Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Limiting the war in China

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Limiting the war in China Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 3:28:11 PM   
LAGAVULIN

 

Posts: 63
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline 		I am currently looking for another PBEM as the japanese(see thread in opponents wanted and am thinking of asking for some limits on the war in China. Not because I don't realise the historic importance of what happened there but because I don't really care for the way the game handles large scal ground combat. I want to play with ships and planes, not huge abstract blobs of anonymous infantry.

Have any players introduced house rules to limit operations in China - maybe cutting some sort of deal fom the start on how far the Japs can advance and then ignoring the place ? Of course the Jaanese player then cant move stuff out of China. Any other thoughts on limiting events in this theatre ?
Post #: 1
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 3:54:38 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		I agree, China is borked, and I hate it.  That being said,

I have 3 (stock) games where China is "stood down", and 2 games (CHS) where it is active.

For CHS, I think it's too soon to tell whether China is borked or not (to form an opinion on my side).  I think it's far better than stock, but I -still- think it needs considerable work (and I've got one game as Allies and one game as Japan in CHS).

That being said, here are some suggestions that are an amalgamation of the house rules (not using all in all my games)...

1.  No bombing strategic facilities in China by either side from Chinese/Manchui AFs.  Note if the Allies are ever able to secure AFs in SE Asia, this -would- allow them to bomb Japanese held strategic facilities -from SE Asia".
2.  Japan must "do her utmost" to maintain proper garrisons at all cities.  All cities have a garrison requirement, alto the only ones you really "need" to garrison are the ones with resources and the AF that you want to use.  Not garrisoning the "worthless" cities (cities with unused AFs and no resources), frees up quite a few troops, and it only means an unusable AF (because the non-garrison will demolish the AF).  But if you at least require a garrision everywhere, it's a bit more realisitic and spread out (drains) the offensive strenght of Japan by about 15%.
3.  In one stock game, we created a "DMZ" - Japan couldn't adance past a certain line.  Frankly in stock, China is easy pickens for Japan.  So basically we said you can capture the first row or two of cities, and that's it.  At the very least, you should not allow the isolation or capture of Chungking.  Don't get me wrong, it difficult to actually "utterly destroy" China.  But you can knock her out (by taking most everything -but- Chungking) fairly easily.  This can free up a lot of troops that can be deployed to fight the western Allies.
4.  No moving China or Manchuko troosp to another theater (such as Burma or between China/Manchuko) without paying PPs.  Japan can march thier ChiCom divisions thru SE Asia and throw them at Burma/India (overland), to limit this, you pay PPs to move a ChiCom Div anywhere (either to Southern Area or wherever).  The 5 Allied Chinese Divs initially assigned to SEAC -may- move into Burma however.
5.  Allied Fighers and 2e bombers may move into China.  Neither side is paying PPs to move aircraft INTO China.  There's nothign stoppng Japan from committing large numbers of aircraft to support a major offensive in China.  Allied powers should be able to allow similiar commitment levels.  Given the abyssmal supply situation in China (at least for Allies), it's not like you're going to be able to stage a war-winning bombing campaing in china (again attacks only vs. AFs/Ports/Ground).  But you can fight fire with fire.

-F-

< Message edited by Feinder -- 10/18/2007 4:28:19 PM >

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to LAGAVULIN)
Post #: 2
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 5:01:44 PM   
mc3744


Posts: 1957
Joined: 3/9/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline 		I use 3 and 4 as well.
No capturing of Chungking and at least another city, no matter what.

I find 1) double edged. With the exception of Chungking if it's not conquerable.

_____________________________

Nec recisa recedit

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 3
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 5:12:08 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Have to admit I also prefer to avoid China now I just never pay any attention to it unless I have to and then its to late its just a millstone against allied players

Broadly I am happy with China quiet no action by either side units withdrawn if PP's paid no strategic bombing by either side from Chinese bases.

or China quiet except for cities on rail line and in north strat bombing only allowed if base has greater than 20,000 supplies and by no more than 1 BG (try doing that in China !!!!)

or China quiet INCLUDING NO FORT OR AF CONSTRUCTION BY ALLIES prior to 1/44 after which either side can do what they like

I prefer China quiet its just a more fun game

(in reply to mc3744)
Post #: 4
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 5:22:00 PM   
LAGAVULIN

 

Posts: 63
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline 		Sounds like negotiating a stand off in China should be possible.

