Can the map of Australia be improved?

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

User avatar
akbrown
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Road, rail to Darwin

Post by akbrown »

ORIGINAL: jrcar
Dave I don't think those forts would count as 9's ... 6-7 maybe. The gear was out of date and initially ammo stock low, plus not that many guns.

The Defence did improve as the war went on especially inner Sydney harbour which had waterfront Pill boxes, something I have never seen around Melbourne.
ORIGINAL: Raverdave
I like the final map, but I would have to argue with the fort levels for both Sydney and Melbourne as both cities had had extensive works done to them stretching right back to the 1870's as a result of the Russian scare in 1862. Fort levels for both should be 9.

Hmmm. I know there were fortifications around Melbourne and Sydney. I have seen some of the forts built to defend Melbourne at Point Nepean for example. But were they really at the maximum possible strength in 1941? Isn't 9 the highest possible level in the game? Shouldn't that equate to the cities being ringed by fortifications so extensive that they cannot be improved further?

Also, the fortification levels can be improved during the game with engineers, so I expect that they would increase further during play. On that topic - does anyone know how quickly they would be built up? I have not yet played the game past the first few turns (waiting for OOB updates to be done before looking for PBEM).

I guess a high number can be justified due to the sheer amount of fortification present as well as its strength. Maybe they should be bumped up by 1 or 2? Any other Aussies with better knowledge that I able to give an opinion? Maybe a concensus can be reached?
Mike Scholl
Posts: 6187
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 1:17 am
Location: Kansas City, MO

RE: Road, rail to Darwin

Post by Mike Scholl »

ORIGINAL: Raverdave

I like the final map, but I would have to argue with the fort levels for both Sydney and Melbourne as both cities had had extensive works done to them stretching right back to the 1870's as a result of the Russian scare in 1862. Fort levels for both should be 9.

I doubt that with some of the works being 80 years out of date they should qualify as
a level 9. And some of that work is represented in the permanent CD installations in
those places (the 9.2's and such). I think the "fortification level" represents prepared-
ness as well as digging in..., and while they were certainly ahead of the game over
other areas (the CD guns were practiced and stocked due to the threat of German
Raiders for the previous 2 years) I would bet that much remained to be done before
the situation was "as good as it could be made".
User avatar
esteban
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 2:47 am

RE: Road, rail to Darwin

Post by esteban »

ORIGINAL: akbrown
ORIGINAL: jrcar
Dave I don't think those forts would count as 9's ... 6-7 maybe. The gear was out of date and initially ammo stock low, plus not that many guns.

The Defence did improve as the war went on especially inner Sydney harbour which had waterfront Pill boxes, something I have never seen around Melbourne.
ORIGINAL: Raverdave
I like the final map, but I would have to argue with the fort levels for both Sydney and Melbourne as both cities had had extensive works done to them stretching right back to the 1870's as a result of the Russian scare in 1862. Fort levels for both should be 9.

Hmmm. I know there were fortifications around Melbourne and Sydney. I have seen some of the forts built to defend Melbourne at Point Nepean for example. But were they really at the maximum possible strength in 1941? Isn't 9 the highest possible level in the game? Shouldn't that equate to the cities being ringed by fortifications so extensive that they cannot be improved further?

Also, the fortification levels can be improved during the game with engineers, so I expect that they would increase further during play. On that topic - does anyone know how quickly they would be built up? I have not yet played the game past the first few turns (waiting for OOB updates to be done before looking for PBEM).

I guess a high number can be justified due to the sheer amount of fortification present as well as its strength. Maybe they should be bumped up by 1 or 2? Any other Aussies with better knowledge that I able to give an opinion? Maybe a concensus can be reached?

