Japanese grand strategy

[mogami]

Hi, When someone takes the time to use the editor and add it. You don't need permission.
anyone can do it.

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, When someone takes the time to use the editor and add it. You don't need permission.
anyone can do it.

hi sorry wasnt tryinng to be a smart as@ or anything. i just thought i had read somewhere that you and pry were working on this and was hoping the rest of the missing Chinese and Japanese OOB's would be added to the game at some point....

im certainly no expert on this subject...

maybe Don Bowen and those guys will finish the OOB's in their upcoming mod...

[mogami]

Hi, Tanaka I would never think of you as being a smart azz. Sorry about my reply I meant no one has to wait for someone else to make corrections to OB.
Anyone can do it. Then post your changes and if someone agrees swap files.

[Rossj]

When i started my first campaign as IJA, I naively thought that there was a broader range of realistic strategies/options available...so when I conquered china I reedeployed troops to take on russia. I never actually invaded, because I thought it would be incredibly tough...so I builtup to 40 IJA divisions for the invasion...but i lost interest in playing out this strategy when it became clear that neither the oob or land game system was up to the task...ultimately the conquest of china was probably invalid...it's like playing somebody whose really good at chess, beating them and finding out that they let you win.

[Mike Scholl]

A realist...., good to see another one. Though I would describe your experiance
more on the order of playing a game of chess and discovering that when you are
the Japanese you get 5 queens. The "bennies" given to the Japanese to enable
the AI to put up a reasonable showing are just too exploitable in the hands of a
real player.

[mogami]

Hi, Mike I don't think that is true. That is part of the reason I don't always agree that the game (or parts of it) is broken.
In PBEM I face all kinds of players. But the over all situation by date in all the games is similair. Some guys go all out and occupy a lot in a short time and then stall. Nothing occurs for a period and in the mean time the slower paced guys catch up.

In no game is China tottering. In no game is India even in range of long range attacks
PH has never fallen. No scores of 4-1 (a few border on 3 -1)

The thing that appears to me to make the single largest difference in pace is those games where the Allied player runs from the SRA (the "Sir Robin")
In the only game I've encountered this as Japan the entire SRA from Bangkok to Timor is Japanese by mid March 42. I think the 45 "extra" days this allows Japan outside the SRA will prove very costly to the Allied player. (more then any exploit I might have used early on)

I'm asking for PBEM scores and dates to see what the average PBEM score is.

[jwilkerson]

In the only game I've encountered this as Japan the entire SRA from Bangkok to Timor is Japanese by mid March 42

I'm playing against this [ Sir Robin ] in one game and in the other against the opposite ... shall we call it the Bunker Defense ... I'm certainly feeling better about my postion ( I'm Japanese in both ) in the Sir Robin game ... but in both I worry about the build up between Broome and Darwin and the potential to launch major counterattack against SRA in late 42 early 43 ... this attack can probably be driven by LBA ... smash a few bases ( like in Timor ) then come in with Amphibs ... establish bases ... then repeat ... etc. on up the chain ... to take out Palembang, Balikpapan ...etc. by ... oh say mid 43 ...

If this is possible ... the Japanese are doomed ... and the allies don't need Carriers to do this ...

Has anyone really shown this can be done ? Should I be worried ?

In other words does the game allow the rail with HQs in Darwin to Broome to bring enough supply forward to support the LBA to make such an offensive possible ?

( once Timor taken then Allies might be able to get AK from Karachi/Perth forward with acceptable losses )

The above is my biggest concern as the Japanese.

[mogami]

Hi, That is one of the axis I plan on using as Allies. If nothing else it spreads the Japanese out. The problem remains for the Allies to provide CAP for those TF against multiple Japanese bases deploying 100+ bombers with escorts. And of course IJN surface TF in the narrows. (You can predict where a transport TF will be once you get a good track on it)

[BlackVoid]

I'm playing against this [ Sir Robin ] in one game and in the other against the opposite ... shall we call it the Bunker Defense ... I'm certainly feeling better about my postion ( I'm Japanese in both ) in the Sir Robin game ... but in both I worry about the build up between Broome and Darwin and the potential to launch major counterattack against SRA in late 42 early 43 ... this attack can probably be driven by LBA ... smash a few bases ( like in Timor ) then come in with Amphibs ... establish bases ... then repeat ... etc. on up the chain ... to take out Palembang, Balikpapan ...etc. by ... oh say mid 43 ...

If this is possible ... the Japanese are doomed ... and the allies don't need Carriers to do this ...

Has anyone really shown this can be done ? Should I be worried ?

In other words does the game allow the rail with HQs in Darwin to Broome to bring enough supply forward to support the LBA to make such an offensive possible ?

I think Japan should take northern AUS to prevent this. The only way the allies can reinforce is by rail. Japan only needs to recon the rail line and if superior force approaches leave or reinforce to match allied buildup. Basically this takes out this route as a possible allied offensive.
Also if allied player starts toi build up Darwin too early you can hurt it a lot with bombing (naval and aerial). So you do not even have to hurry.

