Matrix Games Forums

There is also the conventional advance thru India
after a huge buildup and the liberation of China in a mechanized
Campaign. Japan has no Mech worthy of the name.
Then bomb from airbases built in China.

I still see no need to blunder about fighting over island pestholes.

Originally posted by Chiteng
There is also the conventional advance thru India
after a huge buildup and the liberation of China in a mechanized
Campaign. Japan has no Mech worthy of the name.
Then bomb from airbases built in China.

I still see no need to blunder about fighting over island pestholes.

It the above is a workable strategy in WITP, then the game is
totally broken and not worth buying. PLEASE..., somebody tell
me that an overland Campaign of India to Burma to China for
attacking Japan is NOT viable in the Game.

First, just getting the volumn of men and material to India for
a Major effort like this would have kept Henry Kaiser busy for an
extra year. Until the Fall of 1943, everything would have to be
shipped around Africa. Supplying a Major ground effort such as
was waged in Europe would have called for many times the
shipping devoted to the CBI historically.

Secondly, the Indian Road and Rail system was stretched as
it was (Millions of Indians died of famine during the war)---the
extra capacity for such an effort would have had to be shipped in.
Also, communications from India to Burma (especially North Burma) were weak at best. And Burmese Communications run
North-South, not East-West. So the real main port-of-entry for
such an effort would be the Rangoon area when it could be
re-taken and re-built (and greatly expanded.) Along with the
Burmese Rail system, and Road system.

Then you hit that little string of hills known as the Himalaya
Mountains. NO railways, NO rivers or canals, just one miserable
dirt road over some of the roughest country on earth. Leading
to the middle of nowhere in the middle of the Middle Kingdom.
And PLEASE don't suggest "flying supply over the Hump". This
was the Wars MOST expensive and wasteful supply route---
loading a ton in New York got you a few pounds in China. All
the rest was eaten up in transport costs. The Campaign you
suggest would require a million tons delivered in China a month.
Not even the US could afford that.

And when you get to China, you get Allies more interested
in fighting each other than the Japanese. So any real fighting
would have to be done by US and British forces, with the "allied"
Chinese stealing everything they could lay their hands on in the
rear in a manner that would make the Naples docks look almost
civilized. The effort would require 20 divisions of ENGINEERS, 10
more of MILITARY POLICE, and a TRANSPORTATION FORCE that
would make J.C.H.Lee's "Com Z" look puny---and this without
even beginning to count the actual combat troops.

EAST ASIA IS NOT EUROPE!! Overland Campaigns cannot be
waged as if a European Transportation net existed. Yamashita
turned down an extra Division for his Malayan Campaign because
he couldn't supply or move it---and a Japanese Infantry Division
required far less supply and support than a US/British one. The notion of turning a few Armored Divisions lose in the North China
Plain sounds promising until you look at the Logistics. Then it
becomes obviously impossible. The Pacific War is a massive
Logistical struggle even when you limit the delivery means to
shipping using the shortest possible routes---longer routes make
it a nightmare. But try to include an overland link of any length
and it becomes an impossibility.

Originally posted by Mike Scholl
It the above is a workable strategy in WITP, then the game is
totally broken and not worth buying. PLEASE..., somebody tell
me that an overland Campaign of India to Burma to China for
attacking Japan is NOT viable in the Game.

First, just getting the volumn of men and material to India for
a Major effort like this would have kept Henry Kaiser busy for an
extra year. Until the Fall of 1943, everything would have to be
shipped around Africa. Supplying a Major ground effort such as
was waged in Europe would have called for many times the
shipping devoted to the CBI historically.

Secondly, the Indian Road and Rail system was stretched as
it was (Millions of Indians died of famine during the war)---the
extra capacity for such an effort would have had to be shipped in.
Also, communications from India to Burma (especially North Burma) were weak at best. And Burmese Communications run
North-South, not East-West. So the real main port-of-entry for
such an effort would be the Rangoon area when it could be
re-taken and re-built (and greatly expanded.) Along with the
Burmese Rail system, and Road system.

Then you hit that little string of hills known as the Himalaya
Mountains. NO railways, NO rivers or canals, just one miserable
dirt road over some of the roughest country on earth. Leading
to the middle of nowhere in the middle of the Middle Kingdom.
And PLEASE don't suggest "flying supply over the Hump". This
was the Wars MOST expensive and wasteful supply route---
loading a ton in New York got you a few pounds in China. All
the rest was eaten up in transport costs. The Campaign you
suggest would require a million tons delivered in China a month.
Not even the US could afford that.