Something along the lines of:

Chinese evacuate x y and z and let Japanese occupy them.
Japan agrees to garrison everything.
No one moves stuff out of China without PPs.
Both sides can bomb troops and airfileds in China or stuff outside it but not chinese industry.
No fortifications until 1944

Then just pretend th place does not exist.

Anything else important ?

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 5
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 5:27:04 PM   
mc3744


Posts: 1957
Joined: 3/9/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline 		Some people do not like 4Es based in Chinese cities.
I believe it's a false problem. The lack of supplies is the main limit anyway.
Try to run more than a few sporadic missions out of China with 4Es. If you can it means you found a way to get supplies to China!
Hence I personally don't care. It's about how much you like adding house rules.
If you like them you might add this one too, if you prefer flexibility this one might just sort itself out on its own.

_____________________________

Nec recisa recedit

(in reply to LAGAVULIN)
Post #: 6
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 5:47:48 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		The -ONE- thing I will say that is positive for China is that, it does give you something to do during "the summer doldrums" (when everybody's CVs go back for refit, and there's not much going on over the rest of the map).

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to mc3744)
Post #: 7
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 6:03:08 PM   
Mark VII


Posts: 1838
Joined: 8/11/2003
From: Brentwood,TN
Status: offline 		in current PBEM with May 42 start, we have China on computer control with the understanding that the Japanese must run some supply convoys and the Allies must effort to fly supplies in from India. How nice it is to not be wasting time fighting in China!

_____________________________


(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 8
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 7:10:10 PM   
Curty

 

Posts: 269
Joined: 11/25/2005
From: Barnard Castle,Durham County,UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark VII

in current PBEM with May 42 start, we have China on computer control with the understanding that the Japanese must run some supply convoys and the Allies must effort to fly supplies in from India. How nice it is to not be wasting time fighting in China!


Don't all sorts of wierd things start happening when u put ANYTHING under computer control..or are we just talking the auto-convoy system?

_____________________________


(in reply to Mark VII)
Post #: 9
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 8:26:06 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		I'm actually curious - What's the AI doing with it under computer control?  Just sitting?  Random fairly un-coordingated attacks?  Does it screw up the garrisons?

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to Curty)
Post #: 10
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 10:22:14 PM   
Mark VII


Posts: 1838
Joined: 8/11/2003
From: Brentwood,TN
Status: offline 		To be honest I never really paid much attention to any details! We are only two months game time into this PBEM which started May 1942 with standard map and no mods.

But shortly after we started, a Group Army HQ moved into Nanning and captured it without a shot as the defending IJA brigade retreated. Then about a month later Pakhoi was captured in a similar manner.

As the Allied player looking around for the first time, the only really odd thing I see is five Group Army HQ's and one infantry Corps defending Pakhoi and nothing in Nanning with one unknown Japanese unit one hex SE of Nanning. The rest of the Chinese units show a somewhat normal deployment. The Chinese Airforce has not flown at all and are all bombers are on Naval attack waiting for KB to sail up the Yangtze or Red Rivers.

Very little activity from the Japanese computer, mostly a fair amount of air recon but no air attacks. Hitting the "W" key to see hex control, I see that all the railroads have had some kind of ground movement but there have been no IJA ground attacks in China. As I can't see damage levels in Japanese bases, you would have to ask Capt Ed as to garrison levels and possible damage from lack of garrisons.

