The IJA Army (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding



Message


John 3rd -> The IJA Army (10/16/2011 12:55:41 AM)

Damn. I work nine hours, come home. play with the kids and wife and then find a flurry of activity having occurred on the Thread.

GREAT!

The question that JWE and Michael are getting at (I assume) is doing modified :Pwhex files. Right?

I will be stupid and ask---just what exactly would it entail to have several updates through the time in the Mod? Would this be exceedingly difficult. It is beyond my paygrade but I--personally--like the idea of the map changing once or twice during the course of the war to reflect the engineering that was done. Thus, the answer is YES I'd like that but I don't know how big of deal it would be...

FatR: LIKE the ideas you listed above. ALL of it makes sense and since a bunch of it comes from our work in RA I am already on board for the thoughts. When you are able to get back to serious Mod time please let me know and I can shoot the current files to you. Right now I am going through the Allied Opening day list and starting to look at Army and IJN ideas we've spoken about.

The REAL question is what state is the IJA in on Dec 7th in this Mod? They are heavily committed to a China War with two years of additional preparation and building time. Does this mean they start with some additional units in play?

Let me put forth a proposal for the IJA on Dec 7th:

1. The 1st Imperial Tank Corps in China. This unit is comprised of the 1st and 2nd TK Divisions and, perhaps, a pair of TK Brigades. Consolidate all the normal regiments for 1st and 2nd as well as two Mechanized Inf Div. For the Mech Inf I am thinking of something like 2 TK Regiments and an Inf Reg combined into one unit. This could be the equivalent of the of a 'Shock Army. YES--I know the Japanese don't have much transport but this could be there one and only attempt at it. My thoughts would be to build these units out of troops already there. Pull 4 TK Reg and 2 Inf Reg but make a new unit for them.

2. The additional creation of a IJA Amphib Corps. These would be new units. Have the creation of 3-4 Brigades semi-trained in Amphib Operations. Imagine not much heavy Artillery, a bunch of mortars, and good numbers of MG. We would add a new HQ Unit that would 'command' them, however, my thoughts are that they would be attached to Combined Fleet. Let us say they start with 3 of these Brigades on Dec 7th and then get two more during 1942. This would be an addition of about 25,000 men to the OOB. Don't think this would be a huge stretch of the imagination since we are predicating the scenario on a greater degree of Army-Navy cooperation and sharing of weapon systems.

IJN LCU:
1. We've already covered the Atoll Defense units. I propose they come in two sizes:
a. The larger would be build from an SNLF unit, adding CD, and more support to it. We've discussed this. We could call it a Brigade with about 4,000 men. The Inf would come from recalled SNLF with the additional stuff being new forces.
b. The smaller would be built around a reinforced battalion size: two companies of Inf, two companies of CD, and a company of MG: 2,500 men. Call it a Regiment. These would be all new forces that could be build from the smaller Inf units that come into the game as Nvl Guard elements.

2. Work the Base Forces around some. JWE's labor of love he has described interests me but scares the tar out of me due to how much work it would entail.

Take THAT! Does this meet with good or bad thoughts?





ny59giants -> RE: The IJA Army (10/16/2011 3:08:06 AM)

How about looking at the "Atoll Defense Unit" from the perspective of what unit(s) would be realistically placed on an atoll to fit under the 6,000 stacking limit?? Would it be just the ADU and normal size BF (Aviation Support 24)?? Or some other combination??




John 3rd -> RE: The IJA Army (10/16/2011 3:57:24 AM)

We've talked about that and the general thought was that they should be separate. To me, it would make sense to have an 'all in one' type of unit. Should we revisit this topic?




mike scholl 1 -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/16/2011 6:08:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MateDow

Even if there is no surprise, if assume that the US had two days of notice, what would they have been able to do? Recall the Enterprise and Lexington? Once again, you have the US carriers rushing to their doom. Sortie the battleships? Battleships without sufficient air cover trying to engage KB would be suicidal. Air losses for the Japanese would have been more severe, but probably wouldn't change the probability of success.



