Matrix Games Forums

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?

I guess my technician/engineer mind is at work here. Please note that the question I asked was how to activate WITHOUT attacking! Your reply is a mechanism to activate BY attacking or invading, which legally is an attack. Further, it turns out the rule is misstated in a technical sense: you enter the wrong place - actually most places - and the USSR does not activate! My proposal is to "pre activate" the USSR in the scenario editor for all scenarios, and after this very fine discussion I am 99% decided to do that. I will, however, provide anyone who objects with their own version, without that activation.

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.

Some confusion on your part here Treespider - both with respect to scenarios and real life:

1) I do not propose this for CHS. I propose it for RHS, of which I am coordinator. It is one of the short list of differences between them players can choose from.

2) The decision for war in Japan was made in July 1941, AFTER the Allied (US, UK, Dutch) to embargo oil, iron ore and rubber. That decision in turn was made AFTER the decision by Japan to occupy French Indochina. Japan was trying to cut off China from sources of supply. We wanted Japan to withdraw from China (not Manchuria or a couple of other "countries" previously created out of China, but China as it then was). The causus belli was, at its heart, always China. Both the Allies and Japan were somewhat pig headed and unreasonable about this issue - making war a "when" question rather than an "if" question. Both sides knew this and were standing up for a war - in the Southern area - NOT in the North. Joe Stalin had a full plate, and he never tried to stop Japan directly, although he didn't help them either - he supplied China and Japan's quest to limit supplies was doomed by the impracticality of preventing supply via Russia. Even occupation of Siberia to Lake Baikal does not prevent supply over the old Silk Road route.

3) It is LESS historical to play knowing this front CANNOT be active for years than to play with that possibility. RHS stands for "Real Historical Scenario" - not its original name - a suggestion by one of the CHS team - meant to imply we sought a MORE historical orientation rather than less.
Of course you are free to disagree - but my view is that the "solution" of a wholly passive Soviet Union is anything but historical. Japan needs to worry about what happens if it weakens forces in Manchuria and Korea too much? Anything short of the Soviets MIGHT invade is not historical in my view. Manchuria USED TO BE Russian, and Russia had its fingers in Korean politics as well - they fought over the area more than once and otherwise tangled short of war - since the late 19th century. China was not strong enough to reassert its traditional hegemony over either area.

ORIGINAL: 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.

Cid,
I don't think Japan should attack Russia. Ever. It is stupid.

Everyone,
But that didn't stop my opponent from doing it. And while I found the current OOB severely lacking I LOVE the fact that he did becuase it took so much heat off my other fronts. Even though I now own half of Korea and the northern half of Manchuria as the Allies, I feel the game would have been drastically different had I been given the correct, accurate tools in Russia. And you know what. Playing the USSR as the Allies is fun. Ask Gen. Hoepner and Hawker, it opens up a a whole other unique front with unique possibilities. You really should try it. Really. By the way, this is a game. not real life.

We can sit here and wax poetic about how smart we are on geo-political and logistic ramifications of two front wars, Stalin's priorities, and how things went down in WWII in general. And if you don't want to play around in Russia as the Jap player...DON'T. If as the allied player you want to House Rule that option out for your opponent and he agrees...FINE.

But let's not try to force those of us who CAN or WANT to, to turn a blind eye to the possibility of an alternate Japanese strategy OK? If you dissent, great, if you don't great. But guess what. The new Soviet OOB is going in and it WILL be as accurate as we can make it with the limited space available. Use it or don't. In the end it doesn't really matter, because those who do will find it fun and those who don't won't know the difference.

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?

Fine and thoughtful questions all - which is why I started this thread. Thank you.

Since the game begins with the historical situation, no - the Russian intel situation is not changed. But Sorge was arrested at this time BECAUSE he had detected the Pearl Harbor attack plan - he was involved so high up he actually helped MAKE Japanese policy and of course Russia WANTED Japan at war with the USA. The Soviet "intel advantage" NO LONGER EXISTS AFTER the war begins. So it is not changed by the scenario, but it IS changed by fact. We no longer need to consider it.

