Japan infantry squad organization

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by Brady »

ORIGINAL: Shark7



According the orbat's I have seen, the IJA Para Regiments (actually battalion size) had 650 men, broken down into 3 Para Inf companies a 1 para engineer company equipped with a number of flamethrowers. I am referring to the 1st and 2nd Dash Forward (the 1st and 2nd Para Rgts in game).

Also of note, 1st and 3rd Yokosuka SNLF were para units. Apparently the 2nd Yokosuka SNLF was trained as a para unit, but was never utilized as such, rather being used in a traditional amphibious landing before becoming a permenant base defense force in the DEI.

The SNLF units were initially Rikusentai - literally sailors that were detached from the crew of a ship. This had the obvious implication of downgrading ship performance, so the IJN eventually started training units to be part of/detached from the base forces rather than the crews of warships. Hence the SNLF units drew their names from the bases where they were trained... IE Yokosuka, Maizuru, Sasebo, and Kure.

I'm sure most of you knew some or most of this, but I found it interesting.

I was aware of it, but I had forgoten till just recently that all the troops on Tarawa were SNLF troops.


Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
Schanilec
Posts: 4038
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:30 pm
Location: Grand Forks, ND

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by Schanilec »

Were they? I thought the 5th Naval Base Force was also present. I could be mistaken.
This is one Czech that doesn't bounce.
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by Brady »

ORIGINAL: Schanilec

Were they? I thought the 5th Naval Base Force was also present. I could be mistaken.


For soem reasion I thought their were some IJA troops their was my point, but they were all IJN aparently.
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
Schanilec
Posts: 4038
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:30 pm
Location: Grand Forks, ND

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by Schanilec »

Gottcha.
This is one Czech that doesn't bounce.
User avatar
inqistor
Posts: 1813
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 1:19 pm

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by inqistor »

ORIGINAL: Brady

Yes the SNLF and the IJA air droped the Type 89 and the IJA obviously droped larger mortars as well.

Are you sure? That would mean, that Para squad also have "knee mortar". Anyway, there was special, lighter 81mm mortar used by Paras.
SNLF rifle gernads I belave was from wars start on, the IJA also had them from early on, it was the AT rifle gernad that was introduced in 42, they had HE for a whaile.

But was it standard equipment from the start? I only have found, that "island squad" had one Rifle Grenade Launcher per squad.
Type 97- Thier is a new source that has reveiled that aprox. 1200 Type 97 AT rifles were made, so many more than previously thought to have existed.

Now, that would be enough to arm all Pacific Islands. Which of this signs reads 1200? [;)]
I was aware of it, but I had forgoten till just recently that all the troops on Tarawa were SNLF troops.

What I have found, that if there is "tale" about "tough" defence, it have always its foundations in unit equipment, no morale, training, or luck bullshit. For example SS Panzer Division had 6 infantry battalions, while Wehrmacht Panzer Division only 4, so OBVIOUSLY SS would be stronger.

"Naval units of this type are usually more highly trained, read the 6th Marine Division's intelligence report before the landing on Tarawa in August 1943, and have a greater tenacity and fighting spirit than the average Japanese Army unit."

Tarawa veterans found the reports highly accurate. "They were pretty tough, and they were big, six-foot, the biggest Japs that I ever saw," recalled Maj. Lawrence C. Hays. Their equipment was excellent and there was plenty of surplus found, including large amounts of ammo."


Now, what does it mean "excellent equipment"? Better Rifles? Does he talk about heavy guns? I doubt it.
ORIGINAL: Shark7

According the orbat's I have seen, the IJA Para Regiments (actually battalion size) had 650 men, broken down into 3 Para Inf companies a 1 para engineer company equipped with a number of flamethrowers. I am referring to the 1st and 2nd Dash Forward (the 1st and 2nd Para Rgts in game).

I am actually wondering, if Navy used any AT Rifles. If not, that could indicate, that only IJA Paras could be equipped with this weapon.
Also of note, 1st and 3rd Yokosuka SNLF were para units. Apparently the 2nd Yokosuka SNLF was trained as a para unit, but was never utilized as such, rather being used in a traditional amphibious landing before becoming a permenant base defense force in the DEI.

