China Japan USA and the Euro-Scale Pacific

[Dabrion]

Judging from the AARs there have been a couple of games finished with the euro-scale map. I would like to collect and discuss the changes and challenges of the map(-scale), which tactics and strategies worked well or not to achieve the various goals. I would assume not all operational aspects and builds plans translate well from the board game. What are the changes that need to be addressed, does the amount of hexes in the Pacific mess with time tables or is that untouched because the force pools do not change?

Please discuss and comment.

[Jagdtiger14]

Naval-wise the time tables are not changed, and the scale matters very little. Scale does matter in China/Manchuria and I've made some personal assumptions, but without the surrender option programmed those assumptions can not be truly tested (live game with competent opponent).

[brian brian]

Many (11? 12?) years ago now, I made my own ‘euro-scale’ map of China by printing screen shots from CWiF, printing them on card-stock, and taping them together. Despite that amount of experience, I still struggle to form an opinion on the new scale China. I haven’t seen a game end on it, for various reasons such as a massive Allied or Axis victory elsewhere on the map, a player moving, or a basement emergency.

I have played the opening of the game at this scale several times now. It is a far more interesting game than the “WW1” experience on the ‘Asia’ scale maps. I usually play with the generally hated “HQ Movement” optional too, as I feel logistics are far easier on WiF players than gistorical commanders. Even with that in play, I don’t see impediments or advantages for either side on the new map. Having more room on it makes it more imperative to make decisions based on anticipated futures, rather than reacting to the past or the present, as in all good strategy. But I think that is a little less true on the much more static, ‘Asian’ scale map.

The only conclusion I have reached is it shows off Japan’s hobbling by action limits quite a bit more; most WiF players are familiar with the possibilities in the ‘ooze’ technique.

Overall, Japan will get some resources out of China for quite a long time, on either map, and that is all I can say, even this much time later. I would rather play on the bigger map for the sake of interesting activity. Having read some history on the most mysterious front in WWII - China - I can’t say I really like how well the game handles the situation there, on either map. In the end, though, it is just a game.

[AlbertN]

I feel that the game is screwed with the "Europe Size" map for Asia.
The force pools are simply not sufficient. In the "Guadalcanal" scenario for example, when I was learning the first ropes - noticing that Burma had 2 land pieces I was like "How do I even defend the territory here?".

That mirrors perfectly in the game.
Japan -has- to push in China. They have mobility (Asia map in WiF means you move 1 hex and prolly you flip unless you have an INF moving of 4 - which are rare). And Japan can probably conquer China or at least cripple it with 1-2 factory cities. It is also very easy to follow the "monson" swing due to the added mobility. (At least I used to keep an offensive on the weather line that allows to keep it up pratically all the year).
On the other hand if Soviets attack the Japanese, Japan is toast. -- Yes with the enforced peace thing they survive. But can Japan truly be playable without Manchuria? 3 resources and 2 factories less are not a tiny loss for Japan. And Soviets add to them 3 resources and 1 factory.

[Jagdtiger14]

Cohen, I agree with you that the force pools are not sufficient.

I disagree that Japan has to push in China. And I disagree that Japan can "probably" conquer China (let me qualify: against a competent opponent). Japan would have to get very lucky in several ways, so I would say "probably not", but not impossible either depending on circumstances and opponent.

I have a strategy to use against USSR as Japan, but I need the enforce peace option as a safety net in case things go wrong. I think Japan is very playable without Manchuria if it comes down to it. Depends what your strategy/goals are.

Disagreements are why we love this game so much! I hope one day we will have tournaments...that would be so much fun!

[brian brian]

I don't think you will ever see the Force Pools change, nor should they, and particularly not to further facilitate an extremely unlikely thing like the Japanese truly conquering China.

For one, the IJA I believe was the only major army in the war to stick with "square" formations - four sub-units to make up a larger unit, as opposed to three. This structure made their forces considerably less nimble than the gold standard in WWII - Germany. They may not have had an officer corps capable of operating a greater number of independent units.

A much more important point is Japan's failure on the political front. Their racial policies and barbaric methods had no chance to conquer a country so many times greater than Japan in size and population. They could have united Asia against the hated Western colonizers through the Co-Prosperity Sphere under Japanese hegemony, but instead they treated all other populations they encountered as non-humans who could be mistreated in any way at any Japanese soldier's whim. They generated their own resistance as fast as they advanced and probably helped keep the fascist / kleptocratic Kuomintang/Nationalists in power as much as anything else, though FDR sure helped there as well..

Much of the war in China from 1940 on was a stalemate. Japan could not afford to expand their area of occupation and neither Chinese faction wanted to fight a power that was obviously going to lose to the USA eventually. Japanese forces regularly had to go on "Rice Offensives" to seize the harvest and deny it to others. I get a sense from what I have read that it was all they could do to hold on to what they had, no matter how many Chinese mercenaries they hired to help them. Bushido had many flaws as it scaled up from Samurais to Armies.

Conversely, the Chinese army quickly collapsed in 1944 once Japan decided the American air bases in south-east China were increasingly intolerable, and they quickly over-ran a large area (an area normally taken by Japan in 1939, playing WiF). All that _after_ three years of a massive American effort to arm and train the Nationalist army.

But a stalemate makes for a very boring game.

[Jagdtiger14]

I don't think you will ever see the Force Pools change, nor should they, and particularly not to further facilitate an extremely unlikely thing like the Japanese truly conquering China.

