Brave Sir Robin

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Mistmatz

Not to hijack the thread but somehow when it comes to Sir Robin and maybe evacuations in general there are usually some who think saving fragments is gamey.

I don't consider saving fragments for later rebuild gamey at all as there is a big amount of replacements required. I assume in most mods the infantry squads of the various nations are the limiting factor for rebuilding. Therefore there is for example no use in evacuating fragments of all Phillipine divisions for rebuild as you will (rightfully) never get enough phillipine squads to rebuild them within the duration of the game.

Quite contrary, if the amount of fighting power (squads) a player receives is well defined in a mod the player needs a method to use those. As there is no way to add new units for the player to spent his replacement troops on it's IMO perfectly alright to use the skelotons of the destroyed ones. Of course it's problematic that experience is not set back to a lower value when troops are replaced but this is a general problem that for instance also exists with the chinese respawning LCUs.

Opinions?

Current game engine puts green troops in as replacements... the unit experience is the average of the residual veterans and the new guys. This was NOT true in the old game engine.

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: treespider

The Japanese IRL knew what they were facing....

[:)] Of course they knew what they were facing - they had the best - espionage/prior to hostilities - compliment of information as any country that had yet gone to war! That is the one of the chief reasons the Allies did not trust Japanese immigrant/citizens in their territories.

Military Intel did have a clue about the extent of Japanese espionage and potential...and it fueled one of the greatest political debate/scandals of the modern era - the relocation of Japanese nationals and citizens during the early days of WWII (at least in the USA).

[treespider]

The more (longer) that I play WitP, the more that I consider the WitP engine (and especially so the land combat engine) a steaming pile of poo.

IMO, the OBs of the units, and the capabilities of the units themselves, bear little resemblence to their actual historical counter-parts. I do NOT consider the full-scale invasion of Australia or the whole-sale conquest of India a "historical what-if". I -do- cosider it entertaining fantasy. But no, I do not by any attempt at justification, cosider it "a historical what-if". While I am quite sure many would say I was myopic biggot for claiming that, well - I've been called worse.

Given that in WitP a massive invasion of India or Oz seem to be the norm, WitP is therefor categorized as "entertaining fantasy". It -IS- a very enjoyable game. But it is a very POOR simulation. It's an excellent, very complicated and detailed *fantasy*, but as far as simulation is concerned; well, it's not.

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

While I understand your point in principle Feinder, I completely disagree with it in reality. The reason most Japanese players launch a large-scale attack into either location is due to pulling units out of China and/orManchuria. HAD the Japanese chosen to do this then they might have had to ability to do what many players (such as myself) like to try.

The biggest issue within WitP from a Japanese perspective is the lack-of-cooperation between the IJA and IJN. This cannot be modeled in the game. A reasonably competent Japanese player KNOWS that one cannot win in China and the Russians aren't going to intervene as long as you leave a minimum force level there. The withdrawal of 5-8 Infantry Divisions and supporting units would have been enough to make such a move possible.

Note that I do not say practical...

This not fantasy, it is warGAMING.

IMO...

One other tidbit of information that makes WitP a fantasy when compared to Real Life.

In 1941 and 1942 the Japanese imported circa 22 million tons of raw materials. In the game to fully supply Japanese Industry, the Japanese need only transport something akin to 2.5 million tons a year...

Which means in the game the Japanese have a huge surplus of shipping available for all of these fantasy invasion scenarios...instead of having to use them to actually transport resources, oils and fuels. It also means in the game that the Japanese are not burning through their fuel reserves nearly as fast as they did IRL which gives them even more operational flexibility.

[Big B]

You ask a question that I do not have a ready hard answer to.

My gut tells me that perhaps in the first combat day - only units deemed to be immediately in contact (by some strength ratio) should be displayed on the combat screen.

Then, perhaps as other units may reasonably deploy - then they may show up on the following combat displays?

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: Big B

I believe that ANY land combat in a hex will display ALL enemy units participating in combat in that hex.

Therefore, your 12 men paddle ashore, and engage the local beach defense unit - you won't just see that local beach defense unit on the combat screen - I believe EVERY unit in the hex will show up as they bombard you and engage your "12 man patrol".

