China vs Taiwan please?

[womble]

2 hours ago, Bil Hardenberger said:

GMT games has a boardgame game on this subject:  Next War Taiwan (there is also a Vassal module)... I am looking at it right now in our office bookcase where we keep our wargame collection.  As @The_Capt says though.. this is a very sensitive subject, fascinating, but sensitive.

Bil

There's one called "Breaking the Chains" too... More generally set in the South China Sea, with perhaps more focus on the Spratleys, other islands and the fake land that China is building to "support" its territorial claims in the area.

[Probus]

24 minutes ago, womble said:

There's one called "Breaking the Chains" too... More generally set in the South China Sea, with perhaps more focus on the Spratleys, other islands and the fake land that China is building to "support" its territorial claims in the area.

What a mess that is brewing down there. No wonder Australia wants nuclear powered attack subs.  That region seems ripe for a theoretical conflict, Combat Mission game.  Just like Black Sea.

  Correct me if I'm wrong, but no one has done a computer strategy game for that region, yet. 

  I guess you could mod Black Sea to add Chinese troops since they share so much similarity with Russian equipment. The Taiwanese army will have M-1A2(T)? tanks soon.

[Sequoia]

4 hours ago, Bil Hardenberger said:

GMT games has a boardgame game on this subject:  Next War Taiwan (there is also a Vassal module)... I am looking at it right now in our office bookcase where we keep our wargame collection.  As @The_Capt says though.. this is a very sensitive subject, fascinating, but sensitive.

Bil

A few years back, there was a denial of service attack on the GMT servers. I've pondered what the motive for that was. I never heard if there was a suspect. Of course I am somewhat insinuating here perhaps someone in the PRC did it, but it didn't last long, and again would publishing Next War Taiwan be enough motivation?

I asked the designer of the Next War Series why he never did a Next War Ukraine (There is also Next War Korea, Poland and Pakistan). He replied he wanted to work out a good insurgents system first. 

Also there is Next War Vietnam, in which China (again) tries to capture Hanoi. IMHO if China tries to expand its influence militarily, Vietnam would be the most likely scenario because it would have the least risk of involving the US.

[MikeyD]

A few years back Steve's interest in the Chinese military peaked (or was piqued) and he was casting about for a plausible theater of operations to include the Chinese army in (shoe-horning them into CMBS seemed a bridge too far). At that time I suggested a Taiwan invasion. But Steve shot down that suggestion based on his opinion that the war would be over almost before it started and would be massively lop-sided. One supposes all of the cool naval shenanigans would be far outside the scope of game. This was before Cold War popped up. Our attention turned elsewhere and the conversation was soon forgotten.

[zmoney]

5 hours ago, Erwin said:

 It's probably time to realize that for the west to invest in China is unpatriotic and dangerous.  

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. And was mostly joking about a marketing campaign in China because BFC doesn’t really do marketing campaigns.

It is a funny thing the internet, you post something about something, and someone responds coming from an  angle you hadn’t anticipated possible. But since you brought it up….. selling something to someone isn’t the same as investing in someone.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

A sequel to CM:SF2 set in Africa might do the trick.....Just about everyone seems to have forces in Africa! 

As the eminently wise @LongLeftFlank has pointed out, while the PLA looks all shiny and exciting, it has absolutely zero relevant combat experience.....If I were China I might try something a bit more manageable than Taiwan for my first effort. 

Some scuffles with Al Shebab etc. might be just the ticket to season the troops.

[Probus]

1 hour ago, Sequoia said:

Vietnam would be the most likely scenario because it would have the least risk of involving the US

Interesting take @Sequoia.  You are absolutely right, that would be political suicide, but I thought Vietnam and China were buddy, buddies?

32 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

while the PLA looks all shiny and exciting, it has absolutely zero relevant combat experience.....If I were China I might try something a bit more manageable than Taiwan for my first effort. 

You have a good point.  But if China makes a move anywhere, its going to put the US on high alert (at least you'd hope it would).  Better to have a successful but messy invasion of Taiwan first and then make another country/coalition have to mount an amphibious assault to retake Taiwan.

