Another way to get Chinese slots

[Badnews]

Some mistake:[8D]
There is two 4th Cav Crops in hisroty. The first was disbanded in 1938.6. The second found in 1942.10.
6th Cav Crops was disbanded in 1940.8. The last commander's name is Men, Bing-yue.
8th Cav Corps is no exsits in history.

1GA is different to 1C. They are two units in different War Aeras.
No Prov.59C or Prov.75C in history.

8th Route Army changed its name to 18th Group Army in 1937.9.11. A long time ago.
[:D]

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Badnews

Some mistake:[8D]
There is two 4th Cav Crops in hisroty. The first was disbanded in 1938.6. The second found in 1942.10.
6th Cav Crops was disbanded in 1940.8. The last commander's name is Men, Bing-yue.
8th Cav Corps is no exsits in history.

1GA is different to 1C. They are two units in different War Aeras.
No Prov.59C or Prov.75C in history.

8th Route Army changed its name to 18th Group Army in 1937.9.11. A long time ago.
[:D]

To begin at the end, you are quite right. But the 8th Route Army is a lot more famous to outsiders - so I used a combined name to help players recognize the unit.

I am able to locate a 8th Cavalry corps in history - but I was NOT able to find the 6th corps in 1940. However, Norester (??? sp) lists it in 1941 - so after removing it I put it back in. He is pretty much the standard source for CHS (and by default RHS). While I don't see an 8th Cavalry corps in his listing - it really does seem to have been active - in particular in the 1930s - it was already in existence when the War of Resistence began. However, it does appear the 8th was not a regular organization - but a Provincial one - which is why I identified it that way. Indeed - I find no evidence for ANY regular cavalry corps HQ per se. ALL seem to have belonged to something else - and I am not even sure what a "Muslim" oganization means? [We have both an infantry corps and a cavalry corps so identified].

I wanted reinforcements - and so far have only one unit - so I like the idea of having the 4th Cavalry appear as one as well - and I accept your date - but where did you find that? Also - while there are only two available unused leader slots - I like the chrome of getting it right - so I used one of them for Men.

As for the 59 and 75th corps - you may be looking at a ROC Army listing - and if so it is correct. I must side with Treespider and/or whoever did stock on them, however: I was able to confirm them as PROVINCIAL organizations -
and for that reason I identified them as such above. From now on you will be able to tell central army from other kinds of troops in RHS. I have posted on a separate thread organizations I am unable to confirm the existence of so far. If I post it here - rest assurred I have found data on it somewhere. And unless I say I added it - it is an inherited unit representing CHS scholarship. [I probably have more material on the PLA than any other organization - about 10,000 pages filed not counting books - and for reasons unrelated to this project I am something of a PLA historical researcher. I was married in China, I have an academic mentor who is a formal PLA historian, and I run an international internet discussion group on China populated mainly by academics, intelligence officers and soldiers. During the Clinton era I was forced to build a China oriented strategic studies collection because officials were unable to do that - anyone in any agency who suggested China might be a problem lost his job no less. The current Director, ONI estimated in 2005 that it would take us another ten years to recover what we lost by getting rid of honest China hands. While I don't have time to do an exhaustive documentation process - we would never get anything released if I did - the problem is more a question of finding the right stuff than do we have it?]

[Badnews]

59C found in 1937.8, comes from a part of 38D of 29C.
When 59C founded, it command 38D, 180D and 13th Cav Bde.
59C fight against Japan in many battle in East of China.
1940.5, LGEN Zhang, Zhi-zhong, the commander of 59C, was KIA in Zhao-yi Scenario.
When he died he was given a state funeral in 1940.5.28. He is a hero of my county.[&o]
After 1941.1, 59C command 38D, 180D and Prov.53D.
59C revolt to PLA in 1948.11.11.

[el cid again]

CHS & RHS slot 2360 (former 90th Chinese Corps) is now the Szechuan Provincial 90th Field Army.
Its ratings were raised to 40/40.

