• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
@Gensui Yamamoto I'm too tired to search for posts which referred to this decision/discussion, but keep in mind that: 1) Gen./Adm. Cybvep is not ME, i.e. he is neither the Emperor/General Tojo nor the Administration, 2) sometimes I make a decision based on common sense or interpret general statements in a way that makes them practical, so not everything has to be said or announced explicitly and 3) neither the IJA nor the IJN has total power and the IGHQ is not a democracy, although obviously the opinion of the majority carries much weight. Moreover, I don't know if you remember, but the Administration answered your calls once or twice directly and it was connected with CAG Land Focus.

@Death6 That's a fair question, actually. However, I don't think that I will be able to answer it. It appears that the Chinese lost momentum, but whether we will achieve a breakthrough is a different matter. Casualties are mounting, but we are not gaining that much ground. It is a bit like WWI.

Even though i have no say here my experience against such WW1 like battles are to open another front to the enemy and make them divert troops. For example a 15 division invasion behind the Chinese front would make the Chinese pull out a huge force to counter that.
 
Sounds good in theory, but the Chinese have reserves, so it is possible that they would simply redeploy some divs quickly if we attacked Indochina and the situation would turn into a stalemate, leaving us with more territory to defend. However, the idea has merit and it has been proposed by one of the Generals, but even he believes that we are too overstretched to attack Indochina ATM. We may try to do that later if we deem it necessary.
 
I hope to achieve a breakthrough once our Mountain Infantry will be in position for counter-offensive in mountains of central China, supported with all out assault across the entire Chinese front I think we can make it. If not we should at least hold/regain ground in the center, allowing us to encircle and enemy forces and draw in more troops to that front, giving Army Group South chance to attack deeper.

Failing that we can attack Indochina and/or Thailand in a blitzkrieg move, opening yet another front and spreading our sphere of influence while removing any risks that these states will join Allies (which is very likely). I am in position that our supply net in south China should allow us to send more forces there - actually invasion force that'll act under orders to attack Indochina from the north while the rest will engage from the sea.

I am sure my plans will encounter stiff opposition, but my calculations seemed to be correct so far.

Baltasar said:
Indochina would be too small a gap to make the AI move significant forces anyway.
It's a perfect place to mount an attack against Thailand and Thailand/Indochina border will allow us to attack at our leasure deep into Chinese territory, including they supply lines and the capital itself.
 
Last edited:
Except that both these countries have an almost non-existing infrastructure and it'd be a pain to move through them. We'd also have to guard more ports against Allied landings, we would have to guard the countryside against rebels and we'd have to invest IC days for infrastructure upgrades if we'd really intended to use these areas as launching points for further conquests. All of this seems rather too much a burden and personally, I like a few neutral countries around so our enemies can't just attack us from each and every direction.
 
The Worst infrastructure problem i had in the Asian theater was in the Hinterland of China and Burma the rest was not so scary. Well depends on how streched your supply lines and convoys are but generally there is not much or minimal resistance in South East Asia except the Allies who can be a match against the Imperial might of Japan!
 
Baltasar said:
Except that both these countries have an almost non-existing infrastructure and it'd be a pain to move through them.
Infrastructure is important when you're far from supply depot and Indochina isn't big enough to create that big supply problems as China. We'll be supplied from ports across the country and from the north as well, where supplies are in abundance. Even if infrastructure will be terrible it'll still divert Chinese reinforcements from the main theatre of operations.

Baltasar said:
We'd also have to guard more ports against Allied landings, we would have to guard the countryside against rebels and we'd have to invest IC days for infrastructure upgrades if we'd really intended to use these areas as launching points for further conquests.
I would rather intend to create puppet states, instead of trying to control them all. Has anyone ever seen the rebels yet? We'll have access to Thailand from across the whole Indochina and from Malaya a well, any infrastructural upgrades will be less burdening that our railroad program in China. I see plenty of reasons why invading Indochina and Thailand will be better for us.

That reminds me we should invest more in spy network in both countries, to see their military capabilities. We could also scout Indochinese-Chinese border as well to look out for potential scale of their reserves.
 
That reminds me we should invest more in spy network in both countries, to see their military capabilities. We could also scout Indochinese-Chinese border as well to look out for potential scale of their reserves.

That'd be a true waste of valuable LS. If you want to know what they have, have a fleet sail past their territory, that should show you most of not all their forces. Be reminded that we have to attack ports and can not just land in adjactend provinces as per AAR Rules.

=Holy.Death said:
I would rather intend to create puppet states, instead of trying to control them all. Has anyone ever seen the rebels yet? We'll have access to Thailand from across the whole Indochina and from Malaya a well, any infrastructural upgrades will be less burdening that our railroad program in China. I see plenty of reasons why invading Indochina and Thailand will be better for us.