I agree, WiF will probably never do this, and I don't think they should either. However, I think the Mech in Flames counter sheet will be added to MWiF at some point?

[AlbertN]

Pretty sure the Mech in Flames are already there, the only missing ground units are some KiF added pieces - which are of negligible impact with the exclusion of the ARM-ENG units.
I am just looking from the gaming perspective - in MWiF if China is alive with decent production (5-6 BPs per turn) by the time USA kicks in, Japan is toast as the Chinese units will ooze through the Japanese lines in the MWiF map.
But earlier on the same problem the Chinese have against a decise Japanese.

[Jagdtiger14]

Pretty sure the Mech in Flames are already there, the only missing ground units are some KiF added pieces - which are of negligible impact with the exclusion of the ARM-ENG units. I am just looking from the gaming perspective - in MWiF if China is alive with decent production (5-6 BPs per turn) by the time USA kicks in, Japan is toast as the Chinese units will ooze through the Japanese lines in the MWiF map. But earlier on the same problem the Chinese have against a decise Japanese.

Maybe I'm wrong...its been a while, but I thought the Mech in Flames set included Guard Banner Armies, City Volunteers, plus other units. I might have this confused?

There are some areas you don't want the Chinese to ooze through, and there are other areas it doesn't matter if you have the cities defended with a corp unit. China will encounter supply issues and be under threat of elimination.

[brian brian]

I think parts of the Mech in Flames sheet are included - like the Guderian HQ, for example. (I always build that on the first turn, so useful.) But certain counters that require extra rules coding aren't done. City-Based Volunteers are kinda in the game; almost like an Easter Egg. I bet one could talk Ronnie (rkr1958) into releasing them. Not having them makes it harder for the Axis to garrison their conquests ... but not having Guards Banner Armies also weakens the combat power of the USSR on their return march to Berlin.

You are on to something about "Mech" though - a single Japanese mechanized division can blitz the Communists to Japan's content, particularly sneaky Commies that have oozed through the lines on the north China plain. It's like a big open field covered by an MG42, just daring the Russian Berserker squads to take a run across it. It's easy to forget that a city is not a supply source if you didn't control it at the start of the turn - remind those disorganized ChiComm units of that whenever possible, though of course MWiF kinda does that for you with the status indicator.

(Japan always needs those leg infantry divisions, everywhere, available the cheapest by breaking down an INF for 1.5 BP each - and the resulting motorised division can pair up with the mech division - who says Japan can't play like Germany? - you might even wish to keep the "Japanese Stuka", the "Val," in China for quite some time). And the Commies won't have any air support - another reason Japan won't regret having a few LND3 sitting around garrisoning China on the wet turns and smacking Mao's raider units on the dry turns. It was mentioned that 3 CV planes might be more useful than a LND3 - but I would say a LND3 is more useful than one extra INF unit, though you might draw the pitiful "Lily," but even that plane doubles the defense factors of a lonely Japanese division, far away from anywhere, and that pesky US Army Air Force can't intercept in battles with the Commies. I am used to playing with just the CV plane counters included in Ships in Flames, and with that limited pool I just build out the whole thing, annually. Have never played with the scads of carrier plane counters on the CVPiF sheets, present in MWiF, nor with double CV plane counters on CVs that couldn't even hold 100 aircraft in the first place.

And I would also say - I will not play the new "additional" Chinese cities. The Chinese don't have enough historical brakes on their game play as it is - setting up a vast new network of military bases all over China for what was closer to a 19th Century army won't help matters in China.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Pretty sure the Mech in Flames are already there, the only missing ground units are some KiF added pieces - which are of negligible impact with the exclusion of the ARM-ENG units. I am just looking from the gaming perspective - in MWiF if China is alive with decent production (5-6 BPs per turn) by the time USA kicks in, Japan is toast as the Chinese units will ooze through the Japanese lines in the MWiF map. But earlier on the same problem the Chinese have against a decise Japanese.

Maybe I'm wrong...its been a while, but I thought the Mech in Flames set included Guard Banner Armies, City Volunteers, plus other units. I might have this confused?

There are some areas you don't want the Chinese to ooze through, and there are other areas it doesn't matter if you have the cities defended with a corp unit. China will encounter supply issues and be under threat of elimination.

CBV's and Guards Banner armies are optional rules, for which the code is incomplete at the moment. All other units are present in the game.

[TeaLeaf]

I haven't seen as much MWiF as I have 'just WiF', so for me it is too early to come to a definitive conclusion, though I have the feeling it is harder to defend China in MWiF. China must now defend a frontline twice the usual length, with just the same amount of units.

Japan will still need to rely on luck to crack the Chinese lines, but if they have it, it's almost too easy for them.
In MWiF, the assertion that the Chinese are good at defending but weak at attacking (usually the most persuasive reason why people accept to play with Chinese Attack Weakness option), is largely out of place. Even without the Weakness option they are weak at attacking, and average at defending. At best. They can defend, but their ability to do so is very fragile, depending too much on how the dice fall.

[paulderynck]

Late in the game when Japan can no longer concentrate nor pick actions based only on what's happening with China, the Chinese can attrit Japan to death without Attack Weakness. The ChiComms attacking at full is bad enough, let alone the Natios.

[brian brian]

"What is this 'line' you speak of, grasshoppah?"