Matrix Games Forums

In my PBEM it looks like the Japanese may drive to the very gates of Chungking itself. I am curious what experiences others have had in mounting a successful defense of Chungking. My opponent is with 180 miles and is bombing the city daily with 100-200 bombers. Fort levels are high, but details are classified. [;)]

How hard is it to defend Chunking?
DOes the city itself produce enough supply?
Has anyone ever lost Chunking and if so how?

A few people have lost Chungking yeah.
 
The key to holding it is to prevent encirclement, build up the fort levels and prevent Chungking from being cut off from Chengtu. Chungking brings in 300 free supply per turn, Chengtu adds another 300. When that 600 tons all went to Chungking in my game Chungking held quite well. Once I had it cut off from Chengtu the fall-off in efficiency was quite noticeable.

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

A few people have lost Chungking yeah.

The key to holding it is to prevent encirclement, build up the fort levels and prevent Chungking from being cut off from Chengtu. Chungking brings in 300 free supply per turn, Chengtu adds another 300. When that 600 tons all went to Chungking in my game Chungking held quite well. Once I had it cut off from Chengtu the fall-off in efficiency was quite noticeable.

Thanks Nemo, I had already noticed this and preperations are being made. Chengtu itself is quite well defended. Keeping the road open may prove more difficult.

Did you check Sneer vs Raver AAR?

I have a few suggestions,

1. Turn all the signs around and point them back towards Sian
2. On the outside of the fortifications sprinkle pine needles
(everyone know Shock troops wont cross Pine needles)
3. Build a fake town (like In blazing saddles).
4. Open a bunch of bad japanese bath houses.
5. Just surrender!!!!

Btw what happned at the crossroads the other day, , I attacked an only half of your troops retreated?

i guess that some of troops which werent retreated had a fort level bigger than odds you've achived.

ORIGINAL: Graycompany

I have a few suggestions,

1. Turn all the signs around and point them back towards Sian
2. On the outside of the fortifications sprinkle pine needles
(everyone know Shock troops wont cross Pine needles)
3. Build a fake town (like In blazing saddles).
4. Open a bunch of bad japanese bath houses.
5. Just surrender!!!!

Btw what happned at the crossroads the other day, , I attacked an only half of your troops retreated?

It wasnt a retreat it was chow time. Besides, you barely got 2:1 as I recall, I think only the weaker units witdrew. [;)]

You still have the turn right?

Yes you will have the turn tonight.

I have had Chungking besieged for about 2 months. The Allies have 142 units there and about 330,000 troops to my 600,000.

I figure that it will take 12-18 months to take the city.

Chungking gets 300 supply per day (9,000 per month). This is enough to fully supply about 15 divisions worth about 3800 AV. Figure in the 4X urban bonus and this becomes worth 15,200 AV before even factoring in the the fort value.

So, even after the other 125 units starve to death, there are still more AV at Chungking than the entire CEF has.

Now this does not mean that Chungking can't be taken but it will take a very, very long time. What has to be done is to starve the defenders down to this bare level then continue to attack. The supply level is not enough to recieve reinforcements or even fix disabled units so after being reduced to the bare minimum disabled units will stay disabled.

Several bloody assaults resulting in 0:1 odds will be needed to reduce the forts to 0. Make sure to use all those road construction units to accomplish this. One Deliberate attack per month or two should accomplish this. Bombardments while recovering will disbale the remaining units so victory is possible.

I am not using airstrikes too often due to the high OPs loss rate of Sallys. I use an occasional strike too keep the AF damaged and thus sucking up supplies in a futile effort to fix it.

Think of it as peeling an onion. It takes a long time and there will be a lot of tears involved.

Chungking gets 300 supply per day (9,000 per month). This is enough to fully supply about 15 divisions worth about 3800 AV. Figure in the 4X urban bonus and this becomes worth 15,200 AV before even factoring in the the fort value.

Nope, an average Chinese Corp has a monthly demand of about 1400-1700 supply when kept in constant combat through assault or bombardment. So 9,000 a month will only keep about 5 Corps fully supplied in the long run. About 800-1000 AV.

You also forget units use up huge amounts of supply when assaulting or being assaulted, so I'd say you'll have no problem dealing with them once supply hits zero.

In my game my opponent used land and air bombardment to keep about 80% of the Chinese at high monthly requirements and it sucked China dry in less than a year.

I conceded total defeat in China when total in-country supply fell below 25k (all bases bright red) and about half my army had zero on hand supply. And my opponent NEVER won a single major battle, I always marched out before he was able to force a retreat. Didn't matter though in the end China is doomed anyway.

We agreed to a cease fire to see if it could build back up over 1943 since having about a million extra Japanese troops sitting around an empty China with no one to face totally unbalances the rest of the game. Imagine all those Japanese in the Pacific or marching on India. Without the Chinese army to face them they are unstoppable, the rest of the allies lack enough combat units to do anything to stop them.

All of India has about 2500-3000 assault points, easy to overcome with about 10 Japanese divisions. Even if the US piles everything they have into one hex, about half of the Chinese expeditionary force can easily handle them, leaving the other half to dominate the map.

Jim

Jim,
 
Take a look at AndyMac's report of the land forces he has available... Even a basic count of his available invasion forces comes to a total of 40+ Divisions organised into 11 Corps... So to try to represent that as being the sort of force which half the CEF can handle ( a force which comprises no more than 30 Division-equivalents) is simply fallacious.
 
