Japanese grand strategy

[WiTP_Dude]

According to Orbat a Chinese division is less than 25% the strength of a Japanese division. Therefore it appears that the current Chinese Corps are already composed of about 4 divisions apiece. It's just that they lack supply to flush out their TOE in most cases. Doubling the strength of Chinese Corps would make them much stronger than Japanese divisions if they even get a half way decent amount of supply. This doesn't make sense if a Chinse Corps is 24,000 compared to a Japanese Division of 25,000 with better weapons.

[Rossj]

To clarify my original post...I believe most players who play a game of this level of complexity want it to be as historically accurate as possible. So, OOB changes for the russians and chinese make sense and would be an improvement. Preferably as a patch.

But my original post goes further... a few changes in game mechanis are required to force the japanese to garrison conquered areas and not play board edge tactics.

Here's another idea on how to force the japanese player to meet garrison requirements (for china and elsewhere)...give the allied player permanent victory points for the AV deficit between garrison requirement and garrison size...and/or reduce japanese manpower and armaments pool at an appropriate ratio...

I think the west map edge should be off limits to japanese units to allow for allied unit staging if the japanese conquer india or the soviet far east.

BTW when I played scenario 15 ver 1.4, I still conqured china, while maintaining garrison requirements, conquered india and left a large force there not knowing the brits wouldn't appear on the map edge and deployed 30+ divisions (17 kwangtung and 13 Ch exp.)to take on the soviets in spring 43. I suspect even with an oob upgrade, I'd beat the soviets.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, I agree Japanese can still defeat Soviets. That is ok. But now it takes a lot more effort.
Before Japan faced 3x70AV Tank Bde
The correct OOB is 3x500AV Tank Div and 2x500 AV Mech Div
Also there is going to be 2x the Arty and 3x the engineers (combat I'm not counting the added construction engineers)
plus a airborne Bde (with transports)
A motorcycle Rgt (whoopie)

And the major units will be deployed inside supply cities with the fortified Divisions covering the frontier. (level 9 forts) currently the fortified Div are CD units with 108 inf sqds they should have 240 infantry sqds. The units are also missing items from TOE.


2xCL
22xDD
84xSubmarines
150xPC/PG
68xMSW
transports

MOGAMI.....The biggest single problem with the Soviet Front is that the Russians are
"nailed to the ground" until the Japanese attack. The quickest and best "fix" would be
to "un-nail" them and allow the Allied Player freedom of movement within Russia for
Russian troops. That would prevent the Japanese from being able to come up with
"perfect schemes" for taking advantage of flaws in the Russian Deployment that the
Allied player can do nothing about right now.

[mogami]

ORIGINAL: WiTP_Dude

According to Orbat a Chinese division is less than 25% the strength of a Japanese division. Therefore it appears that the current Chinese Corps are already composed of about 4 divisions apiece. It's just that they lack supply to flush out their TOE in most cases. Doubling the strength of Chinese Corps would make them much stronger than Japanese divisions if they even get a half way decent amount of supply. This doesn't make sense if a Chinse Corps is 24,000 compared to a Japanese Division of 25,000 with better weapons.

Hi, I don't follow the math. If a Japanese Div is 25,000 men then a Chinese Div would be 6.250. A 4 Div Chinese Corps would be 25000. Chinese Corps using this math should be the same size as Japanese Div but they are only 1/2 the size usiing 1.40 Your math shows the Chinese to be 50 percent of actual.

My way to decide how strong Chinese Corps was to divide 3.8 million by 316. It produced each CHinese unit being 12,000 men. Now I know every Chinese Div did not contain 12,000 men.

If I had accurate data I am sure some Chinese "Corps" contained 2 Divisions of 3k each and another contained 8 Div of 20k each

Prehaps it would actually be better if I just said the Chinese have 316x12k Div and then made Corps HQ.

