What if the Soviets are ALWAYS active?

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

yes you have to use the editor example say you wanted to play CHS 155 with soviets activated
using both the database and scen editor open sen155 and save the database to another slot number then open the sen 155 in the sen editor swith soviets on snad save into same slot as database - start game using new slot(sen number) number

OK. I had it right. I think that we should make "yes" in the Soviet's Active field the standard - and let players who don't like that turn it off with the editor. I don't like allowing the AI total control of the Soviets - because mostly it does NOT control them (they just sit) - and because if the Japanese do not move into a certain hex the AI will STILL not activate the Soviets to defend their country! If the Allies control the Soviets, they can move things around, control construction and upgrades, sail ships (one of two subs was torpedoed en route to Siberia near the US West Coast historically) etc. Sailing ships is the ONLY way to supply remote posts on the coast and in islands. Of course, it creates a host of operational problems for the Japanese - they essentially cannot set planes to attack in the North - unless they want to risk a war by striking the wrong ship - a very real issue in that fog shrouded region. On the other hand, more tonnage went to Russia via Alaska than by any other route (or even by all other routes combined) - so Japan may WANT to shut down that line of supply at some point. There are resources in Siberia and useful bases along the Soviet coast and in the Komandorskie Islands. Players need to weigh all the pros and cons, and deploy as if this is a real front, because it is anything but a dependable and safe area. Fighting in the north is a sometime thing due to weather (ask the Germans in Norway). Locking everything up is much less realistic - it means Japan can deploy for an attack and the Russians must just sit there until it jumps off. They cannot even move laterally along the rail lines or send submarines to sea. Nonsense. Taking Siberia will be hard - but in the game it won't be unless it is intelligently handled. On the other hand, we better be sure the Russians don't have too much stuff - or they can invade before the late war period.

Personally I think this is just opening up an unnecessary can of worms. The Japanese had been planning for a year or more for a move South. Their entrnance into Indo-China was part of that strategy which led to the oil embargo. The game is designed for a move south. The game is not designed to simulate a war with the Soviet Union.

In my early post you never answered how the US or Britain would have responded to a Japanese attack on Russia. The Japanese felt they could keep the US out diplomatically for 3-4 months. The game does not simulate this.

IMO (for CHS at least) the game should be played with a simple house rule.

1. Japan should not attack the Soviet Union.

[jwilkerson]

Another issue I don't see mentioned is that whether or not Russia is activated ( though more so if they are ) Russian aircraft can still fly ... and perform recon and if on naval search can even hit and sinnk japanese ships ... while one such incident might not be a cause for war ... and pattern sure would be ... and this is possible to a greater extent if activated. So house rules to cover the use of aircraftmight also be indicated.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

Another issue I don't see mentioned is that whether or not Russia is activated ( though more so if they are ) Russian aircraft can still fly ... and perform recon and if on naval search can even hit and sinnk japanese ships ... while one such incident might not be a cause for war ... and pattern sure would be ... and this is possible to a greater extent if activated. So house rules to cover the use of aircraftmight also be indicated.

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Furthermore it is my opinion that should aircraft such as the PBY "Escape" the Philipines in the manner described above they should be stood down until such time as war is joined between the USSR and Japan as it lends too significant/unrealistic an advantage to the Allies to have PBY's monitoring the movements of the Combined fleet so close to home.

This is my post from above. If Russia is not at war all Naval search should be stood down except within a couple hexes of Russia. Long Range units such as escaped PBY units from the Philipines and the PBY units we are considering adding to the Soviet OOB should be stood down until war is joined for the reasons above. OR just limit max range to something agreeable between players.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Lend lease routes through Alaska are not to be used either to put the Home islands in range of LBA"

Why? This is precisely why Japan invaded the Aleutians. And also Gen Simon Bolivar Buckner built an entire network of fields - bomber capable - both to facilitate Lend Lease and to facilitate either defense or feeding an offensive campaign - which was originally contemplated. It is entirely up to the Allied player wether to use the fields in any particular way. And it is a two edged sword: Japan can sieze Alaskan fields to use to bomb Seattle with the biggest aircraft plant in the world (Renton).