I think you guys are mixing up what the game means by fortifications, with traditional coastal defense forts. In the game context, fortifications are trenches, pillboxes, tank traps, etc. The kind of stuff you are talking about is coastal defense fortifications, that are represented by the various "forts" in the game. For example, if you go out on the Marin Headlands, across the Golden Gate from San Francisco, you will find Forts Cronkite and Baker, which are the old coastal defense emplacements, built to guard the entrance to the SF Bay.

It's pretty extensive stuff, even 60 years later. You can walk up and down the headlands, and see the observation and fire direction bunkers dug into the tops of the cliffs, and further back are the actual emplacements. 12" naval mortar pits, 12" and 14" naval rifle emplacements. Their is one huge casement, dug into a hill for what I think was a pair of 14" naval rifles, that is really impressive to walk around in. All this stuff is included in the "Fort Winfield Scott" coastal defense unit that is the coastal defense unit protecting San Francisco in the game.

But that is not the same thing as fortifications that are designed to impede an army advance. The whole coastal defense system north of SF wouldn't have done much for defense of the area from ground attack, except to provide some shelter for HQs, supplies and hospitals in some of the casements. And to do that, you would have to chase the coastal defense gunners out of their positions.

It may be that a couple Aussie cities need to have coastal defense fort units added, if the guns were still operational in WW2, but the cities were not fortified in the land combat sense of the word.
User avatar
stubby331
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

RE: Road, rail to Darwin

Post by stubby331 »

FYI...

Rottnest Island just off Fremantle had a main battery consisting of two turreted mkX, 9.2-inch breech loading guns emplaced in concrete with an underground magazine, an engine room, plotting rooms and concrete observation posts.

A supporting battery on the southeastern tip of the Island was armed with two six-inch Mark XI guns.

Later in the war, this system was upgraded with radar.

The structures were built to Army specifications in 1937 by civilian Army contractors, for the Commonwealth Department of the Interior.

As part of the Commonwealth decision to increase and improve coastal artillery defences, two defence gun batteries were located on the Island. The primary function of these was to protect the port of Fremantle and prevent enemy vessels from entering the south passage. The battery at Bickley on the south-eastern tip of the Island was armed with two six-inch Mark XI guns. During the Second World War, defence facilities at the Battery were increased to include anti-aircraft defences, concrete gun emplacements, battery emplacements, battery command and observation posts, and night searchlights. Also at Bickley were two mock guns and a dummy railway line built from old sleepers.

On 30 July 1936, land at Bickley was acquired and paid for by the Commonwealth. Work had already begun on the Island in 1935 with the lengthening and strengthening of the old jetty and the construction of a light narrow-gauge railway. This railway ran from the jetty to the batteries at Bickley and Oliver Hill to facilitate the installation of guns and the erection of fortifications. Kingstown Barracks, named after the original Kingstown site in the vicinity, was designed in 1936 by the Department of the Interior Works and Services Branch in New South Wales.
Construction of the complex was commenced in 1937 and included accommodation for four warrant officers or sergeants, and 72 rank and file personnel. The buildings were completed in 1937-38. The complex also included a small hospital, Officers Mess, canteen, engine shed and store, workshop, and single and married officers' quarters. In addition were two smaller brick administration buildings designed in 1937 which, together with the Barracks, enclosed a central parade ground.

Image
Attachments
coastalARTYmap.jpg
coastalARTYmap.jpg (60.75 KiB) Viewed 157 times
In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
User avatar
Raverdave
Posts: 4882
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 5:00 pm
Location: Melb. Australia

RE: Road, rail to Darwin

Post by Raverdave »

Where did you get that map from? I could have used that during the development of the game 5 months ago.[X(]
Image


Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
User avatar
Raverdave
Posts: 4882
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 5:00 pm
Location: Melb. Australia

RE: Road, rail to Darwin

Post by Raverdave »

Well I guess it is a case of how you define what a fort level is............Port Phillip had Point Nepean, Queensclif, south channel fort and fort Gellibrand.
ORIGINAL: jrcar

During the Crimenan war... A Russian Squadron had visited a few years earlier, remember they had a base near Japan.


