Japan/China game balance

[Swenslim]

I think China is balanced, it depends on how allied player will use his forces. For example Loricas is kiking my butt with his 100 000 army groups. In contrast I am kicking Sulusea ass because his units are spreaded and I destroy them 1 by 1.

[loricas]

ORIGINAL: Swenslim

Common, USA will have B-27, P-51, 40 CV's so what a point to whine about China wich has practically no influetion of outcome of war ? My advice ofr allied, entrech at woods. At woods everything works fine for chinise.

hi beloved opponent: yes allied have huge force that came into play later: but if japan have sufficent VP won before. so china is not so ininfluent. also consider the huge numbers of LCU that came in SRA\pacific after china collaps. so maybe no influence on war. but on game...

defending in wood: yes the MRL is in construction: but leaving half of chinese supply in japan hand after 1 month and combined with this the fact that if chinese are in wood also japan is: so no hope of counterattack.

i (and i think most of the player that claim for china situation) accept and agree that japan, can, with time, skill and paying the cost conduct a succesful china campaign.
what we discuss is that now this happen from start, in full winter, with around the starting forces here, with a few more units from manciuria, and at a very limited cost.

PS: in this nothing to cut off from your skill: you are the best opponent i've found in my pbem experience from WITP 1.0 and this is FUN

[Swenslim]

Hi Paolo ! Wish you good day !

I think developers may increase garrison requirments for occupied cities. For example I dont have to garrison many cities with resources-light industry and many requires only 50 garrison, so I have a loto of free units to cunduct offensive operations.

I dont have plans to conqure hole China, I just want to deprive your industry ability to produce enough supplyes for offensive operations and to destroy your inner airfields so your B-27 would not bomb Konshu.

[Canoerebel]

As the Allies in a PBEM vs. Miller (Scenario 2, two day turns), I'm struggling with China right now. We're nearing mid March, 1942. My observations:

1) I am quite concerned about China's fate; if China falls, the Japs can divert a heck of alot of infantry to the Pacific.
2) Chinese units are worthless for attacking.
3) Chinese units in the open are worthless for defense.
4) Chinese air units are pathetic.
5) The supply/industry situation in China is very bad.

The only saving grace is that Chinese troops in good terrain or behind good forts appear to perform decently on defense. So, at this point in my game, my strategy has been to withdraw to a good line, entrench, and prepare to duke it out. But if my opponent manages to pierce my main line at a key point - Changsha, Hengchow, Chengtow, Nanning - then I don't see how I can save China. At that point I think I have two choices - withdraw to Chungking and fight to the death or disperse and fight a guerilla campaign.

In the real war, the Japanese didn't run amock in China after Pearl Harbor, gobbling up vast chunks of territory. The war was far more static in China, if I remember correctly, until the Japanese ended the "false truce" and went on the offensive in late '44 (or was it early '45?).

I think something will have to be done to slow down the Japs in China early if AE is going to remotely resemble real war circumstances and abilities.

[erstad]

Regarding

yapan can also free the 2 air div in manciuria: 13 PP to free all air group here but 3 fighter groups: i don't know if it's intentional or a forgot...

I agree the game engine allows this but hopefully it was clear that in our game we wouldn't do that per the following HR:

Anything that is bought out of Manchuria with PPs. Full PPs need to be paid for each air unit, no using any of the shortcuts/cheats.

If that wasn't clear and it's an issue, PM me and we'll talk.

[erstad]

ORIGINAL: Swenslim


I dont have plans to conqure hole China, I just want to deprive your industry ability to produce enough supplyes for offensive operations and to destroy your inner airfields so your B-27 would not bomb Konshu.

That's exactly why I want to beat up on china. I don't want 10,000 VPs or 10 divisions freed up or whatever, I just don't want chinese airbases anywhere in range of the HI, esp. when B-29s become available. For all the supply problems China has, it's far easier to base a B-29 in China in-game than in real life. Mainly due to the fungible nature of supply.

[loricas]

ORIGINAL: erstad

Regarding

yapan can also free the 2 air div in manciuria: 13 PP to free all air group here but 3 fighter groups: i don't know if it's intentional or a forgot...

I agree the game engine allows this but hopefully it was clear that in our game we wouldn't do that per the following HR:

Anything that is bought out of Manchuria with PPs. Full PPs need to be paid for each air unit, no using any of the shortcuts/cheats.

If that wasn't clear and it's an issue, PM me and we'll talk.

for me it was clear. i pointed this only to reply to Adm Spruance

[witpqs]

The one thing I've heard that most concerns me is the effect of artillery on fortified troops. Lots of big guns on unfortified troops I can understand, but I've seen posts that troops in lvl 3, 4, and 5 forts are slaughtered by artillery bombardments.

Any progress in this area? Have you confirmed the reports?

