The Chinese are toast!

[david12345]

With the addition of forced march and retreats, it seems China has no hope. I have 4 games going with the patch, and in only one are the Chinese not already broken. And all of my games are in early to mid 1940.

If a Japanese player pushes hard, builds armies, and puts a couple of chits into infantry weapons, I don't see any way the Chinese can stand. I predict that China will fall in every one of the games I have against equal opponents.

I have gotten the argument that China must fall or at least be severely pushed back for the Japanese to be competitive in the game. Well if the game MUST go the opposite of history just to work, then something is wrong.

Perhaps if the Japanese started without motorization, or maybe China had more scripted troop arrivals this could be fixed?

Curious what others think. I will bet that China is getting slaughtered in the vast majority of games being played...

[Catacol Highlander]

I am playing 3 games in 1.01 as allies at the moment and am at the end of 1940 or beginning of 41 in all 3. In all 3 China are holding on ok. While you are right that an experienced player can probably make a mess of China every time, I think the time it takes is definitely variable. There is every chance of China herself getting to level 2 infantry by the end of 40 - I have managed it in 1 and am close in the other 2 - and once at level 2 it gets tough for the Japanese. They can do it with investment in tac air and with decent weather, but with pearl and the pacific to plan for in 1941 I dont think it is a foregone conclusion that they will be out of the game by then. The stronger they are in Dec 41 the bigger the headache for the axis player. Japan can go on and crush them through 42 I would think every time, but to do that operations in India, or futher east in the pacific will be damaged so it becomes a question of choice.

I dont see it as impossible at this stage (winter 40/41). Perhaps I'll see it differently when my 3 games get to 1942. I'll post back again in this thread when they get to that stage.

[zirkel1961]

I have the same experience as David12345. I played a inexperienced player as allies and my Chinese surrendered in early 1942 then my opponent quickly attacked Russian in the east and south . I had no choice to surrender in late 1943 as the allies. I'm playing someone else and his Chinese as David put it "are toast" and it is not looking good for the Chinese in two other games. The only game my Chinese are doing well is because the axis player spent big bucks with Japanese chits trying to keep the Russians out of the game.

I think something needs to be done or everyone will learn how easy it is to conquer China thus making the game unplayable

[Armuss]

I too see this problem. Maybe (first thing) change China Army (SA/SD) 3/1 to 2/2?

[Hubert Cater]

Thanks gentlemen and we can take a closer look to see what might be needed to re-balance things as applicable.

[david12345]

Thanks for the input, Hubert.

Although I like forced march on paper, I do believe it is the death of China.

If you google Japanese high water mark in China, or just load one of the other scenarios that start during the war, you can see the Japanese did not get very far at all. It seems that the Japanese are capbable of fielding a hugh army in Global. Maybe a reduction of builds is advisable.

@Catacol. I think with the benefits and ease of taking out China, the Japanese are much better off going with that strategy over India, etc.

The major boost in economy and threat to Russia once they fall is a border line game breaker.

Any help appreciated.

[SeaMonkey]

Let's see, first the Chinese walked all over the Japanese, now the other way around? A semblance of that happened in Al's campaign, Brute Force, the Japs knocked the Chinese out early and I for one thought that there would be great benefit for the Axis. Actually it turned out different, no MPPs of any significance, something like 38 per turn and massive partisans that have to be managed, a real damper on Japanese expansion.

Perhaps there is something there to be learned?

[awen]

im happy to see the chinese losing now and from what i had tried with global it was nearly impossible to shift them from their main defensive positions behind rivers using the japanese even with tons of mpp invested. they just sat there gaining exp levels and strength points whilst my japanese were demorilised and useless as a result, too many useless japanese units after being at the front and taking a beating.

keep force march else the japanese will just not be able to surround the chinese and get stuck unable to move sometimes.

as for japan being a threat to russia thats laughable their tanks are weak and the russians can afford to send tanks to the east because russia is probably the most overpowered country in the game imo and germany cant win against them and the official aar just says the same.