That is what I meant by "super-reccon"

B

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso



Well, dunno about SF or Truk, but i believe on occasion Sub Based "recon" did happen (i.e.: putting commandos onto a beach) - not sure how often it happened in the Pacific, but they did it in the Med and pre-Normandy. It certainly wasn't meant to provoke combat like it automatically would in WITP... but i don't think the game engine allows for stealthy "commando style" recon.

i understand this - i also understand that some recon did go on that is not possible in the game as it currently stands.

So, which way to err? Too much or too little? Or should they try to get it "right"? And if so, how should / could they do it?

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: treespider

The more (longer) that I play WitP, the more that I consider the WitP engine (and especially so the land combat engine) a steaming pile of poo.

IMO, the OBs of the units, and the capabilities of the units themselves, bear little resemblence to their actual historical counter-parts. I do NOT consider the full-scale invasion of Australia or the whole-sale conquest of India a "historical what-if". I -do- cosider it entertaining fantasy. But no, I do not by any attempt at justification, cosider it "a historical what-if". While I am quite sure many would say I was myopic biggot for claiming that, well - I've been called worse.

Given that in WitP a massive invasion of India or Oz seem to be the norm, WitP is therefor categorized as "entertaining fantasy". It -IS- a very enjoyable game. But it is a very POOR simulation. It's an excellent, very complicated and detailed *fantasy*, but as far as simulation is concerned; well, it's not.

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

While I understand your point in principle Feinder, I completely disagree with it in reality. The reason most Japanese players launch a large-scale attack into either location is due to pulling units out of China and/orManchuria. HAD the Japanese chosen to do this then they might have had to ability to do what many players (such as myself) like to try.

The biggest issue within WitP from a Japanese perspective is the lack-of-cooperation between the IJA and IJN. This cannot be modeled in the game. A reasonably competent Japanese player KNOWS that one cannot win in China and the Russians aren't going to intervene as long as you leave a minimum force level there. The withdrawal of 5-8 Infantry Divisions and supporting units would have been enough to make such a move possible.

Note that I do not say practical...

This not fantasy, it is warGAMING.

IMO...

One other tidbit of information that makes WitP a fantasy when compared to Real Life.

In 1941 and 1942 the Japanese imported circa 22 million tons of raw materials. In the game to fully supply Japanese Industry, the Japanese need only transport something akin to 2.5 million tons a year...

Which means in the game the Japanese have a huge surplus of shipping available for all of these fantasy invasion scenarios...instead of having to use them to actually transport resources, oils and fuels. It also means in the game that the Japanese are not burning through their fuel reserves nearly as fast as they did IRL which gives them even more operational flexibility.

True enough - i've mentioned this before, but i'll mention it again:

Japan immediately before the war needed 10 million tons of shipping to support her economy.

She had 6 million tons - 4 million tons were supplied by other countries, and this shipping immediately evaporated when the war started.

Yet, in the game Japan has so much shipping available that the Japanese players will laugh at Allied attempts to conduct an anti-shipping campaign. They can conduct wholesale invasion of Hawaii when in fact they barely had enough shipping to allow enough fuel to get their carriers back to Japan (the original PH plan called for SCUTTLING some of the carriers!)

The game engine doesn't reflect any of this - at least in the mods i've played.

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Big B

You ask a question that I do not have a ready hard answer to.

My gut tells me that perhaps in the first combat day - only units deemed to be immediately in contact (by some strength ratio) should be displayed on the combat screen.

Then, perhaps as other units may reasonably deploy - then they may show up on the following combat displays?

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: Big B

I believe that ANY land combat in a hex will display ALL enemy units participating in combat in that hex.

Therefore, your 12 men paddle ashore, and engage the local beach defense unit - you won't just see that local beach defense unit on the combat screen - I believe EVERY unit in the hex will show up as they bombard you and engage your "12 man patrol".

That is what I meant by "super-reccon"

B

i understand this - i also understand that some recon did go on that is not possible in the game as it currently stands.

So, which way to err? Too much or too little? Or should they try to get it "right"? And if so, how should / could they do it?

Sounds like a reasonable answer - which would probably only require a semi-major code re-write...[:D]

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: treespider

The more (longer) that I play WitP, the more that I consider the WitP engine (and especially so the land combat engine) a steaming pile of poo.

