The rising sun Module

[noxnoctum]

I wish there we could get some rich grognard millionaire to just fund BFC, patronage style, like back in the Renaissance days

[Michael Emrys]

The players will come up with ways to try and protray different areas the game does not cover. I recall some early war battles I played also, again mods were even made to represent tanks that the game did not have.

Even though it was actually another tank being used with similar attributes.

The problem with that approach, as I see it, is that the attributes are never (or at least rarely) similar enough. The Japanese weaponry was strikingly different in its functionality often enough to throw the whole thing out of whack, which would then require arbitrary balancing measures. By the end, you have something which is not at all what it claims to be.

Now, since at bottom this is just a game, and if people enjoy playing it that way, then who is to gainsay them? I'm okay with that, but it would not be a game that I for one would be particularly thrilled to play.

Michael

[Magpie_Oz]

Strip the Brits of their vehicles, mod faces (M1A1TC did some North Koreans for CMSF -- there's a start), uniforms and Airborne helmets, set morale to Fanatic and you've got a reasonable surrogate "Japanese" force to face the US (or British) Army (remember, more US Army soldiers fought in the PTO than Marines). No clue whether squad size compares, I'm sure someone knows.

Bren for Nambu, 2 inch mortars stand in for "knee mortars" and Tojo's yer uncle! Yes, your infantry are lugging SMLE .303 instead of the underpowered Arisaka .25 but ya can't have everything. I gather Japanese artillery was quite good, on the German model. Oh, and buy lots and lots of snipers.

That's going to make modelling the Australians rather tricky.

The Japanese Infantry squad was generally between 13 - 15 and progressively re-armed with the 7.7mm (0.303)

[Michael Emrys]

Pacific theater warfare was indeed different...

A smaller step might be to start with the Burma campaign, which was less unlike European warfare than the island hopping campaign of the Pacific per se. That would still require modeling Japanese weaponry and tactics as well as some jungle fighting. But the campaign itself was interesting enough, if less familiar, to warrant a close look.

Once Burma was under their belt, it would not be such a huge leap to move to the fighting on the larger islands such as New Guinea, Luzon, Guadalcanal, etc. But again, convincing BFC that such a project would be worth their while is for now way, way, waaaaay over the horizon.

Michael

[Magpie_Oz]

But is the fighting in the Pacific really all that different?

Sure the terrain and climate are different but the soldiers involved are basically the same. The US Army and British forces are already modelled all you need to do is add the Japanese.

As for the terrain Jungle is similar to heavy forest, bamboo is like bocage etc so it's not that much of a leap.

The difficulty only arises if you want to model an amphibious landing by the USMC but in reality the actual landing part is a small component once ashore all you need are the peculiarities of the USMC soldiers themselves.

I don't see that the game engine itself would need to be all that fundamentally different.

[Michael Emrys]

I don't see that the game engine itself would need to be all that fundamentally different.

Kind of depends on what is meant by 'fundamentally'. Actually, I tend to agree with you. I doubt that the underlying mechanics would need to be re-designed. A lot of the stuff residing on top of that layer might need serious work though. For my part, I am in no position to claim that such work would be especially onerous. But the whole thing hinges on there being a sufficient incentive for BFC (or any licensee) to undertake it. BFC has so far claimed that such an incentive does not exist. Obviously, a small number of fans here are passionately supportive of such a project. Whether such a group could translate into the volume of sales that might provide such incentive is another matter entirely.

Michael

[Magpie_Oz]

Whether such a group could translate into the volume of sales that might provide such incentive is another matter entirely

Yes of course that is the rub isn't it? Can't blame a company for doing what is commercially viable.

[Michael Emrys]

Yes of course that is the rub isn't it? Can't blame a company for doing what is commercially viable.

Not if we want for it to stay around a while.

Michael

[Sakai007]

Among other issues with the Pacific theater, I can't think of a way of implementing the Banzai charge in a CM setting. Historically the Allies, armed with automatic weapons, stopped these attacks cold. They proved fruitless. The Japanese player would have to be compelled by some game mechanic to use them.

