Blue Sky, White Sun, And A Wholly Red Fort: Asia's Liberation Wars [EoD/Customized]

[Rifal]

All those German values that the ROC leaders admired - work efficiency, education, innovation, conservative social values, clear and centralized hierarchy; well the Nazis pretty much spat on all of them.

Im pretty sure the Nazis valued these things, if only in their own messed up way. Work Efficency benefited the national socialist state, Education was important as long as it was Nat.Soc. education, Innovation especially in military matters the Germans were pushing the envelope constantly, Conservative social values was certanly part of national socialism, clear and centralized hierarchy they certanly had, with more and more loyal nazis at the top ofcourse.

But that aside Im curious, will China ever get its Kreigsmarine adviser? Im pretty sure Germany with its crippled navy can spare some officers. Maybe Otto Ciliax of Channel dash fame?

 

[zanaikin]

Oh. That's because there's a TL I want to discuss with you and this China might react, but because it's in the ASB section of the forum, it requires membership in the forums just to even view it.

EDIT: This is the TL in question - Link (again, it requires membership in AH.com just to view it)

I'll take a look at this once I get more time. Thanks. Have a lot of things I need to get done in the next few weeks.

Im pretty sure the Nazis valued these things, if only in their own messed up way. Work Efficency benefited the national socialist state, Education was important as long as it was Nat.Soc. education, Innovation especially in military matters the Germans were pushing the envelope constantly, Conservative social values was certanly part of national socialism, clear and centralized hierarchy they certanly had, with more and more loyal nazis at the top ofcourse.

But that aside Im curious, will China ever get its Kreigsmarine adviser? Im pretty sure Germany with its crippled navy can spare some officers. Maybe Otto Ciliax of Channel dash fame?

uh... yeah... there are so many misconceptions here.

The Nazi's sense of industrial and military efficiency was abysmal. Between different branches' competing interests and overlaping responsibilities, oftentimes you'll find a dozen project teams working on the exact same thing but none of them were talking to one another. Both Heinz Guderian and Albert Speer discusses the matter extensively in their memoirs, and noted how Hitler liked the departments to be inefficiency and overlapping so they constantly had to fight against one another, which in turn gave him more power as he gets the final decision on everything.

To give an example, when Heinz Guderian became the Inspector General of Armored Forces he made it a priority to increase logistical provision of spare parts to the frontlines, to increase effective tank count by decreasing the amount of time they sit in repair shops. He discovered quickly, to his dismay, that the StuGs -- which increasingly filled the Panzer divisions due to their high production numbers -- were not under his control as they were considered part of the artillery branch. As a result, the man placed in charge of armored troops had absolutely zero control over a large portion of the armored troops' hardware. If that isn't laughably bad efficiency, then I don't know what is.

(They had a clear apex: the Fuhrer. Their 'hierarchy' was utter quagmire. Running an autocratic government efficiently requires more than just one person <_<)

Science... don't get me started. The NatSoc complete rewrote the science books (especially on matters like biology) to further their ideology and blank out any scientific thesis that did not fit their agenda or came from a 'bad' scientist (Slavs, Jews, etc.). Not to mention issues like rating Quantum Mechanics as "jewish science" and discouraging its research (something Heisenberg himself complained about). A number of observers at the time noted that had the Nazis lasted, their next generation of academic graduates would have such faulty biology, chemistry, and physics foundations that they'd be unfit for higher learning.

Most of German engineering "superiority" during WW2 rests on its strong pre-war foundations; for example they've been leading the world in rocketry for decades.

Social conservative values... you mean how the Nazis completely spat upon the Catholic and Protestant Churches who formed the foundation of German social conservatism? Not to mention the Monarchists. Do not mistake far-right conservative for social conservatism (which is based on family and religious values).

---

I'm not sure anyone wants Kriegsmarine advisors given their latest screwups. Will probably look into it more when I actually produce submarines.

 

[GeneralUrist]

Hey, I'm liking this AAR so far. One question though: You occasionally mention things like a "Secret Weapon Submod" or such for EoD. Are these things built in, or do I need to go find them somewhere?

EDIT: You seem very concerned about the need t omodernize your airforce. Does EoD make the airforce much more powerful/important than vanilla? Because in vanilla, aside from ROFLSTOMP naval bombers to kill enemy fleets (and interceptors to kill enemy naval bombers), having an airforce feels largely unnencessary and not at all worth the massive IC investement needed. Said IC being much better spent on more land divisions, especially if you have LOADS OF MANPOWER like India or China.

 

[Baron Jukaga]

I've always found value in microing my tactical air force. It will tilt stalemated battles in your favor, and ground attack on retreating units obliterates pesky divisions that get away. Later, proper use of rockets absolutely devastates infrastructure and industry.