In RL, nothing much happened in China untill 1944 or late 43. Our plan is to review the situation beginning 1943 and then another review at a agreed upon date after that if we decide to continue to do nothing. If or when we decide to start hostilities in China, I would offer to give back Nanning and Pakhoi before the shooting starts as we were not expecting the Chinese offensive with Chinese Generals leading the way! Guess I could try to force some supply carrying AK's through to the new Chinese port of Pakhoi? On to Canton Boys!!!

Personally, I couldn't be more pleased that not much is happening in China under computer contol. As Lagavulin said when he started this thread, I want to play with ships and aircraft and not wasting time on a broken land combat system in China.

During my next email exchange with Capt Ed, I will ask him if he wants to add the Japanese perspective to this thread on what has happened in China while under computer control for two months.....terry


quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

I'm actually curious - What's the AI doing with it under computer control?  Just sitting?  Random fairly un-coordingated attacks?  Does it screw up the garrisons?
-F-



_____________________________


(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 11
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 11:02:24 PM   
Yank


Posts: 175
Joined: 5/19/2004
From: Boston, MA
Status: offline 		What are some of the reasons that China is considered broken in Stock? I know at least one thing I've read is that the Chinese OOB is way short on units/troops/replacements from reality. I also remember a thread some time ago about ZOCs not functioning properly. What other things?

(in reply to Mark VII)
Post #: 12
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/18/2007 11:49:24 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		Zip for supplies, given enough time, China will starve to death almost on it's own.  Ok, thats and exaggeration, but not by much.

Also, the mobility of Japan and the rocket-rails in stock China combine to mean that Japan can mass units faster than China (considerably so), so China can be destroyed in detail by a "maga-army" of IJA divisions.  The lack of supply and dispersed Chinese divs combine to hurt their mobility and Japan can just mass everything and stomp you before you can move a mass to confront his mass.

Again, not to say it's "easy".  there -is- a compression effect.  As Chinese Divs die, they respawn at Chungking.  Eventually you -do- have a bunch of guys at chungking. 

But you can clobber a good part of China as Japan if
1.  You take about a month to set up appropriate fornt-line defenders, and mass your army elsewhere. 
2.  Go around and destroy China in detail with your massive army.  It'll take about 4 - 5 months. 
3.  You won't capture Chungking in 4 - 5 months, but you can effectively knock China out of the war.  Thus freeing up a lot of guys to fight against the Western Allies (assuming you pay PPs for them).
4.  Even tho Chinese are cheaper in vps than the rest (1:12 I think), Japan can still garner a huge number of points by forcign surrender of chines divs.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to Yank)
Post #: 13
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 1:33:07 AM   
trollelite

 

Posts: 444
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline 		Honestly to say, those allied players who get whipped in china should look upon their own mistakes, instead of using HR to shield their incompetence...... Especially you use Andrews map.

In stock, the player should take at least 70% responsibility if his china get knocked out of the war , in chs, you have nothing but your own incompetence to blame.

< Message edited by trollelite -- 10/19/2007 1:38:17 AM >

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 14
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 3:10:09 AM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: trollelite

Honestly to say, those allied players who get whipped in china should look upon their own mistakes, instead of using HR to shield their incompetence...... Especially you use Andrews map.

In stock, the player should take at least 70% responsibility if his china get knocked out of the war , in chs, you have nothing but your own incompetence to blame.


That's very true.

I've played and kicked butt in China AS BOTH SIDES in CHS.

If the Allies let the Japanese do nothing in China, then the Japanese will be able to stockpile 100's of 1000's of supplies to be used elsewhere.

Not a pretty sight when the US starts it's move across the Pacific.


_____________________________


(in reply to trollelite)
Post #: 15
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 5:07:56 AM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline

Well, I guess I'm 70% incompetant then.  I think it was WitPDude that soundly thrashed me in China.  He played a nearly flawless game, and very soundly demostrated just exactly what the meaning of "get there firstest with the mostest" means.

He did nothing that I would call  gamey.  He didn't violate any house rules. He just utterly dominated the map with Mega-Blob (I've decided I like that term ).  And he "taught" me just about every nuiance of the ground combat model -VERY- quickly, albeit somewhat painfully.

