and oil to Japan, make supplies and fuel in industry, and move supplies and fuel to where it is needed." We got rid of "free supply" except to the extent local light industry, fishing, or something of that sort makes it.

Initial operations went very well because of horrible Allied planning and readiness and attitudes (they could not believe Japan was much of a threat) - not because they were well planned. Except for Malaya they were not brilliant. Philippines and Indonesia were fairly well planned, but things went wrong. In the Rabaul area the great strategic opportunity was lost by sending nothing at all for many months. You can do a LOT to do it better - and should.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I am confused.

How do you play "using War Plan Orange Rules"?

RHS is the very first attempt to get production "sensible" - and stock (and everything based on it) seems to completely contradict the foundation of the WITP system: it should be "move resources and oil to Japan, make supplies and fuel in industry, and move supplies and fuel to where it is needed." We got rid of "free supply" except to the extent local light industry, fishing, or something of that sort makes it.

Initial operations went very well because of horrible Allied planning and readiness and attitudes (they could not believe Japan was much of a threat) - not because they were well planned. Except for Malaya they were not brilliant. Philippines and Indonesia were fairly well planned, but things went wrong. In the Rabaul area the great strategic opportunity was lost by sending nothing at all for many months. You can do a LOT to do it better - and should.

See http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1515389. I can't talk about what I'm doing, but I do have some surprises for the Allies in due course.