Yup, and 3rd Yokosuka was dropped exclusively to cut off retreat, so why quite many players insist to ban it in house-rules? I am wondering if 2nd Yokosuka should consist of Para squads, or if it should be available to air-drop. They were trained in it.
1st and 3rd were later merged.
And later there appear Raiding Regiments.
That would suggest, that there was at least 2 reorganizations, so there should be, at least, 2 upgrades for Para Squads.
The SNLF units were initially Rikusentai - literally sailors that were detached from the crew of a ship. This had the obvious implication of downgrading ship performance, so the IJN eventually started training units to be part of/detached from the base forces rather than the crews of warships. Hence the SNLF units drew their names from the bases where they were trained... IE Yokosuka, Maizuru, Sasebo, and Kure.

Yeah. No reason to equip them exactly like IJA infantry. They were even considered to have other missions, than normal infantry.

I am just reading Australian documents, and in fact, Boys AT Rifles are mentioned few times during Malaya Campaign. But they probably were not available in Ambon, as unit there do not had even full complement of LMGs. SO in fact, 15 Hard Attack for Commonwealth includes AT Rifles.
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by herwin »

The morale thing is real--it shows up in unit cohesion and recovery from suppression. Think of it as reflecting the density of the network of close relationships between soldiers in the unit. Teamwork collapses when a team takes enough damage, but in high morale units, the collapse is more gradual, since there are more close relationships.

The Japanese Bushido ethic was something else--it reflected the unwillingness of soldiers to surrender to fear rather than the tightness of the network of relationships. That meant casualties were permanent rather than temporarily due to suppression. Poor quality Japanese units took unnecessary and excessive casualties.
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
User avatar
inqistor
Posts: 1813
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 1:19 pm

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by inqistor »

ORIGINAL: herwin

The morale thing is real--it shows up in unit cohesion and recovery from suppression. Think of it as reflecting the density of the network of close relationships between soldiers in the unit. Teamwork collapses when a team takes enough damage, but in high morale units, the collapse is more gradual, since there are more close relationships.

I am not sure we can put both things under the same parameter. Germans for sure put great emphasis on "comradeship", but US mostly neglected it, especially considering their replacement procedures. With low morale unit just abandon position, even before encountering the enemy.
The Japanese Bushido ethic was something else--it reflected the unwillingness of soldiers to surrender to fear rather than the tightness of the network of relationships. That meant casualties were permanent rather than temporarily due to suppression. Poor quality Japanese units took unnecessary and excessive casualties.

Oh yeah, another problem would be "stand and die". In that case defenders will be harder to dislocate, but overall unit strength will quickly evaporate, so it can not produce result of "rugged defence" because defenders just expand their strength too quickly. Again, that points on different equipment, or tactics.
mike scholl 1
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by mike scholl 1 »

ORIGINAL: herwin

The Japanese Bushido ethic was something else--it reflected the unwillingness of soldiers to surrender to fear rather than the tightness of the network of relationships. That meant casualties were permanent rather than temporarily due to suppression. Poor quality Japanese units took unnecessary and excessive casualties.

Actually it seems to have worked in the opposite manner. Japanese soldiers, having accepted the fact that they were going to die, often wound up hurrying the inevitable just to "get it over with". Suicidal "Banzaii" charges, and just group suicide in general. Situation getting lousy? Kill yourself!
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by Brady »

Yes Taki's para book clearly ilustrates the Type 89 GD being used by the para's.

Rifle gernade, acording to the referance they were isued before the war, so were in service, it is the AT rifle gernade that was introduced in late summer of 42.

Type 97, yes 1200 not 400 as previously thought, and yes many many more units could of been equiped with it, I have sean film fottage of IJA paratrooers training with it, and it is listed in their TOE's.