If the US recognizes a minor "warm-up" conflict, I believe it would be at that point the US decides to make Taiwan into a fortress.  But ultimately, US resolve is what holds the key to a successful Taiwanese invasion.

If China does try to pull off some "warm-up" conflict(s) they would have to be ones that involve naval operations, surely. (Don't call me Shirley)

Lets see, who has a Navy the Chinese can pound on?...  *cough*Vietnam*cough* right @Sequoia?

[Sgt.Squarehead]

1 minute ago, Probus said:

If the US recognizes a minor "warm-up" conflict, I believe it would be at that point the US decides to make Taiwan into a fortress.  But ultimately, US resolve is what holds the key to a successful Taiwanese invasion.

Timing just isn't on the US' side there, regardless of China's actions elsewhere.....China can always mobilize more, faster, in that theatre than the US could ever hope to.

[Erwin]

Note two recent WSJ articles:

_{^{"WASHINGTON—U.S. intelligence agencies learned this spring that China was secretly building what they suspected was a military facility at a port in the United Arab Emirates, one of the U.S.’s closest Mideast allies..."}}

By 

Gordon Lubold  and Warren P. Strobel

Updated Nov. 19, 2021

 

_{^{"The U.S. Navy’s Range Has Diminished Dangerously. Carrier air wings aren’t prepared to overcome weapons that push U.S. ships away from shore."}}

By Jerry Hendrix

Nov. 18, 2021

[LongLeftFlank]

8 hours ago, Sequoia said:

Also there is Next War Vietnam, in which China (again) tries to capture Hanoi. IMHO if China tries to expand its influence militarily, Vietnam would be the most likely scenario because it would have the least risk of involving the US.

Umm, what's Vietnamese for 'bring it, bitchez'?

.... Of all the fights China could pick that could end worse than a Taiwan invasion, you have just picked the second (attacking Siberia would of course be the first).

There are only a few military mobilization ready societies left on our planet, and Vietnam is one.  Nobody will fight more stubbornly and united in defense of their homeland (the dau tranh spirit), as the last 6 superpowers to invade Vietnam with conventional armies (Q'ing China, France, Japan, France again, USA, PRC) all learned to their cost.

(I won't go into the history of French colonialization of Vietnam; suffice it to say it was a series of piecemeal grabs brought about by internal disunity and corruption. There was no French Robert Clive, only the overwhelming advantage of steamships and breech loading arms -- the same tech used to force 'open' Japan, China and Burma, and to rapidly subdue warlike indigenous societies, from Zululand to the American West to the Northwest Frontier (Second Afghan War, not the first) to 'Tatarstan'. Once the Vietnamese people caught up, it was merely a matter of time before the foreigners and the hopelessly corrupt local elites were first confined to the cities and then ejected.

FWIW, I also believe that the US would actively support Vietnam, whether for reasons of reelpolitik or merely to expiate the guilt feelings of the Boomer Generation.

Edited November 20, 2021 by LongLeftFlank

[Oxide]

On 11/20/2021 at 4:19 PM, LongLeftFlank said:

Umm, what's Vietnamese for 'bring it, bitchez'?

.... Of all the fights China could pick that could end worse than a Taiwan invasion, you have just picked the second (attacking Siberia would of course be the first).

There are only a few military mobilization ready societies left on our planet, and Vietnam is one.  Nobody will fight more stubbornly and united in defense of their homeland (the dau tranh spirit), as the last 6 superpowers to invade Vietnam with conventional armies (Q'ing China, France, Japan, France again, USA, PRC) all learned to their cost.

(I won't go into the history of French colonialization of Vietnam; suffice it to say it was a series of piecemeal grabs brought about by internal disunity and corruption. There was no French Robert Clive, only the overwhelming advantage of steamships and breech loading arms -- the same tech used to force 'open' Japan, China and Burma, and to rapidly subdue warlike indigenous societies, from Zululand to the American West to the Northwest Frontier (Second Afghan War, not the first) to 'Tatarstan'. Once the Vietnamese people caught up, it was merely a matter of time before the foreigners and the hopelessly corrupt local elites were first confined to the cities and then ejected.

