Influence Wars - Japan 1936 HPP Interactive AAR - GAMEPLAY THREAD

[Comm Cody]

I disapprove. And here are the changes we need.

1. If we try to get the Warlord allied with us, They will just Support Chiang since they don't trust us. But, I know of someone in Guangix who hates Chaing, what is his name..? *shuffles through papers* Ah, Here he is, Wang Jingwei. He could be beatifically to us, and I advise we try to get him into Japan.
2. Manchuko. As you can recall back in 1931, we staged an incident to take Manchuria from China, we succeed but they have a bad military, We NEED to improve them or give them support on the border with the USSR, who have close ties with the Communists in China.
3. The USSR is waiting to interfere in China, I advise we build up relationships with them, or else we shall suffer, or we can ally with Germany, but can they hold up to what they boast of?

Signed: Assistant General Comm Cody, Adjunct to General Surt.

[Surt]

General Cody the strategy we have devised depends on the possibility to sway the GaungXi and Yunnan gradually, we will avoid conflict with them for some years, only when we are sure of their corroboration will we let events escalate.
At that point our industry will have developed so that our entire army should be up to date and substantially reinforced. But the real hammer is GuangXi's many and relative good quality divisions, atm. they got nearly as many divisions as the KMT.
I'm sure Wang wouldn't say no to the chance of becoming president of it all, he would be a nice counterweight to the GuangXi, but on the other hand we might not need him if we got the 2 other warlords.

While I agree that the Soviets only wait till we withdraw troops from the Manchurian border before they attack us, we wont need to do that if we follow the strategy we have laid out, that is if it works! On the other hand I don't trust Stalin so I don't think its an good idea to become friends with the Soviets.

We should ally with someone who is opposed to the Soviets and who is able to hold their own against them, which leave very few potential allies. This CW, Poland and in case of Poland's defeat at the hand of either the Stalin (who wants revenge from past defeats) or Hitler (who wants the German territories back) Germany as a 2nd choice, Poland is not large or developed enough to withstand either alone. CW is the most likely to oppose us and Germany is an enemy of all 3 which makes them our best candidate for an ally. I'm pretty sure that if Germany were in war with UK, France and the Soviets, we would need to intervene against the Soviets, as I find it unlikely they could win alone against the Soviets.

[Gensui Yamamoto]

I'm unsure about the the Foreign Minister: Hirota Koki (+0.01 change in Neutrality)
doesn't he raise our neutrality which we wanted to lower to 50?

Ps. the link to the research is not right as of 22:22 forum time. but can be seen in my post at the top.

Ah yes, oops my errors, Koki is the current foreign minister, rather we should install the General Staffer Hayashi Senjuro as he will help sway popular opinion to our cause. Fixed images.

[Surt]

Better change that in your plan so its stands clearly.

[Comm Cody]

I suppose I will relent, But consider what I said in a few months when all the hell is breaking loose.

Approval of Plan

[Baltasar]

Unless the Emperor advises us of his plans, we will have to plan for all eventualities. However, the plans of the emperor will dictate what we can reasonably plan. It would be useless to build a strong army if we're going to war on the oceans and vice versa and we currently can not have both.

[DoomBunny]

What are general Baltasars comments on my new proposal for only 5 carriers. Would he also like to add some input as to the requests of the Old Guard for production, so that we may present a final plan soon.

[Baltasar]

My comments have been posted already. I disagree with the production of any new carriers right now.
* First of all, I am anticipating a land war where carriers will be of no use. In fact, the CAGs would probably end up being based away from their carriers when the land front advances.
* Second, I firmly believe that we need to raise a substantial number of land units for the army, along with the marine corps I suggested. I assume the representatives of the army agree on this assessment.
* Third, the Carriers would be outdated by the time they are needed. This is problematic especially true for their engines, which dictate the operational range of the fleets.
* Fourth, your plan lacks the escorts neccesssary to protect the carriers. Just sending out carriers will result in their inevitable destruction if they encounter a hostile fleet, or worse, submarines.

Also, your plan does not include considerations like politics and intelligence, which in turn affect leadership distribution. All in all, it is completely unreasonable and has thus been fully rejected and not worth consideration by our faction. Consider that we could have come up with a similar plan where we demanded everything being directed towards big guns and their respective technologies.

[Baltasar]

*Technical note

Admiral Baltasar, I think you need to agree with the other Admirals of the Navy in some way, like all Generals should agree on the army budget.

This is true.

I was under the impression that I only have to reach an agreement within my respective mini-faction. It is hard to reach an agreement within the army or the navy by virtue of their different aims.

If the army can agree on establishing a marine infantry unit of 10 divisions in two corps over the next 12-18 months as well as 2 capital ships and raising garrison brigades until we have triangle divisions in all our ports, while retaining the rest of the ICs for their (army) projects, I think we can come to an agreement quite quickly. Regarding research, I support investing leadership in infantry equipment and doctrines, but would suggest to also invest in ships and single engine planes, possibly industrial research and supply as well. Whether or not the army wants to spend ICs and research in tanks is their decision.