I meant that Lend lease routes are not to be used to transfer B-17/B-24 units to Russia for operations against The Japanese Home Islands. Mixing US and USSR forces should be a no-brainer no-no for anyone failiar with WWII political history.

[el cid again]

I meant that Lend lease routes are not to be used to transfer B-17/B-24 units to Russia for operations against The Japanese Home Islands. Mixing US and USSR forces should be a no-brainer no-no for anyone failiar with WWII political history.

Actually, we proposed to do that, and Stalin would have none of it. I think it needs to be a universal house rule that Allied forces are FORBIDDEN to enter the USSR unless hostilities begin with Japan. If an airplane "escapes" there it must stay there - or be disbanded. This really happened several times - it is how the Russians got the B-29. Stalin is not a very cooperative ally.

This is the same in China. Red Army and KMT and local troops are NOT very good allies. Yet the game allows the Allies to coordinate them all.
No difference - in fact this is less an issue with respect to Russia than it is in China right now. We cannot adopt a more complex model until WITP II.
[A third team? Russia controls the Red Army in China?]

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: TheElf

ORIGINAL: treespider

Are US units interned if they fly into an active Russia?

I have two units that did that. A pair of PBY units from Manila, one US one Dutch. Though the mechanics to "Intern" them don't exist in the game the effect of their presence is the same, in so far as they operate normally. Unfortunately with American last names on the pilot list. This is no stretch of imagination as the Soviets license built the PBY under the designation PBN as early as 1940, and I think earlier. The fact that there is no naval Search in the USSR as part of the original OOB is an oversight to begin with...

As an experienced Soviet player I can say that in small instances such as the one above, the redeployment of US or commonwealth units in very small numbers is fine. The house rule in questio0n should be expanded to state:

"Combat capable units with the range to fly themselves to the USSR are prohibited. This applies specifically to Heavy bombers as most medium bombers or smaller aircraft don't have the range. Lend lease routes through Alaska are not to be used either to put the Home islands in range of LBA"

Furthermore it is my opinion that should aircraft such as the PBY "Escape" the Philipines in the manner described above they should be stood down until such time as war is joined between the USSR and Japan as it lends too significant/unrealistic an advantage to the Allies to have PBY's monitoring the movements of the Combined fleet so close to home.

Why not just make the whole front persona non grata? By starting the Soviets activated we're introducing a whole set of house rules that need to be implemented.

I haven't played far enough to know, but what are the effects of an all out Soviet Offensive in 1943? Is there anything that would prevent it, could it be succesful?

If you choose to do this in your own PBEM games then more power to you and your opponent. None of these issues will be germaine to your game. You can even use the inherent garrison limitations for the activation of Russia.

The point is to make it possible to have a viable Soviet OOB that CAN serve the purpose of showing an aggressive Jap player why the IJ Army NEVER wanted to invade Russia.

The soviet infrastructure is there. The Soviet OOB, however Anemic, is there. The objective is just to to fill it out and make it as accurate as possible within the framework of the current database.

[el cid again]

Personally I think this is just opening up an unnecessary can of worms. The Japanese had been planning for a year or more for a move South. Their entrnance into Indo-China was part of that strategy which led to the oil embargo. The game is designed for a move south. The game is not designed to simulate a war with the Soviet Union.

In my early post you never answered how the US or Britain would have responded to a Japanese attack on Russia. The Japanese felt they could keep the US out diplomatically for 3-4 months. The game does not simulate this.

IMO (for CHS at least) the game should be played with a simple house rule.

