Allied naval invasions

[eskuche]

I would like to start a convo about Allied naval invasions. I love to poke about and try to find undefended places to move forward and establish LBA or claim free territory once the front lines settle down a bit. This extends to the Japanese mainland, but raids there can be seen as unrealistic and gamey. I try to keep at least all of the production there garrisoned, but, for example, Manchukuo could be ripe for a low-cost low unit strength raid to take out a hundred or two production points over a few turns. In another game, the northernmost Japanese home island with 10 production was landed on.

Should we seek to institute a home guard trigger for Japan or force a garrison amount there as well?

[stjeand]

I agree with the garrison piece...and it should be the case for both the US and the Japanese and India and Australia. For India to send all their troops outside their country to fight is wrong...same with the US and Australia.

BUT in the scenario you are playing against me I specifically put in rules to keep the Japanese from invading locations outside their reach.
I did not put them in to stop the US...which I will have to now. So thanks for helping me find this.

The US had no way to supply troops landing in Japan in 1942...so landing there should not be allowed but the mechanics allow it so code has to be put in to reflect this.
NO Commander In Chief would send 10000 troops on a 100% suicide mission...but the game mechanics allow it.

SO in the Historical Scenario I will have to add code that the US can't supply any troops on any islands around Japan and China until they can take some of the islands along the way.
Sadly this will take days if not weeks of programming.


This is why there have to be house rules...because the mechanics allow things that should not be.

Look at WPE...

The UK could send a massive force to France potentially stopping the Germans. I believe a forced garrison in the UK could help but still they could do this. So most players put in house rules to stop this.
France can build paratroopers and marines and invade behind German lines...Sadly the Germans can't defend there 10+ locations along the border with France to prevent paratroopers...but the mechanics allow it...and all players I have played with know just don't do this and ruin the game.

There are just things that the mechanics can't prevent without major code changes...


Keep in mind...it the game we are playing there is no Japanese unit sitting on top of the 10 point resource...so the US could land there and hold it for a few turns even out of supply

YES if the Japanese land in the US suddenly 8 corps appear...

Wouldn't the Japanese mobilize a local militia if this happened? You bet your sweet @$$ they would so the invasion would be crazy as it would give the Japanese a bunch more units.
I suspect that will need to be added too.

[stjeand]

In looking through the Event file...It appears I can add "garrisons"...

BUT what would the penalty be?

Country Morale drop? Not sure this is possible but this would be huge...even just 2% can be big.
PP loss?

Sadly the garrisons only work on strength points not on type...so can't force Japan to keep say a fighter on the homeland as they would...or the US for that matter.

Any thoughts? I can add this to phase 2.

[eskuche]

My response in a PM but relevant for the general conversation too:
I agree that garrison unit counters AND garrison requirements should be a thing. In our game I saw just a bit too many counters in China so thought you should be checked a bit hehe
They weren't full strength (to save on landing craft) but that's getting into the weeds into gameplay mechanics that aren't relevant.

In terms of garrison requirements: I'm not sure morale would do anything? AFAICT morale and country experience are NOT the same thing at all. It could just simply add to Soviet war %. Probably the easiest and most elegant solution.

In terms of garrison unit counters, it needs to be something that can't be guaranteed to be be taken by one US marine division in one shot, but neither can it be more effective than normal troops. The retreat calculation is based on CV ratio, which makes it tricky. It could be like 3 guns 3 firepower and 5 strength points for 25-35 production. However, the Japanese player needs a reason not to use these as cheap landing troops, so maybe 1 gun 1 firepower, 4 defense and 20 strength points would work as well.

I don't know how rounding works in this game, but rounding for replacements points (60% of normal cost) needs to be taken into account. A high strength weak unit would force a lot of enemy attacks to perish without being able to have offensive power.

addition: this high strength but weak garrison unit could also be used in Manchukuo and for home garrison or for small islands. The high strength would keep the unit strength artificially slightly lower on size 1 islands. I'm not sure if advancements or advancement costs can be modded, but something off the top of my head is an initial 40 cost 20 strength weak unit that is CHEAPER per advancement.