Dave I don't think those forts would count as 9's ... 6-7 maybe. The gear was out of date and initially ammo stock low, plus not that many guns.


The Defence did improve as the war went on especially inner Sydney harbour which had waterfront Pill boxes, something I have never seen around Melbourne.

Cheers

Rob

ORIGINAL: Onime No Kyo
ORIGINAL: Raverdave

I like the final map, but I would have to argue with the fort levels for both Sydney and Melbourne as both cities had had extensive works done to them stretching right back to the 1870's as a result of the Russian scare in 1862. Fort levels for both should be 9.

I'm kinda sorry for posting this but I almost fell out of my chair just now. Russian scare? To Australia? Could you please fill this stupid, undeserving youngster in on this. [:)][&o][:)]
Image


Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
User avatar
stubby331
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

RE: Road, rail to Darwin

Post by stubby331 »

ORIGINAL: Raverdave

Where did you get that map from? I could have used that during the development of the game 5 months ago.[X(]

The map is from the excellent book entitled "The Gunners, A history of the Royal Australian Artillery".

The map is from 1944, but, most of Australia's Coastal defence's were already in place by the start of WW2. The Federal government had actually spent quite a bity of money pre war greatly improving the defences of the major ports all around Australia. Hence my post regards Fremantles defences.
BTW, Rottnest Islands guns and underground magazines etc are all still there, you can go on tours (good stuff too, Ive been [:D]).

FYI.. One of my great uncles was a radar mechanic and served on Rottnest during the war (IIRC the radar was introduced in 43).

I have posted this map before, Ive been beating this drum for 2-1/2 freakin years but gave up because no one was listening to me. (sorry for the outburst, I must be feeling sensitive, give me a break, its my birthday).

There is a wealth of information on Australias Coastal defence units out there (actually known to Australians as Fortress units).

have a look at;

http://www.awm.gov.au/database/collection.asp

From here you can search & view the complete photo database of the Australian War Memorial.

Click on Collections search.

Type in "Fremantle Fortress" in the search engine, Then Select WW2 in the conflicts drop down box, then click search....

But, I agree, Coastal defence Fortress's does not make a city fortified. But it should make it damn hard for any bombardment missions planned.
In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
User avatar
akbrown
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Road, rail to Darwin

Post by akbrown »

From what I have read in this forum, coastal defences do make it tough for bombardment missions. The CD info you have, Stubby, looks ideal for tweaking the OOB if it is needed (haven't checked myself). But the OOB doesn't concern me too much because it can be modded. Same goes for fortification levels - or does it? I am not that familiar with the WitP editors.

I also think that there is a lot more than coastal defences in making up fort levels, so maybe the adjusted levels I have are not too bad? But for me the main issue is the map itself, and especially the communication routes.

I am hoping very much that Matrix/2by3 are sympathetic to my (and some of our) views.
Spartan07
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun May 26, 2002 7:28 pm
Location: UK

RE: Can the map of Australia be improved?

Post by Spartan07 »

Would it not just be easier to change Australia to match our map?

You never kmow unless you ask:)
Mike - Nego
bradfordkay
Posts: 8500
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 8:39 am
Location: Olympia, WA

RE: Can the map of Australia be improved?

Post by bradfordkay »

One of the reasons I enjoy playing good wargames is because of the ability to play around with historical possibilities. A map as ahisotircal as hte WitP Australia depiction does detract from that joy to some extent. THe rest of the game is goos enough for me to overlook it, but I would rather play with a corrected map, if it doesn't detract from game balance.

Perhaps a revamping of the road classifications is in order, with an addition of one more type:

track - unimproved road - improved road - highway/railsystem

The Kukoda Track is an excellent excample of a track, with the present crawling speed of troops on a track feeling right for that route. However, the roads to Darwin and Cooktown, while primitive by US standards, were significantly better than the Kukoda track, IIRC. An unimproved road would be the route between Alice Springs, Darwin (well the southern end of the North Australia Railway) and Cloncurry, rather than the improved road that presently moves troops too quickly. I would set the unimproved road troop movement speed about halfway between the present track and road speeds. I would also change the track to Cooktown to an unimproved road.