1. Japan should not attack the Soviet Union.

Reply:

You are entitled to your opinion. You are in harmony with the scenario designers too. I happen to think it is lousy simulation. It permits:

1) Japan to strip the Kwangtung army, unrealistically;
2) Japan to prepare a devastating attack on the USSR that, even if detected by the allies, cannot even be mitigated by proper deployments;
(You are in effect addressing this with your house rule however)
3) Russian remote points cannot be supplied and ships cannot sail - maybe not even be seen (I have yet to see them in an inactive Russia)

Add to this that both sides can be "sure" of things neither side was sure about. If you are either side and not worried about this front, you are not simulating events, and your decisions are way too easy.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

yes you have to use the editor example say you wanted to play CHS 155 with soviets activated
using both the database and scen editor open sen155 and save the database to another slot number then open the sen 155 in the sen editor swith soviets on snad save into same slot as database - start game using new slot(sen number) number

OK. I had it right. I think that we should make "yes" in the Soviet's Active field the standard - and let players who don't like that turn it off with the editor. I don't like allowing the AI total control of the Soviets - because mostly it does NOT control them (they just sit) - and because if the Japanese do not move into a certain hex the AI will STILL not activate the Soviets to defend their country! If the Allies control the Soviets, they can move things around, control construction and upgrades, sail ships (one of two subs was torpedoed en route to Siberia near the US West Coast historically) etc. Sailing ships is the ONLY way to supply remote posts on the coast and in islands. Of course, it creates a host of operational problems for the Japanese - they essentially cannot set planes to attack in the North - unless they want to risk a war by striking the wrong ship - a very real issue in that fog shrouded region. On the other hand, more tonnage went to Russia via Alaska than by any other route (or even by all other routes combined) - so Japan may WANT to shut down that line of supply at some point. There are resources in Siberia and useful bases along the Soviet coast and in the Komandorskie Islands. Players need to weigh all the pros and cons, and deploy as if this is a real front, because it is anything but a dependable and safe area. Fighting in the north is a sometime thing due to weather (ask the Germans in Norway). Locking everything up is much less realistic - it means Japan can deploy for an attack and the Russians must just sit there until it jumps off. They cannot even move laterally along the rail lines or send submarines to sea. Nonsense. Taking Siberia will be hard - but in the game it won't be unless it is intelligently handled. On the other hand, we better be sure the Russians don't have too much stuff - or they can invade before the late war period.

Dude, Why does this concept have to be made difficult? It is simple. Reegardless whether you are playing the CHS or the Stock game Players SHOULD be activating the Soviets on GT1 in EVERY game. Why?

Because it is fair to give the Allied player the ability to move his LCUs in prep for a POSSIBLE invasion. If the Japanese player KNOWS he isn't EVER going to invade than it is a moot point and perhaps activation can be determined by the traditional Point system coded by the game. But in order to preserve the IJ players element of suprise, should he actually want to try an alternate grand Strategy, consideration should be given to activating the Soviet on GT1 so as to have a consistent start to every game.

IF opponents agree to GT1 activation the ONLY units that move are LCU's and Air units witin Soviet borders. NO ship, should we get the Navy to actually work, should need to move until war is joined. Supply routes to far flung Soveit outposts are not necessary. The US should NOT be sending ANYHTING to Russia, even after the Soviet are at War with Japan. Lend Lease is abstracted and hard coded in the game as it is. Russia needs NO supply from outside its own borders. It gets a $#!t load as it is from off board.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I meant that Lend lease routes are not to be used to transfer B-17/B-24 units to Russia for operations against The Japanese Home Islands. Mixing US and USSR forces should be a no-brainer no-no for anyone failiar with WWII political history.

Actually, we proposed to do that, and Stalin would have none of it. I think it needs to be a universal house rule that Allied forces are FORBIDDEN to enter the USSR unless hostilities begin with Japan. If an airplane "escapes" there it must stay there - or be disbanded. This really happened several times - it is how the Russians got the B-29. Stalin is not a very cooperative ally.

This is the same in China. Red Army and KMT and local troops are NOT very good allies. Yet the game allows the Allies to coordinate them all.
No difference - in fact this is less an issue with respect to Russia than it is in China right now. We cannot adopt a more complex model until WITP II.
[A third team? Russia controls the Red Army in China?]

A simple "Agreed" would have sufficed as a response.

The assumption from the time one purchases even the Stock game is that the player is relatively intelligent on the Subject of WWII. Anyone who is should be able to handle the changes we are talking about.