[Comment: we are raising ratings enough that it may by itself make China tougher to conquer]

CHS & RHS slot 2345 (former 78th Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 78th Field Army.
It has unusually high ratings of 55/55

[Comment: I think it is important to get all units right as of the start of WITP - but not all reinforcements.
Aside from the matter of lack of slots - the code will regenerate any unit lost in only 30 days - so de facto
there are going to be plenty of reinforcements if only units are being lost.]

CHS & RHS slot 2278 (former 52nd Chinese Corps) is now ROC Army 52nd Field Army in RHS.
EDIT: Revised to Manchu 52nd Field Army

CHS & RHS slot 2318 (former 77th Chinese Corps) is now the Miscelaneous Northern Faction 77th Field Army in RHS.

CHS & RHS slot 2253 (former 38th Chinese Corps) is now the Miscelaneous Northern Faction 38th Field Army in RHS.

CHS & RHS slot 2339 (former New 3rd Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 3rd Group Army (that is, big)
It has a high rating of 55/55. There also appears to have been a different 3rd army -
a "Shantung 3rd Route Army" (Lu in Chinese is usually rendered "route" in English) - an oversize force by Chinese standards with possibly 5 divisions - but it may have been wiped out in 1941.
EDIT: It appears there was once a Shantung 3rd Route Army. It may have been broken up. The unit formerly in RHS slot 2231 was a duplicated unit - and is now replaced by a different formation. This slot will now be the ROC 3rd New Army = a Group Army.

CHS & RHS slot 2302 (former 13th Chinese Corps) is now the Miscelaneous Northern Faction 13th Field Army in RHS.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Badnews

59C found in 1937.8, comes from a part of 38D of 29C.
When 59C founded, it command 38D, 180D and 13th Cav Bde.
59C fight against Japan in many battle in East of China.
1940.5, LGEN Zhang, Zhi-zhong, the commander of 59C, was KIA in Zhao-yi Scenario.
When he died he was given a state funeral in 1940.5.28. He is a hero of my county.[&o]
After 1941.1, 59C command 38D, 180D and Prov.53D.
59C revolt to PLA in 1948.11.11.

I did not realize you were writing from China - but I am quite in agreement with what you wrote here.
Above it appeared you said there was no such army - when in fact it was a significant one.

I think it is of some value to remember that at this time China and the US were allies - and indeed the most common view in China was that the US was "the last best hope" that Japan could be defeated. While there were US colonial interests in China - why else maintain a China river gunboat fleet? - the US was the strongest advocate among the great powers of a China run by and for the Chinese - and often it was at loggerheads with its closest ally (the UK) over China policy. The US administration was quite liberal - and unable to reconcile itself to colonial status for China - much less conquest by Japan. If it was reluctant to fight - that was a political necessity of the period - and to some extent a legacy from WWI. For its part China provided the best intelligence of the Pearl Harbor attack - evidence we disregarded and long denied existed - but it is evidence of at least an attitude of cooperation on the part of the Chinese. It should also be said that we didn't entirely support one faction of Chinese during this period: a famous USMC officer was advisor to Mao and the Red Army (and later went on to form Carlson's Raiders). Nor did General Stillwell find working with Chiang an entirely rational or fun process. China was (and is) a country as big as the United States - with even more people - and it was very hard to understand the complex things going on there. But Americans in particular regarded China as inherantly "on our side" and China enjoyed popular support in US politics in many respects throughout this period. What followed the war was not going to be nice no matter who was in power: neither Chiang nor Mao were democrats.

[Badnews]

There are two 4th Cav Corps in chinese history.
The first 4CC found in 1937.8, came from 10th Manchu Cav Div.
The commader is Shan, Zhi-xin. The crops is command only 10th Cav Div and two Bns.
4CC suffered heavy losess in Xuzhou Scenario and disbanded in 1938.6.
 