I would also get rid of the railway running from Darwin towards Perth. Add in an unimproved road towards Broome rather than a track if the RR was for play balance, much like AKBrown's map, but with the change in road types.

Just my two cents worth. This would help the game achieve the feel that I like.
fair winds,
Brad
User avatar
Larz6235
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 10:02 pm

RE: Can the map of Australia be improved?

Post by Larz6235 »

Since I'm not a expert, just some guy who likes to play WitP, Ok. maybe the map isn't 100% accurate. So what.

Did the IJ invade Darwin or any base in Austrialia? I know, I know, just because they didn't doesn't mean it couldn't ahve been done. The way it is now, the Allies can't really use Darwin for that much early anyway. For that matter anywhere, except PH. I'm even beginning to question that. Bringing supplies in and baseing outdated aircraft there, or maybe the Flush Deckers. Lots of movement but no real offensive power.

But what about the playablility factor. It's a check in the back of the IJ mind that here's a base I should be concerned about or not as Mog has suggested. Sure if you were lucky and pulled back all available forces and concentrated in Darwin then what. Sit there while IJ LBA bombed them into the ground. Wait for them to invade and destroy them anyway. Not real Historical. Did the IJ even bomb Darwin?

But if you allow the Allies to use it to slow the IJ rampage through out the early game, the Allies don't stand a chance. Might as well call it IJ Steamroller.

I'm playing Scen15, and the IJ are literially unstoppable. I form my defensive lines and get smacked all around. Hong Kong falls, Shortly there after Singapore and Malaya. Then Borneo. Most of the PI, then Java. Rangoon. The PI. I had 42000 troop in singapore to IJ 92000. It fell. I had 42000 troops in Rangoon against IJ 87000 and it fell. I at least didn't lose those units they retreated. PI 77,000 troops to his 87000. Sure if fell late 42. But it fell. As I expected. Along with all those other cities.

If the IJ want to take Darwin from me in early 42' there isn't much I can do to stop them except, load it up with planes and LCU and hope that it holds.

They have the supply lines. Oil and Supplies from Java and Boreno etc. The KB. The experinced troops. I only want to slow and delay.

As I have yet to play a PBEM game, not sure how another human will act. But listening to Mog. I wouldn't stand a chance.

Just my two cents.

I love the game.
User avatar
Blackhorse
Posts: 1415
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Eastern US

RE: Can the map of Australia be improved?

Post by Blackhorse »

ORIGINAL: Larz6235

Since I'm not a expert, just some guy who likes to play WitP, Ok. maybe the map isn't 100% accurate. So what. . .

If the IJ want to take Darwin from me in early 42' there isn't much I can do to stop them except, load it up with planes and LCU and hope that it holds.

They have the supply lines. Oil and Supplies from Java and Boreno etc. The KB. The experinced troops. I only want to slow and delay.

Hi Larz,

I think you answered your own question. With the current map, the Allies can build up rapidly in Darwin by sending in troops over the ahistorical rail net. The Japanese can invade, and might very well drive out the defenders, given the quality edge of their forces in the early months. Then, utilizing the ahistorical rail net for rapid movement and easy supply, the Japanese Army can drive through the outback for decisive Corps-sized battles against the allies in Perth or Alice Springs.

This would all be very exciting -- (not that I would recommend this strategy to the Japanese!) -- but of course, in real life, it would have been impossible. And that's the main reason for 'fixing' the map of Australia -- to allow the player to do what his counterparts could have done. If the game allows you to do things that they couldn't do, then its just a game, not a simulation.

