Defending China..options...

[Viktor_Kormel_slith]

Like I said in other thread I got problems to defend Cina against Heavy japanese attack. Iwrite what I said :

I have a problem with China in MWIF. I had played with different rules combinations but I can´t get a well balanced game. When I play without land combat weakness China is overpowered (in two games, China conquered manchuria, korea, indochina...)Japan was massacred. With land weakness, four games, Japan conquered China too easily always with the same strategy (first destroy the comunist, very easy, and after, the nationalist, easy). Combining land weakness and additional cities is the best for balance, in my experience, but if Japan is determined to finish china is very difficult save China. So my conclusión is that something in game design are not ok but a I don´t know how could be fixed.

What do you think about it? Could you share yor defence strategies?Conquered China is getting to be and usual thing in our games and it´s no good for fun![:(]

[Orm]

What have your Soviet policy been towards Japan?

Having a Soviet force build up in the Far East might make Japan send forces towards the Soviet border. And if Japan ignores the Soviet forces then USSR should consider a short and victorious war in Manchuria.

[Viktor_Kormel_slith]

ORIGINAL: Orm

What have your Soviet policy been towards Japan?

Having a Soviet force build up in the Far East might make Japan send forces towards the Soviet border. And if Japan ignores the Soviet forces then USSR should consider a short and victorious war in Manchuria.

Here is one of our problems, like compulsory peace is not active, normally neither URSS nor Japan are promt to start the war. In fact, my friends and me used to play with non agression pact homemade rule and from middle 1940 onwards USSR used to be very busy to be a real menace to Japan. Sumaring, I don´t think what you are proposing is for all times solution. [;)]

[Centuur]

I've also come to the conclusion that if the Japanese really wants to conquer China and gets a little bit of luck, he can manage to do so, if Stalin doesn't intervene in Manchuria. Even without attack weakness for the Chinese, the Chinese are more vulnerable than in the boardgame, due to the larger map (and it doesn't really matter if you play with or without the added Chinese cities).

It's a total different war in China if you compare MWIF with WiF. It's become a tactical theater and not a strategical theater, because both sides lack enough units to be able to get a fixed frontline on the map.

But to say that I've found a really good defense strategy for the Chinese? Not really. But I've also not found a good attacking strategy for Japan, if the Soviets put pressure on Manchuria. If that last one happens, Japan lacks enough units to affort losses in China. Stalemate occurs, at least until Germany starts a Barbarossa...

If I look at your response to Mr. Orm, I come to the conclusion that your houserule is the problem here. In MWIF you don't want to start with a USSR-Japanese neutrality pact in place, because that gives Japan the chance to conquer China.

[Vanman]

China has some clear attributes that must take full advantage of:

1. Defense, Defense, Defense. Mountains and Rivers must be used to their fullest. In fact, I think most players tend to underestimate river defense vs mountains.
Halving Japanese attackers can quite frequently be more effective than doubling your own strength. Use the terrain effectively. With this in mind, don't just automatically retreat
to the safety of the mountains on turn one, use the rivers and make any withdrawal an orderly one. Make them fight.

2. Nothing irritates a Japanese player more than a Chinese unit getting behind the lines, liberating a city, and then building new units out of that city.
Japan already has a shortage of land units and a tight schedule. Playing 'whack a mole' is frustrating and time consuming. Even just threatening to do it, creates caution,
and a more cautious Japanese players means you are more likely to survive.

3. Don't make any attacks where the worst result possible is devastating. Be patient. When you get to the point you have expendable fodder....Go for it!

4. Every impulse of yours is a land impulse (Nationalists). Periodically the Japanese need to do a combined or naval, these respites are critical for you to reorganize your defense.

5. In line with #2, pay careful attention to the Japanese supply situation and rail lines. When you get partisans, its tempting to immediately place them in either Shanghai or a resource
hex, but sometimes rain links can do far more damage. If you cut 6 Japanese Corp out of supply, he is in serious trouble, or at least seriously distracted.

6. Even if you are using a house rule (we use a 3:1 garrison in Manchuria/Siberia and it works well), makes sure the Russians pose at least something of a threat. Even 4 Japanese corp
stuck in Manchuria makes a big difference in China.

7. Stay away from the coast, although sometimes if you are presented with an opportunity to take the Hainan resource (if hardly any Japanese are nearby), go for it. Sometimes a distraction
is worth more than a single unit.

[juntoalmar]

ORIGINAL: Vanman

Halving Japanese attackers can quite frequently be more effective than doubling your own strength.

This may be a silly question, but: what is the practical difference in a combat from halving attacker to doubling defender?

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: juntoalmar

ORIGINAL: Vanman

Halving Japanese attackers can quite frequently be more effective than doubling your own strength.

This may be a silly question, but: what is the practical difference in a combat from halving attacker to doubling defender?

The only thing I can think about is that he means to say: don't withdraw directly to the mountains, but defend behind river lines in the clear terrain too. That's something I agree with. But apart from that, there doesn't seem to be any difference between halving the attacker and doubling the defender.

On the contrary: doubling for defense is a little bit better against an enemy who wants to use planes for ground support (or shore bombardment, but that's something the Chinese should avoid until the end game).

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Centuur
I come to the conclusion that your houserule is the problem here. In MWIF you don't want to start with a USSR-Japanese neutrality pact in place, because that gives Japan the chance to conquer China.

And boy do I know that. Check out my AAR with Pat. That's exactly what happened. I, as the allies, agreed to first a one year neutrality pact between the USSR and Japan and then agreed to extend it for an additional two years. The result was that Japan conquered China by early 1941. As the allied player I'll never make that mistake again.