The second 4CC found in 1942.10, came from Prov.4C, "Jin-series".
The commader is Dong, Qi-wu. The corps is command New 3th Cav Div, N4CD and 9th Inf Bde.
This troop is defend in Suiyuan during the war, and be disbanded in 1945.8.

[el cid again]

shia shia

I also like pin yin - which I was surprised to see officially adopted - since it was a creation of Christian missionaries. When we revise something, I adopt the new standard for spelling - since being phonetic it is far easier to understand.

We are revising the commander name to your finding.

[el cid again]

CHS & RHS slot 2243 (former Chinese 31st Corps) will be upgraded to a 3 division ROC Army Group Army in RHS (thanks to Treespider on a different thread)

CHS & RHS slot 2247 (former Chinese 9th Corps) will be eliminated. It will be combined into slot 2368 (former Chinese 99th Corps). That unit will also be upgraded to a three division ROC Army Group Army in RHS (thanks to Badnews on a different thread). The unit will bear a dual designation: 9 / 99 th Group Army. The commander's name will be Pei Chao-Hui. [Slot 2366 seems to have duplicated 2247 - there were TWO 9th Corps - this will be used for 15th Field Army]
2247 will be the ROC Army 5th Route Army. It is one of the strategic reserves of China (IRL committed to - and lost in - Burma). It is at full strength and has a rating of 55/55.


[Comment: the net effect of the above two revisions is to represent six divisions in two slots vice three slots. To the extent a Corps is more likely to survive - and to be effective in the attack - if larger - we may have made ROC stronger. And we will no doubt be able to add some other unit in the slot created. In spite of not getting a lot of missing units identified, I am finding them en passant - just looking at the existing OB - so fast we surely will run out of slots before we run out of units to add.]

CHS & RHS slot 2343 (former 49th Chinese Corps) will be the Hopei Provincial 49th Field Army in RHS. For reasons wholly unclear this unit was grossly overrated in effectiveness for any ROC unit of the period - and it is reduced to the terrible norms for a Provincial force (35/35).

CHS & RHS slot 2281 (former 28th Chinese Corps) will be the Miscelaneous Southern Faction 28th Field Army in RHS. It has a better than normal rating for local troops of 40/40.

CHS & RHS slot 2288 (former 26th Chinese Corps) will be the Miscelaneous Southern Faction 26th Field Army in RHS. It also has a rating of 40/40.

CHS & RHS slot 2292 (former 67th Chinese Corps) will be the Manchu 67th Field Army. For reasons unclear it was given the horrible rating of 25/25 - possibly it had been defeated? It is now rated at the local troop standard of 35/35.

CHS & RHS slot 2307 (former 2nd Provisional Corps) will be the ROC Army 2nd Provisional Field Army in RHS. It has a fairly low rating for a regular unit of 40/40.

[el cid again]

CHS & RHS slot 2323 (former 2nd Chinese Corps) is removed. It is apparently a duplicate reference to the 2nd New Corps - and it isn't listed as a 1941 OB unit. Whichever name you prefer - there is only one 2nd Corps in 1941 according to N (never can spell his name).

CHS & RHS slot 2352 (former 20th Chinese Corps) is now the Szechwan Provincial 20th Field Army in RHS.
It has a relatively good rating for local troops of 40/40.

CHS & RHS slot 2287 (former 100th Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 100th Field Army in RHS. Its ratings were raised to 40/40. [While 45/45 is standard for regulars, this is presumably a relatively newly formed unit]

CHS & RGS slot 2389 (former 86th Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 86th Field Army in RHS. It is rated at 40/40.

CHS & RHS slot 2286 (former 85th Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 85th Field Army in RHS. Also rated at 40/40.

CHS & RHS slot 2282 (former 91st Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 91st Field Army in RHS. Rated at 45/40.
It may have been rated lower for some reason, but as it was not apparent, I rated its skill at the norm for regulars and let its morale be at the low end for regulars.