No, the units transferred west MUST still go. Otherwise the assumption the war in the west goes the same is invalid and we have no basis to know what happens? You want a die roll to say "Russia is defeated?" I don't. So they go, they must go, and they would in all circumstances have gone. Losing a few km of Siberia is nothing compared with losing Moscow.

Actually, you are wrong about the Japanese "ceased all preparations for invading Siberia." Kwangtung Army ALWAYS planned to invade Siberia, and it was always preparing for this in some sense. This was its focus, and it is why it was the strongest of Japan's Army Groups. But you are right that Stalin was informed Japan intended to "strike south" - and the strategic situation - the oil embargo and weak Empire defenses - implied this was likely. A German capture of a British report (on Andromeda) by a German raider was transmitted to Germany from Japan via the Russian telegraph - so Russia may also have known that Germany had captured the details of British unreadiness and that the decision had been made to share it with Japan.

If the Soviets are active, there are no garrison requirements. This means the Japanese are free to strip their defenses. And to suffer the consequences if they do so too much. It is why this is a good option.

I think the Russians really cannot attack in 1942 - due to the situation in the West Stalin would not consider it. When we proposed using Russia as a base to at least bomb Japan - in 1942- he was adament. But later in the war it IS possible. IF it can be done with in theater forces (that is, without affecting operations in the West) he MIGHT have done it.
Otherwise, being able to maneuver is a big gain for the Russians and therefor the Allies. Allied players should value this over frozen units.

This mod cannot change hard code. But the hard code is right - Russian units SHOULD expand later in the war. Not sure why you ask? You know we cannot address this. And you know it is right too - so we should not change it if we could. Matrix got it right - and we honor that. Later in the War Russia is stronger - which is why Japan needs to attack sooner - or pay the price of waiting. The Red Army is the think that kills Japanese hope of victory - not the Atom bomb. The firebombing of Tokyo is much worse than Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. In a single raid it was worse.

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.

It is certainly a theoretical option. It is a compromise, so one can quibble. Are the garrison requirements high enough? I think not - see your comment about air. Do the Soviets lose the ability to control construction, deployment, upgrading, moving ships, supplying points not on the land communicaitons net? Yep. Does Japan have to worry about a Soviet threat? Nope. Not my favorite compromise.

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.

It is odd - but BECAUSE I AGREE COMPLETELY with your reasoning I come to the OPPOSITE conclusion! I do think the USSR "was fighting for its existence" in 1941-2. I do think the "game engine cannot simulate global events." And I do agree that we "as simulators should also be under this limitation." But it is anything but cast in stone that August Storm had to start when it did. It is anything but impossible that war might have broken out anyway - in spite of the reluctance on the part of both Russia and Japan to fight on another frong. NEITHER is strong enough to launch an offensive in 1941 or 1942 - although Japan's only chance is late in 1942 IF it deploys for this. 1943 is a transition year - as it should be. 1944 is a year the Soviets COULD invade and surely 1945 is. Stalin is greedy - and Zhukov is an "overwhelming force" kind of guy anyway - so they want the least costly option possible - Russia lost tens of millions of people in that era. But other choices are possible. I might agree to some sort of freezing with DIFFERENT code - but we don't have different code. The total freezing of the Russians is in my view very ahistoric and sets up Japan for a very ahostoric attack. The inability of the code to detect an invasion at most points is a technical flaw in the system which we bypass by this option. I think we are solving more problems than we create by taking it. However, all options are compromises, and none of them are perfect - sans a release of code.

Cid,
I don't think Japan should attack Russia. Ever. It is stupid.

The whole idea of Imperial Japan is stupid, probably. But INSIDE the mindset of IJA, it is the very opposite. Japan's main strategic rival in Aisa was Russia, and long had been. In a longer term sense, Japan may STILL have designs on Siberia, and even more likely, so may China. But back then Russia was the one with designs on Korea, Manchuria, Mongolia, and probably the Kurils and Hokkaido (which block access to the sea from Vladavostok and other ports). In any case, IF you accept that August Storm will happen if only you wait long enough, WHY fight it with indefensable borders? Better to defend up by Chita - as IJA planned.

