Campaign Activation Honor Rules.

[Helpless]

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

No, units can be divided just fine. But then again, with 3 Warlord Units, it makes no since to divide them.

My bad, I misunderstood your previous post [>:]...

The idea of semi static LCU sounds very interesting... [:)]

[Mike Carroll]

As I look at the situation. I am going to further modify the China rules to allow only non-Chinese Military Units to operate in Manchuria and Korea. That will allow for some minor Japanese advances in Manchuria if the Japanese wish it. China will be able to threaten Korea if Japan ignores the situation. We will see how it plays out.

China:

1. Starts the game as an active power.
2. All Japanese Bases in China must be removed before any moves on Korea can be taken.
3. Chinese land and sea forces may only operate in China and the surrounding Sea Areas. Chinese land units assigned to the Chinese Military HQ may not operate in Manchuria or Korea.
4. A maximum of 12 Chinese infantry/cavalry units can be assigned to non-Chinese Military HQ. No more than 2 HQ units can be assigned to Non-Chinese Military HQ. These are the only Chinese units allowed to operate in Manchuria and Korea. Note that 9 Chinese units start the game as Southeast Asia and may operate in this theatre.

[Helpless]

ORIGINAL: Mike Carroll

As I look at the situation. I am going to further modify the China rules to allow only non-Chinese Military Units to operate in Manchuria and Korea. That will allow for some minor Japanese advances in Manchuria if the Japanese wish it. China will be able to threaten Korea if Japan ignores the situation. We will see how it plays out.

China:

1. Starts the game as an active power.
2. All Japanese Bases in China must be removed before any moves on Korea can be taken.
3. Chinese land and sea forces may only operate in China and the surrounding Sea Areas. Chinese land units assigned to the Chinese Military HQ may not operate in Manchuria or Korea.
4. A maximum of 12 Chinese infantry/cavalry units can be assigned to non-Chinese Military HQ. No more than 2 HQ units can be assigned to Non-Chinese Military HQ. These are the only Chinese units allowed to operate in Manchuria and Korea. Note that 9 Chinese units start the game as Southeast Asia and may operate in this theatre.

Accepted. [8D]

[Mike Carroll]

Well back to you I may try to do an AAR as time and events allow.

[Helpless]

I'm also thinking of that... haven't deicided if it should be Mike-free [;)]

[jwilkerson]

only non-Chinese Military Units to operate in Manchuria

Only problem is "Manchuria" is China one and the same ... so you've said China can't operate in China !
[:D]

[PzB74]

Not sure why China should be made an active power to begin with [&:]

[Helpless]

Imho, Japan has overhelming power if fights only US in the beggining. Some limited Chinese involvment should keep all these divisions from invading L.A. [:D]

[PzB74]

If Japan had to attack China within 4-6 months an attack on the US mainland would become impossible!
Just don't think Japan is in a position to start hostilities against China when the game starts.

[Helpless]

That's what I said, there is more chances to fight in West Coast then in China with all it's non-statics corps.

That's why we need to invent all these sophisticated house rules. Hope that advertised changes to chinese LCUs will make such rules obselete. [:)]

[PzB74]

No one would attack the West Coast without securing the Hawaiian islands first!?
Would be impossible to supply the fleet from Japan itself. A bit of common sense sounds like a good solution for now...

No one has tried to invade the West Coast yet, so I'd like to see how feasable it is before suggesting changes.

[Helpless]

The issue here is not with WC at all. I brought it just for comparison with China. Could be a little bit extreme, but why not [:)]. It's just a game...

You don't need to play much to find how big is Chinese army. There could be several ways to have it "solved":

1. Keep China inactive
2. Have hous rules limiting Chinese actions
3. Don't give a s@#t on China/Korea/Soviets and fight in the Pacific
4. Wait for the changes advertised by Tankerace
5. Start modding


all of them should work [:D]

[Tankerace]

If China is that bad for you, just use a hose rule and forget about it. Jus tignore China in all cases. There are only 4 or 5 free moving Chinese units at start now, and the Japanese now have the 19th and 20th Divs in Korea, which are more than a match for 5 poorly equipped Chinese divs.


That said, I don't wanna see no whining that we overkilled on staticiszing the Chinese. Why? Because there's no whining in WPO [:D]

That said, I still don't think you'd want to invade china. With 30 some divisions, all it will do is bog down, much like it did historically. Theres a reason why the war really started in 1931 and didn't end until 1945.

[Helpless]

you probaly writing about coming patch?
and yes, there is no whining in WPO just fun... [:)]
...and i can't see where you did see it? [;)]

[Tankerace]

Hehehe, I said no whining about over killing of making CHinese units static.

And yes, all this is from the new patch.

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

If China is that bad for you, just use a hose rule and forget about it. Jus tignore China in all cases. There are only 4 or 5 free moving Chinese units at start now, and the Japanese now have the 19th and 20th Divs in Korea, which are more than a match for 5 poorly equipped Chinese divs.


That said, I don't wanna see no whining that we overkilled on staticiszing the Chinese. Why? Because there's no whining in WPO [:D]

That said, I still don't think you'd want to invade china. With 30 some divisions, all it will do is bog down, much like it did historically. Theres a reason why the war really started in 1931 and didn't end until 1945.

It might still be ideal if China could start as "static" as the Soviets do in WITP. I have started up my "practice" game against AI ( Scenario 1 - me playing Japanese ) and I would like to put some energy into blocading Hong Kong - but then I figure the border is so porus ( in the game ) that any blocade would be meaningless ( as supply will flow as needed ). And IRL for civilian needs, this is probably pretty accurate ( though asute Japanese diplomacy might have been able to make a difference ) but for military purposes a blocade should be able to have some effect. I realise this requires greater than zero lines of code - but figure it is still worth making the noise - so it stays in our heads if the opportunity ever presents itself ( not to say that your "war lord" idea isn't cool - wish we'd had that idea for CHS back in the summer ! )

[Tankerace]

I think that would be a very good idea.

Unfortuneatly, as Mike is doing the programming and is also working on WiE, any code improvements will have to wait. Not saying there won't be any, but as eloquently pointed out by Mike himself in the WitP public beta forum, He needs to code WiE to make some money.

So, While with the OOB we can make units static, something like making neutrals will be a while in coming.

That said, I really do like the idea, and when Mike can revist the code I will push for it (if it is possible).

[Helpless]

Speaking abot China, namely Manchuria. I've been posting some problems regarding garrison in that area. Even it seem to be pure technical problem when damage grow to high values, I still think it would be good to get rid of mandatory garrison values in Manchuria as it is in WITP. Politically Munchuria was not equal to China in that period.

[Tankerace]

I assume you mean the keep X amount of troops in here or the Soviets get activated, right? Actually, as long as the troops are in Korea, it will satisfy the rule. If you capture a base you will have to garrison it, but to keep the Soviets from getting activated just keep 500 AV in Korea (easy now with the 19th and 20th Divisions).

Or was this not what you meant.... long day, brain is kinda fried.

[Helpless]

Not really, i ment the number after the slash in base screen. Otherwise all the facilities in the base wil be badly damaged.

tm.asp?m=1006386