CHS & RHS slot 2272 (former 66th Chinese Corps) is now the Kwangtung Provincial Field Army in RHS. This is a reinforcement unit appearing 420315 at Kungming. It had previously existed in the 1930s and probably had been disbanded.

CHS & RHS slot 2271 (former 93rd Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 93rd Field Army in RHS. Grossly low ratings of 25/25 raised to 40/40.

CHS & RHS slot 2297 (Former 65th Chinese Corps) is now the Kwangtung Provincial 65th Field Army in RHS.
Rated at 40/35.

CHS & RHS slot 2305 (former 65th Chinese Corps) is now the Kwangtung Provincial 64th Field Army in RHS.
Rated at 40/45.

Added the Szechuan Provincial 89th and 91st Field Armies to RHS - new to WITP - at Kungchang and 48,30 respectively.

CHS & RHS slot 2357 (former 16th Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 16th Field Army in RHS.
Rated at 50/50.

CHS & RHS slot 2354 (former 72nd Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 72nd Field Army in RHS.

CHS & RHS slot 2350 (former 87th Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 87th Field Army in RHS. For some reason it was horribly rated at 25/25. This was raised to 45/35 (depressed morale in case the rating had some justification, but the experience norm for regulars)

CHS & RHS slot 2349 (former 54th Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 54th Field Army in RHS.
This unit has the high rating of 55/45 (not sure why morale is depressed?)

CHS & RHS slot 2344 (former 70th Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 70th Field Army in RHS.
This unit has the very high rating of 55/55.

[el cid again]

CHS & RHS slots 2340 & 2341 (formerly 58th and 60th Chinese Corps) will now be the ROC Army 58th and 60th Field Armies, respectively. They have unusually high ratings of 50/55.

CHS & RHS slot 2337 (formerly 74th Chinese Corps) will now be the ROC Army 74th Field Army in RHS.

CHS & RHS slot 2367 (formerly 68th Chinese Corps) does not seem to exist in 1941 (N has no reference to it;
nor is it in War of Resistence listings, nor any other I have found. It will be replaced with ROC Army 48th Field Army - which seems to be missing - and might even be a typo - in RHS. EDIT: slot returned to 68th Corps - it is mentioned in the China History Forum and by Treespider below. 48th moves to slot 2369.

CHS & RHS slot 2331 (formerly 81st Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 81st Field Army in RHS.
Values raised to 40/45.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

CHS & RHS slot 2367 (formerly 68th Chinese Corps) does not seem to exist in 1941 (N has no reference to it;
nor is it in War of Resistence listings, nor any other I have found. It will be replaced with ROC Army 48th Field Army - which seems to be missing - and might even be a typo - in RHS.

68th Corps fought in the Battle of Southern Honan in April of 1940 in the vicinity of Nan-yang as part of the 2nd Army Group of the 5th War Area. It was comprised of the 143rd D , 119th D and 36th Prov. D. In the Winter of 1944 the corps is still part of the 2nd Army Group, 5th War Area with the same divisional structure.

[el cid again]

I find it hard to believe there was no 68th Army - I think all numbers were used at one time or another. But I am not finding any reference to it in the 1930s OBs at all - and there is also not one in 1941 by N. How did he manage to miss it? [So much for scholarly sources being right; not that this is an easy matter to be comprehensive about] The 1941 list has 2nd Army Group under the First War Area - not Fifth War Area.

Does not the term "Army Group" imply it is a "group of armies" ?? And since the term used for the major formations was indeed "army" - it really is. It is interesting that academics are mixing "army group" with subordinate "corps" instead of "armies" - except in the case of the Cavalry - which was called "corps" - and special cases (e.g. the Manchu Advanced Corps).

More germane - where did you find a reference to it?

EDIT: Never mind: there is a reference to the "KMT 68th Corps" on the China History Forum - 'abandoned positions along the Yangtze' - so now where to put the 48th ???