And when you get to China, you get Allies more interested
in fighting each other than the Japanese. So any real fighting
would have to be done by US and British forces, with the "allied"
Chinese stealing everything they could lay their hands on in the
rear in a manner that would make the Naples docks look almost
civilized. The effort would require 20 divisions of ENGINEERS, 10
more of MILITARY POLICE, and a TRANSPORTATION FORCE that
would make J.C.H.Lee's "Com Z" look puny---and this without
even beginning to count the actual combat troops.

EAST ASIA IS NOT EUROPE!! Overland Campaigns cannot be
waged as if a European Transportation net existed. Yamashita
turned down an extra Division for his Malayan Campaign because
he couldn't supply or move it---and a Japanese Infantry Division
required far less supply and support than a US/British one. The notion of turning a few Armored Divisions lose in the North China
Plain sounds promising until you look at the Logistics. Then it
becomes obviously impossible. The Pacific War is a massive
Logistical struggle even when you limit the delivery means to
shipping using the shortest possible routes---longer routes make
it a nightmare. But try to include an overland link of any length
and it becomes an impossibility.

um i think u just answered your own question. think of the route over the owen stanley mountains in UV and how hard that is on troops and logistics. im sure WITP will be no different. and it would take forever to try to fly armies into china from india and so forth. first of all there would not be enough air transport squadrons to make it even worth it. it is all give and take. trying to put everything into india and china will leave the pacific wide open for japanese conquest. so any allied player that tried something like that would be making a stupid mistake.

Originally posted by Tanaka
um i think u just answered your own question. think of the route over the owen stanley mountains in UV and how hard that is on troops and logistics. im sure WITP will be no different. and it would take forever to try to fly armies into china from india and so forth. first of all there would not be enough air transport squadrons to make it even worth it. it is all give and take. trying to put everything into india and china will leave the pacific wide open for japanese conquest. so any allied player that tried something like that would be making a stupid mistake.

I KNOW IT. YOU KNOW IT. I'm just hoping one of the playtestors will tell me that 2by3 knows it. Chiteng's statement
makes it plain that not everyone knows it.

Originally posted by Mike Scholl
I KNOW IT. YOU KNOW IT. I'm just hoping one of the playtestors will tell me that 2by3 knows it. Chiteng's statement
makes it plain that not everyone knows it.

Mike,

Dont get in a tizzy, as Tanaka said, you know from UV that such advance should logistically be impossible. The only problem may be if the designers give too much indigenous supply to China. I hope China's supply is severly limited so as to give the historical significance of keeping the China supply line open.

Originally posted by Mogami
Hi, There is nothing wrong with Chiteng's war plan. If the game gives him enough time to achieve victory then it will work.

Thats my point, Of course the strategy will work if you have until 1946 to complete it. Can you tell us if the campaign game is going to have an open ended game end or is it going to be hard coded to end in Aug.1945? If its going to be open ended shouldnt there be degrees of victory ( Major, minor, draw ect...)?

Thanks for any insight you can give.

Originally posted by TIMJOT
Mike,

Dont get in a tizzy, as Tanaka said, you know from UV that such advance should logistically be impossible. The only problem may be if the designers give too much indigenous supply to China. I hope China's supply is severly limited so as to give the historical significance of keeping the China supply line open.

I hope I am excited for no reason..., and UV does give some
reassurance in that sense. But some of the non-sensical ideas
on strategy I've seen from PACIFIC WAR players are enough
to make one wonder. So I thought I'd speak up NOW instead
of grumbling later when things are already coded.

Mike -
I'm one of those Pacwar players who used to take over India as the Japanese (I was until UV at least)... I think the only similarities you'll see between Pacwar and WitP are the combatants involved and the theaters covered. Other than that, I think its gonna be a whole new ballgame, baby...