 

[GeneralUrist]

It will tilt stalemated battles in your favor

Moreso than those 20+ extra divisions you would have if you built INF instead of those 8 TAC wings?

 

[Baron Jukaga]

Moreso than those 20+ extra divisions you would have if you built INF instead of those 8 TAC wings?

Situational. Depends on your manpower for your overall divisions and there's always the command limit though that is less of an issue than manpower. And it just feels.... wrong not to have TAC and/or CAS.

 

[Dofon]

Depending on the state of the ROC'S naval and air doctrines, an expanded navy may be a better compliment to the force projection ability of the ROC. Mainly cheap but effective forces such as submarines, with torpedo boats to provide top cover for transport fleets. I understand this seems futile in the face of naval supremacy of Britain and America, but it would be the only way to expand into the Pacific.

Air forces are a much better compliment for land forces locked into tough meat grinders, though, and that will be the case against the Soviet Union. China already has some mobile forces in the form of the cavalry, so unless China plans on building tons more cavalry to aid in grand encirclements, more land forces will just mean meat grinders for Chinese forces in the frozen north. Since air forces can aid in naval force projection which can only utilize limited land forces, air forces contribute to solving issues with both alliance blocs. More land forces can help, but methinks naval and air forces can help more. just an aerial warfare enthusiast here though...

also, will a few more slow infantry divisions be more useful in a conflict over the long Siberian front than a medium bomber force? you could build fresh air bases along the front in the time frame it takes them to march into new provinces. Further, while their IN are retreating, you could destroy them via ground attack.

 

[GeneralUrist]

I understand now. I actually DO enjoy using my airforce when I can afford to have one, it feels quite satisfying actually, but I can't always afford it.

Y'see my last game was played in Vanilla as the British Raj and I was determined to help as much as I could in Europe. (and later on against the USSR.) And since after the puppet effect I had mediocre IC building a non-insignificant airforce was essentially a pipe dream. OTOH with an MP-to-IC ratio that makes China look industrialized I could pump out MIL without a care in the world. By the time Fall Gelb started I had almost a hundred 1936 MIL divisions in Europe and later would have over 200 MIL divs facing Russia in the hindu kush.

It was a wave of cannon fodder, but I learned to use it eventually. My way of dealing with command limits was to have 24 divs attack at once (the combat limit), and as divs ran out of org I pulled them out and threw fresh divs into it. (It was during this game I learnt that a particular weakness of the AI is that they don't withdraw 0-org divs from defensive battles to recover). This worded pretty well in Europe's small provinces since retreats were short and I could quickly shift fresh divs into a losing battle, but in the hindu kush the bad infra and huge province size did indeed make things almost physically painful. I eventually was able to cope once my lines really started getting thick, but it's something I'd rather not repeat.

My 4 1946 CAV divisions did prove pretty useful towards the end when Stalin's lines faltered, but during world war three I built over 100 MIL divs (benefiting heavily from gearing bonus). I would have struggled to build a tenth of that in Armored Cavalry or ARM, so I knew that would be a questionable investment. Building TAC would have been similarly inefficient probably. (I had around 47 base IC, even after I manually made the raj independent to remove the puppet penalty and ran almost full central planning it was still a pitiful amount considering my MP.)

 

[zanaikin]

Note that there will be no more updates this month. The next update will resolve the India issue and is a big bite (with lots of research, event drafting/testing, writing)... I simply don't have the time for it right now.


@GeneralUrist @Baron Jukaga

Secret Weapons submod is part of the Edge of Darkness mod, yes. See their mod thread for details.

Proper use of air forces is extremely useful for rapid breakthroughs and can often decide tough battles in your favor. Just because China has infinite manpower doesn't mean they wouldn't try to surround and flank at every opportunity (in fact, that's how Xue Yue beat the IJA at Changsha several times in our timeline). And yes, ground attack against retreating troops it key to breaking through defense-in-depth as it stops the defense lines from reforming in strength.

Furthermore, you might have noticed, but I don't play from a purely "mechanical" point-of-view. Will INF spam be a more effective use of IC in Darkest Hour? Probably. Heck, China has vast potential for militia spam and I didn't even consider it since it completely goes against Seeckt's original advice to Chiang. As the intro says, I intend to do this AAR according to the ROC leadership's characters =P

It also wouldn't make any sense -- HOI2 doesn't have the logistic simulator of HOI3 to show that when fighting through Siberia, quality > quantity because you can only supply so many divisions at a time. For China, the best way to achieve that high-quality army isn't to build armor like Germany, but by simply bleeding less manpower and accruing valuable unit experience.