What is missing in your analysis is economics. The economic heart of Japan resource wise is Manchuria and Korea. Here they have some industry, some free power (hydro), some oil and shale oil, a lot of food (Rice from Korea, Soy from Manchuria, in major proportions), and a lot of coal, iron ore and non-ferrous metal ores. In Manchukuo Japan had created a very unusual economic engine - the Zaibatsu were legally forbidden - and Russians, Chinese, Japanese and Koreans were all attracted in millions and effectively cooperated in the economic sense. We don't usually admit this (for political reasons) so we cannot understand what it meant - but DURING the Great Depression Manchuria was BOOMING. It was a great economic engine too valuable to discount - Japan literally cannot survive without its Iron, Coal, Copper, Aluminum, Soy, etc. Its borders with Russia are too long to defend. IJA was right - better to take and defend at the logistic bottleneck - where ONLY the Trans Siberian RR is the line of communicaitons - NO lateral line at all.

ORIGINAL: el cid again

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?

Fine and thoughtful questions all - which is why I started this thread. Thank you.

Since the game begins with the historical situation, no - the Russian intel situation is not changed. But Sorge was arrested at this time BECAUSE he had detected the Pearl Harbor attack plan - he was involved so high up he actually helped MAKE Japanese policy and of course Russia WANTED Japan at war with the USA. The Soviet "intel advantage" NO LONGER EXISTS AFTER the war begins. So it is not changed by the scenario, but it IS changed by fact. We no longer need to consider it.

No, the units transferred west MUST still go. Otherwise the assumption the war in the west goes the same is invalid and we have no basis to know what happens? You want a die roll to say "Russia is defeated?" I don't. So they go, they must go, and they would in all circumstances have gone. Losing a few km of Siberia is nothing compared with losing Moscow.

Actually, you are wrong about the Japanese "ceased all preparations for invading Siberia." Kwangtung Army ALWAYS planned to invade Siberia, and it was always preparing for this in some sense. This was its focus, and it is why it was the strongest of Japan's Army Groups. But you are right that Stalin was informed Japan intended to "strike south" - and the strategic situation - the oil embargo and weak Empire defenses - implied this was likely. A German capture of a British report (on Andromeda) by a German raider was transmitted to Germany from Japan via the Russian telegraph - so Russia may also have known that Germany had captured the details of British unreadiness and that the decision had been made to share it with Japan.

According to Toland (take it as you may) part of the decision to transfer the Soviet Manchurian units West was based in part on Sorge's last communication before being arrested which was prompted by the following...

"Even though the Russians didn't yet know the results of the imperial conference of July 2, one of their agents, Hotsumi Ozaki, had just heard a rumor of the decision to go south instead of attacking Siberia. For confirmation his chief Richard Sorge, sent him to Manchuria, where he discovered that the Kwantung Army's secret order for three thousand railroad workers to help mount an attack on the Red Army had inexplicably been reduced to practically nothing. On October 4th Sorge radioed this information to Moscow, along with the latest diplomatic developments..." which stated that war with the US was immminent (within a month or two) and that the Japanese had no intention of attacking Siberia. My contention is that if the Japanese had seriously planned for a Siberian invasion the Soviets would not have transferred as many units.

So let the Kwantung Army start accumulating Prep Points for Vladivostok or othe Soviet bases to simulate staff officers within the Kwantung Army prepping for war.

I would also suggest that part of the reason the Kwantung Army was so large was the fear of a Soviet attack. which leads to the suggestion that the Soviets start active. I feel though that this is ripe for player abuse without a plethora of house rules.

If the Soviets are active, there are no garrison requirements. This means the Japanese are free to strip their defenses. And to suffer the consequences if they do so too much. It is why this is a good option.

I think the Russians really cannot attack in 1942 - due to the situation in the West Stalin would not consider it. When we proposed using Russia as a base to at least bomb Japan - in 1942- he was adament. But later in the war it IS possible. IF it can be done with in theater forces (that is, without affecting operations in the West) he MIGHT have done it.
Otherwise, being able to maneuver is a big gain for the Russians and therefor the Allies. Allied players should value this over frozen units.