Part of the implementation of the new Soviet OOB will be covered in the readme file. I will be writing a "how to" of sorts so as to give players all the info they need to make the Soviets work correctly in their game. Anyone can take it or leave it depending on their personal preferences.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

This is why most players use the "Activate Russia" on Turn one House Rule.

I thought it was something we had to build in to the scenario with the editor. How can PLAYERS "activate Russia" - without actually attacking?

From the Manual 8.6 Russia and the Manchukuo Garrison pg. 154

If the Japanese player moves a unit into the Soviet Union or Mongolia, or in any way attacks a Soviet unit or base, the Soviet Union is immediately activated.

Is everyone beginning to see how easy this is? Why must we TRY to make it hard?

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: treespider

The problem is as I see it the Japanese debated two courses of action before the War...

A. Attack the Soviet Union.

B. Occupy the SRA and defacto attack the US.

Had the Japanese not attacked the SRA or Britain or any US positions and invaded the Soviet Union would they have done so in December of 1941? Would the US or Britain have involved themselves in that conflict and if so when?

Unfortunately the game we are given is not designed to address those issues. The game we have addresses option B.

I thought that the Japanese rejected option A because of the necessity of getting oil (and perhaps other raw materials)? In effect, even if they wanted to pursue option A they had to pursue option B first.

Exactly. But this is not RL. And even with the Stock game people will always try to do things differently. It's human nature. All we are talking about is making the potential war with Russia as accurate as we can. What players actually do is up to them and how they do it is up to them and their opponents.

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

Another issue I don't see mentioned is that whether or not Russia is activated ( though more so if they are ) Russian aircraft can still fly ... and perform recon and if on naval search can even hit and sinnk japanese ships ... while one such incident might not be a cause for war ... and pattern sure would be ... and this is possible to a greater extent if activated. So house rules to cover the use of aircraftmight also be indicated.

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Furthermore it is my opinion that should aircraft such as the PBY "Escape" the Philipines in the manner described above they should be stood down until such time as war is joined between the USSR and Japan as it lends too significant/unrealistic an advantage to the Allies to have PBY's monitoring the movements of the Combined fleet so close to home.

This is my post from above. If Russia is not at war all Naval search should be stood down except within a couple hexes of Russia. Long Range units such as escaped PBY units from the Philipines and the PBY units we are considering adding to the Soviet OOB should be stood down until war is joined for the reasons above. OR just limit max range to something agreeable between players.

Ok that works - wasn't clear you meant all Soviet aircraft as well ...

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: TheElf

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

Another issue I don't see mentioned is that whether or not Russia is activated ( though more so if they are ) Russian aircraft can still fly ... and perform recon and if on naval search can even hit and sinnk japanese ships ... while one such incident might not be a cause for war ... and pattern sure would be ... and this is possible to a greater extent if activated. So house rules to cover the use of aircraftmight also be indicated.

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Furthermore it is my opinion that should aircraft such as the PBY "Escape" the Philipines in the manner described above they should be stood down until such time as war is joined between the USSR and Japan as it lends too significant/unrealistic an advantage to the Allies to have PBY's monitoring the movements of the Combined fleet so close to home.

This is my post from above. If Russia is not at war all Naval search should be stood down except within a couple hexes of Russia. Long Range units such as escaped PBY units from the Philipines and the PBY units we are considering adding to the Soviet OOB should be stood down until war is joined for the reasons above. OR just limit max range to something agreeable between players.

Ok that works - wasn't clear you meant all Soviet aircraft as well ...

And I think it works well. By having an activated USSR it adds a whole other element of political tension to the Japanese player's game that REALLY WAS THERE. It allows the opponents to discuss very real boundaries and injects the potential for small conlficts and "International Incidences". If for example opponents agree that Japanese shipping will not come within 1 hex of the Soviet Shore then any wayward Jap TF could find it self under attack from protective Soviet units. The Jap player must honor geoploitical boundaries or be forced to ward off accusations of war movements too near Soviet borders.