I do plan to improve carriers' anti-air to make naval bombers less overpowered.

Absolutely love the use of massed rockets. Hopefully I'll get to use them later in the AAR.

Air forces are a much better compliment for land forces locked into tough meat grinders, though, and that will be the case against the Soviet Union. China already has some mobile forces in the form of the cavalry, so unless China plans on building tons more cavalry to aid in grand encirclements, more land forces will just mean meat grinders for Chinese forces in the frozen north. Since air forces can aid in naval force projection which can only utilize limited land forces, air forces contribute to solving issues with both alliance blocs. More land forces can help, but methinks naval and air forces can help more. just an aerial warfare enthusiast here though...

I've mentioned that I won't be building much more mobile divisions... China just doesn't have the petrol to upkeep them. Bombers are more flexible than mobile formations in this regard, as they pose less of a constant drain and their fuel costs only soar when they sortie.

This worded pretty well in Europe's small provinces since retreats were short and I could quickly shift fresh divs into a losing battle, but in the hindu kush the bad infra and huge province size did indeed make things almost physically painful.

In Siberia, a retreat could often take several months =P

 

[GeneralUrist]

Furthermore, you might have noticed, but I don't play from a purely "mechanical" point-of-view. Will INF spam be a more effective use of IC in Darkest Hour? Probably. Heck, China has vast potential for militia spam and I didn't even consider it since it completely goes against Seeckt's original advice to Chiang. As the intro says, I intend to do this AAR according to the ROC leadership's characters =P

Yeah I do some of that too. In particular I also have that quirk where in peacetime I will build long and unnecessary railway links all across my country because it feels like it should be done. In terms of division construction I don't tend towards RPing unless I specifically focus on on it. I mean, if this game had realistic politics I would never be able to deploy that Hindu Horde to Europe in the first place.

(Really, the lack of a real "war weariness" system impacts HoI quite a bit. As it as you can continue to pursue any war, no matter how bloody or pointless, indefinitely untill you run out of manpower or VPs and nobody will ever complain.

I've mentioned that I won't be building much more mobile divisions... China just doesn't have the petrol to upkeep them.

Speaking of petrol... I find that with a few exceptions I can just automate trade and will have as many resources as I need so long as I'm not at war with half the world. Am I shooting myself in the foot by doing that?

 

[Kienzle]

@zanaikin how is the update coming along? Very interested to see what shape India takes in this world.

 

[Rifal]

Sooooo... how far away is Barbarossa and will China take part in it?
The destruction of the Soviet Union and total German hegemony in Europe would result in a cross continent war between the Axis+China vs USA and Britain (assuming the USA joins the allies)

There is also the issue of Japan, humiliated and defeated she might be but she is still (and will be for a long time) the only Asian power that can contest American naval supremacy in the Pacific. So many questions, so many opportunities for delicious alt. History.

 

[zanaikin]

@zanaikin how is the update coming along? Very interested to see what shape India takes in this world.

Sorry all of my gaming time has been sunk into this as of late:

(I wish HOI had this kind of view for battles...)

The good news is I'm entering end-game so... should be done soon at which point I'll return to this AAR xD

Sooooo... how far away is Barbarossa and will China take part in it?
The destruction of the Soviet Union and total German hegemony in Europe would result in a cross continent war between the Axis+China vs USA and Britain (assuming the USA joins the allies)

There is also the issue of Japan, humiliated and defeated she might be but she is still (and will be for a long time) the only Asian power that can contest American naval supremacy in the Pacific. So many questions, so many opportunities for delicious alt. History.

Barbarossa will begin whenever the German AI decides it should begin. China -- unlike Japan -- has no problem admitting that it is very much the junior Axis partner and will follow the Wehrmacht's lead when it comes to Russia.

I wrote an event for Japan that for some reason still hasn't kicked off... may need to do some troubleshooting to make sure it's working properly. But in general I'm completely out of my depth here. I simply have no idea what Japan would do in this scenario

 

[Rifal]

If Japan is still expansionistic/looking to regain its status they might attempt to use its powerful navy to bully smaller powers in the region. Maybe play subterfuge with China´s network of Asian Allies? If it has become a more democratic leaning nation they might look to join the allies, they were allies with the Entente during WWI after all.

 

[Kienzle]

I wrote an event for Japan that for some reason still hasn't kicked off... may need to do some troubleshooting to make sure it's working properly. But in general I'm completely out of my depth here. I simply have no idea what Japan would do in this scenario

I have a hard time imagining that Japan wouldn't reenter the war for a couple reasons. Unlike the defeat of Japan IoTL, the nation's industry and military are still completely intact. The populace also hasn't been shocked into pacifism as a result of hardcore strategic / atomic bombing. If anything, the earlier war was the kind of humiliating, though not devastating, defeat that should leave a lot of people in the government looking forward to a "round two."