IMO, the OBs of the units, and the capabilities of the units themselves, bear little resemblence to their actual historical counter-parts. I do NOT consider the full-scale invasion of Australia or the whole-sale conquest of India a "historical what-if". I -do- cosider it entertaining fantasy. But no, I do not by any attempt at justification, cosider it "a historical what-if". While I am quite sure many would say I was myopic biggot for claiming that, well - I've been called worse.

Given that in WitP a massive invasion of India or Oz seem to be the norm, WitP is therefor categorized as "entertaining fantasy". It -IS- a very enjoyable game. But it is a very POOR simulation. It's an excellent, very complicated and detailed *fantasy*, but as far as simulation is concerned; well, it's not.

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

While I understand your point in principle Feinder, I completely disagree with it in reality. The reason most Japanese players launch a large-scale attack into either location is due to pulling units out of China and/orManchuria. HAD the Japanese chosen to do this then they might have had to ability to do what many players (such as myself) like to try.

The biggest issue within WitP from a Japanese perspective is the lack-of-cooperation between the IJA and IJN. This cannot be modeled in the game. A reasonably competent Japanese player KNOWS that one cannot win in China and the Russians aren't going to intervene as long as you leave a minimum force level there. The withdrawal of 5-8 Infantry Divisions and supporting units would have been enough to make such a move possible.

Note that I do not say practical...

This not fantasy, it is warGAMING.

IMO...

One other tidbit of information that makes WitP a fantasy when compared to Real Life.

In 1941 and 1942 the Japanese imported circa 22 million tons of raw materials. In the game to fully supply Japanese Industry, the Japanese need only transport something akin to 2.5 million tons a year...

Which means in the game the Japanese have a huge surplus of shipping available for all of these fantasy invasion scenarios...instead of having to use them to actually transport resources, oils and fuels. It also means in the game that the Japanese are not burning through their fuel reserves nearly as fast as they did IRL which gives them even more operational flexibility.

True enough - i've mentioned this before, but i'll mention it again:

Japan immediately before the war needed 10 million tons of shipping to support her economy.

She had 6 million tons - 4 million tons were supplied by other countries, and this shipping immediately evaporated when the war started.

Yet, in the game Japan has so much shipping available that the Japanese players will laugh at Allied attempts to conduct an anti-shipping campaign. They can conduct wholesale invasion of Hawaii when in fact they barely had enough shipping to allow enough fuel to get their carriers back to Japan (the original PH plan called for SCUTTLING some of the carriers!)

The game engine doesn't reflect any of this - at least in the mods i've played.

AE does....

[rtrapasso]

If lack of supply is going to be the cause of the fall of Singapore, then taking a few combat units out will actually make it last longer {supply drops less}.

It isn't lack of supply per se that causes the fall of Singapore - its because you don't have enough AV to keep the Japanese from taking it... and lack of AV can be CAUSED by lack of supply.

It does help a bit if you can try to balance the amount of supply with the number of units, but eventually it breaks down under pressure.

As mentioned, i try to get out the noncombat types since they don't help all that much... i certainly don't want the &*%^ engineers to keep using up supply to fix the airfield and port so that it is easier for the Japanese to use... just the opposite: i want the facilities WRECKED.

By the time a siege has gone on, the engineers usually can't destroy much on the turn when the city falls... Best to get them out, but when is tricky - you DO want them to build forts for a while, but by the time that has happened, it's hard to get them to safety.

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: treespider







One other tidbit of information that makes WitP a fantasy when compared to Real Life.

In 1941 and 1942 the Japanese imported circa 22 million tons of raw materials. In the game to fully supply Japanese Industry, the Japanese need only transport something akin to 2.5 million tons a year...

Which means in the game the Japanese have a huge surplus of shipping available for all of these fantasy invasion scenarios...instead of having to use them to actually transport resources, oils and fuels. It also means in the game that the Japanese are not burning through their fuel reserves nearly as fast as they did IRL which gives them even more operational flexibility.

True enough - i've mentioned this before, but i'll mention it again:

Japan immediately before the war needed 10 million tons of shipping to support her economy.

She had 6 million tons - 4 million tons were supplied by other countries, and this shipping immediately evaporated when the war started.

