el cid again
Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
|
Actually, this is only true in stock. Mods have made considerable strides toward developing the power of China.
Mifune put me on to Treespider's ideas years ago - and I partially adopted some of these for RHS. Every mod
and stock should add the huge number of missing units, aircraft, devices, etc. Every mod and stock also should
not allow planning fields to be zero for units that have long been in the area, nor locations to be unfortified
when they have ancient and/or modern forts in them. Nor are the general values for morale or disruption valid -
use them when and where appropriate vice universally. Many locations of great logistical importance are missing,
and many locations lack their historical industry. What is the point of an oil refinery without an oilfield to
feed it? Virtually every oilfield (of the period) is missing. Add all that is missing and any mod (or stock)
will cease to be a walkover.
RHS (since WITP days) has devised a way for guerilla units to be somewhat independent of supply lines - it works -
and it means that these units can undertake missions to cut enemy supply lines, just as IRL.
China's air force is woeful enough IRL without imposing on it the omission of significant types and units.
China's air force can be useful and a problem for the enemy if you simply put it all in the game AND IF you
give realistic values to base forces. AVG could fly in - use LOCAL support - fly a mission - and hurt the enemy
badly even very early in the war. But you cannot do that in stock because the base forces are (a) too few and
(b) much too small in terms of air support squads.
China had a real riverine navy. It dominated the upper Yellow River and it never lost control of the Upper Yangtze
River - although it did lose control of the Pearl River (the third great river system) and the Lower Yellow River.
In RHS we have fully developed river systems (with seasonal effects which matter in China)- and we have given China
its historical coast defense units as well as significant riverine minelaying capability (using mainly small Russian
"Rybka" river mines). And we also added the Chinese Marines, which are not restricted, and so they can move by naval
units. Some of the British and US gunboats retreated upriver to Chunking and were turned over to the ROCN. ROCN
also had some of its own, and it devised ways to convert River Steamers and Junks to gunboats, landing craft,
minesweepers, minelayers, and other useful vessels. By giving player these historical options to convert craft,
the ROCN can make what it needs given current losses - so it retains a range of options.
China is not some sideshow. China is the SUBJECT of the Pacific War. The Allied embargo was intended to force Japan
to change its China policy - and to withdraw substantially from China. If Japan was willing to accept that,
and also to accept the Allies could dictate ALL policy from then on (having learned the embargo worked, why would
they stop demanding things?) - there would have been no attack on the SRA.
quote:
ORIGINAL: HansBolter
quote:
ORIGINAL: witpqs
I agree. I think it better reflects the problems that defenders face in such a situation. Are the retreating troops really just left to starve, and so on?
It does make certain things more difficult, but I still like it.
Ditto.
The game has always been a cakewalk in China for the Japanese.
Stacking limits makes the game more realistic in many ways and eliminates DeathStar stack gaming.
Just because it didn't fix China, whose problems far eclipse stacking, doesn't make it a failure.
|
Printable Version
RE: Snowballing through defence with stacking limits - 
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