You do have some valid points but this sort of egregious exaggeration undercuts the valid points you make. You should look into stopping it.

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
Even a basic count of his available invasion forces comes to a total of 40+ Divisions organised into 11 Corps...

I said US, not allies, if you're going to call me a liar please base your accusations on what I actually said. Half the CEF can easily handle all the US land forces in game. And if you're trying to say an unencumbered CEF doesn't unbalance the game...[8|]

Jim

Jim,

I know you said US not Allies. On the other hand the forces available to the Allied player are NOT limited to US forces so picking a segment out simply isn't representative.

As to an unencumbered CF "unbalancing" the game... No I disagree... It isn't an issue of balance IMO. It is an issue of player's getting a reasonable advantage for good play. IF a Japanese player can manage to create a situation in the Chinese theatre ( through annihilation or the pinning down of enemy forces in supply backwaters) whereby he can afford to move significant forces out of China then why prevent him? Surely this added operational flexibility is merely the player's reward for good play?

I mean if an Allied player gets to cut off the DEI from the Home Islands you don't see people running around saying that this "unbalances" the game and that the Japanese convoys should be given free passage. No, if, as a player, you let bad things happen to portions of your force THEN you absolutely deserve to face the consequences ( fewer forces available for your own operations, limited options and an enemy able to apportion greater forces to each of his operations). That's the reality of what happens when one side is succesful and the other isn't and these constant attempts to insulate players from the effects of their poor play just reinforce that poor play.


In one thread you argue that the issue of balance is unimportant ( so that Allies will get more planes in 1944... which, BTW, I agree with you they probably should get) but now in this thread you raise the issue of the destruction of Chinese forces and the subsequent freeing up of Japanese forces as "unbalancing"... You can't have your cake and eat it. Either you are happy to abide by what balance dictates OR you are happy to abide by history and the logical consequences of actions... e.g. If Japan had managed to reduce the number of troops necessary in China it WOULD have moved those troops elsewhere and made the Allies' job harder and balance be-damned. But to decry balance in one thread when applying it would act to limit Allied capabilities and then to use it to bolster an argument to limit Japanese capabilities in another is an inconsistent approach and, as such, an invalid approach.

So could you explain why balance isn't, in your opinion, a valid argument to limit allied plane numbers but is a valid argument when seeking to limit the gains Japan will reap if it does well in China?

there is one important thing which should be considered too... In my very first PBEM game, which i was played against my good friend he took Kendari in August 1942[X(] using the Aussies troops!

I have feelings that some of guys here on board would complain: the game is broken, how the hell Allies can advance so deep and so fast (and what is most important so early!) in SRA???!!!??

I have no objections - i was guilty for that - i used KB "nowhere" and my divisions were bad positioned and i've paid the price for that.

But using same logic with China Exp. Army which should be limited for China operation would apply for Oz troops as well. I've noticed only few games with HR "no Aussies outside Australia and PNG". I do not mind about that...it is just my remark....

The solution to the Chinese Exp. Army is simple - don't lose China. [;)]

I refuse to believe China is hopeless for the allies. Ultimately I might be proven wrong but as late as Feb '43 I'm mostly doing well there. To be fair to others, I'm only playing on AB's map which helps.

Back to the OP's Q - do you have any room & forces left to maneuver with? Personally I'd risk weakening the garrison at Chungking if there was a chance of cutting, or even just threatening your opponent's supply lines. Another thought (might be considered gamey) - if you have any units at less than 1/3 strength, use them - if you lose 'em you'll get them back stronger. A pure siege will probably be futile, ultimately.

i do agree with you. The problem with China for the Allies is this is only theatre where than CAN NOT make a mistake. If they make a mistake than there is a big chance that they will be steamrolled....

Well, i can say that evil part of me is enjoying knowing that Allies are are in same position as Japanese in the game, at least in one theatre[;)] (Japan can't affort a mistake anywhere and anytime!)

ORIGINAL: pauk

i do agree with you. The problem with China for the Allies is this is only theatre where than CAN NOT make a mistake. If they make a mistake than there is a big chance that they will be steamrolled....

True, or at least early. In my '43 game I can probably now survive one big mistake (which I might have just made! [:'(])

I suspect one reason China gets a bad name with some allied players is because when you play the AI, you can ignore China. Then, starting PBEM, you're not ready for a war of maneuver, you make that one mistake before you figure out what's happening and by then it's too late.

Well, i can say that evil part of me is enjoying knowing that Allies are are in same position as Japanese in the game, at least in one theatre[;)] (Japan can't affort a mistake anywhere and anytime!)

[:D]

ctangus, Pauk,
 
Precisely. I think you have both hit the nail on the head.

ORIGINAL: ctangus

The solution to the Chinese Exp. Army is simple - don't lose China. [;)]

I refuse to believe China is hopeless for the allies. Ultimately I might be proven wrong but as late as Feb '43 I'm mostly doing well there. To be fair to others, I'm only playing on AB's map which helps.

China is for the most part hopeless if your opponent is skilled in the art of siege, for all of China is no more than one big castle under siege. It is not a game of move and counter move as much as it is of waiting out the supply levels of the defenders. The analysis I have been doing in my game says that Chunking can be beaten IF the Japanese player plays his cards right.

The basic problem with China is that with the supply system the way it is it is virtually impossible for Chinese units to go on the offensive. While they are great defenders it takes about half the Chinese army to move even 3 divisions of Japanese troops. Without a serious threat of counter attack the Japanese will eventually wear an opponent down.