[el cid again]

Added Manchu 51st Field Army at Kweiyang. New unit but listed from 1930s and by N.

Added ROC Army 57th Field Army at Luchow. New unit but listed from 1930s and by N.

CHS & RHS slot 2324 (former 80th Chinese Corps) is now the ROC Army 80th Field Army in RHS.

CHS & RHS slots 2337, 2338, 2339, 2344, 2352, 2355 & 2356 are preserved as is: named ROC Army Field Armies.
[40, 76, 23, 12, 33, 96 & 34th, respectively]

CHS & RHS slots 2264, 2267, 2270, 2271, 2274, 2276, 2280, 2282 & 2284 are preserved as is: named
ROC Army Field Armies [36, 37, 35, 14, 93, 45, 18, 61, 91 & 72nd, respectively]

[treespider]

Does not the term "Army Group" imply it is a "group of armies" ?? And since the term used for the major formations was indeed "army" - it really is. It is interesting that academics are mixing "army group" with subordinate "corps" instead of "armies" - except in the case of the Cavalry - which was called "corps" - and special cases (e.g. the Manchu Advanced Corps).

Cid...

You really should refer to them as Corps but it is your mod and your choice. The "Army" reference appears to be a translation by the US Army and the DIA (not CIA). In fact your description of "Group Armies" etc appears to be directly lifted from Stillwell's Mission to China by Romanus et al.

Chinese authors appear to refer to your "Armies" as "Corps" - cases in point - History of the Sino-Japanese War bu Hsu Long-Hsuen (from which Niehorster crafted his OOB) and Military History of Modern China 1929-1949 by FF Liu. When i get home this evening I'll provide the information from Liu. Also form his posts it seems that our Chinese forum member badnews also refers to them as corps..

Now we await the 3 page white paper on the etymology of the "Corps" and "Army" in the Chjinese language ...(sometimes I wonder why I even bother)[8|]

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I find it hard to believe there was no 68th Army - I think all numbers were used at one time or another. But I am not finding any reference to it in the 1930s OBs at all - and there is also not one in 1941 by N. How did he manage to miss it? [So much for scholarly sources being right; not that this is an easy matter to be comprehensive about] The 1941 list has 2nd Army Group under the First War Area - not Fifth War Area.

...
More germane - where did you find a reference to it?

It is in History of the Sino-Japanese edited by Hsu Long-Hsuen.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: treespider

Does not the term "Army Group" imply it is a "group of armies" ?? And since the term used for the major formations was indeed "army" - it really is. It is interesting that academics are mixing "army group" with subordinate "corps" instead of "armies" - except in the case of the Cavalry - which was called "corps" - and special cases (e.g. the Manchu Advanced Corps).

Cid...

You really should refer to them as Corps but it is your mod and your choice. The "Army" reference appears to be a translation by the US Army and the DIA (not CIA). In fact your description of "Group Armies" etc appears to be directly lifted from Stillwell's Mission to China by Romanus et al.

Chinese authors appear to refer to your "Armies" as "Corps" - cases in point - History of the Sino-Japanese War bu Hsu Long-Hsuen (from which Niehorster crafted his OOB) and Military History of Modern China 1929-1949 by FF Liu. When i get home this evening I'll provide the information from Liu. Also form his posts it seems that our Chinese forum member badnews also refers to them as corps..

REPLY: Sure he does: PLA formally converted to the term a few years ago. Only old people in PLA still call them group armies. But it was and remained official usage until about 2002 or so - at which time I had to go through 154 pages of modern OB and change it! It would not be controversial if you would just read the Chinese symbol. It is an ancient usage and a reasonable translation. Ancient European armies were not often bigger either - and traditionally divided into three parts as well.