[carverrt]

David,

Let's play a game... show me how you beat China.

Robert

[Amadeus]

I too see this problem. Maybe (first thing) change China Army (SA/SD) 3/1 to 2/2?

Please Hubert, do not do that. Do not weaken China in attacking value. In my tournament games against Clausewitz (2nd place in fun challenge) China is quite good. Clausewitz too. In my tourny game against Peter it is similar.

I remember China in my game against crispy before the patch. My chinese troops finally could push him back. Maybe it was a tiny space too easy and hey it was fun that the japanese field army has to fight. Please not weaken attacking values!!

[Catacol Highlander]

I wouldnt change the attack/defence values. Defence 2 would make them impossible to shift at tech 2 infantry.

It is certainly much more tough than in the AAR now in 1.01. Of my 3 allied games the Chinese in 1 are starting to struggle now - they are ok in the other 2. I would suggest simply looking at the mpps again and doing a very minor adjust to increase revenue slightly. Or do something minor to the map in the northern sector to make a breakthrough there a little harder. Or start them with one more corps?

It is a tough one. For 2 years they are Japan's only enemy. Fall too fast and Japan gets mighty strong. Stand too long and Japan is really up against it (see the AAR).

[david12345]

Awen has a point, I have seen Chinese units get tons of experiance and turn into monster units, but that is only if the japanese is making low odds attacks turn after turn. However, as for japan attacking russia being laughable, I disagree strongly. The highly experianced japanese can create considerable problems for russia, which, by the way, I believe is closer to being under powered than over powered.

I think more money might be a good idea for China. Many turns all my money goes straight into reinforcing the same units and I can never build.

[SeaMonkey]

Ideally I believe the Japanese should have to take 3 years to complete the Chinese surrender, that would make it in the Autumn of 42. Obviously the USA would be in it by then and would have forces available to make life difficult for the Japanese in the Pacific.

Solely at the players' choice, Axis choose to concentrate on China, opening for Allies in the Pacific, but Japanese can gamble Allies concentrate on Europe, so have a little more time. All about consequence of decision making, Axis and Allies.

[Amadeus]

I agree to David. There is only some minor money adjustment necessary.

[Strategiclayabout]

From a dozen games played in China with Gold now:

Maybe just cutting motorization from Japan's starting tech would help ?

It will slow their armies except spec forces (and already motorized ones) or corps and tanks (but you need to buy those).

Will be harder for Japan to shift armies and change fronts quickly.

*

The other thing possible is to put more "popping" partisan squares in China (maybe by replacing some "supply cutting partisan squares" so Japan has to put more units to hold the ground when advancing.

[Big Al]

IMO if China is to be captured it should be at the sacrifice of being strong vs the USA. Everything is a balance.

[Amadeus]

The other thing possible is to put more "popping" partisan squares in China (maybe by replacing some "supply cutting partisan squares" so Japan has to put more units to hold the ground when advancing.

Oh my god. No!! Partisans are fun cutter. They only absorb units which are needed to play.

[david12345]

I like the idea of taking away jap starting motorization. That and a little more money just might do the trick.

I agree with Amadeus, partisans are enough of a pain already!

[mcaryf1]

I would like to propose an alternative solution to the problem of China v Japan which is actually based on the true situation in WW2.

The Japanese army was very much superior to the Chinese in the way of equipment. For example the majority of Chinese units had little or no artillery. However the Japanese units as portrayed in the standard game are too numerous. The real situation was that the Japanese could pretty well force their way to any location that they wished, as demonstrated during the Ichi-Go offensive, but they could not hold onto the areas they conquered as the countryside remained hostile and they did not have sufficient troops to garrison new areas that they could potentially conquer.