This is much closer to what the battlewagon faction thinks is reasonable than what doom bunny / the carrier faction suggests. However, we would still need the emperors plans, so we can plan accordingly. Policy, and thus the decision for war, is being made by the emperor, not the military.

[Cybvep]

*Technical note

I was under the impression that I only have to reach an agreement within my respective mini-faction. It is hard to reach an agreement within the army or the navy by virtue of their different aims.

Well... That's the whole point, right? Be advised that the final plan will be evaluated by the Emperor and if the Emperor thinks that it's unconvincing, then the opposing faction will be more likely to gain more influence. Therefore, a steadfast defence of own priorities is not always the best option. It may be beneficial in some situations, though. It's all about balance

*

[Baltasar]

*Technical note

Well... That's the whole point, right?

Hm.. no? If we have to agree within a faction on a plan, then have to agree within a branch on a plan and than have to agree with the opposite branch on a plan, this will take ages... at best. Currently, the navy seems unable to agree on a plan within their faction while I am still missing a detailed production plan from the army. To me it seems more sensible to have the factions offer detailed plans, then have them negotiate a bit back and forth and reach a majority.

[Cybvep]

*Technical note

Hm.. no? If we have to agree within a faction on a plan, then have to agree within a branch on a plan and than have to agree with the opposite branch on a plan, this will take ages... at best.

If it takes incredibly long, then I will intervene. I have no problem with waiting a bit longer for plans, though.

To me it seems more sensible to have the factions offer detailed plans, then have them negotiate a bit back and forth and reach a majority.

You can do that if you want. I do not care at all, as long as you present the final plan. Actually, several posters already gave detailed plans of their mini-factions and the Army seems to be quite close to finalise their common plan.

*

[Baltasar]

You can do that if you want.

huh? Which way is it, then? Either we can do what we want or we have to reach agreements within our faction....

If I can, I'l agree with the army plan in most points, since they already are quite similar. We'd need to negotiate a bit about the size of the marine corps and the construction of new ships, apparently.

The marines will be charged with storming beachheads and ports, enabling the army to ship in without getting wet feet. However, we do need a sizable formation because they need to be able to hold a bridgehead for a limited timeframe by themselves, because we must be able to conduct several operations simultaneously and because we need to be able to react swiftly if we need to operate in different areas at the same time.

The capitals are needed to reinforce the current fleet, to maintain our level of knowledge and to replace outdated ships in the current fleet so we can detach them from active service and assign them home defense duties.

[Cybvep]

*Technical note

Of course that you have to reach an agreement with the rest of faction members. The whole point of the gameplay is to explore rivalry both between the IJA and the IJN AND within the Army and the Navy themselves.

However, the way you make a compromise is not important, so you can do it this way:

have the factions offer detailed plans, then have them negotiate a bit back and forth and reach a majority.

if you find this useful.

Actually, the Army generals seemed to do just that.

BTW I want to remind the Army generals that in the matters of ministers (except the Chief of the Army/Navy), sliders and IC building the Navy will have to agree with your choices as well. If you cannot reach an agreement concerning the Japanese homeland, then the Emperor will intervene.

We'd need to negotiate a bit about the size of the marine corps and the construction of new ships, apparently.

Remember that the Navy/Army can always wait till the construction is completed and put more stuff then, as long as it fits the general budget and is within the influence level which I will assign after the plans are finalised. If you say that your plan is to create 2 CVs and 2 BBs by 1938, for example, but it won't be possible to produce the ships at the same time, then I will try to produce them one after another.

As a rule of thumbs, planning is your job, while the execution of your plans is mine

Personal note: Considering that it's the first discussion, it is actually going better than I anticipated. Things should become easier when we are done with the First Chapter and everyone will be accustomed with the way things work here.

*

[Gensui Yamamoto]

BTW I want to remind the Army generals that in the matters of ministers (except the Chief of the Army/Navy), sliders and IC building the Navy will have to agree with your choices as well.

Of course my Emperor *bows*

I have already sent correspondence to the most prestigious naval commanders on the matter asking for their independent support in the said appointments of ministers.

As of yet, the IJN does not appear to have a conclusive construction plan, or common ground to begin even discussing how many resources will be spent on homeland affairs. I fear that with their time wasting nothing may ever be decided. When I spoke earlier about not trusting the navy to do its job, this only reaffirms my suspicions. If they cannot come to a decision in times of peace, however will they cope under the pressure of war!

To me it seems more sensible to have the factions offer detailed plans, then have them negotiate a bit back and forth and reach a majority.

Admiral,
Myself and fellow army commanders have been in polite discussion quite openly on how we should like to progress in the following year. What comments the admiralty have to say on the matter have not been ignored, nor have we pushed for the totality of the production budget. Indeed, there are more major naval builds in many respects, than ones for the armed forces. Likewise we have not rulled out the navy for technological upgrade.

