C.O.R.E HOI - Far East (Japan-Nationalist China-ChiCom-Siam-Phillipines)

[jdrou]

Originally posted by Phil K
So let me just clarify this again so I can work through these files: *everything* in the C.O.R.E. Events folder - including the subfolders of Modified and Original - are used by C.O.R.E.? It's just the default HOI Event folder that isn't used? Correct?

I believe so. The event files are specified in the scenario file by one or more "include" lines that point to another file with a list of "include" event files. (You could get the same effect by "including" all the event files directly or putting all the events in the actual scenario file but this is cleaner). Only events that are "included" in the scenario file directly or indirectly are actually used.

 

[Generalisimo]

Originally posted by Phil K
So let me just clarify this again so I can work through these files: *everything* in the C.O.R.E. Events folder - including the subfolders of Modified and Original - are used by C.O.R.E.? It's just the default HOI Event folder that isn't used? Correct?

yes.

 

[Generalisimo]

Originally posted by JRaup
I Belive this to be the case. As I recall, there has to be at least a "shadow" file in the original HoI DB folders for the Moddir to work right for some file types, ministers and leaders as I remember. You may have to wait for either Copper Nicus or steel to get back from vacation for a "definite official" type answer.

That is just for new countries (like Syria, Lebanon, RSI, etc...), they MUST have their leaders/ministers file in the original directory, so when you use the moddir function the modded files are opened, so a dummy file is created there.

 

[JRaup]

Assistance needed

So far, I'm stumped on getting info on the assassination of Samuel H Chang. None of my resources give anything other than "on 19 July 1940, US newspaper magnate Samuel H Chang assassinated in Shanghai." I can't find anything more than that obline either. Not even what papers he owned, or why he was assassinated. Does anyone out there have more details on this I can use?

 

[unmerged(18738)]

Question:

How on earth does the AI for Japan_North, Japan_Central, or Japan_South get triggered? I have searched through all the AI files and Events files and find nothing that shows how we go from Japan.ai to any of these other AI files.

Further, only the Japan_Central has any 'flags' parameters. None of the others do. What trips this flag?

-PK

 

[jdrou]

Originally posted by Phil K
Question:

How on earth does the AI for Japan_North, Japan_Central, or Japan_South get triggered? I have searched through all the AI files and Events files and find nothing that shows how we go from Japan.ai to any of these other AI files.

They are all triggered in nomonhan.txt.

 

[unmerged(18738)]

Thanks, Jdrou. I only read the USSR events at the top of the file.

Methinks that any corresponding AI switch flags should be indicated at the top of the country's main (start of game) AI file in a note as a main reference.

-PK

 

[unmerged(18738)]

How do we keep Japan and the USSR in a separate peace while Germany and the USSR are at war? This is, of course, the historical route to take.

What I tend to see happen in my games is that Japan joins the Axis after Barbarossa (which always comes early) has started and therefore is immediately at war w/ the USSR by default.

I'd like to see Japan join the Axis and keep her separate peace with the USSR (for the greatest part - I suppose we could have some far-flung odds where she disrespected her treaty w/ the USSR).

-PK

 

[unmerged(18738)]

Alright. Crap - I've written 5 semi-related events based on the USSR-Japan Neutrality Treaty of 1941.

* USSR-Japan Neutrality Treaty
* triggers future separate peace with USSR when Japan joins Axis (written from Soviet file so that Japan isn't dumped from Axis)
* the neutrality treaty initializes two other files:
1) Japan protects interests in Manchuria
2) USSR protects interests in Mongolia

I used the Event Template for it and have checked and re-checked it for validity and typos.

Still, I am having problems loading the files when I start up the scenario. Keeps telling me there are lhs command problems in core_Japan and core_USSR (where the various events have been added). I believe the event ID numbers are valid (and unused).

Anyone good enough to help out? PM me and I'll send you the altered files.

Thanks!

EDIT: Never mind - I got it to work as I wanted, it's just that it's not possible code-wise.

-PK

 

[unmerged(18738)]

..........

 

[OHgamer]

Tweaking the Indochina transfer to Japan...

In the games I have played recently it seems that Japan gets bogged down in China and then takes over Indochina from Vichy, leading to Chinese invasion and a further tie-down of the Japanese forces on the mainland. Just as an idea, would it work to put into the triggers of these event requirements that Japan control Guangzhou (Canton - HoI province 1704) and Haikou (Hainan Island - HoI province 1724) before the event can trigger. That would ensure the Japanese would have a better chance to keep their forces in Indochina supplied reasonably well without several hundred miles of Chinese territory intervening.

Just an idea.

 

[Steel]

Re: Tweaking the Indochina transfer to Japan...

