Matrix Games Forums

I am currently playing pbm chs v2.08 scen 155 and am very much enjoying the game.

I note that Andrew Brown is working on an update to this scenario and I would like to suggest some additions to the late war jap warship construction schedule. Mainly due to the unfavourable war situation and shortages of raw materials etc in 1944/45 the japanese cancelled much warship construction to concentrate on such things as suicide subs etc. If the war had gone better for the japanese there is no doubt that these warships would have been built. The ships concerned include many destroyers as well as carriers etc.

My main source of info on these ships is Japanese Warships of ww2 by Watts. Some of the cancelled ships were already named - these include:

8 Yugumo class dd - Kawagiri, Kiyokaze, Murakaze, Satokaze, Taekaze, Tanigiri, Umigiri, Yamagiri. 1941 programme

4 Akitsuki class dd - Hazuki, Kiyotsuki, Michitsuki, Ootsuki. 1941 programme

The 1942 programme cancelled vessels were not named but include 2 Taiho class cv, several Unryu class cv, 8 Yugumo class dd, 16 Shimakaze class dd, 16 Akitsuki class dd and so on.

The 1941 programme vessels were not 'fantasy ships' - they would have been built if there had been enough steel etc. 1942 programme vessels are more in dispute and it may need a fantasy scenario to include them.

I think it would be useful to increase possible late warship construction to allow for the fact that many japanese players do better than history and could easily build these ships if given the chance.

If anyone would like more info from Watts etc let me know - for instance I have not listed any vessels smaller than dd.

ORIGINAL: asdicus

I am currently playing pbm chs v2.08 scen 155 and am very much enjoying the game.

I note that Andrew Brown is working on an update to this scenario and I would like to suggest some additions to the late war jap warship construction schedule. Mainly due to the unfavourable war situation and shortages of raw materials etc in 1944/45 the japanese cancelled much warship construction to concentrate on such things as suicide subs etc. If the war had gone better for the japanese there is no doubt that these warships would have been built. The ships concerned include many destroyers as well as carriers etc.

Virtually the entire Japanese surface fleet was decomissioned in early 1945. The situation was terrible both operationally and economically. The ships that had been built (or planned) were in general not useful any more.

Although I believe (with Parillo, author of The Japanese Merchant Marine and World War Two) that the Japanese could have used their assets more efficiently - it is difficult to imagine how they could have had a viable naval situation as late as 1945? The Japanese leadership was well aware of this before the war began. Japan believed in "the short, victorious war" - the nickname for the Russo Japanese War - which was exactly that - on land and at sea. They hoped for a similar outcome vs the Allies - however unrealistically. And in this view the Japanese leadership was essentially correct: Japan might just be able to win a war vs a power ten times its size (just as it did when it beat the Russians in 1906 - for Russia was ten times its size by economic and military measures). But it would have to do so in a fairly short period: UNLESS the Allies were discouraged by a series of defeats and the successful establishment of a Japanese autarky (regional economy), they must lose once the US mobilized its economy.

In that context, it is very likely that most possible war situations would result in very similar outcomes in 1945. That is, it is not likely that early (pre war and early war) plans for ships would be realistic or germane to the situatinn. Only a very few ships contemplated would be even marginally useful (AA destroyers and short range high speed submarines come to mind). The kinds of things that really mattered were not the sort the Japanese leadership was likely to consider: lowly transport ships and ASW escorts. And since CHS (following the original stock design) has not provided a requirement for most of its AOs and AKs, building (and protecting) more will not matter in it. The most critical resource for both Japan and the USA (after oil) was steel: building warships uses steel that could and should be used to build factories, transports, tanks and guns.

Yes, steel production was the main constraint on shipbuilding, and shipbuilding was the largest user of steel production.

See also Kaigun. The scenario I proposed (War Plan Orange) was what the Japanese could have created if they had been a bit more sensible about their strategic goals. It basically ends in 1944.

The ship building program consumes 6300+ HI for the japanese from turn one. That's about half of their industrial capacity and it is still woefully lacking, especially in the naval shipyard part at the beginning, and later in the merchant shipyard capacity. To upgrade even the naval yards by 200 points would mean an additional 600 HI needed. Which is, unless you conquer china and parts of india or southern australia, all that the japanese can conquer on the map. Or you can make concessions in armament and veichle production, both being big HI eaters themselves.

