Japanese grand strategy

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
Nikademus
Posts: 22517
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Alien spacecraft

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by Nikademus »

ORIGINAL: moses

Could these small units be somehow deployable behind the lines to unoccupied Japanese hexes?!!! Small gorilla units (AV10-20) that could be placed in Japans rear to keep him honest with garrison requirements and force him to have units fighting away from the front would be really cool and would make Japan's life hell. I don't know if airdrop makes sence or how it would be done.

Not without a rewrite. All LCU's use the same supply trace in the game. What my dispicible Aussie opponent did (does) is break alot of his units up into thirds. This has two advantages....one it gives him a much bigger ability to "spread out the defender/attackers and it also makes for intel muddling when you point your cursor over a hex/city and see oh....35 "units" there. (gads!)

True a third of a Chinese corp is pretty weak but at the same time it's a cheap investment should it be cut off or destroyed. (I got a couple but it took a long time to hunt em down) Keep in mind that even an undersupplied/out of supply unit can still move somewhat so a merry chase he led.

Biggest impact was that it forced me to spread out my own forces for security and delayed my advance somewhat. Once i closed enough of the flanks, it made it much harder if not impossible for him to try flank attacks against my supply lines. Once the outer cities started falling he opted to preserve forces which despite the logistics, was a smart move....saves VP and the forces for later battles. As i mentioned earlier, i've taken ground and cities. (Yennen was a hell of a fight.) but have destroyed few troops. Kind of like real life China in that (not the cities, but in the elusiveness of the enemy)
Sounds like you're on track.[:)]

Of course we are....we rock [;)]
moses
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 3:39 am

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by moses »

Not worried about supply. Drop em behind the lines and let them die. They carry supply for a month and then Japan kills them. But OK, I don't know that air drops make sence anyway. In reality they would probably infiltrate in some way.

Perhaps they could be given a high movement rate which would allow them to get through the woods hexes faster.

In the area of Changsa/Wuhan it is fairly easy to combat the problem of an opponent who divides up his units like this. You just do the same. Get a couple divisions of mongol cav and split them in threes. Now just set up a continuous front with these little things. It takes a month or so to get your line set up but then the quagmire strategy has problems.

Now if they could get behind the line somehow its a whole new ballgame.
medicff
Posts: 710
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 10:53 pm
Location: WPB, Florida

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by medicff »

ORIGINAL: moses

Not worried about supply. Drop em behind the lines and let them die. They carry supply for a month and then Japan kills them. But OK, I don't know that air drops make sence anyway. In reality they would probably infiltrate in some way.

Perhaps they could be given a high movement rate which would allow them to get through the woods hexes faster.

In the area of Changsa/Wuhan it is fairly easy to combat the problem of an opponent who divides up his units like this. You just do the same. Get a couple divisions of mongol cav and split them in threes. Now just set up a continuous front with these little things. It takes a month or so to get your line set up but then the quagmire strategy has problems.

Now if they could get behind the line somehow its a whole new ballgame.

Another potential problem with the small unit quagmire strategy is that shock attacks allow the attacker to follow and continually push forward at a much faster movement rate. Is it better to keep at least some force together? I haven't tried the quagmire yet as I was behind the eight ball to start for the most part.
User avatar
Nikademus
Posts: 22517
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Alien spacecraft

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by Nikademus »

air drops are only allowed at bases. Being able to drop paras anywhere has been requested alot but the potential 'gamisms' dont warrent such a feature in my opinion.
moses
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 3:39 am

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by moses »

Another potential problem with the small unit quagmire strategy is that shock attacks allow the attacker to follow and continually push forward at a much faster movement rate. Is it better to keep at least some force together? I haven't tried the quagmire yet as I was behind the eight ball to start for the most part.

Is this still true. When the game came out it worked this way but I thought this was taken out. I havn't noticed it anyway in a long time.
User avatar
Mr.Frag
Posts: 11195
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 5:00 pm
Location: Purgatory

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by Mr.Frag »

ORIGINAL: moses
Another potential problem with the small unit quagmire strategy is that shock attacks allow the attacker to follow and continually push forward at a much faster movement rate. Is it better to keep at least some force together? I haven't tried the quagmire yet as I was behind the eight ball to start for the most part.

Is this still true. When the game came out it worked this way but I thought this was taken out. I havn't noticed it anyway in a long time.