Equally as important, the early war seems to be going a lot worse for the Allies here than in IoTL, if that's even possible. Britain's colonial empire is devastated, the Mediterranean is closed off, and there's no likely prospect of the US entering anytime soon. I think that would leave Britain looking for any kind of friends it could get. Combined with the history of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance and Japan seems like a natural ally. But I could also understand Japan "biding its time" a while longer and waiting to see where ROC weaknesses develop.

 

[J_Master]

I wrote an event for Japan that for some reason still hasn't kicked off... may need to do some troubleshooting to make sure it's working properly. But in general I'm completely out of my depth here. I simply have no idea what Japan would do in this scenario

Japan would, in this situation, adhere to realpolitics. Take chances as they come. China does not have the navy to secure the Philipines and DEI. If Japan would enter the war on the Axis side, that would very much be a part of their bounty. If things were to go down south for the Axis, something very unlikely, Japan could indeed reactivate the old alliance with the British and secure her intrest in mainland Asia. Japan is seeking to regain her lost honour, she just needs to be provided the right oppertunity.

 

[zanaikin]

@Rifal @Kienzle @J_Master
I agree that Japan should do something, just not sure what. It's complicated because the two choices... see this post I wrote back in last October:

So I gave Japan an event with a random chance to trigger after WWII reaches Asia. It hasn't triggered yet. Once it does I'll have to... figure out what to do with them ^^'

The options are:

1) Resurrect the old British-Japanese Alliance
- [Pro] Britain would promise Japan the return of Taiwan + Manchuria, as well as recognize the Nanshin-ron's claims Hainan from China. That's more territory than Japan could gain from any other proposal. And China's industrialization reveals than Manchuria has even more resources than they expected.
- [Con] Britain and allies can't be expected to help at all, which puts the whole burden on the rebuilt Japanese army, especially along the Chinese-Korean border which will no doubt see skyrocketing casualties, thus risking a repeat of the 1935 war.
- [Con] Japan can't take advantage of the chaos to seize Southeast Asia territories (i.e. the Indonesian oil fields).
- [Con] Japan would essentially be fighting a war where the British has the most to gain (i.e. WW1 Romania all over again).

2) Line up after China to take advantage of Allies.
- [Pro] No direct alliance with the Axis required. Japan can cut its own path between the two big alliances, taking advantage of any opportunities that arise.
- [Pro] No jeopardizing their Korean economic possessions with a major land war.
- [Pro] Option to take Dutch Indonesia. The Dutch have a defensive naval treaty with the Americans, but FDR would rather US not get pulled into a war with Japan (he wants war with Germany after all). However, Japan didn't guess right about this historically, so I doubt they would now.
- [Con] Given Chinese claims on Northern Manchuria, only North Sakhalin and Kamchatka are really available to be seized from Russia without getting into a major land shooting war.

So the big questions are:
- If Japan sides with Britain: would they be willing to fight a land war vs China alone after they just lost 5 years ago? Especially knowing that it's Britain who would benefit the most from Japanese blood?
- If Japan sides against Britain: will they risk Pearl Harbor again, in this scenario? The general presumption in Japanese circles has always been that if they move against the Dutch East Indies, the US will get involved (I forgot which treaty entailed US defensive obligations).

 

[Rifal]

So the big questions are:
- If Japan sides with Britain: would they be willing to fight a land war vs China alone after they just lost 5 years ago? Especially knowing that it's Britain who would benefit the most from Japanese blood?
- If Japan sides against Britain: will they risk Pearl Harbor again, in this scenario? The general presumption in Japanese circles has always been that if they move against the Dutch East Indies, the US will get involved (I forgot which treaty entailed US defensive obligations).

Japans navy faction has more influence than the humiliated army I assume, so Japan fighting a local war against the Dutch East Indies seems the most likely. As for Pearl Harbour, I cant tell but they would probably gauge American response to the take over of the east indies and go from there.

 

[Force Lord]

It entirely depends on how Japan handles the Indochina issue. If Japan decides to act as it did historically (not as likely this time since there's no war with China forcing Japan to look for a way to bar foreign aid from reaching the Chinese), then a US oil embargo is certain and will compel the Japanese leadership to try and seize the East Indies oil even at the risk of war with America. But if Japan refrains from poaching French Indochina, there is less reason for the US to put Japan into a corner.

 

[hoi2geek]

So are there any updates so far?