I think the current CMx2 in entirely capable of this kind of battle. As stated before, mission builders could force 'banzi' style charges using either side in CMBN if they wanted too. It seems to me that many people do not play strictly as their historical counterparts would either. There is nothing that compels the player to play according to historical doctrine now, with the exception of the manner in which missions are built. You could use German light infantry en-mass against a couple US platoons supported by a weapons company with a short mission time and assault orders in the heavy woods. Give the US tons of good arty, observers, TRPs, and give the Germans a single 75mm field gun and you would have a good approximation of Iwo Jima

One thing I don't think the current engine could do is the infiltration warfare that made up a majority of the common actions in the PTO.

The framework for a title and 2-4 modules could be:

Main title - Combat Mission: Americal - This would be the base pack, with regular US Army infantry and standard Imperial Japanese Army Infantry.

Module 1 - Guadalcanal - This would have the US Marines. Since they used a ton of 03 Springfields at the time and with their unique TOE would make an accaptable module. And for the Japanese, the Special Naval Landing Force (SNLF), being naval troops and very motivated and maybe some extra goodies for the IJA.

Module 2 - AIF - This would introduce the Australians. Namely, the AIF, fresh from the middle east and thrown into combat defending Port Moresby on the end of the Kokoda Trail. The Australians, with their unique weapons and OOB, would make an excellent module all in it's own.

Module 3 - Buna - This would be the other end of the Kokoda Trail. The Australian infantryman at this time may have been to most effective jungle fighting man in the world, but at Buna & Gona, the swamps swallowed all. The US Army fought here too, it what may have been the most hostile battlefield of WWII. The Japanese built pill boxes in the swamp itself, and the battle was fought from dry spot to dry spot, visibility never more then 75 yards, and that was exceptional. The battles would be difficult to model here, but small unit actions would feel like battalion sized engagements in their length and tension. This would upgrade both the OZ and US armies to late 43 - early 44 equipment levels and provide a solid amount of content, as well as adding some armor to the Japanese side.

Module 4 - Wewak - This would be the 'odds and ends' module, adding some rare equipment and getting all the armies involved up to at least late 44 equipment and OOB levels.

Even with all this, there is still the epic China/Burma/India theater which could be it's own game and module set. Also the Central Pacific that was dominated by epic naval battles and vicious battles over tiny atolls. And the Philippines is still yet to be covered in any of these. That theater lends itself best to the current CMx2 engine, with tank battles (albeit one sided), open fields, and traditional city fighting.

HeHe, now that it's all laid out, someone with $1 million to spare, get to developing :p I have an artist that will work real cheap, and he just got out of the Army after a tour in Iraq. I realize forcing him to play CMSF and like it may have been a bad idea, but it's got his art back where it needs to be, about the military!!!

[Sequoia]

I wish there we could get some rich grognard millionaire to just fund BFC, patronage style, like back in the Renaissance days

You mean like Curt Schilling does for the Advanced Squad leader game system? Actually Schilling promised his wife the game company would make a profit or he would sell it.

[YankeeDog]

Seems to me that given enough gumption, PTO fanbois should be able to mod up a creditable representation once the Commonwealth module comes out.

Strip the Brits of their vehicles, mod faces (M1A1TC did some North Koreans for CMSF -- there's a start), uniforms and Airborne helmets, set morale to Fanatic and you've got a reasonable surrogate "Japanese" force to face the US (or British) Army (remember, more US Army soldiers fought in the PTO than Marines). No clue whether squad size compares, I'm sure someone knows.

Bren for Nambu, 2 inch mortars stand in for "knee mortars" and Tojo's yer uncle! Yes, your infantry are lugging SMLE .303 instead of the underpowered Arisaka .25 but ya can't have everything. I gather Japanese artillery was quite good, on the German model. Oh, and buy lots and lots of snipers.

For tanks, you'll likely need to wait until the final "funnies" module when French H39s or PzIIs / 38(t) come along to stand in for the Type 97.