Originally posted by OHgamer
In the games I have played recently it seems that Japan gets bogged down in China and then takes over Indochina from Vichy, leading to Chinese invasion and a further tie-down of the Japanese forces on the mainland. Just as an idea, would it work to put into the triggers of these event requirements that Japan control Guangzhou (Canton - HoI province 1704) and Haikou (Hainan Island - HoI province 1724) before the event can trigger. That would ensure the Japanese would have a better chance to keep their forces in Indochina supplied reasonably well without several hundred miles of Chinese territory intervening.

Just an idea.

Did you check if the convoys were running ok? IIRC that event has an option to create some convoys and militia garrisons. About the triggers, my only concern would be that Hainan Island is sometimes one of the last Chinese strongholds and could delay the event indefinitely. I'll test your suggestion with the v0.6 setup.

 

[unmerged(18048)]

Kiri peace a bit too good for NatChi

I just had the Kiri peace event (492009 in nomohan.txt) occuring and accepted by Japan AI. I have a few problems with it:

1) Japan controlled all of NatChi except Baoshan and Jangmen. I doubt Japan would even think about negotiating anymore in such a situation. So some triggers checking if Japan doesn't already control Guiyang or Nanning (or so) should be added.

2) As a result Japan gained 4 seperate provinces (difficult to defend) with 21 IC and lost 8 connected ones from its starting setup with 20 IC (admittedly the new ones are core) + all other occupied ones. Would Japan really go for such a meager price, especially since a puppet NatChi with its low tech soldiers isn't that useful (more so with the lack of techsharing of the AI).

3) The executing event (492011) states that "transfer most of former NatChi provinces to Manchuria". Actually it transfers all of provinces (including the former Japanese one) to NatChi. Also the ComChi provinces which Japan had 'liberated' and annexed now belong to NatChi. So the big winner is NatChi. It lost the war and completely won the peace.

4) IMHO this event severely weakens the AI since Japan looses access to the Chinese IC without any real compensation. If I played Japan and got this event I would happily take the 5% dissent hit for not having to offer this peace.

 

[Steel]

Thanks for the feedback. The Manchuria statement is from a very early version of that event, I'll change that to China.

EDIT: Can you clarify something, do you mean this statement:

# transfer most of former NatChi provinces to Manchuria

That's a comment, it's never displayed in game.

As you yourself noted, the provinces gained in the peace are core provinces and thus worth the full IC amount plus manpower whereas an occupied or annexed China is worth only 25% or 33% of the conquered industry. On top of that, Japan get's almost all of China's resources on a daily basis. In other words, this is no meagre price but a gain in every way (influence, dissent reduction, manpower, IC, peace, bases and resources), the last of which is critical for Japanese industry.

Calling China a winner is hardly accurate when they are permanently limited to 50 IC through the puppet status. However they can indeed be a useful puppet for Japan if as a player you share tech and provide supplies to them. It's quite possible to get 100+ extra divisions for the Axis cause in this manner.


Bottom line - I think you perhaps don't fully appreciate the benefits of the peace. If anything is called for, it is perhaps a follow-on event for modernization of the Chinese army and attachment of Japanese advisors (ie tech transfer and supply transfer).

 

[unmerged(18048)]

Re: Kiri

>That's a comment, it's never displayed in game.

Yes, but based on it (and the discussions in the thread mentioned in the comments) I thought that you might have intended something different than you implemented.

>As you yourself noted, the provinces gained in the peace are core provinces
>and thus worth the full IC amount plus manpower whereas an occupied or
>annexed China is worth only 25% or 33% of the conquered industry.
But thats 25%/33% of a lot more IC. NatChi start in 1936 with ca. 100 IC (lots of low IC provinces so probably quite more later due to industry building) + 10 IC from ComChi + 20 IC from the provinces Japan occupies at the beginning. That >130 IC *25%/33% (or more with a Prince of Terror) = >32/>43 IC vs 21 IC.

>On top of that, Japan get's almost all of China's resources on a daily basis.
When annexed Japan gets all of them, not only almost all.

>Calling China a winner is hardly accurate when they are permanently >limited to 50 IC through the puppet status.
I didn't talk game terms there. NatChi comes out of the _lost_ war with 6 provinces more than it had at the start of the war. Ever in history heard of gaining land through a lost war.

IMHO at least the triggers I mentioned should be added to check if NatChi isn't already nearly defeated. And since the historic plan seemingly was to partition NatChi some of the provinces should go to Manchuria (or someone else).

But in the end I believe the event is maybe nice flavour but players should avoid it:

• Single player: Japan should avoid it (to not get the 5% dissent) since every competent player can annex NatChi in short time and then gets an advantageous result (see above)
• Multiplayer: Might be interesting if SOV intervenes or threatens to but it results in a very short JAP-SOV border and the JAP player won't get any notice if SOV takes NatChi provinces. It might be interesting if NatChi was also player-lead, but which NatChi player would agree to Kiri?