Generaly the IJA nd the IJN infentry squads should see higher AT values from wars start and they should increase over the course of the war, their value of 5 equates to 5 cm the game equilvent of a hand gernade, and the Type 99 AT mine (not realy a mine but an infentry anti tank device) was widely used buy both the IJA and the IJN at the squad leval, and capable of defeating 20 cm of armor, but often they were imployed in pairs to better efect- 30 cm.


One thing absent from SNLF units are Combate enginears, they did field Flamethrowers on many ocashions(Wake for example), and the SNLF paras did use them as well.
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by herwin »

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: herwin

The Japanese Bushido ethic was something else--it reflected the unwillingness of soldiers to surrender to fear rather than the tightness of the network of relationships. That meant casualties were permanent rather than temporarily due to suppression. Poor quality Japanese units took unnecessary and excessive casualties.

Actually it seems to have worked in the opposite manner. Japanese soldiers, having accepted the fact that they were going to die, often wound up hurrying the inevitable just to "get it over with". Suicidal "Banzaii" charges, and just group suicide in general. Situation getting lousy? Kill yourself!

It's clear that most suicide is a response to overwhelming pain. It's a way out.
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by JWE »

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1
ORIGINAL: herwin

The Japanese Bushido ethic was something else--it reflected the unwillingness of soldiers to surrender to fear rather than the tightness of the network of relationships. That meant casualties were permanent rather than temporarily due to suppression. Poor quality Japanese units took unnecessary and excessive casualties.
Actually it seems to have worked in the opposite manner. Japanese soldiers, having accepted the fact that they were going to die, often wound up hurrying the inevitable just to "get it over with". Suicidal "Banzaii" charges, and just group suicide in general. Situation getting lousy? Kill yourself!
I tend to agree in broad, but there’s a lot more paint on that particular palette. The Bushido thing was institutionalized, yes, in the ‘20s, but as an affirmative explanation and morale underpinning of pre-existing tactical proclivities. Yoshikawa Eiji did not write his master works in a vacuum. They came about as a result of the horror of the Russo-Japanese conflict.

Japanese tactical norms were identified in the Satsuma conflict and matured at Port Arthur. All that remained was to give special meaning to the scope of the incredible sacrifice made in that conflict. Just kinda fyi, there’s an exquisite Japanese film, Sakinomori no Uta, that deals with Hill 203. Done in 1980, it expresses some elements of late 20th century attitudes, but I find it factually flawless.

I think it is fair to say that Japanese infantry was the most highly trained and highly motivated infantry in the world. But this is, in itself, both laudatory and unfortunate. Highly trained and highly motivated to do what? The historical imperatives (and their tactical norms) prepared them to expend blood to achieve an objective; and to expend blood far beyond (Western) conventionally acceptable levels to achieve the desirable result.

Given all this, it isn’t hard to understand why they ignored Yamashita and his recommendations and why they gave such a low priority to weapon system development. It’s also not hard to understand why and how they were shredded by opponents that put the value of “lead” over the value of “spirit”. I really must say, here, that those opponents also had “spirit” up the wazoo; maybe not burning so brightly, but sufficient to keep them at the triggers of the guns.

A lot of these attitudes and conclusions were developed over many years hanging with Alvin Coox. Now deceased, he’s nevertheless the ultimate authority for me. His Japanese was flawless, his logic was frikkin Socratic, and his love of the genre (the IJA) is unconditional.

[ed] he made me understand, a long time ago, that the basis of my assumptions were flawed. I came from a typical Western military background, so the elements of tactics were A, B, C, and the brilliant commander would do D, E and F, and perhaps ignore B. Alvin said that japanese elementary tactics were 1, 2, 3, and had nothing to do with our conventional A, B, C, thought. Took a while to sink in, but soon realized the playing field was much larger than I previously thought.
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by herwin »

Fitting Japanese performance into Western models is hard. If you've ever looked at the OCS Burma game, you can recognise that. The performance of an average Japanese division in a set-piece battle was similar to that of a Commonwealth division or a '44 German division, but that wasn't their forte. They were extremely adept at infiltration tactics, and they never gave up. On the other hand, a low-quality Japanese unit was a low-quality unit, just expressed in the Japanese way.
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
xlegendre
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 5:51 am

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by xlegendre »

Have a look at this web site : very well informed about IJA & IJN organisation, at all level (divisional, regimental, battalion, companies, squad...)