[CrackingShow]

I'll be sure to garrison the home islands and manchuria/korea....

Didn't think that the Allies can move 48 hexes with a transport unit and hit Japan/Manchuria/Korea in 1-3 turns!!!

Building a 1939 tech Infantry Div and putting it on Garrison only costs 45 production, which isn't THAT expensive..

[Uxbridge]

However, the Japanese player needs a reason not to use these as cheap landing troops, so maybe 1 gun 1 firepower, 4 defense and 20 strength points would work as well.

I was thinking about this too, but most of all, I don't want the Japanese to place swarms of cheap units at bottlenecks all over the map. If I opt for having them, I will give them as non-replaceble reinforcements after the initial Japanese landing frenzy is over. I was thinking maybe 10-12 three-steps units, given gradually over the time of a year. These can garrison islands or be used to free up better combat units in Manchucko, as the Japanese did historically by emptying that army of the majority of its combat elements.

[stjeand]

Another option that came to mind for a garrison unit.

Japan does not use Mech units. They never had any so the unit can be "replaced" rather than removed as was done to France in WPE.

IF replaced with a garrison unit...say a...a 5/5...it would cost double to use LCs on since double LCs are used for armor and mech.
Not sure I would want to use a 5/5 to land when I could use a 10/10 for the same price.
I don't want the units to be powerful...but also not too weak. I will have to spend a bit of time looking at the island wars...I think they should be easily killable though by the US with invasions. Keep in mind a turn is 2 weeks...and most of the island battles took less than that.

[eskuche]

That makes sense. However I can confirm that YueJin does use those units.

[stjeand]

Well since the Japanese never had Mech units they should not be used.

I will be making armor divisions for all countries rather than corps.

At least in my mod...Al will not make the changes unless he wants too.

[eskuche]

I will say that the current army landing bug is making the game NOT a foregone conclusion once the Allies stabilize...

[ThunderLizard11]

ORIGINAL: stjeand

In looking through the Event file...It appears I can add "garrisons"...

BUT what would the penalty be?

Country Morale drop? Not sure this is possible but this would be huge...even just 2% can be big.
PP loss?

Sadly the garrisons only work on strength points not on type...so can't force Japan to keep say a fighter on the homeland as they would...or the US for that matter.

Any thoughts? I can add this to phase 2.

Game supply mechanics should prevent this. So you land troops in Japan and then they run out of supply.

Are you building a mod? This should be base game stuff.

[stjeand]

Yes I have a mod...

I have not added the US part yet. Step 1 was to slow the crazy Japanese advance where they can have a mass invasion of India on turn 3 or 4 as well as Australia.

The mod appears to have prevented this but I have not been able to get enough testers to prove it.

I am working on Phase 2 now...which will include something forcing the US to perform some island hopping to invade Japan and be in supply.
I do not want to force them to have to take specific islands...most some islands within X hexes of each other before they will be in supply.

Like an island that is within X hexes of Hawaii or it will not be in supply.
The next island will need to be within X hexes of that island and so on until you get to Japan.

IF the chain is broken by attack...supply will be lost.


I tested this with the Japanese needing to take some ports before taking the DEI
Then they need to take a bunch of ports before getting supply to India and Australia.

Works pretty good...BUT Japan does not have the "forces" to garrison all these islands in the 1941 scenario.
IF you load the 42 scenario they have 20 2/10 divisions...which you can not build so...
I decided to create them a garrison unit that is cheaper but will be able to for an island to actually be attacked rather than just step onto it.


Also I am pondering the Japanese calling up the "homeguard" if they are invaded, like the US does.

But this might not be until phase 3...

Then again if not one wants the scenario it is more of a pet project that I can play alone.

[AlvaroSousa]

I will look into supply restrictions and garrisons like the Axis have against them