Rather then deploying the Chinese in lumps in cities at start. (with a few wiild atacks)
I think I am going to deploy the Chinese as a "Front"

Now here is another problem.
The Chinese had 3.8 million troops but if every Chinese div had been 100 percent they would have had 6.2 million troops (Chinese div should have around 20k each)

So rather then have Chinese Corps at 25 percent or 100 percent depending on actual size I am making them all 75 percent of TOE

[WiTP_Dude]

First not all divisions are equal. Second the Orbat site just says that Chinese divisions are "around 6,000" while Japanese divisions are "more than 25,000". The Japanese size I can look into more if you want though I suspect some around here probably have those numbers already.

No, a Chinese Corps with all its equipment present (not disrupted) and 100% supply is not half the strength of a Japanese division. It is close to 70% - 80% the strength. Plus the Japanese have better weapons. So I'm fairly certain that these Chinese Corps already consist of four Chinese "divisions".

Finally I think the 3.7 million chinese troops isn't accurate.

[mogami]

Hi, I think the 3.8million is exactly accurate. It is from Chinese sources. It is from this that the actual war results were produced.
Try to have 300,000 Chinese attacking at Changsha on Dec 24 1941. The Chinese did it for real. The only way to do it, for it to be possible is if current Chinese units are 50 percent of actual.

I think I was plain enough. I know not all Chinese units were at 100 percent.
Since I don't know which were 100 and which were 50 I made them all 75.

Chinese equipment was a wide selection. at least 40 Div were equiped and trained by the Germans. Many were equiped and trained by the Soviets. Many were equiped with US equipment (I'm refering to pre 1941)
If I could I would have a actual TOE for every unit.

The point remains and will remain it appears no matter what that.

The Japanese could not and did not mount offensive operations in China.
The Pacific War grew out of this reality.

No one has to play a scenario they don't agree with.

I want my scenario to reflect reality. As Japan I am not out to build a world Empire
To win in China in the real world of 1941 to 1946 the Japanese would have to win the Pacific War. If they lose the Pacific War they lose China. If they win the Pacific War they win China.

[WiTP_Dude]

It is ok I guess. I am working on a China only scenario but it probably won't be done until 2010 or so. The editor isn't fun to play with and the research will take some time.

[mogami]

Hi, I'll share what ever I find. I posted a OOB for Corps and Army and unattached Div But it does not give unit sizes or TOE. I even know all the Corps commanders names.

[WiTP_Dude]

Here is something to discuss: the Chinese only had 1,300 artillery pieces and 83,000 machine guns in 1943. Also, about divisions in combat:

1941: 90 KMT, 145 Others, 235 Total

[Zorfwaddle]

Hi Mogami,

A Legkotankovaya brigada is a light tank brigade (legkij=light), and "preobrazovana" is a participle meaning "transformed." Let me know if there is any other russian you might need translated. I even have 12 students who need to do translation work for the military block of the Russian course they are taking

George (Russian Military Language Instructor)

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez
Actually, allowing the Allied player to decide where to place Russian troops at the start of a scenario might be a good idea. Also allowing the Russian to move 1-2 units each turn would allow him to respond in a limited way to any perceived buildup near Russian territory by the Japanese. Russian would never be allowed to cross the border until after war declared.
Chez

You've hit on the most important point. If the Russians are pinned in place in any way,
then the Japanese player has the opportunity to analize that "fixed" deployment for
ways to take advantage. In reality, the Russians were as free to move around on their
side of the border as the Japanese on the other side. If the Allied player is free to
deploy and move the Russians (within Russia) and leaves himself open to a Japanese
"master-stroke", then his failure is his own responsibility. But if the game forces
stupidity on him (as it does now), then the Allied player has a perfect right to feel
"cheated". Let the players make the decisions, not a given set-up he has no control
over.

