Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

...I really don't get this thread at all.

Are we going to force the Japanese player to do everything stupid the real Japanese chose to do in the war as well?

We've already got PoW and Repulse hard coded to sail to their deaths pointlessly, are we adding in multiple British divisions to this rule too?

[8|]

I concur with this opinion...

I currently have a campaign going, where the Japanese player has completely ingnored the western half of the map.
So I'm to be hamstrung by not taking the initiative in the west?
Allowing the Japanese to throw everything east?

I think not...[:D]

BTW, we are using the PP expenditure HR for (R) LCU's.[;)]

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace


While I am not advocating for tying the Allied hands to replicate a series of disasterous British (mostly Churchill's) strategic and operational decisions, for those who want more of the historical political feel, a house rule could be used that requires the Allied player to pay to change the HQ of III Indian Corps reinforcements if they want to send them anywhere other than Singers.

Interesting concept. I have to think about it more, but I may add it to my HR.

i am facing a HUGE army in burma from mid 42 playing as Japan.
my two cents - those Australian units should be required to go to Aust -or pay a stupendous Political point penalty, I feel that in real life, if Churchill had done what he wanted to do -that would have seen Australia pull out of European war totally -complete breach of faith. Curtin would have done it for sure.

Pitty there are almost no books from the Japanese side on campaigns like Burma ( or almost any other) ... I bet they learned a lot also.

Related to Akyab, place can be deathtrap to either side units. If one turns hex-sides on, one sees that it can trace supply only via 2 hex-sides, very easy to "Stalingrad" units there. If you occupy those 2 hexes and enter to Akyab via both hex-sides, place is cut off from land supply. It will be very painful to try to supply units there either by sea or air, considering how many planes both sides can have contesting that from different places.
 

ORIGINAL: aspqrz

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

To me it's all logistics. The India/Burma border is just much much easier to move supplies accross than IRL. The Arakan Offensive failed mostly because of logistics, and that was a shoestring operation of an understrength Corps, not the 10-division invasion the Allies can launch in 1943 in AE.

Not sure how to model it, but that's really the problem to me.

My take is that 1st Arakan failed to due to an inept tactical plan executed by inexperience troops against a very competent enemy.

Having just read Slim's "Defeat into Victory" I wouldn't be quite so harsh ... it was probably more inept upper level commanders (i.e. not Slim) who kept interfering with operational parameters and in actual operations ... but certainly, yes, the Japanese were tactically competent ... much more so than the British in many ways. Of course, they took huge risks and, if less unrealistic constraints had been put on the British forces these risks may not have paid off (of course, if less constraints had been put on the Brits they may not have undertaken the campaign until they had a larger force available).

Oh, btw, thanks to those posters on other threads who recommended to all and sundry to read "Defeat into Victory" ... an excellent insight into the campaign!

Phil

I think the lack of appetite for action by the senior Brit commanders, the general distrust/contempt the UK Army had for the Indian Army (I include the UK units of the Indian Army) and the siphoning off of the better officers and forces for the Middle east, the Royal Navy "Fleet in being" and a general lack of creativity earlier on were the main culprites in the war.

In reality I think AE actually shows that there probably WAS enough force and shipping to make the planned attacks (there were several plans, that were well thought out, but tended to be shelved... not enough landing craft... too far to get ice for the gin... etc etc)

Certainly logistics in WITP is easier than IRL, but this applies to both sides. Certainly hindsight is an advantage, again goes to both sides (as Japan you have to go early, but you also know you can trash about everything with one hand tied behind your back for the first few months).

In the game with Nik and Joe we also reinforced with 1 US Div (as Stillwell wanted), and kept the Aussie corps in that area, in return for 2 UK Divs defending the approaches to, and then Darwin. So yes we did you more force as well, although that wasn't actually used south of the Indian border until after we had defeated the Japanese forces (through airpower, feights and a bit of hard fighting).

I think it is a tough ask for Japan but I also think that most Japanese players don't send even the historical forces that were there... but I'm still trying to find good sources for what was there after the initial attacks, so I could be wrong. Burma needs forces from China.

I look forward to giving it a go, I lost that theatre as the Allies in a WITP game, a mistake I hope to repeat on an allied opponant as a Japanese commander one day... and I think the answer is go hard early, exhaust the allied airforce while you can attack in mass... holding back is the wrong strategy here... but at some point the allied airpower will stop you... seeing that tipping point then pulling out is the hard part.

The Allied Army is fragile, defeat it once or twice and it won't come back for a long time... But you have to defeat it first.

Cheers

Rob

The code may not support this concept but the neatest way to force the initial deployments would be to "lock" the task forces containing the initial reinforcements (18 Brit etc). Meaning that you could not split the TFs or change their orders without a PP cost being paid. Once empty, they're released. If you can get away with loading the units up and leaving without getting sunk, great, go for it.

jrcar is correct IMO

Japan cannot afford to sit back on the Burma theatre - if the allies pull back to India with Burcorps and you havent nailed the location of I Aus Corps I think Japan NEEDS to take Assam in 42 while they can to give strategic depth.

i.e. take Ledo and the border region overland

If you dont you will be fighting post monsoon in Upper Burma in late 42.

The allies coomited about 4 Divs to 1st Arakan in late 42 to try and retake Akyab.