Again the assumption is players are intelligent and can handle these complex ideas.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Exactly. But this is not RL. And even with the Stock game people will always try to do things differently. It's human nature. All we are talking about is making the potential war with Russia as accurate as we can. What players actually do is up to them and how they do it is up to them and their opponents.

Agree about the game - I was replying strictly to your historical comment.

[treespider]

I still feel this is opening an unnecessary Pandoras box. The game is designed to simulate a Japanese attack on the US and Britain in Dec of 1941. Although I understand that players like to explore fantasy scenario's, I thought CHS was supposed to be a "Historical" scenario. In history the Emperor put his seal on a national policy to focus the attention South. Had it gone the other way this attack on the Soviet Union more than likely would have atarted several months earlier than the start of the game.

That being said and the decison is made to pursue the Soviet fantasy scenario...perhaps we could call it SFS.

The Elf said:

All we are talking about is making the potential war with Russia as accurate as we can.

Will the fact that the Soviets had excellent intelligence of Japanese pre-war intentions be changed? If not will the Soviets also receive the units that were transferred to the West? The Red Army did not initiate these transfers until they had received information that the Japanese had ceased all preparations for an attack on Siberia. I haven't looked yet but are the Garrison requirements still listed if the Soviet Union is active? If the Soviets cannot attack in 1942 or 43 or 44 where is the "tension" for the Japanese"? In another thread some people have said that the Soviets are hard-coded to expand their strength late in the game by the conversion of their div's to corps, does this mod contend with that? If the Japanese attack the Soviet Union first is there a provision recognizing Japanese diplomatic efforts to keep the US out of the war?

[moses]

I still feel this is opening an unnecessary Pandoras box

Agree. The current garrison requirements force Japan to maintain proper ground strength. It would be nice if air strength figured into this but lets not quibble.

The only problem is that Russia should be allowed to redeploy in responce to any massive Japanese redeployment prior to attack.

So here is a simple airtight house rule: Before launching attacks into Russia Japan must declare war by launching a single one squadren airstrike against a single small Russian airbase for two days in a row. On these two days neither side will launch any further airstrikes. On day 3 both sides may fight as desired.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: moses

I still feel this is opening an unnecessary Pandoras box

Agree. The current garrison requirements force Japan to maintain proper ground strength. It would be nice if air strength figured into this but lets not quibble.

The only problem is that Russia should be allowed to redeploy in responce to any massive Japanese redeployment prior to attack.

So here is a simple airtight house rule: Before launching attacks into Russia Japan must declare war by launching a single one squadren airstrike against a single small Russian airbase for two days in a row. On these two days neither side will launch any further airstrikes. On day 3 both sides may fight as desired.

Now that sounds more reasonable. Heck you could even allow a week or more lead time..

[akdreemer]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Don't misunderstand, I don't mean "the Soviets are in the war as bellegerants."
I mean what if the Soviets are set to active, so the Allied player can move their units,
upgrade them, build forts, etc?

EITHER side COULD attack the other - because they really could - but it would be like real life - don't do that if you don't want a war! It would go a long way to recreating the tension on that front. You could have half measures too - like recon flights. Some players might tolerate them - others might not. And both sides would have to worry about an attack all the time - don't transfer too much away from the front! The border is awful - you can never defend it all properly.

This way the Russians are not managed by the AI and the game cannot be messed up if the Allied player does not invade the right hex first.

Again I am amazed how we assume that the Pcific War operated in a vacuum and what decisions made as a player can be inifinite as opposed to what was historically capable of doing. I think we all get so wrapped up into the mechanics of unit OOB's and device attributes that we seem to forget that the Pacific War was really a part of a greater World War. Events at other fronts should be a factor in all that we do. In the summer and winter of 1941 the Soviet Union was fighting for it very existence. The last the thing Soviets could do was to open up a second front with Japan. Indded the Soviets stripped most of the high quality troops from Siberia and Russian Far East because (a) they were desperately needed to fight the Germans and (b) the Soviets knew that once the Japansese made their moves towards the the SRA that the Japanese would be committed to fighting in the Pacific and Southeast Asia. It took the Soviets 5 months of transferring troops from their western front after Germany was defeated to get sufficient troop to guarentee overwhelming success. By then the Kwantung Army was but a hollow shell with most of the experienced troops transferred to as replacements to more active commands.