Yet, in the game Japan has so much shipping available that the Japanese players will laugh at Allied attempts to conduct an anti-shipping campaign. They can conduct wholesale invasion of Hawaii when in fact they barely had enough shipping to allow enough fuel to get their carriers back to Japan (the original PH plan called for SCUTTLING some of the carriers!)

The game engine doesn't reflect any of this - at least in the mods i've played.

AE does....

Haven't seen the test of the Japanese Economy yet - i know Andrew was working hard on it... so i don't know how accurately it will reflect reality.

i know there are many more slots available to allow more units, planes, ships, etc. to be present.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

Haven't seen the test of the Japanese Economy yet - i know Andrew was working hard on it... so i don't know how accurately it will reflect reality.

i know there are many more slots available to allow more units, planes, ships, etc. to be present.

Well it should be better than the current model, as far as the strain on shipping is concerned. I'm intimately familiar on how the new model works...Lots more resources and oil/fuel required to be transported to the Home Islands...to the tune of historic imports.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Big B

From the scenario design forum...

ORIGINAL: vettim89

In truth the problem is really the Land Combat System (BEEP!: thread hijack warning). From the historical info we have the poorly trained. equipped, and often led Commonwealth, Phillipine, RA US, and Dutch troops could not stand up to the Japanese Army that had been fighting in China for the better part of a decade. The RL Allies folded before the oncoming Japanese.This is not to say that there weren't cases where the Allies put up stout defense, just that from a strategic point of view, it was an untenable situation.

The Allies failed to turn back any Japanese advance until August/September 1942 when the Australians repelled the Milne Bay invasion. That was followed by numerous battles on GC eventually leading to vicory. IMO troop quality and experience plus supplies finally came up enough at this point where the Allied armies could and did first resist and then defeat the Japanese.

So if "Sir Robin" means withdrawing unit fragments by sub and other means than ok its a bit gamey. But if "Sir Robin" is really the JFB screaming "Stand still so I can hit you", the RL Allies didn't/couldn't, why should your AFB opponents? If the latter is true then IMHO, the Japanese player needs to invade areas where the Allies have no choice but fight: Oz, India, HI, WCUSA (LOL)

To me what makes this game great is exploring the What If's. If the invasion of Oz/India is the ultimate Japanes What If, isn't the implementation of Sir RObin in whatever form really just another What If? How many of you JFB want to take me up in a game where you agree to not invade Oz, India, HI, New Zealand, New Caledonia, Samoa, or Alaska Proper if I agree to not Sir Robin?

For those who don't venture into the scenario design forum - this discussion has been going on for a couple of days.
Not wishing to infringe on RHS design discussions - I am starting this thread here for any and all input regarding "the Sir Robin" defense.

Personally, I find that term as more of a taunt than anything else -
But that is why this thread has been started.

I did not start the thread intending to limit it to RHS - Sir Robin is a bad idea in ALL forms of WITP - not just RHS - and it is also gamey and political nonsense. But most of all it is poor military strategy: it optimizes Japanese power - whatever the opponent goals may be - minimizes their losses and maximizes their resources to use their (larger) forces for.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

What's gamey about the "Brave Sir Robinson" is that the it often involves withdrawing PI or Dutch units from their homeland to defend some foriegn country.  Beyond this I have not particular problem with the strategy.

Same for lots of other cases - Malay states local troops - I suppose they would withdraw the Hong Kong units if they were not static. This is politically impossible to justify, would probably get a commander a courts martial, and - worst of all - it does not make military sense. It is simplistic to think the enemy can win everywhere - and horribly counterproductive to make that true - by defending nowhere.

[el cid again]

[quote]ORIGINAL: Big B

Well, to paraphrase what vettim89 nicely said above -

WWII happened how it happened. If you wish to agree, that under no circumstances - you will move one inch beyond the limit of historical Japanese expansion/nor build one more unit than Japan historically did - then I will agree to not save/move any unit that was historically destroyed in that time and place.

However, WitP is a fluid game - and such guarantees cannot/should not be made...otherwise we can all just watch a documentary and drink a beer.[;)]

B
[quote]

But I am NOT a person who believes history is cast in cement

History is not the story of what inevitably had to happen

History is not the story of what was likely to happen

History is the story of what DID happen, given choices and luck, sometimes even things that were very unlikely happened.

