The peasants ... they did as they always did for the previous +2000 years; they worked the land and tried to find food each day.
Very true. The Chinese economy was rural and work intensive, over an area very densely populated (the western half of China is almost empty). This made it very brittle, and it comes to no surprise that most dynasties ended from peasant rebellions, after a few years of bad harvest.
Under the imperial system, peasants mostly fed themselves, with a little overhead from the local mandarin. During the 30s, they had to feed the KMT officials, and the local warlords (several of them in the richer areas), and then the Japanese, and their mules, and the collaborationnists, and...
I believe this explains why the Japanese advance stopped cold once the coastal, and richer areas, were captured. The whole system collapsed, as there were too many "overheads" to feed, and several years of war (civil or against the japanese) had damaged the workforce. It still was possible for Japan or the KMT to act, eg Ichi Go or the various chinese offensives, but a little at a time, and not for long periods of time.
As for garrisons, I don't buy the risk of a CCP coup. This is pure post-war rewriting (by all participants, no one really wanted to accept the fact that operations in the North were mostly famine-driven). Garrisons were certainly necessary, though, if the Japanese wanted to forage for food and fodder.
There is a very good reason that the traditional greeting in south china translates as: "Have you have your rice today?" "Yes" meant it was a good day. Ponder that for a moment or two. For that to get ingrained into a language means generations were hungry ... not just a few days.
In the north west (Lanchow, Sining), you wouldn't speak of rice, but soup... Have you drunk your soup today?
I don't think there is a good way to model this. Witp is prolly doing as good as anyone has.
I think a possible solution would be to consider that, in AE, whereas supplies represent ammo and petrol, food and fodder is indirectly modelled through fatigue. A starved unit has high fatigue, which cause its squads to be disabled, to march at a slower rate, to lose morale and battle efficiency. Therefore, the situation could be modelled by making China a "high fatigue zone", where units have high fatigue, recover slowly (or need more support to do so).
Suppose that in China, support works at 1/10th efficiency, for every one. We might get something more historical...
And let's not forget that KMT and CCP were not actually "allies" as they are in the game...
Not just KMT and CCP. A lot of the units branded KMT in the game are warlord armies, who might have sided with the KMT, CCP or even the collaborationnists. Same goes with the collab troops, by the way.
< Message edited by fcharton -- 9/25/2012 3:08:13 PM >