Japan-USSR border requirements, thoughts on balance

Strategic Command WWII: War in the Pacific is a turn-based strategy game. It offers a comprehensive experience of the Pacific Theater, challenging you to achieve victory in one of history's greatest conflicts.
Post Reply
MoongazerSlitherineSSL
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2024 9:01 am

Japan-USSR border requirements, thoughts on balance

Post by MoongazerSlitherineSSL »

I don't understand why it is a requirement of any unit, not corps or army, like in the case with the Chinese warlords in Xinjiang and Xikang. Right now Japan player can just stuff Manchuria with cheap garrisons and bring the Kwantung Army against China, pushing it into the mountains in a matter of several turns. Capturing Changsha and Luizhou connects the entire Japanese territory from Seoul to Rangoon and Singapore, greatly boosting both Japan's reaction time to any threats, income and defensive naval capabilities due to high supply ports. There is absolutely no reason not to do it from day one and I think it kind of limits opening plays. Historically this also makes little sense, Soviet-Japanese relations were quite sour all way through and such weakness in Manchuria would not have gone unnoticed by Uncle Joe.
Nginear
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2022 5:29 pm
Location: 'MERICA

Re: Japan-USSR border requirements, thoughts on balance

Post by Nginear »

I think it would make more sense too if those hexes had the same requirement as those two hexes in west China that require a corp/army/tank.
User avatar
Platoonist
Posts: 3042
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 4:53 am
Location: Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems

Re: Japan-USSR border requirements, thoughts on balance

Post by Platoonist »

At least they made the Manchukuo, Nanjing and other Japanese minion units ineligible for fulfilling such garrison requirements.
Image
Post Reply

Return to “Strategic Command WWII: War in the Pacific”