What is wrong with Sir Robin is that it ignores what was possible in a political sense AS WELL as what is good strategy. You should not want to have NO defense (or possibly no defense except at Singapore, Soerabaja and Bataan) - in the entire SRA. IF you go that way, in every possible way it can be measured, you make a situation worse for the Allies - even the historical defense of Malaya (which is dismal) is much better than this.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: BrucePowers

It is a game. I like doing different things to have fun. I thought that was the point of a game. Just my opinion.

And if you are a gamer this is perfectly valid.

I am not a gamer.

Even so - I believe in doing things different. But for me they must be possible things - just because the game lets me do it
is not enough.

Even if one does not care about the possible as I do - the larger point is Sir Robin does not work well. It may be close to
the worst possible case for the Allies. It may be the worst possible case - although I have to assume if I wanted to do worse I could
find ways to commit suicide that were even "better." [Load units on ships and send them where they must be sunk???]

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

i will point out that by leaving your troops in place to be reduced piecemeal, you are giving the Japanese player several thousand points, which means you will have to recoup that times 1.75 or 2 or 3 in order to get a win*... and by having the troops available, it makes it easier later in the game...

i personally don't do a "full-fledged" Sir Robin, but i do make it a priority to get out non-combat type units (Base Forces, HQ, etc.) i will point out the Allies generally made attempts to do the same, except in real life, the "Base Force" units were attached to air units for the most part. When evacuating, air units made every attempt to get out their mechanics, etc. when they left from what i've read.

*EDIT - depending on when you are trying to get a win... or it might make it that much easier for the Japanese to get an autovictory by giving them a few thousand extra points.

Let me be clear: I love to evacuate base forces which have no function (including demolition in some cases as a function). I try hard to evacuate a part of a unit - to rebuild on - if that is feasible too. I don't think opposing Sir Robin means "move nothing" and adopt a "totally static defense."

Let me explain about autovictory and vp: when you give up LOCATIONS you give up pp - and there are far more of these than there are for units. Giving up locations to save units is silly: giving up maximum locations will bring the opposition much closer to auto victory.

Also - I am told that autovictory is not cast in stone - that if you get it - you may elect to keep playing. This didn't happen in UV- but I never saw it in WITP - and a player who has says it does not end the game as it did in UV.

Also - in RHS the number of locations is such that the chance of an autovictory is remote. IF it is going to be won - it is going to be won by capturing locations- so don't give them up. Japan starts with a horrible number of victory points, a small fraction of the Allied total. It may get over the 1:1 level - but getting to 4:1 is not realistic in 99 and 44/100 per cent of games. IF it is possible, Sir Robin is the way to get there.

[rtrapasso]

This whole business of "Sir Robin" withdrawing everything, everywhere - of course is not possible...

i mean, even if you WANTED to, unless you designed a mod with a LOT more political points (or possibly a lot fewer troops) than the mods/scenarios i've seen, you can't withdraw or even move troops in PI, DEI, Malaysia into some sort of defensible position in the game... there are too many troops and not enough political points.

So, what exactly IS a Sir Robin defense in reality? [&:]Does it mean withdrawing combat troops and leaving the engineers behind? Apparently the reverse is not a true "Sir Robin" (from previous comments.)

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Dixie

I don't have a problem with it myself.  I'll try to save the Aussie units from Malaya and the 4th Marines for example.  If my oppo wants to flee without putting up a fight then that's his/her choice, just as I may or may not want to withdraw major Japanese combat units from the Pacific to defend Japan.

I think it is wrong to evacuate Malaya - when IRL troops and supplies and air units went TO Malaya. You cannot expect to hold it 100 days if you make it weaker. Nor should you want to lose it fast.

But that is up to the player. In RHS EOS family - it is feasible to evacuate massive numbers of units (due to pp). It is only forbidden by the primary RHS house rule: you may not do what would not be done by real commanders. And indeed - it is OK by that rule to evacuate Malaya - AFTER you fight for it. But not BEFORE you fight for it - before you know the enemy is tough.