So when players decide to pursue the historical option and not attack the Soviets in December and the Japanese are tied up in Burma and the SRA what is to prevent the Soviets from Attacking then. I can't think of a better way for the Allies to burn Japanese Supply then a land war in Manchuria.

This mod cannot change hard code. But the hard code is right - Russian units SHOULD expand later in the war. Not sure why you ask?

I ask because by changing the early Soviet OOB you are also affecting the end of the war Soviet OOB.

You know we cannot address this. And you know it is right too - so we should not change it if we could. Matrix got it right - and we honor that. Later in the War Russia is stronger - which is why Japan needs to attack sooner - or pay the price of waiting. The Red Army is the think that kills Japanese hope of victory - not the Atom bomb. The firebombing of Tokyo is much worse than Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. In a single raid it was worse.

ORIGINAL: el cid again

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.

Some confusion on your part here Treespider - both with respect to scenarios and real life:

1) I do not propose this for CHS. I propose it for RHS, of which I am coordinator. It is one of the short list of differences between them players can choose from.

So be it.

2) The decision for war in Japan was made in July 1941, AFTER the Allied (US, UK, Dutch) to embargo oil, iron ore and rubber. That decision in turn was made AFTER the decision by Japan to occupy French Indochina. Japan was trying to cut off China from sources of supply. We wanted Japan to withdraw from China (not Manchuria or a couple of other "countries" previously created out of China, but China as it then was). The causus belli was, at its heart, always China. Both the Allies and Japan were somewhat pig headed and unreasonable about this issue - making war a "when" question rather than an "if" question. Both sides knew this and were standing up for a war - in the Southern area - NOT in the North. Joe Stalin had a full plate, and he never tried to stop Japan directly, although he didn't help them either - he supplied China and Japan's quest to limit supplies was doomed by the impracticality of preventing supply via Russia. Even occupation of Siberia to Lake Baikal does not prevent supply over the old Silk Road route.

This is where you are mistaken about the history...

"When France capitulated in June 1940, Japan moved into northern French Indochina. And though the United States had no interest there, we imposed an embargo on steel and scrap metal. After Hitler invaded Russia in June 1941, Japan moved into southern Indochina. FDR ordered all Japanese assets frozen.'

The Emperor did affix his seal on July 2nd authorizing the move south before the oil embargo, although the oil embargo likely was anticapated by the Japanese. Continuing from the same source...

"But FDR did not want to cut off oil. As he told his Cabinet on July 18, an embargo meant war, for that would force oil-starved Japan to seize the oil fields of the Dutch East Indies. But a State Department lawyer named Dean Acheson drew up the sanctions in such a way as to block any Japanese purchases of U.S. oil. By the time FDR found out, in September, he could not back down."

from the following website: http://www.theamericancause.org/patwhydidjapan.htm

which is independently supported by other texts.

3) It is LESS historical to play knowing this front CANNOT be active for years than to play with that possibility. RHS stands for "Real Historical Scenario" - not its original name - a suggestion by one of the CHS team - meant to imply we sought a MORE historical orientation rather than less.

Of course you are free to disagree - but my view is that the "solution" of a wholly passive Soviet Union is anything but historical. Japan needs to worry about what happens if it weakens forces in Manchuria and Korea too much? Anything short of the Soviets MIGHT invade is not historical in my view. Manchuria USED TO BE Russian, and Russia had its fingers in Korean politics as well - they fought over the area more than once and otherwise tangled short of war - since the late 19th century. China was not strong enough to reassert its traditional hegemony over either area.

And this is currently accounted for by the garrison limit. Which brings up a question...can this limit be modded....ie raised?

OK - I will do this BOTH ways.

Select scenario 41CV if you want the Soviets passive.
Select scenario 41BB if you want the Soviets active.

Those who think the carrier decisions resulting from a historical Pearl Harbor and Midway probably also think the Soviets must be frozen.

Those who think the war as planned when it began probably also think that the Soviet threat (both ways) is a historical item.

I am doing 41CV for those who want as close as possible to Scenario 15 and to CHS anyway. I am doing 41BB because I prefer it - I think it is more historical to force existing building on both sides. So I will put my preferred Soviet option here too - and those who want a CHS/stock like scenario with better data can use the other one.