Of course the AI will fall for it.

 

[Steel]

Re: Re: Kiri

Originally posted by woos Yes, but based on it (and the discussions in the thread mentioned in the comments) I thought that you might have intended something different than you implemented.

No. It's a left-over comment from an earlier revision of that event chain which created a Greater Manchuria rather than a puppet government.

But thats 25%/33% of a lot more IC. NatChi start in 1936 with ca. 100 IC (lots of low IC provinces so probably quite more later due to industry building) + 10 IC from ComChi + 20 IC from the provinces Japan occupies at the beginning. That >130 IC *25%/33% (or more with a Prince of Terror) = >32/>43 IC vs 21 IC.

The ComChi provinces are not guaranteed, you are ignoring the NatChi ICs (which are 100% utilised up to the max of 50 IC) and it would be a strange event indeed if you gained *more* IC by placing the defeated lands under a puppet.

When annexed Japan gets all of them, not only almost all.

Yes, the difference is 100 per day of each resource. You can do the sums yourself to determine if that's relevant based on the amount of coal and steel resources in China.

I didn't talk game terms there. NatChi comes out of the _lost_ war with 6 provinces more than it had at the start of the war. Ever in history heard of gaining land through a lost war.

It's a puppet government, they are given lands to administrate by a victorious Japan. We could create 20 different puppet states and give them 3 provinces each but what's the point? It would be a waste of tags and effort.

IMHO at least the triggers I mentioned should be added to check if NatChi isn't already nearly defeated. And since the historic plan seemingly was to partition NatChi some of the provinces should go to Manchuria (or someone else).

Why? Who?

But in the end I believe the event is maybe nice flavour but players should avoid it

Well, given a marginal difference in IC and resources between annexation and Kiri I would rather opt for Kiri because:

- 10 DI increase
- 10 dissent reduction
- 28 manpower increase
- earlier end to the conflict
- Chinese armed forces and manpower pool can be used for Japan's cause

Obviously the situation will differ from game to game but I always felt a puppet with 100 divisions and 5000 manpower was better than annexed land which I have to garrison. You clearly see the benefits differently and that's what the B option is for in the first event.

 

[Generalisimo]

being Japan is more easy to accept the Kiri project... i have done it and i can assure it have more benefits than annexing China...
Don't forget to gain military control over them... then you can use all their divisions for your cause...
(they are your puppet, so it is a valid thing to do that, i do not like asking for military control to Germany for example... ... )

 

[unmerged(18048)]

Re: Kiri

Well, opinions may indeed differ and play style vary. Nevertheless I decided to do some empirics and loaded a previous save posing as Japan. One time I got the last missing province and annexed NatChi and one time I simply waited for Kiri (actually I removed the "random=10" trigger after having to wait too long thanks to Murphy). Result:

NatChi annexed: 235 IC
Kiri accepted: 190 IC

(AI had selected Resource Industrialist and Compassionate Gentlemen as ministers)

It's not really marginal and all other benefits are unimportant in comparison (especially the -10% dissent since Japan had no dissent to reduce) because the AI had led Japan into a situation where it is starving for IC. In peace mode even the 235 IC are not enough to fulfill the 507 Supply needs of the Japanese army, navy and air force. So as I said: The Kiri event severly weakens the AI (especially since it will occur even if only one province is missing for annexation and the AI doesn't know to reject it).

BTW: If someone wants to improve the Japanese AI, less transports would be nice (95 transports * 0.9 = 85 supplies consumed alone by them) and it should build up industry at least once on all its 1-IC islands.
Even better would be an AI which wouldn't build more military than it can supply, but that's probably hardcoded and therefore might not work with the increased supply requirements of CORE (which I BTW like).

 

[unmerged(18048)]

Re: Kiri

Since I played around with the trigger of 492009 by removing random=10 anyway I added the following

               NOT = { OR = {
                	control = { province = 1612 data = -1 } # Wutungliao
                	control = { province = 1614 data = -1 } # Guiyang
                	control = { province = 1606 data = -1 } # Kaiyuan
                	}
                }

which seems to make the event more inline with
> 2 - NatChi has lost significant territory in east/south China but still holds west China.
from the original Kiri thread.

 

[hendriks]

China

During my last USSR game, China fell again.

- Yinchuan seems an important province, if Japs take it, NatChina takes troops away to guard all surrounding areas, put a fort there?

- Xianyang falls may 1938, once this happens, bye bye China, increase fort or divisons of ChiCom??

- Japan annexed ChiCom September 1938

- ChiCom has military access through Natchina, why not the other way around??

- NatChina annexed May 1940

- Japan keeps influencing USA, turns USA fascist all the time.

- Japan had join the axis, so no pacific war except against UK, can this event be deleted?? NO way Japan would go for Axis unless maybe after a victory in the east by Germany.........