Quick note. Please read chap.XIII, Watson's "The War Department - Chief of Staff: Prewar Plans and Operations", United States Army in World War II, Historical Division, Dept of the Army, Washington, DC, 1950

1. No respectable amount of .50 ammo before late spring 1942 (add shipping time)

2. The 12in guns would be coastal mounts and not available before 1943 (add shipping and mounting time)

3. 25 of the 155mm guns would not be manufactured before 1942 (add processing and shipping time)

Admitted, if all shipping was available and everything went right, the garrison would have been significantly enhanced, at least in personnel and equipment O/H. There would have still been significant shortages of ammo and supplies, among them such as .50 ammo and 3in HE for the M3 and M4 AA Guns.

Still think that until, say 1944 on the Philippines Defense Plan timeline, that Japanese control of seas and air around the Philippines would allow them to choose the time and place of engagement. Assets that would have engaged the USN (the Kido Butai, which is what the IGHQ wanted in the first staff) under the "Through Ticket" Orange Plan of the '20's would be available whether the USN was attacked at Pearl Harbor or executed "Rainbow 5" and the cautionary advance to the Philippines (the initial carrier raids would not have begun until Mar '42)

Originally posted by Mike Scholl
I KNOW IT. YOU KNOW IT. I'm just hoping one of the playtestors will tell me that 2by3 knows it. Chiteng's statement
makes it plain that not everyone knows it.

I am not a beta tester

Originally posted by Mike Scholl
I hope I am excited for no reason..., and UV does give some
reassurance in that sense. But some of the non-sensical ideas
on strategy I've seen from PACIFIC WAR players are enough
to make one wonder. So I thought I'd speak up NOW instead
of grumbling later when things are already coded.

Yeah, I know what you mean, but from what we know from UV and insight from the Alpha testers. It looks like the supply/logistics model is totally different. I believe its been said there only 3 entry points for supply. Them being the west coast, Japan, and India. I assume places like Australia and China will have a certain minimal level of indigenous supply. Supply Shipping will be limited to actual ships.

Originally posted by TIMJOT
Yeah, I know what you mean, but from what we know from UV and insight from the Alpha testers. It looks like the supply/logistics model is totally different. I believe its been said there only 3 entry points for supply. Them being the west coast, Japan, and India. I assume places like Australia and China will have a certain minimal level of indigenous supply. Supply Shipping will be limited to actual ships.

Ok then Grab Saigon or Hanoi, ship in the supply and advance North. The Strategy works (in a game).


I am not sure which game you are calling 'PACWAR'
If you mean Gary's I dont like that game.

I was refering to board games.

Hi, I won't lose any sleep worrying the Allies might "Grab" Saigon or Hanoi and march north through China.
If you look at the map you will see Hainan. The allies would have to first capture the Japanese bases here before going to Hanoi.
If they were able to capture Saigon they would still have to worry about Hainan once they reached Hanoi (supply in sufficent amounts can not be unloaded at Saigon to supply units up in Hanoi. This is a major effort. Is this a subsitute for the CenPac or SWPAC operations?
Heavy bombers require a lot of supply. It would be better to capture a port city within range of Japan. (or just "Grab" Formosa)

But wait then you would be acting like MacArthur. It is much easer to supply operations coming up through PI then overland in China.

Originally posted by Chiteng
Ok then Grab Saigon or Hanoi, ship in the supply and advance North. The Strategy works (in a game).


I am not sure which game you are calling 'PACWAR'
If you mean Gary's I dont like that game.

I was refering to board games.

Yeah I agree, thats a viable strategy there are railheads in in-dochina, that lead right into mainland china. You could secure southern china ports as you advanced up the coast, but I would think you would also need to grab Malaya and Singapore to secure the Malacca straits.

BTW, I believe Mike was refering to GG's PacWar.

Originally posted by Mogami

If they were able to capture Saigon they would still have to worry about Hainan once they reached Hanoi (supply in sufficent amounts can not be unloaded at Saigon to supply units up in Hanoi. This is a major effort. Is this a subsitute for the CenPac or SWPAC operations?
Heavy bombers require a lot of supply. It would be better to capture a port city within range of Japan. (or just "Grab" Formosa)

Not saying it would be the best strategy, but at least its a viable "China" strategy if one was insistent on pursueing a stategy through China.

Curious though, Is there not a rail line and road system up through indo-China into south China in the game? I believe it existed historically. Wasnt the initial rational for the IJA to enter Indo-china was to stop the flow of supplies to the Nats through there?