If you want to persue this option, we should make sure to destroy as few of their divisions as possible. Otherwise, we have to guard them as well. It'd still do nothing much to improve our situation, though. We can already trade with them and they do serve us very good as a neutral buffer country.

Regarding supply, we'd have to create shipping lanes manually (or rather have Cybvep do it). It'd help us but we would still be a lot better off if we had a road over to Thailand.
 
Last edited:
Be reminded that we have to attack ports and can not just land in adjactend provinces as per AAR Rules.
Not true. That's the case in Siberia. Also, we cannot evacuate without a port. However, we don't have to land IN a port province. We didn't do this in case of landings in China and on Hawaii.

Rebels sometimes appear, but if I manage to destroy them easily, then I don't think that it's necessary to report it.
 
Ah, I thought this rule applied to all ports since the reason for not allowing to land in adjactend provinces was that the amphibious system is not realistic.
 
The new update is posted (here). These are troubling times, my friends...

EDIT:
Ah, I thought this rule applied to all ports since the reason for not allowing to land in adjactend provinces was that the amphibious system is not realistic.
Gamey "raids" are not allowed, evacuations are harder and we use AI control, so the risk is greater and amphibious invasions mean sth. We cannot evacuate our marines, for example, because they don't have access to a port.
 
Last edited:
Keeping track of the enemies, I'm confused. 48th Destroyer Division has been sighted on 29th Oct, although it had been sunk by IJN Soryu at Kiska Island on 11th Sept '42. Ideas? Does it show twice in your ledger?
 
Keeping track of the enemies, I'm confused. 48th Destroyer Division has been sighted on 29th Oct, although it had been sunk by IJN Soryu at Kiska Island on 11th Sept '42. Ideas? Does it show twice in your ledger?
That's possible, the ledger is not always reliable. Also, sometimes the naming system gets confused and you have two ships with the same name.

Anyway, it's sort of realistic, as IRL ships sometimes were reported as sunk even though that didn't happen.
 
Last edited:
didn't the US build 2 USS Essex Carriers? Or am I getting them mixed up?
 
You mean... IRL?

yes. there's something about a US carrier that got sunk early on and was rebuild later. She was definitely Essex-class, but I'm unsure about her actual name.

about the update: I still can't decide whether you're gaining or not. Royal Navy seems stronger than real-life, that's for sure.
 
That's possible, the ledger is not always reliable. Also, sometimes the naming system gets confused and you have two ships with the same name.

Anyway, it's sort of realistic, as IRL ships sometimes were reported as sunk even though that didn't happen.

I've never seen the system using the same name twice and I suspect that 48th DD was a prewar unit anyway and the system has started to use generic names...
 
I still can't decide whether you're gaining or not. Royal Navy seems stronger than real-life, that's for sure.
Yes, although many of their ships are quite old.

Now that the USA is in the Allies neither the KM nor the RM poses much threat, so I guess that we will see a more active RM in the Far East, although if the Allies decide to invade Italy or France, the AI will probably use one of the major fleets in order to escort the TPs.

We don't know what the Americans are doing, though. They may be active in the Pacific Theatre, in the European Theatre or in both theatres. For all we know they could already be supporting the British in Spain or preparing a giant force in order to attack one of our islands.

I've never seen the system using the same name twice and I suspect that 48th DD was a prewar unit anyway and the system has started to use generic names...
That's possible, too, although I could swear that I saw two Japanese subs with the same name.
 
Grave news indeed... A few divisions are very likely to be cut off in Malaya and heavy Royal Navy's presence in the Far East makes invasion plans for Indochina too risky now. I hope we'll gain the upper hand in next months on the South China Sea or make breakthrough in South China with Mountain Infantry, otherwise we'll have hard time making significant progress needed to end this war anytime soon. I wonder if we can create the axis of advance for Army Group South to flank the Chinese army and/or reach the capital...
 
The war in China actually is progressing better than I expected. We are leaving many bodies behind, our war exhaustion is increasing, we are losing MP fast and IC required for reinforcements stays at 30-50 levels, BUT we are pushing forward, while several months ago it looked like the Chinese would roll us over in the Centre. Now the Pacific Theatre is our biggest problem. It's funny how dynamic the situation is, because 3-4 updates ago the Navy wanted to keep ship production only at the minimal level.

Ironically, Africa doesn't look that bad - the Axis is still fighting in 1943, which forces the Allies to station troops there (=good for us).

I think that we can still save the marines - I only see GARs in Kuala Lumpur and they are slow and weak when attacking, so unless the Allies bring more infantry, our marines have a chance.