An accurate transportation net -- like akbrown's proposal -- would recreate the challenge the Australians faced in getting enough men and equipment out to defend the northwest; would illustrate why the Japanese had no burning desire to invade there, as there was no militarily viable land route from Darwin to the south or the east; and would force the allies to run ships into Darwin, through Japanese air cover, if they wanted to build it into an uber-base for attacks into the DEI in late 1942 or 1943.

Any map change that increases historical accuracy, and improves gameplay is well-worth considering, IMHO.


Oh, and by the way, yes, the Japanese did bomb Darwin -- frequently.
WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!
User avatar
stubby331
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

RE: Can the map of Australia be improved?

Post by stubby331 »

Found some great excerpts from published works which outline the sort of effort required to supply Darwin WITHOUT A DIRECT RAIL CONNECTION from Alice springs. As discussed, the AHISTORICAL rail link just makes it too easy.


Excerpt from "Outback Corridor":

When a train arrived at Alice Springs from the south all troops and Allied Works Council workers going north by Army convoy were taken to the Staging Camp for an overnight stay before proceeding on next day. The contents of freight trains were off-loaded onto army transports (in the early days 3 ton trucks - Chevrolets, D3 Internationals, later semi-trailers and from 1944 on to Mack-Lanover 10 ton diesels and trailers) for movement north. Normally two platoons of 30 vehicles cleared a freight train load, depending on the vehicle used and type of freight. When the vehicles were loaded they returned to their Army Transport unit lines and parked overnight ready for departure next morning. The train, having been cleared, returned south to Terowie to receive another trans-shipment of supplies and equipment.


Excerpt from "Convoys Up The Track":

Every day three convoys, usually of thirty vehicles, left Alice Springs at forty five minute intervals from 0600 hrs to travel north. Daily, six convoys left the staging camps at Barrow Creek, Banka Banka, Elliot and Larrimah, northward or southward bound. The normal return journey took eight days. The actual turn around time was eleven days, the extra three days being spent in Alice Springs for unloading, vehicle maintenance, military training, washing clothes, collection of pay and reloading for the next convoy.


Excerpt from "An Australian Adventure":

During its four years of operation this unit [Darwin Overland Maintenance Force] increased to 8,000 men and over 3,000 vehicles of every shape and size. Once Alice had her teeth into this war business she certainly pulled no punches. In those four years her convoys covered 82,612,196 miles. They transported from her bulk stores 487,197 tons of war materials and supplies. Apart from the unit personnel, her trucks carried 194,852 persons of all ranks. Naturally such colossal transportation was costly. There were 22,427 tyres used to keep this vital life-line going. To keep those trucks moving, Alice poured into their tanks 8,724,270 gallons of petrol and 350,473 gallons of diesel fuel. Under the bonnets went 197,232 gallons of engine and transmission oil and through the grease guns went 77,690 pounds of grease.


Excerpt from "An Australian Adventure":

She [Alice Springs] not only had to transport men, but she had to feed them, provide water for them, install electric light for them, entertain them, and do a host of other things. I know she was blamed for some things she provided, such as flies, mosquitoes, dust, and bog-holes. Some grumbled about cold or her heat, but all admit she certainly gave them the whole works.

In order that Alice would have an adequate water supply to meet any eventuality, forty one bores and five wells were put down in the town area. Local piggeries produced 55,304 pounds of pork, and gardens grew 380,924 pounds of vegetables.
...

The citizens of Alice Springs played a great part through their various social activities and organisations. In June 1941 Griffiths House, which was originally planned as a children's hostel, was opened as a soldiers' and servicemen's club. It continued in this role until the end of the war. Over a million cups of tea were handed out and over half a million postage stamps were sold for letters written on the premises. Other churches also opened their buildings to cater for the boys.
In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
User avatar
esteban
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 2:47 am

RE: Can the map of Australia be improved?

Post by esteban »

ORIGINAL: stubby331

Local piggeries produced 55,304 pounds of pork...