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/Japan/I ... B-3.html#I
User avatar
inqistor
Posts: 1813
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 1:19 pm

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by inqistor »

ORIGINAL: Brady
Yes Taki's para book clearly ilustrates the Type 89 GD being used by the para's.

I see them in 1944 manual TOE, but there are none mentioned in Raiding Regiment TOE, you cited earlier:

The raiding regement had 816 men, armed with 455x 7.7mm Type 2 rifles, 769 x 8mm Type 94 pistoles, 27 x 7.7mm Type 99 LMG's 6x 7.7mm Type 92 HMGs, 4 x 7cm infentry guns 4 x 3.7cm Type 94 AT guns or 4 8cm Type 97 trench mortars.

Yet, I do not think they resigned from them later. Another inconsistency with text, and actual numbers [:)]
Type 97, yes 1200 not 400 as previously thought, and yes many many more units could of been equiped with it, I have sean film fottage of IJA paratrooers training with it, and it is listed in their TOE's.

I have seen this movie. Undoubtedly it IS 20mm AT Rifle, and it was transported by only 2 soldiers, not 4 (and they actually run with it). Now the question is:
Does IJN Paras also used them?
Generaly the IJA nd the IJN infentry squads should see higher AT values from wars start and they should increase over the course of the war, their value of 5 equates to 5 cm the game equilvent of a hand gernade, and the Type 99 AT mine (not realy a mine but an infentry anti tank device) was widely used buy both the IJA and the IJN at the squad leval, and capable of defeating 20 cm of armor, but often they were imployed in pairs to better efect- 30 cm.

I would say that Hard/Soft Attack is used before combat, so it represents range weapons. All mines/contact weapons should be included in AV, so if SNLF did not used AT Rifles, they should stay at 5 HA, at the war beginning.
One thing absent from SNLF units are Combate enginears, they did field Flamethrowers on many ocashions(Wake for example), and the SNLF paras did use them as well.

Flamethrower is not THAT complicated weapon, so it could be issued into infantry. Now, if it was common, that would in fact increase Hard Attack.
ORIGINAL: JWE
The Bushido thing was institutionalized, yes, in the ‘20s, but as an affirmative explanation and morale underpinning of pre-existing tactical proclivities.

We must remember, that Japan was an old nation, with BUSHIDO implemented earlier directly into SAMURAI code.

The first Meiji era census at the end of the 19th century counted 1,282,000 members of the "high samurai", allowed to ride a horse, and 492,000 members of the "low samurai", allowed to wear two swords but not to ride a horse, in a country of about 25 million.

Considering that HALF of old family Samurais were in appropriate age for serving in armed forces, that would leave only 1 million of them. And you have IJA army, IJN ships/forces, and air forces to fill.

Yes, there were reforms, but I do not think there was some kind of direct indoctrination into soldiers, especially not in that short period. Either you were from Samurai family, or you will still be this poor Ashigaru whos only job is to follow orders, and die for your Daimyo. I would say conscript Japan soldier, was still simple conscript.

ORIGINAL: leister2

Have a look at this web site : very well informed about IJA & IJN organisation, at all level (divisional, regimental, battalion, companies, squad...)

That is my main source. There is clear, that SNLF squad have 2 LMGs there. But here you have same manual, but with clearer chapters, and with all pictures.
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by Brady »

Type 89- SNLF paras used them that I am shure of, as for the IJA Para's I am not 100% certain, nead to look a bit more.

Type 97 20 mm AT rifle, I have not sean any evidance to sugest the SNLF paras used it.

