Hiroshima / Nagasaki reconstruction (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War



Message

Captjohn757 -> Hiroshima / Nagasaki reconstruction (8/8/2019 7:48:10 PM)

One of the interesting twists in Strategic Command: World at War is the relative quick recovery shown by Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the atomic bomb attacks. Historically both of these cites were uninhabitable and their ports, by consequence, of little military or economic value. A few months after the surrender, the national government formulated plans to rebuild a number of Japanese cities (about 120 cities), including Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but reconstruction did not actually begin until 1948-1949. Straightforward analysis (and history) tells you the atomic bomb attacks severely crippled the Japanese and dramatically hastened the surrender. Unfortunately, World at War overlooks the dramatic impact of the atomic bomb attacks and simply treats the destruction to the cities as nothing more than a massive aerial bombing . . . it would seem more appropriate to render both of these cities and their respective ports as level 0 (zero) resources for an extensive period of time --- at least a year, more likely two given given the disruption / damage caused and the marginal ability of the Japanese to allocate MPPs to initiate rebuilding.



ThunderLizard11 -> RE: Hiroshima / Nagasaki reconstruction (8/9/2019 12:44:09 AM)

Good idea. Also, I'd like to see the level of investment needed represented better. The Manhattan project was an enormous investment of resources and success was not guaranteed.



BillRunacre -> RE: Hiroshima / Nagasaki reconstruction (8/9/2019 2:13:53 PM)

In your experience, are these cities generally still in Axis hands for some time after the atomic bombs are dropped?



Captjohn757 -> RE: Hiroshima / Nagasaki reconstruction (8/9/2019 11:16:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

In your experience, are these cities generally still in Axis hands for some time after the atomic bombs are dropped?

Absolutely, especially when the AI has control of the Allies. The AI's grand strategy in the Pacific Theater, as well as some tactical operations, lacks cohesiveness, allowing the Japanese to easily continue the war into 1946 and sometimes 1947.

On a side note, I've had discussions with a couple of Japanese friends about the Hiroshima bombing and the necessity (or lack thereof) of also bombing Nagasaki, to which I've usually pointed to the usual suspects: U.S. reluctance to continue the war on Japanese soil (ie., body count) and the requirement/interest in an unconditional surrender as quickly as possible. One response I heard on a couple of occasions (mind you, this is passed down from somebody who knew somebody in the Japanese government, unofficially of course) is that the Japanese moved hastily to capitulation, partly out of fear that after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Tokyo would be next. Interesting perspective . . .



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.40625