The Japanese Army has 14 Corps and 18 Armies which is equivalent to 50 Corps sized units as well as 16 special force units and garrisons. The German Army has 20 Corps and 14 Armies equivalent to 48 Corps sized units and only 5 special forces and garrisons. In practice the German army was numerically 10 - 20% larger than that of Japan as well as being much better equipped.

Thus my solution would be to reduce the size of the IJA by about 15% but have each of its units maintain a clear qualitative advantage over an equivalent Chinese unit. For the Chinese I would make their units cheaper to build or rebuild on the basis that they are manpower heavy but equipment light but make the cost of upgrading their infantry tech quite high as they are really starting from -1 in terms of equipment.

This might need some fine tuning to give a balanced game but would better reflect the real problems both China and Japan faced.

Finally in the standard scenario it is not at all obvious why Japan might have wished to occupy Manchuria and those parts of China with which it starts. In practice of course there were major mineral and coal deposits and mines in Manchuria and relevant parts of China e.g. Benxihu (scene of the world's worst ever mining disaster with over 1500 lives lost in 1942) in Manchuria, Chingching near Yenan (an important target for the Communist Chinese 100 regiment offensive) and Shandong near Nanking.

Regards

Mike

[zirkel1961]

Just bought 2 new carriers right off the aircraft carrier dealership showroom floor after China surrender to my greatness. I was thinking of spending the 975 bucks on trying to keep the US out of the war until say 1948!! I had another player surrneder to me in 1940 because of how badly I mauled the west flank his west flank.

Sorry but the Chinese can do little if anything to stop the Japanese. They just set back and take the punishment as one city and defensive line fall.

Anyone who hasn't had this experience need to stop playing their grandmother or crazy aunt!

[Big Al]

if you are looking to play history then yes Japan can easily overrun China. if you want a wargame thats fun and balanced you need to make China as such.

[aesopo]

Just bought 2 new carriers right off the aircraft carrier dealership showroom floor after China surrender to my greatness. I was thinking of spending the 975 bucks on trying to keep the US out of the war until say 1948!! I had another player surrneder to me in 1940 because of how badly I mauled the west flank his west flank.

Sorry but the Chinese can do little if anything to stop the Japanese. They just set back and take the punishment as one city and defensive line fall.

Anyone who hasn't had this experience need to stop playing their grandmother or crazy aunt!

I agree with you, China can be subdued with the right focus and tactics.

[SeaMonkey]

I'm thinking that with the Changsha position properly supported and maybe an additional engineer, coupled with an appropriate amount of lendlease MPPs from USA, the Chinese situation would be more at the discretion of the players.

I would like to see the USA be forced to pay more attention to the Pacific arena as there seems to be a habit of the Allied player to put off action in this theater to concentrate on Europe. Now of course this is historical, but I would like to have some tough decisions for the USA in regards to China continuing the effort, as was also historical.

[lhughes41]

SeaMonkey makes a good point here. It always seems the easy choice to focus on Germany. While we want to keep historical motivations in place maybe the game as a game could help here. For example maybe the conquering date for pacific victory locations could be earlier. Thus if the allies ignore the pacific they reduce their victories levels and maybe even tie or lose the game... while winning the war. That is because they ignored Japan they can't conquer her objectives in time (for the game).

In short have the game motivate attention of sufficient historical strength to the pacific but let the natural focus of more force on Germany continue.

[mcaryf1]

You can always create National Morale events in both China and the USA if it appears that the US is providing insufficient effort. In real life the Japanese would have been happy to come to some sort of accommodation with the Nationalist Chinese. It would be interesting if the game mechanics allowed a major country with low morale to quit the war by returning to neutrality rather than surrendering. Stalin supposedly put out some sort of peace feelers to the Nazis after the failure of his winter offensive in 1941 to achieve a victory in early 1942. It was never Hitler's intention to completely conquer the Soviet Union. He wanted a new border on the AA line - Archangel to Astrakhan so he could have been interested in a negotiated peace at some stage.

Regards

Mike