Originally posted by Mogami
Hi, I won't lose any sleep worrying the Allies might "Grab" Saigon or Hanoi and march north through China.
If you look at the map you will see Hainan. The allies would have to first capture the Japanese bases here before going to Hanoi.
If they were able to capture Saigon they would still have to worry about Hainan once they reached Hanoi (supply in sufficent amounts can not be unloaded at Saigon to supply units up in Hanoi. This is a major effort. Is this a subsitute for the CenPac or SWPAC operations?
Heavy bombers require a lot of supply. It would be better to capture a port city within range of Japan. (or just "Grab" Formosa)

But wait then you would be acting like MacArthur. It is much easer to supply operations coming up through PI then overland in China.

I am not in Beta Mogami as you know. There is no way I could possibly know how WitP(matrix) would work.

However, a land strategy does not demand a huge navy.
If you are able to build airfields wherever you want rather than
where the game demands.

Hi, I had a very long response, but then I realized I could shorten it. Coming up from NG through PI to Formosa requires less effort then fighting through China. (In China you can not isolate the defense)
You would be trying to supply a massive land and air force over a single rail line. (over a vast distance)

Originally posted by Mogami
Hi, I had a very long response, but then I realized I could shorten it. Coming up from NG through PI to Formosa requires less effort then fighting through China. (In China you can not isolate the defense)
You would be trying to supply a massive land and air force over a single rail line. (over a vast distance)

Well then there is still no need to fight in NG.
Just go straight from Pearl to Saipan.

I hope I am excited for no reason..., and UV does give some

Mike, you should try to take people's speculation about the game with a grain of salt, keep in mind only the developers and beta testers have played it an anyone else is just guessing at how and what may be implemented.

Mogami, Couldnt you supply Hanoi through Haiphong? I dont have the map in front of me but I seem to recall that being the deep water port that served Hanoi, while Cam Rahn Bay served Saigon.

What about the Burma road? IIRC correctly most of the British effort in Burma initially was an attempt to open that supply route to China. Does that cross the Himalayas or lower country? I realize a supply route isn't neccessarily enough to move and supply an army through, but it was seen as a while as a lifeline for Chinese forces so I imagine it must have had significant capacity.

Originally posted by Chiteng
Ok then Grab Saigon or Hanoi, ship in the supply and advance North. The Strategy works (in a game).


I am not sure which game you are calling 'PACWAR'
If you mean Gary's I dont like that game.

I was refering to board games.

Historically, this is pretty much a "no-go" as well. Yes, there
IS a rail connection from French Indo-China up into China itself.
But it ain't the B&O by a LONG shot. The weight of the rail in
almost all of these railroads was much lighter than a standard
US Railroad, the rolling stock and engine capacity lighter as well.
The roads are still dirt, and there are a fair sized group of
mountains on the China/Indo China border (which is why China
ends where it does, and Viet Nam/Laos begin). If 2by3 have
done their homework, you will find it VERY difficult to support
even a Corps advance along this route.., and it still really doesn't
go anywhere useful for several hundred additional miles.

Whoever it was that pointed out that if you had come this far
you would be better off going to Formosa had the right idea.
Most of the "freight' in China travelled on rivers and canals at
this time---and they don't go where you want to go. ONE Liberty
Ship can dump thousands of tons of supply right on the Formosa
docks (weight depends more on what's being shipped than the
actual capacity). Bringing the same amount north on trains that
far will need anything up to 25 trainloads---if the Japanese have
left the rails, bridges, water supplies, and tunnels intact. And if
the Chinese don't steal half of it before it arrives.

The best way to put it is to think of the Asian Continent as a
VERY BIG, VERY DRY, sponge. It will SUCK UP a HUGE amount of
effort, men, and material before a "trickle" oozes from the other
side. Islands (of any size) provide far easier access and control
for your forces---and if you don't need them you can by-pass 'em
and not have to worry about their garrisons. Plus staging a
major advance out of the Indian Ocean requires that EVERYTHING
be shipped half-way around the world before you even START.
It's fun to dream about, but logistically it's a screaming, cold-sweat, NIGHTMARE!!

If 2by3 is on it's toes, supply available in Karachi will be limited
and take a BIG investment in shipping to increase. It takes a
LOT more ships "in transit" to deliver the same tonnage over
15,000 miles than it does over 5,000---and building them means you can't build something else. Guess we'll see....