Take a quick look t the difference in Japanese aircraft losses between the first wave and the second (30 minutes later) wave of the historical Pearl Harbor strike. They DOUBLED with only 30 minutes warning! Two days would have every single defensive asset manned and ready, full CAP (and no A/C sidlined for maintainence), torpedo nets rigged, ships manned with full watertight integrity intact, etc. KIDO BUTAI would have been crippled by it's air and aircrew losses (and at a time when BN5 Kate production had been ended). As Coral Sea and Philippine Sea proved, you don't need to sink CV's to put them out of action..., just destroy their air groups.




MateDow -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/16/2011 6:57:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

Take a quick look t the difference in Japanese aircraft losses between the first wave and the second (30 minutes later) wave of the historical Pearl Harbor strike. They DOUBLED with only 30 minutes warning! Two days would have every single defensive asset manned and ready, full CAP (and no A/C sidlined for maintainence), torpedo nets rigged, ships manned with full watertight integrity intact, etc. KIDO BUTAI would have been crippled by it's air and aircrew losses (and at a time when BN5 Kate production had been ended). As Coral Sea and Philippine Sea proved, you don't need to sink CV's to put them out of action..., just destroy their air groups.




But this assumes that the US Fleet stays in port. If they are there, they aren't interfering with the landings. The KB has done its job of ensuring that the landings are a success.

Even with heavy aircraft losses, the US Fleet would be heavily damaged. The best thing would be to pull the US Fleet out of the noose to the West Coast, at least that way you have it, but would that be a politically viable solution? Reality says that Halsey groups his three carriers together and tries to interdict. Remember that he wanted to hunt the KB with only the Enterprise historically. Even if you gather four carriers together, you are still handing the Japanese a 1.5-1 advantage in strength, not counting the CVLs or experience gap.

US land-based airpower would be limited to what was on hand, there would be no way to get fighters in place, and there weren't any additional heavy bombers to transfer in. They would also be at a severe disadvantage against the Japanese pilots in terms of experience.

This is a gamble for the Japanese, but one that is commiserate with the fact that they are attacking the US to begin with. At no point in the game will this opportunity exist. The US will rush aircraft and LCU reinforcements to the Hawaiian Islands. At the beginning, you are fighting what is in place, which is relatively little, with the reward of neutralizing the primary US position in the Pacific. Clausewitz or Mahan would approve of the operation and the risk.

If they destroy the US Fleet from the outset, there will be time for new aircrew training. The Japanese were able to rebuild their pilot corps following Midway and Santa Cruz. If they don't lose the precious carriers, they will have the chance to hold the US at arms length. We are assuming that the Japanese have implemented a rationale training scheme, this will help minimize the impact of losses.

All of this assumes that the US gets that all important firm intelligence with two days notice. Actually sees the carriers, not just increased radio traffic. Without the sighting of Japanese forces, you are back to Kimmel and Short making the same preparations that they made historically, and that results in the US Fleet being caught unprepared in port with little air cover.

To replicate the increased radio traffic in game, make the default setting "no surprise" which will allow for additional CAP and response. That will increase the Japanese losses significantly, but will be countered by the increased combat power available to the Americans.




John 3rd -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/16/2011 8:31:30 PM)

Matedow: I love your outside of the box thinking but this is not a practical suggestion. If someone wants to try and take out PH with an invasion then that is their choice. I've tried it in my current game and might be willing to try it again, however, I don't think players should be forced into it.




mike scholl 1 -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/16/2011 9:45:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MateDow


quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

Take a quick look t the difference in Japanese aircraft losses between the first wave and the second (30 minutes later) wave of the historical Pearl Harbor strike. They DOUBLED with only 30 minutes warning! Two days would have every single defensive asset manned and ready, full CAP (and no A/C sidlined for maintainence), torpedo nets rigged, ships manned with full watertight integrity intact, etc. KIDO BUTAI would have been crippled by it's air and aircrew losses (and at a time when BN5 Kate production had been ended). As Coral Sea and Philippine Sea proved, you don't need to sink CV's to put them out of action..., just destroy their air groups.