[Viktor_Kormel_slith]

"If I look at your response to Mr. Orm, I come to the conclusion that your houserule is the problem here. In MWIF you don't want to start with a USSR-Japanese neutrality pact in place, because that gives Japan the chance to conquer China."

In my opinion, the truth is I played with old WIF, until raw 5, many global games and I remember was very dificult, near impossible conquering China, unless China player was very agressive or very bad player. I remember that it was not common a war between USRR and Japan too, so if in MWIF the only effective way to avoid the conquest of China is a USSR Japan war, something is wrong with the game. By other way, this war use to be very risky to USSR. USSR needs every unit to resist Barbarossa,specially in 1941. I have seen many times USRR beated by germans because "Uncle Joe" have decided it was a good idea take a walk in Manchuria.

There must be a better solution to my dilemma. Specially interesting to me is the idea of choosing The blitzkrieg chart instead assault, I´ll try it next game.

[Viktor_Kormel_slith]

And one thing more, I don´t agree with who said that additional cities is not important rule for this question. If you wanna to conquer China yo have to occupy every city or risk your rearguard.[:)]

[Centuur]

I've concluded that the USSR can make sure that Japan doesn't goes all out in China. Simply by putting a large enough force on the Manchurian border, so that the Japanese need units there too.

A neutrality pact in place at start of the game means that the USSR has to have a lot more units in place there, to break a pact.
Therefore: don't start with a neutrality pact in place. And if Japan gets lucky enough in China, Stalin must intervene in Manchuria.
The USSR and Japan signed the non-agression pact in april 1941 historically. So wait and see what happens with the Soviets, just as Stalin did in WW II. Keep the Soviet options open for as long as it can do so.

Historically, things are unclear on how many men and equipment Stalin had on the Transbaikal Front, as the area was called in 1941. Figures differ from about 300.000 men to about 500.000 men. So that would be about 5 army sized units in MWIF, sitting on the border. No way the Japanese would have ignored the Soviets there. And they didn't. They had quite some men and equipment in Manchuria and northern Korea doing nothing but looking at Uncle Joe.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Viktor_Kormel

And one thing more, I don´t agree with who said that additional cities is not important rule for this question. If you wanna to conquer China yo have to occupy every city or risk your rearguard.[:)]

No, you have to take every factory city. Then China is conquered and then you have to garrison against partisans.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

If the Japanese player sets up to take out the Communists, have the Nationalists place/send units to the north. 4 or 5 corps can really help shore up the southern portion of the Communist front line. Those are mountain hexes and Ankang is a great supply source for the Nationalists - reinforcements can arrive there too. I have the Nationalists hold Chengchow at the start of the war. Forcing the Japanese to take that city before attacking the Communists helps spread the losses between the Nationalists and the Communists. If desperate, holding Ningsia and/or Sining is a possible last resort for the Communists staying in the game.

[Viktor_Kormel_slith]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Viktor_Kormel

And one thing more, I don´t agree with who said that additional cities is not important rule for this question. If you wanna to conquer China yo have to occupy every city or risk your rearguard.[:)]

No, you have to take every factory city. Then China is conquered and then you have to garrison against partisans.

I wouldn´t want to say that you must to capture every city, I would want to say that is highly recommended unless you don´t care the chinese units behind your advanced front lines. In my experience, units in your rearguard could be very dangerous because they could break your supply lines or even recapture some cities. For all this I prefer conquering every city.

[Viktor_Kormel_slith]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

If the Japanese player sets up to take out the Communists, have the Nationalists place/send units to the north. 4 or 5 corps can really help shore up the southern portion of the Communist front line. Those are mountain hexes and Ankang is a great supply source for the Nationalists - reinforcements can arrive there too. I have the Nationalists hold Chengchow at the start of the war. Forcing the Japanese to take that city before attacking the Communists helps spread the losses between the Nationalists and the Communists. If desperate, holding Ningsia and/or Sining is a possible last resort for the Communists staying in the game.

Today, we were talking about this and get the same conclusion. It is necesarry the nationalist support in the south flank of comunists, to slow down the japanese advance and this way get mores units. We agree with you Steve.[;)]

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Viktor_Kormel

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

If the Japanese player sets up to take out the Communists, have the Nationalists place/send units to the north. 4 or 5 corps can really help shore up the southern portion of the Communist front line. Those are mountain hexes and Ankang is a great supply source for the Nationalists - reinforcements can arrive there too. I have the Nationalists hold Chengchow at the start of the war. Forcing the Japanese to take that city before attacking the Communists helps spread the losses between the Nationalists and the Communists. If desperate, holding Ningsia and/or Sining is a possible last resort for the Communists staying in the game.

Today, we were talking about this and get the same conclusion. It is necesarry the nationalist support in the south flank of comunists, to slow down the japanese advance and this way get mores units. We agree with you Steve.[;)]

Of course that means you're brilliant.[;)]

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Viktor_Kormel

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Viktor_Kormel

And one thing more, I don´t agree with who said that additional cities is not important rule for this question. If you wanna to conquer China yo have to occupy every city or risk your rearguard.[:)]

No, you have to take every factory city. Then China is conquered and then you have to garrison against partisans.

I wouldn´t want to say that you must to capture every city, I would want to say that is highly recommended unless you don´t care the chinese units behind your advanced front lines. In my experience, units in your rearguard could be very dangerous because they could break your supply lines or even recapture some cities. For all this I prefer conquering every city.

No if you conquer a country, all its units in the country are removed from the game and it can't build any more. You only have to worry about partisans.