FWIW, I also believe that the US would actively support Vietnam, whether for reasons of reelpolitik or merely to expiate the guilt feelings of the Boomer Generation.

Yeah, my wife had to learn how to field strip an AK and shoot at university. (mandatory)

A lot of countries would support Vietnam, but the Government does not want to increase tension with China, so they don't join alliances and have been developing the means to manufacture their own weapons and equipment instead. China have no issue messing with them at sea however, but over land I don't think they have the stomach for it.

And there is a bucket ton of Russians now living and working in Vietnam as well, since it's easy for Russians to obtain VISA's to travel there.. I think China has upset enough countries already.

 

 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

As @LongLeftFlank has pointed Taiwan don't seem to have taken the threat from China terribly seriously.....They have a sum total of four, yes four, submarines, two of which are the oldest serving submarines in the world, one of them nominally having participated in WWII! 

China, on the other hand, have roughtly double that number.....Of SSNs (& a similar number of SSBNs)! 

I'm not even going to try to count their conventional subs! 

 

Edited November 23, 2021 by Sgt.Squarehead

[Probus]

I agree with you totally about (their/they're/there/thar) current situation.  What I was saying was they're starting to take their situation more seriously over there. First round of F-16Vs:

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2021-11-18/taiwan-deploys-advanced-f-16v-fighter-jets-amid-china-threat?context=amp

Plus they are buying M-1A2Ts:

https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3783933

More Patriots (PAC3),

40 M-109A6, advanced munitions, drones...

https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2021/08/06/us-government-clears-750-million-artillery-sale-to-taiwan/

Maybe too little, too late.

Edited November 23, 2021 by Probus

[Sgt.Squarehead]

When are the tanks & artillery scheduled to be delivered.....It would be rather easy for China to interfere with that (in a potentially WWIII triggering sort of way). 

Edited November 23, 2021 by Sgt.Squarehead

[womble]

16 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Taiwan don't seem to have taken the threat from China terribly seriously.....They have a sum total of four, yes four, submarines

I suspect Taiwan have always thought their own attack subs would probably just foul the US subs that would be busy sinking/trying to sink any naval invasion. Those US bubbleheads have quite a rep that'd be hard for a never-fought-a-wet-war navy to come close to.

Do we have any idea how well the ASW of the PLAN would crimp the style of the US submariners?

[Sgt.Squarehead]

28 minutes ago, womble said:

I suspect Taiwan have always thought their own attack subs would probably just foul the US subs that would be busy sinking/trying to sink any naval invasion.

Thus starting WWIII.

China isn't going to let the US interfere at no cost, they have directly said as much, on numerous occasions.....US sub hits Chinese transport ship, Chinese missiles hit Guam.

The policy of 'Strategic Ambiguity' is a relic from times when China could not hit back at the US, but those days are over.....This is not politics, it's fact.  Denial or jingoism won't change reality one iota.

Edited November 23, 2021 by Sgt.Squarehead

[Erwin]

The challenge of China is a rerun of the dilemma the democratic nations what was faced vs Hitler in 1939.  If everyone is scared of confronting an aggressive military expansion cos it could trigger a WW and chooses appeasement, the aggressor keeps going until the situation gets much worse.  

China has made no secret that its goal is world domination.  

Edited November 24, 2021 by Erwin

[womble]

19 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Thus starting WWIII.

China isn't going to let the US interfere at no cost, they have directly said as much, on numerous occasions.....US sub hits Chinese transport ship, Chinese missiles hit Guam.

The policy of 'Strategic Ambiguity' is a relic from times when China could not hit back at the US, but those days are over.....This is not politics, it's fact.  Denial or jingoism won't change reality one iota.

Aye. Disturbing, innit?

The only saving grace is that China can't afford a WW3, since their economy relies very heavily on exporting goods to the rest of the world, and that would instantly stop if a general war started. The propaganda bonus of actually having a concrete enemy to face off against would struggle to counter the sudden loss of foreign exchange income, especially given the strange balance of construction investment in their internal economical workings. Of course, by the same token, the West can't afford a WW3 because of our reliance on importation of cheap Chinese-produced goods... So we're probably okay, and so's Taiwan.