But this assumes that the US Fleet stays in port. If they are there, they aren't interfering with the landings. The KB has done its job of ensuring that the landings are a success.



They don't have to interfer with the landings..., that's what Oahu's CD batteries are for. And you are planning landings in December, when the North Coast of the islands get's it's heaviest surf of the year. Ever see a surfing contest on the "Banzaii Pipeline"? Imagine trying it in a Daihatsu! You'ld have 10,000 drowned before the first man ever struggled to shore (and was immediately shot by the deployed garrison). The only practical landing beaches in December are on the South shore---straight into the teeth of all the CD batteries. ROTS a RUCK, Chuck. Why do you think the Japs landed 100 miles North of the Manilla Bay CD defenses..., or 250 miles North of the Singapore CD's?




JWE -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/16/2011 9:49:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Matedow: I love your outside of the box thinking but this is not a practical suggestion. If someone wants to try and take out PH with an invasion then that is their choice. I've tried it in my current game and might be willing to try it again, however, I don't think players should be forced into it.

Does beg the question, John. Are you thinking of any tweaks to the AI, or are you looking at a PBEM "but I'll take whatever the hell I can get from the AI" kinda model?




John 3rd -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/16/2011 9:55:03 PM)

I have always felt that Mods were mostly designed for PBEM. The AI can only do so much. What do you think on that?




JWE -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/16/2011 10:03:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
I have always felt that Mods were mostly designed for PBEM. The AI can only do so much. What do you think on that?

I do agree with you on that John, I was just curious. No worries Bro.




Andy Mac -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/16/2011 10:25:52 PM)

AI does better with all in one base type forces they are slightly more vulnerable to air attack and disrtuption but are easier for the AI to use

If you are going to do something like that best bet is to run and AI v AI game out to mid 43 see where the AI puts naval gauard units over write existing Naval Guard Units with your new combined units

Defence of CENTPAC and garrison units are mostly controlled by AI script 110 for support units and 115 - 121 for support units

45 does the same for Truk, North NG and Pelelius




MateDow -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/16/2011 10:30:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Matedow: I love your outside of the box thinking but this is not a practical suggestion. If someone wants to try and take out PH with an invasion then that is their choice. I've tried it in my current game and might be willing to try it again, however, I don't think players should be forced into it.



I recommend not taking PH, that is suicide with the CD units. [;)]

Take Kauai and Hawaii and then siege PH. Without supplies it becomes rather like Truk became; a base without function.




mike scholl 1 -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/17/2011 12:30:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MateDow


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Matedow: I love your outside of the box thinking but this is not a practical suggestion. If someone wants to try and take out PH with an invasion then that is their choice. I've tried it in my current game and might be willing to try it again, however, I don't think players should be forced into it.



I recommend not taking PH, that is suicide with the CD units. [;)]

Take Kauai and Hawaii and then siege PH. Without supplies it becomes rather like Truk became; a base without function.



Haven't you got that reversed? Neither of those two islands have large facilities, and KB can't sit off Hawaii forever..., so any forces the Japanese landed would be simply "hung out to dry" far from logistical support. And you haven't subdued the well-warned garrison of Oahu unless you sacrificed half of KB's aircrews and planes to do it. Attacking Hawaii is simply a cracked-brain pipe dream from any realistic point of view...




John 3rd -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/17/2011 6:11:45 AM)

I've learned this lesson. If you try to take Hawaii you must grab Lihue, Kona, Hilo, and LaHaina AT THE SAME TIME, build fast, and then reduce PH. It is difficult and costly. Have only learned this through the school of hard knocks with current campaign.




mike scholl 1 -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/17/2011 10:23:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I've learned this lesson. If you try to take Hawaii you must grab Lihue, Kona, Hilo, and LaHaina AT THE SAME TIME, build fast, and then reduce PH. It is difficult and costly. Have only learned this through the school of hard knocks with current campaign.