[loricas]

the game is started: here the summary of HR we choice:

1)only active theatre china
2) no shock attack order
3) no city bomb mission
4) both side must meet garrison requirements at all time. requirement lifted if a enemy LCU in adiacent hexs
5) the air units in formosa can never rebase in china but can make missions in china from formosa for a max of 4 turn (8 day) in december and 11 turn in january
6) AVG part assigned to UK 221 HQ can go in china only with PP
7) the allied can transfer in india Transport aircraft (and air support unit) from all over the map for the air bridge
8) 3 HB squadrons in cagayan, clark can also be used in this game in china/india via PP
9) japan can use 2/3 of PP and china 1/3 keeping the others stored
10) japan can use everything in china at set-up plus the 2 para units (and air transports) starting in Formosa. plus the 2 rgt starting near hanoi. the 38 div can be used against HK then shipped out. 21 div in shangai must also leave. with fully PP payment can bring in, from Manciuria, LCU and air units. for ship (excluded supply convoy) must be discusses of common agreement (exception invasion of costal city transport\escort)
11) the allied is active in china, and limited to ENG and Air in India\Burma. can also make supply convoy to india-burma(exception hr 7)
12) as a overall rule before making a choice both player must ask himself: if i'm playing GC i do this: and made only if answer is yes
13) from 7 dic turn included both player must stop all operation in the rest of the map: but maybe same base islands must be supplied to prevent attrition losses

[sven6345789]

i guess China is getting hit hard in most pbem games because no one has found a viable tactic for the chinese yet.

lets take a look at history.
Japan did not undertake an all-out effort in China in 1942. There were some battles (Changsa, for example), which the japanese lost, because they were not undertaking an all-out effort. There was no need for that. They already had the most valuable areas. The japanese were hoping for a collapse of the GMT Government, thereby winning the war without to much cost to the troops and supplies. They only made sure that Chiang would not get any supplies from Burma or from ports.
Chiang, on the other hand, knew he could not beat the japanese on a one on one basis. He didn't even control all his troops (only if the warlords wanted him to). Chiang planned for the time after the (in his opinion inevitable) victory of the allies. The communists were his main enemy. After the defeat of Japan, the civil war would start anew, and Chiang needed his army for that.
So, since both sides went better without a full scale war, there was none. You could actually call it a truce in some areas.
When the americans decided to make china an active theater (B-29), the japanese had to react, resulting in their 1944 offensive which utterly destroyed the GMT army. It never recovered from Ichi-Go.

now in the game, many japanese players make china an active theater from the start. For the Chinese, you can either slug it out or spread out and make a nuisance of yourself in the japanese rear. He cannot garrison every rail line in force. Just make him pay for trying to enter Chungking or Szechuan province. if he attacks in Loyang, you infiltrate from the south, he cannot defend everything.
AND, the most important thing. The war is NOT won or lost in China. Even if China caves in, The US carriers will still come, and the supply the japanese has burned to archieve kicking china out of the war might be missing later on.

[castor troy]

you can´t win the war if you take out China, but if China is knocked out you should not forget how many inf divisions the Japanese have available to garisson the continent, which means that an offensive out of India will meet a stiff resistance.

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: castor troy
you can´t win the war if you take out China, but if China is knocked out you should not forget how many inf divisions the Japanese have available to garisson the continent, which means that an offensive out of India will meet a stiff resistance.

If China goes India is next, theres no way they will be able to hold off 20 extra divisions. Or even 10. Sea supremacy or the lack thereof may be an issue, though, I assume you would have to ship supply from Singapore to the Indian subcontinent presumably. Sea supremacy or the lack thereof mostly comes down to 'When'.

Even the US doesn't get many LCUs - plenty of CVs and bombers, but there's only a finite number of marines. LCUs are an Allied achilles heel in general I think.

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

As the Allies in a PBEM vs. Miller (Scenario 2, two day turns), I'm struggling with China right now. We're nearing mid March, 1942. My observations:

1) I am quite concerned about China's fate; if China falls, the Japs can divert a heck of alot of infantry to the Pacific.
2) Chinese units are worthless for attacking.
3) Chinese units in the open are worthless for defense.
4) Chinese air units are pathetic.
5) The supply/industry situation in China is very bad.

The only saving grace is that Chinese troops in good terrain or behind good forts appear to perform decently on defense. So, at this point in my game, my strategy has been to withdraw to a good line, entrench, and prepare to duke it out. But if my opponent manages to pierce my main line at a key point - Changsha, Hengchow, Chengtow, Nanning - then I don't see how I can save China. At that point I think I have two choices - withdraw to Chungking and fight to the death or disperse and fight a guerilla campaign.

In the real war, the Japanese didn't run amock in China after Pearl Harbor, gobbling up vast chunks of territory. The war was far more static in China, if I remember correctly, until the Japanese ended the "false truce" and went on the offensive in late '44 (or was it early '45?).

I think something will have to be done to slow down the Japs in China early if AE is going to remotely resemble real war circumstances and abilities.