Shock with follow gives you a head start, it doesn't take you into the next hex.
moses
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 3:39 am

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by moses »

Darn I forgot all about that. I remember doing this when I first got the game and remember people had problems. So there was some change and I thought they had totally removed the feature. But its still there. All this time I've been playing w/o one of my options.[&:]
Andy Mac
Posts: 12578
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 8:08 pm
Location: Alexandria, Scotland

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by Andy Mac »

OK it might just be me but I have 5 PBEM's on the go as allies.

In every single one I am under a lot of pressure in China it just isnt a quiet or static theatre.

I am spending more and more time as the allies worrying about China.

Is that how its supposed to be ?

Having read this thread I thought not but I cannot seem to stabilise a front with any of my forward resource cities and without them I eventually get pushed back and back unless I spend massive amounts of micro management time splitting units to threaten the IJA rear and even then I still get pushed back or flanked.

Am I doing somethig wrong (all games under 1.0 now on 1.4)

Andy
User avatar
WiTP_Dude
Posts: 1434
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:28 pm

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by WiTP_Dude »

It is not your fault, the Chinese theater is balanced toward the Japanese side at this point. Against a skilled opponent, you will have difficulties no matter what you do.
Image
________________________________________
I feal so dirty when I sink convoys with 4E bombers, makes porn feal wholsome. - Brady, Founding Member of the Japanese Fanboy Club
moses
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 3:39 am

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by moses »

Read the thread in the War room on China stategy. I think a good player can hold as China. You just have to know the secret stategies

WITP_DUDE you know. If you played me again as China you would probably stop me cold. Or at least it would be a 6 month fight for the front line cities.
User avatar
WiTP_Dude
Posts: 1434
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:28 pm

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by WiTP_Dude »

ORIGINAL: moses

Read the thread in the War room on China stategy. I think a good player can hold as China. You just have to know the secret stategies

WITP_DUDE you know. If you played me again as China you would probably stop me cold. Or at least it would be a 6 month fight for the front line cities.

Yes but there are counter-strategies the Japanese player can use. The Chinese must react to what the Japanese do.
Image
________________________________________
I feal so dirty when I sink convoys with 4E bombers, makes porn feal wholsome. - Brady, Founding Member of the Japanese Fanboy Club
moses
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 3:39 am

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by moses »

True there are counter-strategies but they are all slow.

In games between beginning players Japan will usually crush Japan since the obvious logical Japanese strategy crushes the obvious logical Chinese strategy.

In games between experienced players I also think the game is still biased toward Japan because in the end I think Japan will eventually take all three front line cities more than half the time. It should be a little harder to do this I think. Still its a good fight.

But I agree with all your points.
User avatar
WiTP_Dude
Posts: 1434
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:28 pm

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by WiTP_Dude »

Against Feinder I amassed 16 divisions to take Changsa. Nothing can stop that. Now I am moving north to deal with that area. After that I'll sweep south and finish up.
Image
________________________________________
I feal so dirty when I sink convoys with 4E bombers, makes porn feal wholsome. - Brady, Founding Member of the Japanese Fanboy Club
moses
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 3:39 am

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by moses »

How far are you already. It must have taken till end of Dec to get 16 divisions in Changsa. What was holding the rest of the front. You should do an AAR.
User avatar
WiTP_Dude
Posts: 1434
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:28 pm

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by WiTP_Dude »

Feinder is doing a AAR. You can read my very short summary of the war in the first post of this "find opponent" thread:

http://www.matrixgames.com/default.asp? ... m%3D783327
Image
________________________________________
I feal so dirty when I sink convoys with 4E bombers, makes porn feal wholsome. - Brady, Founding Member of the Japanese Fanboy Club
Mike Scholl
Posts: 6187
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 1:17 am
Location: Kansas City, MO

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by Mike Scholl »

ORIGINAL: Rossj
The common thread to the events leading up to war is that Japan was doing all of this to break the stalemate in china...if the IJA had sent in several divisions from the home islands and southern area army after the sra was captured, maybe they could have marched on chunking by late '42. I don't think the IJA were idiots, but they never got a chance to redeploy troops from elsewhere for a grand offensive because the they lost the initiative in mid '42.

ROSSJ.....Did you ever stop to think that if the Japanese had "several divisions from the
home islands and southern area army" available after the capture of the SRA---they
had the same units available at the beginning of 1941 long before they went to war with
the rest of the world? Why didn't they just finish off the Chinese then? Were they just
stupid? OR DID THEY KNOW THAT IN THE REAL WORLD IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE (they'd
been trying it for three and a half years by then, so they probably had a pretty fair idea
of what they could and couldn't do).