British are indeed probably the best choice to simulate Japanese, primarily because their small arms and other infantry platoon weapons are the closest, at least if you're you're talking about the better, late-war Japanese designs. Many Japanese units remained equipped with older, inferior weapons like the Type 39 rifle and the Type 11 LMG, and there is no real analog for these older weapons in Western WWII designs.

Best Japanese rifle of the war was the 7.7mm Type 99 rifle (the weaker 6.6mm Type 39 was alternate standard by the 1940s in the IJA, though many formations remained equipped with the Type 39 right up to the end of the war). The Type 99 is reasonably close to the SMLE in power and capability, with the mag size (5 vs. the SMLE's 10) probably being the most significant difference.

And the Type 99 LMG is indeed a close analog of the Bren. Same Mag layout and capacity, similar ROF, etc. Overall, though, the Type 99 was not as good a weapon as the Bren – it had significant jamming problems, among other issues.

And the Brit 50mm mortar is probably as close as you're going to get to the so-called "knee mortar."

SMGs are more problematic... the Japanese had a couple of decent designs, most notably the Type 100, but didn't produce or issue anywhere near as many of these as Western forces did. This is important because it dramatically reduces the short-range firepower of Japanese squads in tight terrain (such as jungle fighting). If using Brits to simulate Japanese, you'd need to search for British formations with few or no Sten guns.

MMG and HMGs are tricky, too. Most of the common Japanese designs, such as the Type 92 HMG were derived from the WWI-era French Hotchkiss, and used an unusual rigid strip feed not seen in other contemporary designs. Not sure there's really any Western analog for these weapons. Cyclic ROF was fairly similar to the Vickers, but otherwise I think the Japanese MGs were pretty clearly inferior – harder to operate, much more likely to jam, and lower practical ROF due to the unusual feed. The Type 92 was also very heavy -- much heavier than the Vickers -- so mobility is a significant issue.

As far as indirect support, suffice it to say that the Japanese were nothing at all like the Germans any of the other Western combatants. Their hardware was very different, and in general their system of organization and communication was far inferior. Details are complex, but in general, you’d want to represent fewer tubes, slower response, and lower ROF than from comparable Western formations.

TOE is another large topic… In general, Japanese squads were large (13 man squads were common), and plt. HQ units were often quite small – often, just 2 men, a Lt. and a Plt. Sgt. In at least one common rifle platoon TOE, the platoon also has 4 squads – 3 13-man rifle squads armed with rifles and an LMG, and a 13-man “grenadier squad”, which is really just a rifle squad, equipped with knee mortars rather than the LMG.

I dunno… take it for what you will. Someone who’s really desperate for PTO could cook up a reasonable facsimile of Japanese TOE, especially with the flexibility the CMBN editor give in attaching independent teams to platoons. It wouldn't be perfect, but would be playable.

[MOSwas71331]

I wish there we could get some rich grognard millionaire to just fund BFC, patronage style, like back in the Renaissance days

If I ever win really big bucks in Powerball or Megamillion, I'd be happy to chip in a million or so US $.

[Frenchy]

As much as I would like to see a CM:PTO version covering the years 1942 - 1943, BFC has said in the past it isn't going happen. This goes as far back the original Combat Mission.

[LukeFF]

Seems to me that given enough gumption, PTO fanbois should be able to mod up a creditable representation once the Commonwealth module comes out.

Strip the Brits of their vehicles, mod faces (M1A1TC did some North Koreans for CMSF -- there's a start), uniforms and Airborne helmets, set morale to Fanatic and you've got a reasonable surrogate "Japanese" force to face the US (or British) Army (remember, more US Army soldiers fought in the PTO than Marines). No clue whether squad size compares, I'm sure someone knows.

Bren for Nambu, 2 inch mortars stand in for "knee mortars" and Tojo's yer uncle! Yes, your infantry are lugging SMLE .303 instead of the underpowered Arisaka .25 but ya can't have everything. I gather Japanese artillery was quite good, on the German model. Oh, and buy lots and lots of snipers.

For tanks, you'll likely need to wait until the final "funnies" module when French H39s or PzIIs / 38(t) come along to stand in for the Type 97.

Wayyyyy too much fudging for my taste.