[mogami]

Hi, One major change in deployent I've already doen was to place the 2 Soviets div that were located there back on top of the Soviet oil center on the Island they share with Japan that before Japan only had to waltz up to capture or land a single SNLF ontop of.
Now there are 500AV there. Also while the border is manned by light units the Japanese can push back with ease behind this weak front is a stack of Soviets over 1k Av next to a city with another 1k AV worth of Soviets next to a city with another 1k AV worth of Soviets. before the border and both cioties could be taken in a single turn using a frontal attack and amph landing on the empty cities cutting off a large number of Soviets. Now the Amph attack fails and the frontal attack runs right into a mass of Soviets. Because the cities fell so fast Soviet airpower was not a factor. Now it is.
The first turn the Japanese Attack they have to hope they damage the 84 Soviet subs in port. Because they will be at sea the following turn. (what if bad weather stops the port attack?)
There are no Soviet cities unmanned and the airfields all have units on them to prevent 1 turn captures via paratroops.
We will have to have a test where the japanese attack to see impact of the changes but i don't think the japanese can attack the Soviets now without a massive influx of troops from outside manchuria and a much longer commitment in time.

The border is not held in strength but the japanese need to reduce the forts or achive 11 to 1 odds to take the hex. (250AV dug in level 9)

[Bradley7735]

Hi Mogami,

This is just with your mod, right? If this is tested, will the OOB changes be added to the official scenarios?

Thanks!

[mogami]

Hi, I don't know. But the most popular scenarios right now are not offical.
Players should edit the files to meet what they consider important. If you don't agree with the designer who after all is using his opinion in many cases then edit them.

[Bradley7735]

Are you planning on providing Don/Andrew/Lemurs/Ron/others your information regarding the Soviet and Chinese OOB's? I think those guys are pulling a lot of good information from a lot of smart people. I think your data would be good in their mod. (the big mod that has a dozen threads in the Scenario forum)

I like your ideas of having at least 1 unit in every base and having supply spread out more. Plus, all the hard work you've done on the soviet OOB might be desired by those guys.

bc

[mogami]

Hi, I already told them they could have it....for......$1,000,000[X(]
or was it a beer?

[Feinder]

Interesting thread.

I don't know the exact OBs, but obviously y'all are well researched. So no comment there.

The comment about a "Chinese Army" being roughly eqivilant to a "Japanese Div", I've also seen that elsewhere. I believe I was reading related info at a site dedicated to the Chindits, and it was referencing comments by Stillwell and the British commander (I think it was Alexander). I'm not sure if the comment was talking about the number of troops in the army, or the qwhat percentage of troops could be actually brought into action at one time.

I agree, the problem is the ability of Japan to blind-side Russia, my massing everyone. You could get around this, similar to how they did with China in v1.4, to put 100 obj-points on all Russia units for the cities they are in or near (defending). It helps, it doens't solve, but it's a suggestion.

And the read I get from this is that folks are greatly underestimating the quality of the Soviet troops in the Far East. Despite Stalins "purges" in the late 30s, they did -not- suck, not by a long shot. In August of 1939 at Khalkin-Gol, the Soviets soundly trounced the IJA (to tune of 60,000 IJA killed or captured, plus many more if consider the campaign started in about May, but August showed the climax).

In 1941, it was not Russia that was threatened by Japan, rather it was Japan that worried that the Soviet Union would move against Manchuko. It was -Japan- that approached Russia with a non-agression pact that was signed in April 1941.

-F-

[Tophat]

ORIGINAL: WiTP_Dude

Here is something to discuss: the Chinese only had 1,300 artillery pieces and 83,000 machine guns in 1943. Also, about divisions in combat:

1941: 90 KMT, 145 Others, 235 Total

Thanks I have been trying to pour through my book collection,decent amount in boxes from a move,to locate some sources for how factionalized the Chinese were during WWII.
Its these other divisions,their loyalty,actual effective strength and ability thats a question.

[mogami]

Hi, Using those numbers each Chinese div had 325 MG. For comparison the German 352nd Division on D-Day in France. Had 240mG and it had an extra 63 attached that other Div did not have,.
The Arty numbers translate into 54x24gun Bn. (6 guns per div (a btry) )

[Tophat]

i'm sorry,but there is noway possible that any uniform table of organization or equitment allotment was inplace in any of the Chinese formations!
Some of these chinese divisions Gen.StilWell describes were battalions called divisions so as not to disgrace or put in lesser regard the little tinpot Warlord incharge of them! Are you taking any of this into account?

Love the using of Divisions in France before D-day....look at some of those staic divisions organization level.....it'd be lavish in equitment compared to anumber of chinese formations!