Is "piggeries" a word? [:)]

More seriously, good information there Stubby
User avatar
stubby331
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

RE: Can the map of Australia be improved?

Post by stubby331 »

ORIGINAL: esteban
ORIGINAL: stubby331

Local piggeries produced 55,304 pounds of pork...

Is "piggeries" a word? [:)]

More seriously, good information there Stubby

Alice Springs and Camelot have a lot in common - both good Pig Country. (have to be a python fan to get that one).

On a more serious note, I'm interested to see how long this thread is left swinging in the breeze (pardon the pun) before we here anymore from the Matrix boys, didnt Mogami say he was going to do some testing on the "Darwin base buildup, all over in the SRA by end 43" thing?
In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)
ZOOMIE1980
Posts: 1283
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 5:07 am

RE: Can the map of Australia be improved?

Post by ZOOMIE1980 »

ORIGINAL: stubby331
ORIGINAL: esteban
ORIGINAL: stubby331

Local piggeries produced 55,304 pounds of pork...

Is "piggeries" a word? [:)]

More seriously, good information there Stubby

Alice Springs and Camelot have a lot in common - both good Pig Country. (have to be a python fan to get that one).

On a more serious note, I'm interested to see how long this thread is left swinging in the breeze (pardon the pun) before we here anymore from the Matrix boys, didnt Mogami say he was going to do some testing on the "Darwin base buildup, all over in the SRA by end 43" thing?

I think the Aircraft Upgrade flap has eclipsed this one, now.....and even that one is getting a "no response" from Matrix/2X3....
Top Cat
Posts: 157
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2002 10:20 am
Location: Adelaide, Australia

RE: Can the map of Australia be improved?

Post by Top Cat »

Found the following map showing various military establishments along the Darwin - Alice Springs route. Show the railway ending somewhere near "Birdum".

The following link also has interesting info on Airbases throughout Australia. Nearly 50 listed for the NT alone.

Military Airfields In Australia

Cheers
Top Cat

Image


Also a relevant quote...

At a conference between General George H. Brett and General Casey on 24 Apr 19 42, Casey had talked Brett out of using the Darwin area as major staging area for an expeditionary force into the Indies because the overland supply routes were to weak, nevertheless the chief engineer Gen Casey agreed with the building of the airbases in Northern Territory. (1 May 1945 General Casey's son Lt. Hugh B Casey would join the 808th Engineer Aviation Battalion while the unit was on the Island of Luzon in the Philippines).

With the region diminishing in tactical importance and far from Casey's offices the 808th and 43rd Engineers were largely left on their own devices. By May 1942, the 808th was the best equipped engineer unit in the theatre. The 808th had been working more or less independently since March 1942. Upon receiving orders to build an airfield, the engineers selected sites prepared plans and began construction. By the time higher Headquarters approved plans work was well along.
Attachments
ntmap03.jpg
ntmap03.jpg (126.37 KiB) Viewed 156 times
User avatar
akbrown
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Can the map of Australia be improved?

Post by akbrown »

ORIGINAL: Top Cat

Found the following map showing various military establishments along the Darwin - Alice Springs route. Show the railway ending somewhere near "Birdum".

Yes, that is an interesting map which I also found some time ago. It shows that there were a lot of airbases built in the top end.

In relation to my suggested map, I ano thinking that it may be better to get rid of the Katherine base and just use Daly Waters, and Darwin itself, as conglomerate bases to represent all of the various airfields built in the area. This is less accurate but requires on less extra base to be added.
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Can the map of Australia be improved?

Post by jrcar »

And most of those bases were built later in the war.

Cheers

Rob
AE BETA Breaker
User avatar
akbrown
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Can the map of Australia be improved?

Post by akbrown »

ORIGINAL: jrcar

And most of those bases were built later in the war.

Cheers

Rob

That is why I believe that if such bases were added to the game they should start with very low airfield ratings
Post Reply

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