Aircraft production, even while expanded a lot, manages to consume barely 1/4 of the japanese HI.


note that i was talking about ingame figures and those are mostly from what i remember when i did my '43 industry overview in a long gone stock game. And there i had conquered china so i had 15k HI. In CHS the HI problems are most likely worse unless you go on a conquest spree.

ORIGINAL: herwin

Yes, steel production was the main constraint on shipbuilding, and shipbuilding was the largest user of steel production.

See also Kaigun. The scenario I proposed (War Plan Orange) was what the Japanese could have created if they had been a bit more sensible about their strategic goals. It basically ends in 1944.

Note that in RHS we have some alternative shipbuilding programs in place for players to look at. BBO (and its derivitives RPO and PPO) show what would happen if the early plans were not radically changed by lessons learned (perhaps because the battles were later or different - or as sometimes happend - the Japanese drew the wrong conclusions from them). This is war as most naval thinkers believed in it before WWII - with more focus on gunships - less on carriers - and more Japanese special ships (which ultimately were not efficient users of steel). An alternative casting is found in EOS - where Japan is ruled by a rather ruthless (almost American) planning committee - and many of the plans are changed for strategic or technical reasons not related to battle outcomes. In this case Japan is more carrier oriented than it is in BBO - but not quite as carrier crazy as it was IRL (with large programs of very marginal aircraft ships). Instead - recognizing the limitation of the potential to produce trained aircrew - the focus is on better carriers - more protection for the carriers in the form of escort ships of high speed and great AA value. As IRL all the battleships and cruisers have the ability to convert to carriers if needed (but this isn't implimented in any other form of WITP even though it is historical). There is an early focus on smaller submarines - rather than gigantic ultra long range ones - and historical plans not implemented for minor ASW escorts are also implemented. Japan cannot really build more hulls - it is limited not only by steel but by power plant production. But it can build different hulls, or convert existing hulls. In EOS many possibilities not taken IRL are explored - most of them really planned. And many of the large destroyer orders are on the table - although the later ones should be cancelled by wise players in most game situations - you do have the options - along with their historical names (if known).

ORIGINAL: String

The ship building program consumes 6300+ HI for the japanese from turn one. That's about half of their industrial capacity and it is still woefully lacking, especially in the naval shipyard part at the beginning, and later in the merchant shipyard capacity. To upgrade even the naval yards by 200 points would mean an additional 600 HI needed. Which is, unless you conquer china and parts of india or southern australia, all that the japanese can conquer on the map. Or you can make concessions in armament and veichle production, both being big HI eaters themselves.

Aircraft production, even while expanded a lot, manages to consume barely 1/4 of the japanese HI.


note that i was talking about ingame figures and those are mostly from what i remember when i did my '43 industry overview in a long gone stock game. And there i had conquered china so i had 15k HI. In CHS the HI problems are most likely worse unless you go on a conquest spree.

Andrew feels that there is too much Japanese industry- and apparently over time CHS is scaling it back. In CHS we are going the other way - but there is a catch. If you want to feed all your industry, you eat the stockpiles rapidly - and you must go after, obtain, and actually move where needed the oil and industry for the industry you want to use. This in turn means your AKs and AOs are not free to support military operations - and they either demand escorts or you lose many because you didn't escort them. Similarly, they need air support - and if you provide it you then don't have as much air power for military operations of an offensive nature. All of which is the sort of trade off I intended for you to face. Yet another option you have is to curtail vehicle, plane, ship or armaments production - or construction of factories - in favor of whatever you want to give priority to. You can expand plants at locations more easily supplied in Japan - and let them eat off oil and / or resources that don't have to ship vast distances by sea - which may be more efficient than producing all your HI in Japan. You can try lots of options - but if you do eventually you will learn that Japan should NOT expand shipbuilding at any point - that it should NOT build all the ships in the planning que - and it should seek a balanced sort of production integrated with the particular strategy you have adopted. Any strategy based on vastly increasing Japanese production of anything (tanks, planes, ships, name it) is bound not to work out very well. A viable strategy will seek to sustain more modest production of all of them - and have stocks able to keep the economy going no matter how well the Allies do.