Limiting the war in China

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

LAGAVULIN
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:45 pm

Limiting the war in China

Post by LAGAVULIN »

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 ?
User avatar
Feinder
Posts: 6983
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:33 pm
Location: Land o' Lakes, FL

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by Feinder »

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

Image
User avatar
mc3744
Posts: 1957
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 5:04 pm
Location: Italy

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by mc3744 »

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
Andy Mac
Posts: 12573
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 8:08 pm
Location: Alexandria, Scotland

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by Andy Mac »

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
LAGAVULIN
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:45 pm

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by LAGAVULIN »

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 ?
User avatar
mc3744
Posts: 1957
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 5:04 pm
Location: Italy

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by mc3744 »

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
User avatar
Feinder
Posts: 6983
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:33 pm
Location: Land o' Lakes, FL

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by Feinder »

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

Image
User avatar
Mark VII
Posts: 1844
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 6:41 am
Location: Brentwood,TN

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by 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![8D]
Image
Curty
Posts: 269
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: Barnard Castle,Durham County,UK
Contact:

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by Curty »

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![8D]

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?
Image
User avatar
Feinder
Posts: 6983
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:33 pm
Location: Land o' Lakes, FL

RE: Limiting the war in China

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

Image
User avatar
Mark VII
Posts: 1844
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 6:41 am
Location: Brentwood,TN

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by Mark VII »

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

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-
Image
User avatar
Yank
Posts: 175
Joined: Wed May 19, 2004 12:05 am
Location: Boston, MA

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by Yank »

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?
Ils ne passeront pas

User avatar
Feinder
Posts: 6983
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:33 pm
Location: Land o' Lakes, FL

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by Feinder »

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

Image
trollelite
Posts: 444
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:01 pm

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by 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.
Halsey
Posts: 4688
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 10:44 pm

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by Halsey »

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.[;)]
User avatar
Feinder
Posts: 6983
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:33 pm
Location: Land o' Lakes, FL

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by Feinder »

[8|]
 
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

Image
User avatar
n01487477
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:00 am

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by n01487477 »

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.
User avatar
Captain Ed
Posts: 533
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:53 am
Location: Victoria BC

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by Captain Ed »

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
trollelite
Posts: 444
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:01 pm

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by trollelite »

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.
 
 
trollelite
Posts: 444
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:01 pm

RE: Limiting the war in China

Post by trollelite »

You Japanese player sleeps inactive in china, then he moved 15-20 corps to vietnam, and then the fun really begins.[:'(]
Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”