And I'll bet it wasn't done with the US recieving two days to prepare for your arrival and no "surprise" bennies to your opening attacks.




FatR -> RE: The IJA Army (10/17/2011 9:50:20 PM)

Sorry, MateDow, what you are proposing is not feasible. Neither IRL, nor in the game. Not to say that a successful invasion of Hawaii was/is categorically impossible (I've seen an AAR on a German forum where it succeeded, the invasion in my own Scen 70 game can be deemed a partial success), but odds just are very much stacked against Japanese, and the possibility of success basically hinges on throwing the enemy leadership so far out of the loop that it commits several more huge mistakes, after allowing surprise strike on Pearl, which by itself went improbably well for Japanese (no one on their side expected the RL outcome - and the biggest flaw of most early Hawaii invasion plans is taking it for a given).




FatR -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/17/2011 9:54:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I have always felt that Mods were mostly designed for PBEM. The AI can only do so much. What do you think on that?

I'm on the fence, personally. Can anyone of the potentially interested players comment on this?




John 3rd -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/18/2011 12:02:05 AM)

This is a very pertinent question AND consideration to be discussed.

JWE: How hard would it be to create a ...dex for (say) January 1, 1943, January 1, 1944, and January 1, 1945? Players would agree to update their games on these dates to reflect and modify changes in the Map.




DOCUP -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/18/2011 12:14:01 AM)

I would like to try this in PBEM.




John 3rd -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/18/2011 12:19:32 AM)

Lew and I intend to try it as well. I'll be Japanese (SURPRISE) and he'll be Allies.




DOCUP -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/18/2011 1:00:27 AM)

Guess I will need to find me an Evil Opponent[8|]




AdmNelson -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/18/2011 4:38:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Lew and I intend to try it as well. I'll be Japanese (SURPRISE) and he'll be Allies.


Surprise to who




tophat21 -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/18/2011 8:09:23 AM)

i only play against the ai....never played a pbem....as for the china being started 2 years later the new starting positions for japan i think will depend on how many more transports
and trained troops they will have at july 7th 1939....these 2 factors will determine how many landings on the coast
and where the extra landings can happen...if i can help in anyway just ask




JWE -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/18/2011 1:03:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
This is a very pertinent question AND consideration to be discussed.

JWE: How hard would it be to create a ...dex for (say) January 1, 1943, January 1, 1944, and January 1, 1945? Players would agree to update their games on these dates to reflect and modify changes in the Map.

It's not hard at all. Just make sure you have a complete changelog and keep the different pwhexe separate [;)]




kfsgo -> RE: The PERFECT WAR Mod: What is the Vision? (10/18/2011 1:23:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tophat21

i only play against the ai....never played a pbem....as for the china being started 2 years later the new starting positions for japan i think will depend on how many more transports
and trained troops they will have at july 7th 1939....these 2 factors will determine how many landings on the coast
and where the extra landings can happen...if i can help in anyway just ask


It's difficult to judge exactly how far the Japanese can get on a two year timescale; the performance of the Chinese forces was unspectacular, but the Chinese were in the middle of a "centralised" industrial expansion when the Japanese invasion occurred - the timing of it seems to have displaced a lot of brand new facilities - aircraft (re)assembly plants, steel mills, armament works etc, which were mostly being put up around Wuhan and ended up evacuated into Szechwan and rebuilt on a significantly smaller scale. The expectation on the part of the Chinese appears to have been that the war would actually begin in 1936, and the 'move industry into the interior' plans started around 1933 - Japanese pressure has been ongoing for a while, so it's not as if they're going to spend two years sitting around doing nothing, it's just tricky to figure out precisely what they'd do. There are a lot of offhanded references in the lit I'm going through to stuff, but it's tricky to follow up as there are only so many hours in the day and I need most of them for other things at the moment! I should have a broad outline by next week, though.