"Even though the Russians didn't yet know the results of the imperial conference of July 2, one of their agents, Hotsumi Ozaki, had just heard a rumor of the decision to go south instead of attacking Siberia. For confirmation his chief Richard Sorge, sent him to Manchuria, where he discovered that the Kwantung Army's secret order for three thousand railroad workers to help mount an attack on the Red Army had inexplicably been reduced to practically nothing. On October 4th Sorge radioed this information to Moscow, along with the latest diplomatic developments..." which stated that war with the US was immminent (within a month or two) and that the Japanese had no intention of attacking Siberia. My contention is that if the Japanese had seriously planned for a Siberian invasion the Soviets would not have transferred as many units.

I agree. I am intimately familiar with this material - in Japanese, English, Russian and German. I fully agree. But you do not understand what it means. It means that the historical decision to deploy the troops stands - it is a pre war decision based on pre war events. It also means that the loss of Sorge and his entire ring means the Soviets are thereafter in the dark. But it does not change that Kwangtung Army focused on the Soviets, and always intended to go North "later." You have missed this. It is clear in the Japanese accounts.

So when players decide to pursue the historical option and not attack the Soviets in December and the Japanese are tied up in Burma and the SRA what is to prevent the Soviets from Attacking then. I can't think of a better way for the Allies to burn Japanese Supply then a land war in Manchuria.

Outstanding question. And the answer OUGHT TO BE one of tension. It IS a possibility - not a great one - but it exists. Why freeze it out? The answer in detail is "it depends on Soviet strength." It might just result in IJA taking Kita after all. And it is dangerous for Russia to fight on two fronts. I think the Red Army is not up to it. If you disagree - try it. And Japan needs to have a real army AND air force up north - just in case.
I love it.

I ask because by changing the early Soviet OOB you are also affecting the end of the war Soviet OOB.

One of us does not understand how the code works. I think it will work just like carrier groups work - forced change on a certain date. Nothing we can do affects it at all.

And this is currently accounted for by the garrison limit. Which brings up a question...can this limit be modded....ie raised?

Nope. It is not a soft field. It is in the code. We don't know where or how.

This is where you are mistaken about the history...

"When France capitulated in June 1940, Japan moved into northern French Indochina. And though the United States had no interest there, we imposed an embargo on steel and scrap metal. After Hitler invaded Russia in June 1941, Japan moved into southern Indochina. FDR ordered all Japanese assets frozen.'

The Emperor did affix his seal on July 2nd authorizing the move south before the oil embargo, although the oil embargo likely was anticapated by the Japanese. Continuing from the same source...

"But FDR did not want to cut off oil. As he told his Cabinet on July 18, an embargo meant war, for that would force oil-starved Japan to seize the oil fields of the Dutch East Indies. But a State Department lawyer named Dean Acheson drew up the sanctions in such a way as to block any Japanese purchases of U.S. oil. By the time FDR found out, in September, he could not back down."

I see no mistakes on my part here. This is my understanding - except about letting FDR off the hook. He has command responsibility - if he does not know what Acheson is up to it is STILL his responsibility. And he is so complex and secretive I am not sure what he intended. But policy is policy and he is boss. He understood it meant war too - and he tried to get us in the war by causing incidents in the Tonkin Gulf - so probably he wanted war early.

ORIGINAL: el cid again

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.

It is odd - but BECAUSE I AGREE COMPLETELY with your reasoning I come to the OPPOSITE conclusion! I do think the USSR "was fighting for its existence" in 1941-2. I do think the "game engine cannot simulate global events." And I do agree that we "as simulators should also be under this limitation." But it is anything but cast in stone that August Storm had to start when it did. It is anything but impossible that war might have broken out anyway - in spite of the reluctance on the part of both Russia and Japan to fight on another frong. NEITHER is strong enough to launch an offensive in 1941 or 1942 - although Japan's only chance is late in 1942 IF it deploys for this. 1943 is a transition year - as it should be. 1944 is a year the Soviets COULD invade and surely 1945 is. Stalin is greedy - and Zhukov is an "overwhelming force" kind of guy anyway - so they want the least costly option possible - Russia lost tens of millions of people in that era. But other choices are possible. I might agree to some sort of freezing with DIFFERENT code - but we don't have different code. The total freezing of the Russians is in my view very ahistoric and sets up Japan for a very ahostoric attack. The inability of the code to detect an invasion at most points is a technical flaw in the system which we bypass by this option. I think we are solving more problems than we create by taking it. However, all options are compromises, and none of them are perfect - sans a release of code.