But if all that makes me incompetant, that's fine.  Getting clobbered in China isn't exactly how I would define incompentant, but to each his own.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 16
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 5:08:47 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		While BigB 1.4 doesn't stop Action in China it severely limits it for the Chinese and the Japanese. check out his notes from the mod ... I'm into Feb 1942, PBEM, and everything is much more static, particularly for the Chinese/Allies. It's the Japanese decision to ignite the powder keg, by attacking static units... anyway, house rules are good too ... just this is the best mod I've tried.

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 17
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 6:46:11 AM   
Captain Ed


Posts: 533
Joined: 3/21/2004
From: Victoria BC
Status: offline 		In my PBEM with MarkVII. We have put China on Computer Control as Mark said Pakhoi and Nanning have fallen to the Chinese. My garrison from Nanning retreated all the way to Wuhan my Pakhoi garrison was thrown out and is the Mysterious unit Mark is talking about. About 80% of all LCU`s are preping to defend Shanghai but are not moving at all. Air units are only Recon at the moment. It would appear that China will remain Quiet.

_____________________________

THE FIRST DAY OF YOUR DIET IS THE HARDEST
THE SECOND DAY IS EASY CAUSE YOU QUIT

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 18
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 11:48:04 AM   
trollelite

 

Posts: 444
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline 		Don't complain anymore, allied guys. In game you do enjoy something what chinese would not dare to hope in history. You could move allied air force in china to defend important bases and ambush Jap bombers, while churchill would not agree moving even a single RAF spitfire to china, you could move dakotas to china to airlift their troops, so chinese get a mobility that they didn't even imagine in the real life. In the real world, many chinese recruits starve to death even before they arrived to their units, because of incompetence and corruption of their officers. If he could eat as much meat in one month as the US soldier in one day, he could count himself very lucky, and you think such soldier would have a high moral? The chinese in game is already much stronger than what they should be.

Most of those who get defeated in china made some basic errors. If he knew to concentrate his force, if he treated his flank with at least a bit caution, if he knew at least some basic facts of using terrain, if he could only restrain his inpatience , didn't engage Japs in the first chance he got and so didn't defend what he could not defend and ruined his army in the process, etc.


(in reply to Captain Ed)
Post #: 19
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 11:49:36 AM   
trollelite

 

Posts: 444
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline 		You Japanese player sleeps inactive in china, then he moved 15-20 corps to vietnam, and then the fun really begins.

(in reply to trollelite)
Post #: 20
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 3:28:52 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline
quote:

Don't complain anymore, allied guys. In game you do enjoy something what chinese would not dare to hope in history. You could move allied air force in china to defend important bases and ambush Jap bombers,


I won't waste my time on this execept to say that, there are many historical in-accuracies about WitP, and of them, the ability to to move SEAC squadrons into China is most certainly one of the more mundane.  I will also disagree with you that the Chinese OB in WitP is actually *over-represented*.

(* shrug *)

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to trollelite)
Post #: 21
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 3:55:09 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		I also am not even going to rise to this one China in stock for a number of reasons is a joke unless an Allied player spends half his turn looking at China its going to get over run

OOB is lower than history (otherwise you get an allied juggernaught)
Units are starving after 1 retreat
Supply is to easy to ship in the interior
Resource bombing (don't make me laugh)
Railways that allow concentration at lightspeed.
Roads that act like superhighways

A few players do well as the allies but in the main if the Japanese go for China on stock map its game over China more often than not.

I don't know about CHS as I have not really played it
Andy

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 22
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 4:12:28 PM   
wild_Willie2


Posts: 2934
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Arnhem (holland) yes a bridge to far...
Status: offline 		To be honest, I NEVER overran China in an Pbem as Japan.

If the allied player concentrates A lot of forces inside the interior city's it's actually VERY hard to conquer those city's.