AT weapons (hard atack), the rating represent the squads abality to defeat armor, so the Type 97 not being in the TOE in game despite its theoriticle presence in a unit or to be at hand, coupled with the presence of the Anti Tank weapon the Type 99 Anti Tank charge, would imbue the Japanese (IJA and SNLF) with a squad leval capabality to defeat 2 cm of armor or up to 3 cm of armor right from the wars start. (equilvent to at leat a 15 hard atack, arguably a 20)
Then in 42 (late) you see the IJA and the SNLF get AT rifle gernades in small numbers this only marginaly increases their abaitys to atack enemy armor, but does increase the tools they have on hand.
In 1943 we see the Type 3 arive then the Lunge mine in 1944 these have much better penatrtion values so in 43/44 we should see squad Hard values go up.

Presently in game the early war US squads have a 15 hard atack this because of the presence of the AT rilfe gernade.

In game Flame throwers are moslty asigned to the IJA Enginear type squads, the SNLF at present does not as far as I can tell have such a squad type.
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by JWE »

Close, but no cigar; but perhaps a festive cigarillo.

The game engine is set up to handle things in terms of phases: fire phase, assault phase. That’s the way it works and no amount of but .. but .. but .. can change it. It is what it is, so one must either deal with it or go elsewhere. That’s exactly the choice the developers had. So …

AT grenades, AT mines, flamethrowers, bangalores, C-4 blocks, yadda yadda, are NOT modeled in the hard/soft firepower of squad capability. The breakpoint in the model is 30 meters, and everything below that is incorporated into the AV/fort reduction characteristics of the units. Mainly because everybody in the whole world had the same stuff and could do the same things and even though the Allies had vastly more of it than Japan (especially as the war went on) their proportional increase is only 5% (some extra USMC assault squads). So if you want to forget the game engine imperatives and get specific and historical …

The basic anti-armor values came from Gary Grigsby’s original numbers. Given Gary’s combat algorithm, they were quite sufficient, but given the adaptive changes we made in AE, there was a push to give devices a “historical” basis, in order to satisfy the OOB perfectionists. Great in the one sense, but it fell short in the other. We spent so much time on the individual AT “devices”, that we didn’t consider their effects on the sidebar units.

Any unit, that has an anti-armor value is an AT unit for engine purposes. This works well for AT Devices with high “Val” but low “Num”, but any anti-armor value for a squad causes that squad to be an AT “device” within the game model. So, 108 squads = 108 AT devices.

Some math is required to express a squad’s AT capability as a function of a specific AT unit’s AT capability.

If you wish, I can provide a very grainy set of anti-armor statistics, calculated in accord with the game model parameters.
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by Brady »

In a nut shell then why does the US at games start squad get a 15 and the Japanese get a 5, I was told, perhaps incorectly, that the former was do to the presence of AT Rifle gernades and the later do to the presence of just gernades, the other Japanese devices excaping consideration as an oversight (Japanese AT rifle gernades, Type 99 Anti Tank device, exc..), not a planed move, or so again I was told.
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by herwin »

ORIGINAL: Brady

In a nut shell then why does the US at games start squad get a 15 and the Japanese get a 5, I was told, perhaps incorectly, that the former was do to the presence of AT Rifle gernades and the later do to the presence of just gernades, the other Japanese devices excaping consideration as an oversight (Japanese AT rifle gernades, Type 99 Anti Tank device, exc..), not a planed move, or so again I was told.

I'm curious about this, too. Is it to model relative target acquisition capability? In CityFight, infantry was modelled as mostly target acquisition assets and AT guns/missiles as mostly target engagement assets. The more complex and three-dimensional the terrain, the more places for targets to appear, and the more target acquisition assets you needed to complement the kill systems if you wanted to engage targets as quickly as they appeared. And you needed communications to tie it all together. A tank platoon had only 10-15 pairs of eyes, while a tank platoon married to an infantry platoon had 50 or so.
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
User avatar
ilovestrategy
Posts: 3614
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 8:41 pm
Location: San Diego
Contact:

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by ilovestrategy »

What does BAR stand for? I'm guessing Browning Automatic Rifle?
After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!
Image
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Japan infantry squad organization

Post by Brady »

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

What does BAR stand for? I'm guessing Browning Automatic Rifle?


BAR- Because its an American Rifle, thats why it has a higher Soft atack value.
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”