Strange, although I too also agree with what you are saying, I must disagree with messing with this part of the game as far as activation goes without the corresponding code changes. The decision to go to war by either side should also involove huge expenditures of political points as well as a fairly elaborate event engine at miminal. Maybe call me a purist when dealing with history, but one cannot do what is was not possible to do and still call it a historical rendition. By 1944 Stalin had Hitler on the ropes. However, the German could and did still extract a huge cost for their defeat, 300k casualities just in the Battle for Berlin. Stalin wanted nothing more than to see Hitler destroyed and the German nation humbled. So the soonest I could see this happening would be early summer with a force significantly reduced from what August Storm forces were. There was also increased resistence to the notion of Soviet involvement in what was seen as a purely US endeavor, with some help form the Commonwealth. Indeed, on could say that the US had the manifest destiny to destroy Japan and did not need any one else help.

ORIGINAL: 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?

I had a first decided to ingnore, but what the heck...[:D]

If I am attempting to simluate history from an certain historical perspective i choose to play with that in mind. Thus with no means of altering historically known events outside the Pacific I choose a self-imposed limit my options on the Strategic aspect of the game. At the very least there should be a high PP cost for bringing the Soviets into the war for whichever side activated the Soviets. Lacking this I choose to remain comitted to status quo.

If not then what would be the basis for the massive Allied reinforcement to the Pacific in the summer of 1945 from a drawdown of US European Forces. Why not let me have these whenever I want them? Why not let the japanese the option of not attacking either the Phillipines or Pearl Harbor? There are many otpions one can take in constructiing the simulation, but would they necessarily be historical?? If you are going to change one, then why not others? By this reasoning I feel that having the Soviets activated before it was historically possible is not logical.

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

ORIGINAL: TheElf

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior



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?

I had a first decided to ingnore, but what the heck...[:D]

If I am attempting to simluate history from an certain historical perspective i choose to play with that in mind. Thus with no means of altering historically known events outside the Pacific I choose a self-imposed limit my options on the Strategic aspect of the game. At the very least there should be a high PP cost for bringing the Soviets into the war for whichever side activated the Soviets. Lacking this I choose to remain comitted to status quo.

If not then what would be the basis for the massive Allied reinforcement to the Pacific in the summer of 1945 from a drawdown of US European Forces. Why not let me have these whenever I want them? Why not let the japanese the option of not attacking either the Phillipines or Pearl Harbor? There are many otpions one can take in constructiing the simulation, but would they necessarily be historical?? If you are going to change one, then why not others? By this reasoning I feel that having the Soviets activated before it was historically possible is not logical.

Again. What stops you from playing YOUR game that way AW?

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Again. What stops you from playing YOUR game that way AW?

I must admit you are quite persitent. However I beleived I have answered this question already.

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior
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.

Again I am amazed that someone who could say "Again I am amazed how we assume that the Pcific War operated in a vacuum..." and yet be advocating we all ignore Russia. [8|]

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.

Exactly. One of the fronts you speak of is in Manchuria along the Trans-Baikal.

The last the thing Soviets could do was to open up a second front with Japan.

Exactly. Which is why in the CHS we will likely recommend that Japan retains the initiative for war. Just like in the Stock game.

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.

I would argue that though this is true, The Japs would have had a hard time even with the B team in the Far East.

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.

Good point. Which is why the Russia question has to assume that everything goes west as it did historically as we have no other data on what the Far East would have looked like. W ehave to assume that Stalin would not have changed a thing Had the Japanese exercised an alternate grand strategy. He'd have been confident, after the Khalkin Gol incident, that his Far East Army could handle or delay any Japanese offensive until such time as the August Storm Operation could be realized. After all what do you think would be more important to Joe? Moscow and Stalingrad or Vladivostok and Borzya?