I bombed recources, surrounded the city's, prepper, rested, supplied and supported my forces, ground attacked the enemy and still got nowhere NEAR 2:1 assault values due to the sheer number of (unsupplied) forces inside the city's with their 4x defence bonus. 


_____________________________

In vinum illic est sapientia , in matera illic est vires , in aqua illic es bacteria.

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there are bacteria.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 23
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 5:20:26 PM   
Jim D Burns


Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: trollelite

Honestly to say, those allied players who get whipped in china should look upon their own mistakes, instead of using HR to shield their incompetence...... Especially you use Andrews map.

In stock, the player should take at least 70% responsibility if his china get knocked out of the war , in chs, you have nothing but your own incompetence to blame.



This is total bull. In my last stock PBEM game I won every single ground combat in China and stalemated the Japanese wherever he tried to attack me, but China starved to death before the end of 1942 anyway.

CHS is completely different and it appears China has a chance, but stock China cannot be won due to too few supplies. It is for the Japanese player to lose in stock, fail to occupy forward Chinese bases to stop their supply production and fail to bombard Chinese units every day thus increasing their supply consumption every turn and Japan can lose in China. But do these two things in stock and Japan cannot lose. Even if Japan never makes a ground attack, China will starve to death.

Jim


P.S. Here's the AAR for that old game: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1123796 My opponent simply vanished, so the game was never finished, but China was a gonner by the time the AAR ended.

< Message edited by Jim D Burns -- 10/19/2007 5:31:50 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to trollelite)
Post #: 24
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 5:23:07 PM   
trollelite

 

Posts: 444
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline 		Rifleman is the backbone your AVC and chinese rifleman just not up to the standard as described in the game database. Most recruits didn't get any training at all before sent to frontline, not much better than persant armed with hunting rifle. Half a dozen Jap divisions simply rolled over about 1/3 of chinese field army (perhaps 25-30 corps or so) in 1944,  including capture 6 or 7 bases in the game map(with high forts, I believe). Such thing could never happen in this game.

(in reply to wild_Willie2)
Post #: 25
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/19/2007 5:24:06 PM   
trollelite

 

Posts: 444
Joined: 1/29/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns


quote:

ORIGINAL: trollelite

Honestly to say, those allied players who get whipped in china should look upon their own mistakes, instead of using HR to shield their incompetence...... Especially you use Andrews map.

In stock, the player should take at least 70% responsibility if his china get knocked out of the war , in chs, you have nothing but your own incompetence to blame.



This is total bull. In my last stock PBEM game I won every single ground combat in China and stalemated the Japanese wherever he tried to attack me, but China starved to death before the end of 1942 anyway.

CHS is completely different and it appears China has a chance, but stock China cannot be won due to too few supplies. It is for the Japanese player to lose in stock, fail to occupy forward Chinese bases to stop their supply production and fail to bombard Chinese units every day thus increasing their supply consumption every turn and Japan can lose in China. But do these two things in stock and Japan cannot lose. Even if Japan never makes a ground attack, China will starve to death.

Jim


Jim



I have seen your skills, and quite impressed.

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 26
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/20/2007 2:19:59 AM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline 		Several points

Feinder, you might be selling yourself short - wasn't the game with Witpdude before they changed stock to make China more defendable? I think they set prep points to 100 for the chinese, who weren't prepped before. But i know they did something (too lazy to look now and won't have time later because I'm hopping on an airplane)

On the computer-controlled china thing - I did have one game where we did that, forget against who. A big problem I found late was that there was some city (Ti-somethig) the AI didn't keep the garrison in, by the time I found it the oil, etc. was trashed and a bunch of supply burned to repair it.