Now we await the 3 page white paper on the etymology of the "Corps" and "Army" in the Chjinese language ...(sometimes I wonder why I even bother)[8|]

No time. Besides - you appear unimpressed by linguistic argument. RHS uses the leteral translation OR the native language term whenever possible - for "flavor" - thus "curved gun regiment" or "Yobeki regiment" I really am not following scholars in English - but records in Chinese - and official Chinese military unit listings have been pretty stable for a long time. When I translate it tends to be literally since that creates a flavor of thinking in the source. A "curved gun" would more properly be tranlsated "mortar" - but it sounds Japanese to say it like they do. [FYI the Japanese name for a submarine is, literally, "diving can"]

For what it is worth - if I was after translation for clarity I would use "corps" for modern Western readers. For histocial gamers I prefer the "flavor" of a literal translation: it is essentially a form of chrome, but it also helps players immerse in the game. Gamers pretty much know the term "army" was used all over Asia for "corps" - and anyway the term "corps" is pretty sloppy even in the West - see the Berisian Corps down in NEI for example - and we have others in RHS. I use the term used because it "sounds good" and it is respectful of actual usage. If we needed to communicate to modern non-specialists we should indeed us the term corps however.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I find it hard to believe there was no 68th Army - I think all numbers were used at one time or another. But I am not finding any reference to it in the 1930s OBs at all - and there is also not one in 1941 by N. How did he manage to miss it? [So much for scholarly sources being right; not that this is an easy matter to be comprehensive about] The 1941 list has 2nd Army Group under the First War Area - not Fifth War Area.

...
More germane - where did you find a reference to it?

It is in History of the Sino-Japanese edited by Hsu Long-Hsuen.

Thanks - but as noted above - I already had decided you would - as the unit is mentioned in a history forum. I restored the unit.

[el cid again]

Final edition: ROC Army New Fifth Army - apparently a reformed Xiangsi 5th Route Army - absent previously in WITP -
at Chengtu.

We have a few open slots [6 of them] - if anyone can identify early reinforcement formations or wholly absent formations.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

For what it is worth - if I was after translation for clarity I would use "corps" for modern Western readers. For histocial gamers I prefer the "flavor" of a literal translation: it is essentially a form of chrome, but it also helps players immerse in the game. Gamers pretty much know the term "army" was used all over Asia for "corps" - and anyway the term "corps" is pretty sloppy even in the West - see the Berisian Corps down in NEI for example - and we have others in RHS. I use the term used because it "sounds good" and it is respectful of actual usage. If we needed to communicate to modern non-specialists we should indeed us the term corps however.

FF Liu was formerly an officer in the Chinese nationalist forces in both staff and combat assignments. He was wounded twice during World War II, and decorated "for conspicuous gallantry in action." He came to the United States and received his doctorate at Princeton University. He is the author of A Military History of Modern China 1924-1949, Princeton University Press, 1956. He provides the following chart on page 127, note the use of Group Armies and Armies before November 1938. After 1938 the Army no longer exists. In the narrative he states that the basic field organization for a tactical unit was the division the strategic unit was the corps.

In addition in Hsu's History of the Sino Japanese War 1937-1945 as this to say on page 288. Hsu describes a military conference called by Generalisimo Chiang. "Based on the above-mentioned opinions (of the conference), our government proceeded to reorganize command agencies and to abolish the army and division subordinated brigade headquarters. The corps was used as a strategic unit in order to reduce the number of command levels and achieve flexibility. "

[el cid again]

Which - if true - makes one wonder how it was the ROC went BACK to using the term "army" for a corps sized unit?
Too much tradition??? This is STILL the case today. PLA has gone over to using "corps" - after the century turned - but ROC has not. It did do away with divisions though (active anyway) - in favor of brigades. From my first visit to Taiwan - in 1968 - until now - I never have encountered any usage of corps at all.

PLA may offer a clue: having formally adopted "corps" - only those who read (but never actually participate) use it - the soldiers STILL say "group army"!