If you add to that

18th Brit + refugees from Malaya
2 x Aus Divs
Maybe a US Div
BUr corps intact and pulled back *say 3 Div equivalents
Add a chinese Army re equipped in India

You can triple that historic force or more.

If the Japanese commit to another theatre like Australia so much the better you now know as the allies that they cannot end run round you.

As Japan you dont want to give the allies free pilot training by taking Akyab etc or get in contact on the Assam Front

But thats short sighted IMO NOT taking those regions if you havent totally trashed BURCORPS and 18th Brit Div will come back to haunt you.

The CW army is fragile in 42 if you let them hoard their limited devices and get multiple Divs upt to strength in peace and quiet they can and will muster a major force.

I think the issue is not that the CW is to stong but that the Japanese are letting them resit and train in peace for to long.

Typically this is the Japanese can go swanning off the New Cal, Australia, Fiji or even make progress in China also I think their is a reluctance to close on allied air power when you know by keeping back RAF Fighters wont have the legs to reach you.

That strategic buffer does have those effects but it works both ways I think a par Japanese performance against a full Burma Sir Robin needs to be Dacca to Tezpur

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

... I think a par Japanese performance against a full Burma Sir Robin needs to be Dacca to Tezpur

ISn't there a point that you trigger extra Indian forces?

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

... I think a par Japanese performance against a full Burma Sir Robin needs to be Dacca to Tezpur

ISn't there a point that you trigger extra Indian forces?

You need to be in Northern India for that to happen. IIRC, it's triggered around Delhi or so. You can safely conquer Calcutta etc.

I am not saying commit massive forces or even leave the bad terrain for the plains - its simply about Japan needs to trash the Indian Army while its pathetically weak
 
Its still fragile in 42 but with backbone of a few Aus Divs and 1 or 2 Brit Divs plus other forces it can get the job done.
 
Ultimately its not about ground its about Destroying BURCORPS.
 
Ground is almost irrelevant Japan needs to trash the Indian Army in 42 while they can to stop it coming back in 43.
 
If they run Japan must pursue until they are destroyed or be willing to commit a lot more force to Burma in 42/43 i.e. 44/45 levels top stop the Allied counter attack.
 
Almost no Allied player will be stupid enough to commit to wholesale frontal attacks on a ltd axis in the way Irwin did in 1st Arakan you need to write down the Indian Amry while its weak to stop it coming back at you ahistorically early
 

Totally agree with Andy.

The Brits where not only physically but psychologically damaged by the Japanese invasion of Burma... the psychological damage isn't as likely in hindsight to an Allied player.

You must destroy the weak ground forces. To do that you must destroy the Brit airforces early. Then you can sit back south of the mountains and suffer a couple of years of intense air attacks knowing that the allied player is still getting together the forces they need to deal with you on the ground.

As a consequence I think in AE you need a bit more force than what was commited there IRL, the impact of this is that some other options become less viaable, ground looks impresive in the newspaper maps but in reality with your back door kicked in that ground is pointless.

Cheers

Rob

Andy Mac is spot on with his comments.

In my own AAR I was able to overrun not only Burma but most of Indochina by late 1942. Heres why....

First of all, Burma is indefensible in both directions. My Japanese opponent outflanked me on the Thai/Burma border in early 1942 and I was forced to retreat. But by retreating....mostly on railroads to Myitkina no less....I was able to extract virtually all of Burma Corps. Burma Corps fortifies in Myitkina and gains both experience and replacements.....soon you have over 1000 AV in Burma Corps with decent experience. Initially I had no intention of playing "Sir Robin" but the Japanese offensive forced it.

Second, Andy Mac scared me with some of his WitP pre-release comments so I sent all of Ist Australian Corps to NE India.....thats another 1300-1400 AV. They just sat in NE India garrisoning the coastal ports. Same goes for 18th UK Division.

Third, I was able to extract all of IIIrd Indian Corps from Malaya and bring everyone back to NE India....thats another 1500 AV.

My opponent was so focused on overrunning China.....and I was running out of supply in China....that I attacked Burma in desperation just hoping to reopen the Burma Road.

But I had over 4000 AV from Burma Corps/Ist Australian Corps/IIIrd Indian Corps. Japan needs 9-10 divisions to stop that. I was hoping to force Japan to pull troops out of China and commit them to Burma/SE Asia.....but they never did and consequently lost not only Burma but all of Thailand and Indochina.

Japan gets PPs just like the Allies....she can start buying 80 experience brigades from Manchuria in 1/42. Japan has the ability in AE to attempt to overrun China or the USSR, or she can invade Ceylon/India/Australia/New Zealand/New Caledonia/New Hebrides/Port Moresby/Fijis/Samoa/ etc......even Hawaii or.....gasp....the North American west coast.

I had a Japanese opponent invade western and northern Australia with over 150,000 troops in a game of CHS and I responded by sending nearly 200,000 reinforcements to OZ...barely saving SE OZ. Conversely, if an Allied player invades Burma with over 200,000 troops....none of which were Indian Command....and the Japanese player doesnt respond Im not sure what to say. Certainly trying to hard code this from happening isnt the solution.

Maybe Japan should use their PPs to buy additional troops from Manchuria or the home islands to reinforce Burma.....sometimes good defense is better than good offense.