What does it take to get you folks out of "fantasyland"? If the game allows a quick
victory in China, then the game is historically inaccurate. Period. End of story! It
needs to be fixed. Could the Japanese have worn down China over the course of
another few years? Maybe..., but it's just as likely that the strain of the China War
might have worn down the Japanese. Once it was put "on the back burner" by Japan's
decision to take on the US and Britian and company, there was really NO chance of
a quick win in China historically. The Japanese had not been able to win the China
War when they could commit the entire resources of their empire to the task---taking
on a good portion of the rest of the world certainly didn't improve their chances.
User avatar
freeboy
Posts: 8969
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 9:33 am
Location: Colorado

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by freeboy »

I think that you can see historically the Jap army overran several bases which the US used in 43? for lba... China was a complex puzzle... did the army want to overrun this large land mass? I am not totally convinced it was ever a goal... so statingthat because something did not happen it could not ...
well..

Also, many think that a good China strategy can avoid the chineese being slaughtered...
if anything would help add supplies lift capability, or supplies inland.....
keeping open the Ledo road is a must as well
"Tanks forward"
User avatar
Feinder
Posts: 7188
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:33 pm
Location: Land o' Lakes, FL

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by Feinder »

See my current AAR here:

China only AAR : Feinder vs. WitP_Dude

WitP_Dude hit me at Changsha with 16 Ing Divs, 2 Arm Rgts, and 2 Inf Brg. It took him until about 12-25 to mass all those guys at Changsha, btw.

I was more than a little surprised to suddenly see 40 units appear in Changsha. I tried retreating (and just declaring and open city), but alas I didn't get out before his attack, and being forced to retreat. Still, I didn't take as many casualties as I thought I would, and am currently camped in the forrest across the river to the NW. I actually was able to correctly estimate his assault strength when I was able to see the fact that he actually had 16 Divs (promply followed by a "Holy sh1t!"). If I had done that to begin with (fled Changsha), I'd be sitting just fine (with about 15k more supplies than I do now), and have gottent a 2x defense bonus from the woods. But Changsha and that city to the SE are indefensible (just open terrain). If I had chosen to defend in the woods, across the river where I am now, it would have been a different story.

He also swallowed up an army up near Homan, and I'm going to lose it for being stupid (and not realizing you couldn't move into a contested ZOC).

Other notes may be read from my AAR.

The only feed back I can really offer at this point is...
1. Yes, the rail system is a b1tch. The IJA player can move units VERY rapidly (in comparision), and there isn't anything you can do about it. The answer is to plan for that (which I didn't). If you're near the rail line, IJA can, and will move units to meet you very quickly.
2. I'd be for stacking limits. What we're spiraling into, is two massive armies facing each other. I'm not even saying "Dude started it!" by massing at Changsha; because I certainly have a HUGE army in the south by own design (and set that in motion from day-1, because I had the same intent that he did). Eventually (probably at end of January), his mega-army is gonna meet my mega-army, and we'll see who is more mega (and no, I'm not so sure that it's going to be easy victory for Dude). The loser will probably lose the game, because their army will be shattered, and the winner will be able to mop up everything else. I doubt the game will be OVER in a month, but for all intent purposes things will be done.

Either way, Dude has proven a very capable teacher (if unforgiving [;)]) of land-combat. I've learned quite a few things this time around.

-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

Image
moses
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 3:39 am

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by moses »

You bring up an interesting point about the combat system. It is incredibly decicive and one sided and this shows up best in large combats. For example:

Say China puts 20 corps in Changsa and Japan enters the hex with 12 Divisions. If China shock attacks first (say a Jap unit enters the hex with the remainder of the force entering the next turn) Japan will suffer massive losses while retreating with China suffering very little loss. It may not be exagerating much to say that Japan has lost the war in China.

If on the other hand Japan shock attacks first you could very well have the opposite result with China losing heavily vs zero Jap loss.

Move 2 equal forces into a clear terrain hex, who wins. The side who shock attacks first. The winner takes almost no losses the loser takes heavy losses.
User avatar
Mr.Frag
Posts: 11195
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 5:00 pm
Location: Purgatory

RE: Japanese grand strategy

Post by Mr.Frag »

Move 2 equal forces into a clear terrain hex, who wins. The side who shock attacks first. The winner takes almost no losses the loser takes heavy losses.

Not really true ... you are still not understanding the system.

Fatigue level *directly* relates to losses. Units that have low fatigue will simply get bounced out of the hex. Units with high fatigue will take lots of losses.

*You* control the fatigue of your units by how you use them.
Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”