China falls everytime

[david12345]

I checked online, Japan did not get very far in China during the war.

Just about every game that I have played, even when I'm against players better than I, China falls like clockwork.

I think something is wrong here, am I alone on this? It obviously hasn't been addressed by any of the patches...

[jon_j_rambo]

Ah, in a game against Pacestick, I got overconfident......put zero effort against China, then he got INF +2.

[david12345]

bump for some input. would like to know how Mr. Cater feels.

[Hubert Cater]

Tough call to be honest as the idea of balancing history and gameplay comes to mind and of course we always have hindsight to deal with where in these games perhaps the Japanese player is simply putting more effort/resources into China or better strategies than a real Japan ever did.

As a designer we also have to keep in mind that the games need to be interesting and early on a common complaint was that China was too tough a nut to crack with little overall movement in the frontlines.

To be honest this is probably the first time the issue of China falling everytime has come up so I'd be hesitant to make changes until I hear more from others as things play out differently in other matches and some might not feel the same concerns.

Usually when a consensus is reached I make adjustments so in the meantime I'll likely wait for more feedback.

[SeaMonkey]

You want a tough China david? Move on over to Nupremal's mod, an excellent rendition of the world conflict, and the Chinese aspects are the best.

[jon_j_rambo]

Wanna change game play? Make Austrailia worth more. Change victory conditions.

[Colin I]

Agree - Oz is not worth going after right now compared to other targets. Its hard to take (big country, barren interior) and vulnerable to counter assaults by US. Compared to India which is harder for Allies to retake and gets you close to Middle East and is a logical extension of taking China or SE Asia.

Also, maybe peace option with China (decision events or diplomacy option) so costs MPP and you do not get big bonus for taking it but frees up units early.

A good player will take China but if you make this harder you cripple Japan, bogging it down in an endless land war.

[david12345]

Thanx for the input, Mr. Cater, and others. It would be interesting to see how often other players have China fall.

Hoping for more imput.

dave

[CSS]

China can fall, but the effort and resources it take are large, depriving the buildup of the IJN. in my multiplayer China fell and as the U.S I wiped out the smaller IJN, and invaded Japan !

[Hubert Cater]

That's an interesting point CSS and I wonder David if you are finding in your games that the Japanese player is roughly committing historical forces and resources towards China and seeing it fall or if it is indeed the case that the Japanese player is pushing much harder against China than they did in real life.

If it is the former then I would be more inclined to make adjustments but if it is the latter then I think it is more reasonable an outcome especially so if other aspects of the Japanese war machine are likely to suffer as a result.

[Wushuki]

I would say it is fairly easy to gather up sufficient forces to take all high income targets in the area (Philippines, Brunei, Malaya, Burma, Indochina, Hong Kong, the Solomon Islands, Dutch East Indies, Nauru and Rabaul) while simultaneously attacking Pearl Harbor and keeping sufficient pressure on China.

In my experience the best strategy for China seems to be to invest in industrial technology (to about level 3) and shortly after in infantry weapons (to level 2). If China then manages to successfully retreat to Lanchow and beyond and avoids getting caught in a pincer movement by a northern attack in the direction of Lanchow they will have a sufficiently strong economy to mass produce upgraded corpses and stuff the whole area with them. By then they will have lost sufficient corpses already to be able to constantly rebuild destroyed corpses and thereby avoiding the high upgrade costs.

A wise Axis player will foresee this and by this time use upgraded tanks and tactical bombers, against which the Chinese cannot possibly defend themselves, because they simply cannot afford getting AT technologies and an airforce as well. China therefore can do little else then spend all its money on corpses just for the hit points that will delay Japan. Japan however will constantly gain terrain on China by taking the land they destroyed enemy units upon and thus this is not a long term solution. The result of this is that by the time the US enters the war Japan will only need several infantry units in addition to its tanks and aircraft to finish off China and can relocate most of its units to other fronts.

It seems to me then that Japan just does not face any serious opposition until late 1942, and by that time they will have such a huge advantage over China that turning the tide has become impossible. Admittedly, most of my experience in this comes from before patch 1.02 where Russia received boosts to its airforce, so I am not quite sure how the situation in Russia would be once China falls. Prior to 1.02, the early fall of China would almost certainly end in a victory for the Axis however as Russia would have to spread its forces over 3 locations (south east Russia, far east Russia and western Russia) and would eventually be captured, making an Allied victory impossible.

Some solutions to the current weakness of China might be:

1) Increase their maximum research funding to 500, so that they can simultaneously put 2 chits in IW and 2 chits in IT. This increases the speed at which they will get their required techs and makes them therefore more resilient at an earlier date.

2) Remove the Japanese IW level 1 at the start and give them a chit in this instead. This would make it more difficult for Japan to break through early on and therefore buy China some extra time.

3) Increase the mountain tank defense bonus to 5, which makes tanks perform more poorly in China. As I have said before, considering the enormous difference between upgraded tanks and upgraded infantry a general tank nerf would be in order for the whole game. This can be achieved by increasing the tank defense bonus on all rough terrain by 1 point. This makes sense both from the historic perspective as well as from the gameplay perspective.

4) Give China an anti-air unit to have some defense against the Japanese tactical bombers.

5) Reduce the high upgrade cost for Chinese units from 20% to 15% to make it easier to provide Chinese units with upgraded weapons.

Obviously any of the above suggestions would have to go through rigorous testing first to see what the exact effects on the game balance would be. It is difficult to make accurate predictions without testing. Similarly I have no idea how historically accurate they would be, for that reason option 2 for example might not be viable.

[david12345]

I have no idea what forces would be historical.

I still have plenty of money to buy all the japanese subs, dd's, and air.

The payoff for taking china (big bucks, no chinese front, threat to russia) worth the trouble for sure.

@ Wushuki - Good input, but I play much different from you. I take china with no tanks and minimal air (just use it for knocking entrenchment and countering chinese air). Both ways work, but unless you really want to go after russia, I would prefer to have the extra naval units over tanks.

[Sharkman]

I like the idea of cheaper upgrades for the Chinese units, uprade 2 Chinese armies and you can click the 'next turn' button because there's no money left.

But what I really hate about the Chinese is their immobility, they are defending their own land, their units are lightly armed, yet often they cannot even reach the next square, while the Japanese dance back and forth across the front. The Chinese should have some kind of rough terrain movement modifier, that alone would enable them to carry out a better coordinated defense.

[jon_j_rambo]

Pointless conversation if you don't state whether we are discussing a game against the "AI" or H2H.

[david12345]

Pointless conversation if you don't state whether we are discussing a game against the "AI" or H2H.

H2H I don't play against AI