The larger point is that it is bad strategy to evacuate wholesale - that you hurt the enemy less if you do it. I am facing a game in which ALL non static units in Malaya, Burma, Luzon seem to have left ALL points except Singapore, Manila (and apparently NOTHING in Burma) - and this is not good Allied play. Aside from preventing me to test the scenario design (are adequate assault and air and logistic elements assigned?) it is going to result in a stronger Japanese position.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

This whole business of "Sir Robin" withdrawing everything, everywhere - of course is not possible...

i mean, even if you WANTED to, unless you designed a mod with a LOT more political points (or possibly a lot fewer troops) than the mods/scenarios i've seen, you can't withdraw or even move troops in PI, DEI, Malaysia into some sort of defensible position in the game... there are too many troops and not enough political points.

So, what exactly IS a Sir Robin defense in reality? [&:]Does it mean withdrawing combat troops and leaving the engineers behind? Apparently the reverse is not a true "Sir Robin" (from previous comments.)

IMO I think it is more a state of mind...an unwillingness (so to speak) of the Allies to try and engage the Japanese during 1942.

[el cid again]

Tree is right. See also "The Andromedon Affair" in Sea Classics. A German raider captured an Imperial Defense Report on all Far East military units of the British Empire: this was given to Japan just in time for the decision for war - and probably was critical for that decision - in July 1941 [The raider captain was made first commander of the German Navy when it reformed in the 1950s]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005


The Japanese player (in stock at least) has several advantages over history. First and foremost is knowledge of his opponents OOB and the ability to alter his accordingly...not much to be done about that.

Beg to differ on the foreknowledge issue....the japanese in fact have very good pre-war intelligence on what they were facing....as I posted in another thread...

Interesting quote in "The Dutch Naval Air Force Against Japan" dealing with this whole foreknowledge issue -

So instead of an overt invasion, the IJN took steps to intensify covert intelligence operations throughout the East indies. A large fleet of approximately 500 Japanese fishing boats - manned by some 4,000 civilians, reservists and active-duty personnel - was assigned to the operations. To support this fleet, the Japanese set up entire fishing communities and fisheries throughout the NEI., which allowed their ships to move at will. In some instances Japanese submarines resupplied them.

As a result, the fishing boats were able to move freely. In the process, they often flagrantly violated Dutch territorial waters and fishery regulations to "fish" and dive for pearls near important military installations. When stopped and searched, many were often found with sophisticated sounding equipment, well-detailed charts of various harbors throughout the East indies and powerful radio equipment capable of transmitting all the way to Japan.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: Big B

Well, to paraphrase what vettim89 nicely said above -

WWII happened how it happened. If you wish to agree, that under no circumstances - you will move one inch beyond the limit of historical Japanese expansion/nor build one more unit than Japan historically did - then I will agree to not save/move any unit that was historically destroyed in that time and place.

However, WitP is a fluid game - and such guarantees cannot/should not be made...otherwise we can all just watch a documentary and drink a beer.[;)]

The last time I checked you were not able to build more units than the Japanese had IRL. Granted the existing scenario design often duplicates or triplicates units that existed in history...however it is not like the japanese can build or fabricate NEW land, air or sea units beyond what the scenario designer feels should be present. As an example as a Japanese player i cannot build additional Battleships after the Yamato and musashi are added to my inventory. Nor can I create 30 additional fighter Sentais over and above what the scenario provides.

Just my 2 pfennings on this one aspect...

Depends what you want to call "units" - lots of extra shipping put in for the IJN in stock (was put in mainly for the AI).

EDIT: Also, i believe that the original poster was referring to the fact that it is possible to make non-historical number of aircraft, and was referring to these as "units" (i.e. - not as formations). This is my guess at the intention of the author, and may not be what he meant.

Lets not be confused here: NO form of WITP gives Japan ALL of its ships or planes or military units. RHS tries to do the latter two - and made heroic efforts for ships (creating multiple ship units). Even so - vast numbers of ships are abstrated (local vessels move between Level 3 ports or as ferries - all forms of WITP have ferries at Hong Kong for example). But there is no way for captured tonnage to be captured - for example. Nor is it possible to create additional fighter Sentais - unless it is done by a moder before the game begins. [Nor should you want to - Japan could not feed those Sentais the pilots they would need]

I don't think ANY "additional ships" were put in by stock. CHS added many missing ships. So did RHS. I found only about two fictional ships - one a sister of Akashi - a repair ship.