[mogami]

Hi, If Japan takes Darwin and tries to hold it then two things will result
1. The Allies will have it back by late 1942 and Japan will have lost everything they moved there. (so the Allied offense will occur any way)
2. Japan will not have units in other areas making those Allied offensives easier.


Moral of story. Japan should not try to fight land battles where the enemy can march to engage. This negates the IJN and the IJN is the backbone to any long term defense.
Allied heavy bombers will take out Darwins airfield long before the Japanese can hurt them. The heavy bombers will also destroy the Japanese supply.
The Allied player can take his time. 1942 is a year he is low on shipping for assaults against defended beaches. He has plenty of ground combat units. The Aussie units cannot leave Oz without paying a lot of PP. All Japan going there does is let them be used for free and train while killing out of supply Japanese. Try it (not against AI) and let me know the results.

[BlackVoid]

Other locations can be left to be defended by the Navy, not that many ground troops needed (in 1942).
If allies move too many troops against Darwin, then they weaken the South...
Japan can always evac Darwin by ships if things don't go well.
If allies are coming strong, Japan can ship also ship in reserves quickly.
Allies bombing Darwin - from where???
NW Aus is vulnerable to bombard runs (assuming Japan has PM)
No allied escorts can reach Darwin
If allies chose to come by sea, I welcome them - I have more and bigger ports in the area.

On the other hand if allies have Darwin, many bases are vulnarable to bombing. If you have Darwin, the SRA is secure. Perth is too far away, India is too far away. Most of the troops Japan would need for SRA can be used to defend Darwin.

[mogami]

Hi, I am in favor of Japan taking any Northern Oz city he can and Darwin for sure if he can but I don't think he should ever consider tryingto hold them. To hold one he has to hold all 4 or that is where the Allies will base the attack on the others.
Once Allied aircraft are up there the IJN is not going to want to come around and no transports will come to evac. Japan has to evac before Allied air power appears.
The Allies will send whatever it takes. It is a battle he is sure to win so he will come.

The Japanese from Dec 7 1941 to the end must never allow any force to become engaged in combat when the Japanese player knows he is going to lose. He is forced into this on certain Islands but he is intending on the ground combat never taking place.
Combat units on Islands are only to prevent enemy FT or submarines or paras from getting a cheap base. If you put more then a division you are either offering up a horde of VP or building POW camps for the enemy.

Japan can go anywhere it wants from Dec 41 to May/June 42. He cannot go everywhere he wants. But any one area he picks he will overwhelm the defender. He better be completly done ard free to redeploy by May or the Allies are going to start hurting him.

The Allied offensives will be covered by 10 CV (360+ fighters and 500 bombers)
The Allied offensive will have a supply train with 100k supply and 200k fuel
The Allied offensive will have engineers able to build airfields from 0 to 6 in under 3 months
The Allied offensives will have 300 aircraft with HQ on these airfields as soon as they are built.
Allied transport TF will have 100 fighters on CAP (not from the 10 CV's)

If the IJN is tied to the defense of one area the Allies will go where it is not able to reach.

Japan actually does better to protect the SRA from airfields out of range of Darwin and Broome. (where IJN bombers can reach Allied TF but their airfields are out of range)

Of course if Japan clobbers the Allied fleet in 42 to where it cannot ome in 43 then things are much better. But starting a long battle in North Oz will drain Japan long before it hurts the Allies. Take Darwin take all those bases but don't send more then you can get out in 1 night of loading transports. Because the turn after the Allied herd moves into the hex everything will die. Pilots will remain behind if the groups ac are damaged. So you'll need AK to evac the groups.

The IJN does not scare the USN in 1943 unless the USN was hurt bad in 1942. Northern Oz does not require the USN to even particapte.

[Hornblower]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, That is one of the axis I plan on using as Allies. If nothing else it spreads the Japanese out. The problem remains for the Allies to provide CAP for those TF against multiple Japanese bases deploying 100+ bombers with escorts. And of course IJN surface TF in the narrows. (You can predict where a transport TF will be once you get a good track on it)

Rather then the “pull out” tactic, I practice the “pull south” tactic. once it becomes painfully obvious that a base in the SRA is going to fall, I pull it south to Timor. I’ve pulled out the 22nd and 27th Oz brigades among other units. I’ve used a flying shuttle service of sorts- dutch and American PBY’s to transport what I can from the doomed base to Darwin or Timor. And where I can I supplement that with a AK or two to get the heavier parts of the unit out. I’ve elected to spend the PP’s and take out the 81st PA and a few base units. They were isolated and going to fall as soon as the first SNLF hit the beaches anyway.

Also I managed to save a good number of P-40’s and B-17’s from PI and plan on ultimately moving them south once its obvious I’m going to loose mindanowa, and use them as the main weapon in holding Timor and Darwin.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Mike I don't think that is true. That is part of the reason I don't always agree that the game (or parts of it) is broken.
In PBEM I face all kinds of players. But the over all situation by date in all the games is similair. Some guys go all out and occupy a lot in a short time and then stall. Nothing occurs for a period and in the mean time the slower paced guys catch up.