John 3rd -> IJN Troops (10/20/2011 1:42:48 AM)

Michael and I had a good chat yesterday and a couple of interesting ideas occurred due to the conversation. We were speaking about the IJN Troops and came up with an interesting proposal. Since the Navy and Army didn't trust each other and the Navy is now planning to fight an attritional war, the Infantry units of the Kaigun are completely overhauled. Here is the proposal:

1. SNLF Units are deployed at the start of the war as normal. As we have discussed, those units are then withdrawn to make room for the creation of Atoll Defence Forces. There will be two types of these units:

a. The first is based off of the SNLF Coy and is a Battalion-Sized unit of about 1,000 men. There would be Inf, Mortars, MG, a few Combat Engineers, and a few CD guns (thinking 2 5" and 4 smaller DP guns).

b. A regimental-sized unit of about 4,000+ men that would pack some serious punch. Imagine two SNLF, combat engineers, about 20 CD guns of differing sizes, and support.

The SNLF would all need to be withdrawn by the end of 1942 and the new units become available starting just a few months later. If my counting is correct we would be looking at roughly 4-6 smaller ADU and 6-8 larger ADU. In terms of manpower costs the only additions would come in the area of Combat engineers and the men to many the CD Guns.

2. Naval Guard units are totally revamped so they are able to form-up into larger OFFENSIVE Brigades. In this are we would totally disolve the traditional Naval Guard units and replace them with a Brigade that is broken into 3 pieces at the start of the war. Imagine 1st Naval Guard Brigade-A/-B/-C. The original Naval Guard units will be thrown out and replaced with an all-new TOE containing a heavy amount of Inf, MG, Mortars, 75MM Howitzers, and support. The components would be about 1,500-2,000 men with the Brigade filling out at about 6,000 men. Manpower and Industrial additions will come in the Mortar and MG areas. Try to imagine these as Shock Units to be used in the early campaign to grab bases and combined later for a viable reaction force to Allied assaults.

Figure the IJN starts with 3-4 of these units in Dec 1941 and then gain a couple more during 1942. Will simply go through the old Naval Guard units and do the math of 3-to-1.




mike scholl 1 -> RE: IJN Troops (10/20/2011 11:16:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Michael and I had a good chat yesterday and a couple of interesting ideas occurred due to the conversation. We were speaking about the IJN Troops and came up with an interesting proposal. Since the Navy and Army didn't trust each other and the Navy is now planning to fight an attritional war, the Infantry units of the Kaigun are completely overhauled. Here is the proposal:



While this is interesting and feasable, there is one potential down-side to the IJN enlarging it's own "army". The IJA will be even more annoyed than it already was by the additional threat to it's traditional role, and will refuse to co-operate with the Navy AT ALL! Small "landing forces" and "guard units" are one thing..., but fully fledged "Combat Brigades" are a direct challange to an already recalcatent Army and could lead to direct confrontation.




FatR -> RE: IJN Troops (10/20/2011 1:46:55 PM)

I agree, this infringes too much on the Army's territory. A less politically volatile decision might be forming less garrizon units and more south seas garrizons on the Army side, with latter having better armament and providing greater flexibility in deployment, but probably lacking ability to convert to divisions later (as some of the garrizon units can). As about atoll defense units, maybe keep the infantry contingent slightly smaller than in their base SNLF, but add heavier weapons?




Terminus -> RE: IJN Troops (10/20/2011 2:00:03 PM)

Besides, where are the extra men coming from?




John 3rd -> RE: IJN Troops (10/20/2011 3:01:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Besides, where are the extra men coming from?


Was manpower ever a true Japanese problem? Seemed to me they were able to raise the troops without issue they just couldn't keep up with leadership. I might be wrong here but I haven't read much describing a manpower issue.




Page: <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1