This is actually quite historical - China had to use defensive lines heavily influenced by terrain or they got kicked hard. Japan showed in 44 that they could kick China when ever they chose when they wanted to launch a general offensive. Most players choose to Launch Ichi Go at the start as there is no reason historically why Japan could not .

The three things which may be modeled incorrect
- Artillery losses esp under low supply situations common in China
- The ability of Chinese Commanders to encircle Japanese 2-3 division attacks. ( the land Battle star problem though we may learn to to deal with it better. Maybe the surrounded penalty is too low , is it troops/artillery performance under low supply conditions again. )
- The difficulty with supply as you get further inland you need more and more transport resources.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: bklooste

This is actually quite historical - China had to use defensive lines heavily influenced by terrain or they got kicked hard. Japan showed in 44 that they could kick China when ever they chose when they wanted to launch a general offensive. Most players choose to Launch Ichi Go at the start as there is no reason historically why Japan could not .

Actually, there is. The Japanese were much stronger in China in 1944 than in 1941 (when they had just pulled assets out to support the SRA offensive.) Their supply situation was much better (China being one of the few areas they still COULD supply in 1944.) But the best arguement of all is that if the Japanese were capable of wiping out the Chinese in 1941 (or at any other time), WHY DIDN'T THEY DO IT?

Certainly the Pacific War would have been much easier for them without the running sore of China. And they hadn't made any real effort there since 1940. If it was so "easy", why didn't they use the 18 month lull before PH to finish the job? Were they just stupid? Or did they realize that China was just too big, and had too many people, to be conquerable by traditional military means. Even in 1944, they didn't try to hold any of the territory seized in "Ichi Go". Instead they had to fall back immediately to re-garrison the positions they had stripped to make the advance.

What's really wrong with China in the game is that Japanese garrison requirements are too low. They ought to be increased to "soak up" the excess offensive capacity of the Jap player.

[vaned74]

I agree Japanese garrison requirements in China are too low.

A quick comment - one of the reasons Japan went for the SRA in 1941 as opposed to "knocking China" out of the war was that it needed oil.  More pressure in China resulted in more response from the US in freezing assets and embargoing strategic materials.  They couldn't knock China out without endangering their supplies of critical petroleum and other strategic materials that could never be sourced in China (even if fully occupied).  Thus, they had to go for the SRA before contemplating anything else.

That said, the ability for Japan to do both China and the SRA in AE seems too strong.  Higher garrison requirements for Japan in China as well as China in China would be good (with failure to meet garrison requirements resulting in loss of supplies, fuel, and perhaps increased supply line cost to trace supply through the poorly garrisoned hex).

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: erstad

<...>

House rules:
<...>
No shock attacks
<...>

Regarding the "no shock attacks" idea. This one was hotly debated back in WITP days by no other than Moses and Halsey, both experienced players (I'd say top ten ranking for both). In this case, my inclination is to actually agree with Moses point which was that shock attacks were a pro-Chinese attribute. And I will go further and say that I think this is true ini AE as well. Winning a shock attack in the open is strickly a matter of AV, which the Chinese have plenty of. So strangely the Chinese will be better off in the open where they can shock attack and exploit there larger numbers of AV. Also, AE is different from WITP in one regard in that VP are reduced for Chinese land losses relative to stock.

[findmeifyoucan]

Personally, I just like making a nuisance of myself as an American player in China. LOL
Good points you have especially with the fact that Japan cannot attack everywhere!!

Tony

[loricas]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: erstad

<...>

House rules:
<...>
No shock attacks
<...>

Regarding the "no shock attacks" idea. This one was hotly debated back in WITP days by no other than Moses and Halsey, both experienced players (I'd say top ten ranking for both). In this case, my inclination is to actually agree with Moses point which was that shock attacks were a pro-Chinese attribute. And I will go further and say that I think this is true ini AE as well. Winning a shock attack in the open is strickly a matter of AV, which the Chinese have plenty of. So strangely the Chinese will be better off in the open where they can shock attack and exploit there larger numbers of AV. Also, AE is different from WITP in one regard in that VP are reduced for Chinese land losses relative to stock.

thank for suggestion. in my Pbem (no shock) i also noted than china on off work better in open, but that without HR to limit Japan Air superiority in china, is a risky choice as they can force the chinese to use combat move while moving in move mode. and defend in clear is not a good idea
but when we start our test we have to due a choice beetween shock or not shock. We have coiche no shock. now we have started the game so i think we must go with no shock to the end. as soon as we finish maybe we can do another with shock.(or other players can start a test using our HR and shock).
soon the "military observer" start to work at AAR in order to keep comunity informed.
for now i think that the 40000 chinese supply depot at chuhsien (88,56) must be relocated or a combat unit must be put here: now a paradroop in the first turn deprive china of 40000 supply, with very little cost for japan (i've demostrative save if needed). and also that as the land sistem work now, it was better to have manciuria garrisons number based on the unmodified PP cost to free a unit in place of AV: so free a art have a impact