In no game is China tottering. In no game is India even in range of long range attacks
PH has never fallen. No scores of 4-1 (a few border on 3 -1)

The thing that appears to me to make the single largest difference in pace is those games where the Allied player runs from the SRA (the "Sir Robin")
In the only game I've encountered this as Japan the entire SRA from Bangkok to Timor is Japanese by mid March 42. I think the 45 "extra" days this allows Japan outside the SRA will prove very costly to the Allied player. (more then any exploit I might have used early on)

I'm asking for PBEM scores and dates to see what the average PBEM score is.

MOGAMI.....Again I ask you in how many of your games are you playing the Allies?
You are a gentleman with a reasonable and historical approach to the game, so I
would be suprised to see you making use of the "loopholes". And in any game
where you ARE playing the Allies, is your opponant a gentleman such as yourself...,
or a "win at any cost" gamer? That would be your only chance of coming into con-
tact with the problems.

[moses]

I don't think anyone has said that the game is broken. I don't think that the game problems that have been raised in this thread result from the use of loopholes or from ungentlemanly play.

In world war II infantry combat the defender had an advantage. It was possible for a defending force to fight a delay inflicting casualties on an attacker while gradually wearing him down. One would expect this to be possible in the game. But try and fight a delay in Burma or China.

In Burma for example: It should be possible to have a bde defend a hex against a divisional Japanese force. The hope would not be to stop Japan but to fight, inflict some casualties, buy some time, and then withdraw to the next defensive position. Try this in the game. Your brigade will be crushed in one turn. You will have lost in the range of 25-30 % casualties and your morale will be reduced greatly. The Japanese will lose absolutly nothing or at best a squad or two. Kill ratio's by the attacker of 100-1 are normal.

A delaying action is therefore almost impossible to conduct which directly causes the problems that have been noted in the large land theaters. Combat is far too decisive and quick. Its a winner take all system which seems more appropriate to a game which simulates ancient warfare than a game of WWII.

I have simply suggested that by shifting the balance slightly in the direction of the defender you might very well correct the problems with land combat in the game. Preferably this would require a SLIGHT increase in actual kills to the attacker and some change to increase the attackers supply requirements or decrease their supply.

[Nikademus]

In world war II infantry combat the defender had an advantage. It was possible for a defending force to fight a delay inflicting casualties on an attacker while gradually wearing him down. One would expect this to be possible in the game. But try and fight a delay in Burma or China.

My opponent is doing this very well in our current game.

[moses]

Perhaps I'll just use the editor and run a couple simple tests. One Jap Division attacks a british bde. 10 Jap divisions attack 10 Chinese corps. I will count the losses for both sides and see what happens. Of course allies will be defeated in both cases as that is the intent. Of interest are the casualty ratio's.

I haven't done it so I really don't know for sure. I predict 100 to 1 losses. I suspect that the Japanese may not lose a single element which will make the loss ratio undefined. we'll see.

IRL I would expect the Japanese to lose a few squads.

[Nikademus]

Already tested it.

The defender has the edge unless he's forced to retreat. In a test, a Japanese attacker battered itself to pieces against a US unit defending that did not retreat. The Japanese unit lost equipment and squads. The US unit suffered only disabled equipment and squads.

My opponent times his operations very well and rarely suffers a forced retreat as a result. He fought a very well executed delaying action in Burma making me fight (and suffer losses) until the moment of near truth, then withdrew leaving me an empty base to capture.

Thus far, i've destroyed little of his major forces but captured ground, the only exceptions being in island situations such as Borneo, Timor and Celebres where i forced units to either surrender or wither on the vine.

In China, Burma, PI and Malaya though.....with the exception of a couple fragments of a Chinese Corp, all units have successfully retreated or fought a fighting retreat.

[Andy Mac]

Aye and British early war Bdes in Burma are not good examples against IJA Divisions.

The IJA divisions are usually fresh at max TOE and often have some supporting non TOE armour and are of high morale and xp

The UK Bdes are low on heavy eqipment disrupted not prepared and typically lower morale

Andy

[Nikademus]

Tell that to my no longer fresh Japanese divisions. I've not had it easy in Burma but then again, i split my forces because Allied players always fortify Burma and i wanted to gain a foothold before this occured with the idea of at least taking Central Burma and establishing a position, so several divisions went north while the Malaya operation proceeded south. Rangoon was an open city but Mandalay and Akyab were heavily defended. A week long fight for Mandalay was hard fought but with the assistance of airpower (of which without i might not have succeeded), the defences slowly began to crumble. At that point my opponent bugged out to the next defence lines. I might have upset his timetable had i shock attacked sooner but i tend to use such attacks very sparingly because of the disabling effect of them if you get too many 0-1's against moderate Forts (which i knew him to have built)

My Akyab thrust was defeated and thrown back. ah well.....live and learn. [;)] Currently i own 85% of Burma but Lashio and Myt. in the north are still in enemy hands and will probably stay that way until reinforcements arrive.