We have already thought carefully about what the navy may need, and I am sure some discussion on minor alterations could be made given a strong case for them. After all, as army commanders, it is the navy that should really know its needs more than us. Furthermore, the army should like to listen to the admiralty wishes since it allows us to have a chance to review them, and if they shall bring benefit to our Empire of the Rising Sun.

Do not assume that just because we are a different branch of the armed forces we are an enemy who won't listen to your concerns. Our ears are open to talk and discussion.

On points of detail, the Marine Corps shall need to wait, Japan must first become proficient in the knowledge that surrounds amphibious warfare before we can begin to train troops on the matter. Likewise, we have given a large percentage of the budget to naval concerns already! Calling for more to be spent on the navy at this time would be looking a gift horse in the mouth. Nay!

I share escort concerns, and I may myself have looked to see the laying of two hulls before the years end. However Japan is not yet ready for such investments. Hence why we have set our plans thus.

On these points, let us defer to the future when we are in a stronger technological and industrial footing. My office shall away your future presence.

[Baltasar]

General Yamamoto,

our plan actually would mean that, if we disregard what we are currently producing, the vast majority of our productive assets will be at the army's disposal.

Regarding the marine infantry corps, I can only repeat that they would spearhead landing operations which then would exploited by the army. Furthermore, the proposed timeframe for this project would mean that these units would occupy ICs for a longer timeframe but not much at the same time.

[Gensui Yamamoto]

General Yamamoto,
our plan actually would mean that, if we disregard what we are currently producing, the vast majority of our productive assets will be at the army's disposal.

Saying that only reaffirms again that you are living in cloud cuckoo land my fellow commander! The ships alone would take up HALF of all the industrial capacity of Japan! It would be a 40% increase in the proposed current expenditure. How can that give more 'productive assets' to the army, like you claim?

You plan furthermore lacks detail, or specifics with regards to how Japan should wind its way through the year, being far too nebulous and generic. Where are the specifics? Where is the rationale for so many new ships? Where will the army benefit? We do not have the technology for Marine divisions yet, so we cannot even start with this line until it has been suitably developed...

Nay, this does not fill me with confidence.

[Baltasar]

Saying that only reaffirms again that you are living in cloud cuckoo land my fellow commander! The ships alone would take up HALF of all the industrial capacity of Japan! It would be a 40% increase in the proposed current expenditure. How can that give more 'productive assets' to the army, like you claim?

My proposal includes two heavy cruisers in serial, not parallel, to be layed down within the year 1936, so not even neccessarily until the end of the year. Can you please enlighten me how this can possibly make up 40% of Japans assets?

You plan furthermore lacks detail, or specifics with regards to how Japan should wind its way through the year, being far too nebulous and generic. Where are the specifics? Where is the rationale for so many new ships? Where will the army benefit? We do not have the technology for Marine divisions yet, so we cannot even start with this line until it has been suitably developed...

Nay, this does not fill me with confidence.

The technology can be aquired within a short timeframe. Again, you're neglecting that the proposed 10 divisions should be built within a span of 12 to 18 months, again reducing the immediate ICs neccessary for them. Not to mention that they can be deployed in regular land operations, if the neccessity arises.

[Surt]

My proposal includes two heavy cruisers in serial, not parallel, to be layed down within the year 1936, so not even neccessarily until the end of the year. Can you please enlighten me how this can possibly make up 40% of Japans assets?

I Think my collegue thinks of this

should start the construction of one battleship, one battlecruiser and 2 heavy cruisers so our engineers do not lose their knowledge.

Which is around 38 IC + the CV+2CAG for another around 32 IC, with 15 IC for supplies and 12 IC for upgrades (army+navy) and 2 for consumer goods leaves ... aproximately 6 IC to the Army, which is around 2 reserve gar divisions. *sounds of fainting minor Generals in the background*

The technology can be aquired within a short timeframe. Again, you're neglecting that the proposed 10 divisions should be built within a span of 12 to 18 months, again reducing the immediate ICs neccessary for them. Not to mention that they can be deployed in regular land operations, if the neccessity arises.

The pre-analysis of marines is that we can first start doing serious research on them next year and then only when our general infantry tech is up to it, so it will be late '37 before they happen.
Then it would be nice if the Navy would build some marines, though I am astonished by the amount you want to build, an entire marine army! Serious studies by the Army has shown that 2-3 divisions is more than enough in the next 5 years, by '42 the situation might change depending on the world situation at that time.

[Baltasar]

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...1#post12929380

[...]
If the army can agree on establishing a marine infantry unit of 10 divisions in two corps over the next 12-18 months as well as 2 capital ships and raising garrison brigades until we have triangle divisions in all our ports, while retaining the rest of the ICs for their (army) projects, I think we can come to an agreement quite quickly. Regarding research, I support investing leadership in infantry equipment and doctrines, but would suggest to also invest in ships and single engine planes, possibly industrial research and supply as well. Whether or not the army wants to spend ICs and research in tanks is their decision.

[...]

Mind you that this is a plan for round about 18 months, not only 6.