[JulianJ]

What an interesting discussion. 

Firstly, I think some sort of Far Eastern Modern War would be great fun! 

I'm wearing my Attila the Hun hat here. I have enjoyed playing all sorts of murderous games for 6 decades and supporting rulers/organisations/nations that I would never do in real life. Some* of my non-gamer friends find this difficult to understand, but I hope most people here will.

That said, my views on invading Taiwan have turned 180 degrees since I read the Ian Easton book. He may not have the whole view but he makes it clear, based on factual research, that an amphibious invasion of Taiwan is really, really difficult, because of the weather, the mere 14 landing beaches (all heavily fortified) and the population, who may well be ready to fight stubbornly. The Taiwanese strategy doesn't rest on submarines, but brutally sucking the Chinese invasion forces into cauldron battles on the TRP beachheads where they get massacred. Logistics over the strait is a bastard. 

So, in summary, awful in real life, hope it never happens. 

Would make a fascinating game.

BTW, the US forces, at the top of their game in 1945, planned an invasion of Formosa (Taiwan) then held by the Japanese, and decided it would cause so many casualties that it was best to bypass it. 

*actually funkin' all of them.

[JulianJ]

@Erwin 

Quote

China has made no secret that its goal is world domination.  

Firstly, this is politics, and we avoid it here, so let's not go there. But you started it.

Secondly, you couldn't be more wrong. The whole point about Chinese civilisation (and this is somewhat nationalistic) is that it is only applicable to China, and nowhere else. They aren't remotely interested in any sort of hegemony, and if you read any of the thinking of the CPC or previous Chinese philosophers going back a long time you would know this is the case. China has made no secret they want a multi-polar world, where everyone goes their own way. That does threaten the West, but not in the way you think.

[kevinkin]

BFC has stayed away from the Pacific, even for WW2. It is a bit frustrating. But the developers need to direct their creative juices into what they like and can manage. BTW, a modern conflict between China and Taiwan would require a huge amount of naval and air simulation to be realistic. They surprised us with Cold War. But that is almost 100 percent ground combat. If China would land in force on Taiwan, would a simulation of Taiwan's surrender be at all interesting? 

[JulianJ]

@kevinkin 

 

I think many of us are frustrated by the limitations of BFC, who are a tiny company. Yes, lots of air/naval sim would be great! 

However Ian Easton says that the Taiwanese high command recognises that they can't defeat the Chinese on the sea and have prepared for a Stalingrad-like defence of the island. They don't expect to win, just to hold out till the Chinese ground forces are decimated, and political/economic pressures bear down on them. So CM Taiwan would involve lots of brutal urban combat.

 

[Erwin]

55 minutes ago, JulianJ said:

China has made no secret they want a multi-polar world, where everyone goes their own way.

China lies and lies and lies... just like the Germany in the 30's and the SU during the CW.  Remember that China said that they were not going to militarize the fake islands in the S China Seas.  China invaded Tibet, took over HK...  and is building up its deepwater fleet as fast as it can while creating naval bases around the world.  

48 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

modern conflict between China and Taiwan would require a huge amount of naval and air simulation to be realistic.

Someone earlier made the perceptive remark that all China would have to do to humiliate the west (US primarily) and demonstrate its military dominance is invade an undefended island belonging to Taiwan, not Taiwan itself.  That would present us with a huge dilemma.  

[Sgt.Squarehead]

9 minutes ago, JulianJ said:

So CM Taiwan would involve lots of brutal urban combat.

You called? 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

9 minutes ago, Erwin said:

China invaded Tibet, took over HK...  and is building up its deepwater fleet as fast as it can while creating naval bases around the world.

That's it is it? 

China annexed Tibet in the period between 1950 & 1960. 

I should probably point out that that doesn't really place them at the top of the pile for 'invading'.....Indeed, if 'invading' is to be taken as a measure of 'evil intent', certain other countries should warrant a great deal more attention than China.