What would have happened to the Soviets if, during the winter of 41 they were unable to call on these fresh forces? No way to simulate this without a global events engine. Unfortunately, there is no global event engine, other than an enimic British naval withdraw, thus until one gets incoded into the game (not a very real possibility), I feel that the Soviet situation should be as status quo, inactive unitl the either the Japanese attack or after an Historical start date. I want to play a game that has Historical possibilities based on the limitations of the game engine. Thus until the Germans were defeated the Societ Union had no desire to war against the Japanese. We as simulators should also be under this limitation.

[el cid again]

Because it is fair to give the Allied player the ability to move his LCUs in prep for a POSSIBLE invasion. If the Japanese player KNOWS he isn't EVER going to invade than it is a moot point and perhaps activation can be determined by the traditional Point system coded by the game. But in order to preserve the IJ players element of suprise, should he actually want to try an alternate grand Strategy, consideration should be given to activating the Soviet on GT1 so as to have a consistent start to every game.

I am not sure Elf means this, but he may have meant Japan SHOULD invade the USSR at some point. If he didn't mean that, I do. Why wait until it is too late, and Russia can kill Japan? It appears to me from Kwangtung Army documents Japan was always looking for the right time, but it never came. This is one of those cases where war is inevitable. Both sides were not ready - which is why they signed an agreement not to fight. In the end both sides honored that deal too - Stalin waited until AFTER it expired to invade. But either side could have withdrawn from the agreement on 30 days notice - and been legal. And Japan NEVER EVER has started a war with formal notice - unless you count the Pearl Harbor attack - which few do. [Even if you count the notice that delivered late - it is not a formal declaration of war in a legal sense.] Wether or not Japan can defeat the Russians is a different question - one only answerable in a simulation.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Don't misunderstand, I don't mean "the Soviets are in the war as bellegerants."
I mean what if the Soviets are set to active, so the Allied player can move their units,
upgrade them, build forts, etc?

EITHER side COULD attack the other - because they really could - but it would be like real life - don't do that if you don't want a war! It would go a long way to recreating the tension on that front. You could have half measures too - like recon flights. Some players might tolerate them - others might not. And both sides would have to worry about an attack all the time - don't transfer too much away from the front! The border is awful - you can never defend it all properly.

This way the Russians are not managed by the AI and the game cannot be messed up if the Allied player does not invade the right hex first.

Again I am amazed how we assume that the Pcific War operated in a vacuum and what decisions made as a player can be inifinite as opposed to what was historically capable of doing. I think we all get so wrapped up into the mechanics of unit OOB's and device attributes that we seem to forget that the Pacific War was really a part of a greater World War. Events at other fronts should be a factor in all that we do. In the summer and winter of 1941 the Soviet Union was fighting for it very existence. The last the thing Soviets could do was to open up a second front with Japan. Indded the Soviets stripped most of the high quality troops from Siberia and Russian Far East because (a) they were desperately needed to fight the Germans and (b) the Soviets knew that once the Japansese made their moves towards the the SRA that the Japanese would be committed to fighting in the Pacific and Southeast Asia. It took the Soviets 5 months of transferring troops from their western front after Germany was defeated to get sufficient troop to guarentee overwhelming success. By then the Kwantung Army was but a hollow shell with most of the experienced troops transferred to as replacements to more active commands.

What would have happened to the Soviets if, during the winter of 41 they were unable to call on these fresh forces? No way to simulate this without a global events engine. Unfortunately, there is no global event engine, other than an enimic British naval withdraw, thus until one gets incoded into the game (not a very real possibility), I feel that the Soviet situation should be as status quo, inactive unitl the either the Japanese attack or after an Historical start date. I want to play a game that has Historical possibilities based on the limitations of the game engine. Thus until the Germans were defeated the Societ Union had no desire to war against the Japanese. We as simulators should also be under this limitation.

What stops you from playing your game like this AW?