I do think from experience that it's important to have some understanding on strat bombing to/from China (not just in China). If I'm Allied, I can react to the game the Japanese have played, and if they took it easy on bombing so can I. But as Japan, I've learned I need to know in advance what kind of game my opponent plans to play. If they are going to do unrestricted bombing, then I'm going to try to pummel Chinese resources into dust while I can. If they agree to limit bombing, then so will I. What I don't want is to take it easy and then find 100's of B-29s hitting everything range of Chungking (and don't tell me you can't get the supply there, because I've had it happen. My guess is hundreds of mediums flying over the hump. )

But as with everything else, it's important to discuss expectations. Feinder and I actually had a bit of a rocky time at first with China because we had agreed it would be a backwater, but the definition was a little fuzzy and I'm more a "write it down with all the detail necessary" guy, and he's more a "my actions are nuanced responses to your actions, open your eyes dude!" guy but we got that all straightened out.

< Message edited by erstad -- 10/20/2007 2:25:26 AM >

(in reply to trollelite)
Post #: 27
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/20/2007 11:24:53 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		With no house rules, I am getting smashed in China. This has actually got me to re-read Barbara Tuchman's "Sitllwell and the American Experience in China." I highly recommend it to anyone who had not read it.

Japan eventually did roll right up to Chunking before running out of steam. They pretty much could and did win against the Nationalist whenever they wanted. It was Chang's philosphy to never really confront the Japanese in open battle but to give ground and let the Allies beat Japan elsewhere. (not a bad philosphy when you think about it) The Japanese did not move towards Chunking until late in the war in a reaction against the growing threat from Allied airbases. As a Japanese player, I would not want any airbases near my industry. Historically, aside from soaking up a lot of Japanese troops, China was a failure for the Allied cause and was eventually written off when the Allies decided that they were capable of winning the war elsewhere. I don't think any Allied player should really think that they can win the war in China.

House rules should be as simple as possible.

Japan has to stop at Chunking and Kumming. (or basically at the historical IJA high water mark).

No Allied 4E bombers in China unless the Allies control the Ledo road. (probably would not have the supply anyway).

No troops or aircraft in or out of the theater without paying PP. (except perhaps AVG)

And, perhaps no British units air or land in China, as for political reasons there is no way Churchill was going to help the Chinese.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to erstad)
Post #: 28
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/21/2007 5:15:55 AM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		(* not directed at any individual poster *)

What I'm still missing is the reason why many folks are so quick to latch "historical" constraints on the Allies when Japan can do just about anything they want. Sure Winny wasn't fond of the Chinese. But does a Japanese player keep 4th Fleet units within CentPac and Southern Army units in NEI? Most folks allow for the "training" of Japanese units. Many of the Japanese units were "disbanded", never to return (historically). Squadron go wherever they like if not Home/China/Kwang. Same for LCUs.

The fact of the matter is, the primary reason that so many constraints are heaped upon the Allies, is simply because of the fact that the Allied records are in English and still exist. Japan can do anything she wants, because 1. Folks don't read Japanese, and 2. the records aren't available. When in fact, there were just as many foilbles affecting the Japanese thruought the war, but given that much of it is "unknowable" the ludicrous (and often arbirtrary) OB that is WitP is taken as fact (when in reality it's largely a guestimated crock of crap).

A Japanese player quickly jumps to "I want to be able to use my units in the best way, and not make the same mistakes as historical!" Sure, not a problem. And given the that there's (relatively) little material to more accurately contrain Japan, consider that the "facts" of WitP are very largely -not-. More power to ya (I've played Japan before, and have a current one in progress). But that being the case, don't preach at me what I can and cannot do with my bombers or which units I can tranfer to help-out a completely borked OB for in China.

(* shrug *)

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to LAGAVULIN)
Post #: 29
RE: Limiting the war in China - 10/22/2007 11:58:29 AM   
Gen.Hoepner


Posts: 3645
Joined: 9/4/2001
From: italy
Status: offline 		I don't get the point, really. China is IMHO very interesting, regardeless which side you play with. I've done good performances both with allies as with japs and i think, once you understand how the handle the ground movement system, it can be quite an interesting theatre to deal with.
Chances are given both to allies and to japan. It's up to the best player to gain advantage from this theatre.

Well, that's imho, obviously

_____________________________

[image]http://yfrog.com/2m70331348022314716641664j [/image]

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Limiting the war in China Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.656