Do you thin that Japan surrendering to nukes and soviet DOW should be simulated?

[qqsuen]

This is one of the some historical occurrence that are sadly not possible to be represented in the game under the current capitulation system, as the only way to defeat a country is to occupy at least 10% (worth) of core territory, which would inevitably involves the invasion of the home island to achieve.

Do you think that there should be specific conditions (like losing all continental holdings and pacific islands, lower than X% of NU, getting nuke, at war with both the Allies and the SU...etc.) and events set in a way that would force Japan into an unconditional surrender without the Home Island getting invaded at all?

 

[Alex_brunius]

This is one of the some historical occurrence that are sadly not possible to be represented in the game under the current capitulation system, as the only way to defeat a country is to occupy at least 10% (worth) of core territory, which would inevitably involves the invasion of the home island to achieve.

Do you think that there should be specific conditions (like losing all continental holdings and pacific islands, lower than X% of NU, getting nuke, at war with both the Allies and the SU...etc.) and events set in a way that would force Japan into an unconditional surrender without the Home Island getting invaded at all?

Shouldn't the easiest way to fix it be to put for example 20% of Japans core VPs on islands which USA historically took, like Okinawa, Iwo Jima, Palau and so on?

 

[Gort11]

Yes. You should absolutely be able to make Japan surrender without requiring an invasion of the home islands.

Perhaps there should be a general mechanic for surrender when some combination of naval losses, strategic bombing, nuclear strikes, and complete outnumberedness in the war occur, for any nation. You should probably be able to knock the UK out of the war in the same way, for example, if you sink its entire navy, carry out massive strategic bombing and nuke Birmingham and Leeds.

 

[DuroSVK]

Do the same for the British too, please.

 

[safe-keeper]

There have been discussions on this, and the consensus seems to be that there need to be more possibilities for peace, period, even for WWII itself. An EU peace system would be vastly superior to what we have now, and allow for things like the Axis minor allies "dropping out" of the war as the Russians advanced, and the Soviet invasion of Finland stalling, for them to reach a peace agreement that merely had Finland cede some land to the Soviets.

 

[hkrommel]

This is one of the some historical occurrence that are sadly not possible to be represented in the game under the current capitulation system, as the only way to defeat a country is to occupy at least 10% (worth) of core territory, which would inevitably involves the invasion of the home island to achieve.

Do you think that there should be specific conditions (like losing all continental holdings and pacific islands, lower than X% of NU, getting nuke, at war with both the Allies and the SU...etc.) and events set in a way that would force Japan into an unconditional surrender without the Home Island getting invaded at all?

Have you ever honestly played a game where the situation in 1945 looked similar to the historical 1945 situation? If no, then these kinds of mechanics shouldn't be in-game.

That said, peace negotiations and nukes definitely need a rework.

 

[Opanashc]

Everyone heard of why Germany kept fighting, even when it obvious that it had lost. Reich fought until it literally had no land and soldiers under its control - in hopes of Soviet-Allied dispute. Its leaders hoped, that Communists and Capitalists would start fighting, giving Germany better chances.
Japan was probably thinking the same - with better odds. It was not at war with USSR, and now Allied and Soviet armies were facing each other with no other enemies in Europe. Enemy of my enemy is my friend - that was the logic between anti-Axis alliance between East and West. Now the common enemy was gone, so they were no longer friends. But Moscow and Washington reached an agreement to end Tokyo, and history ended up as it was. I'd say, it wasn't the destruction of Kwantung Army or nuclear strikes that forced Japan to seek peace, but loss of hope for any other outcome. They were clinging to straws, and straws broke.

 

[hkrommel]

They were clinging to straws, and straws broke.

Well yes but August Storm and the nuclear strike broke those straws, both by showing that the Soviets and Allies were at least going to focus on Japan before each other, and by showing the measures the Allies were willing and able to take in order to minimize their own casualties. You're not wrong but what you're saying isn't in opposition to each other or mutually exclusive.

 

[Opanashc]

Well yes but August Storm and the nuclear strike broke those straws, both by showing that the Soviets and Allies were at least going to focus on Japan before each other, and by showing the measures the Allies were willing and able to take in order to minimize their own casualties. You're not wrong but what you're saying isn't in opposition to each other or mutually exclusive.

Japan was doomed with or without nukes or Soviets entering the war - just a matter of time and casualties. Tokyo was destroyed just as completely as Nagasaki, and no nuke landed there. But with Soviets in the war, Japan had no hope of Allied-Soviet war erupting until Japan was vanquished. Everyone knew, that the anti-Axis alliance was one of convenience. I am willing to bet, that had USSR declared war and made no move whatsoever and no nukes were dropped, Japan would have still surrendered in 1945. It's not the August Storm that tilted the balance, but Soviet DOW in itself.

 

[hkrommel]

Japan was doomed with or without nukes or Soviets entering the war - just a matter of time and casualties. Tokyo was destroyed just as completely as Nagasaki, and no nuke landed there. But with Soviets in the war, Japan had no hope of Allied-Soviet war erupting until Japan was vanquished. Everyone knew, that the anti-Axis alliance was one of convenience. I am willing to bet, that had USSR declared war and made no move whatsoever and no nukes were dropped, Japan would have still surrendered in 1945. It's not the August Storm that tilted the balance, but Soviet DOW in itself.

Maybe, maybe not. IIRC it required a unanimous cabinet vote to surrender, and the Emperor only intervened to cause that vote in response to the nukes. Maybe over time it would have worn them down, but the nature of the surrender process makes me doubtful, at least for a 1945 surrender without an invasion.