For the love of God please nerf China!

[Cybvep]

Not that impressive is it? They made good gains early in the war along the coastal regions, and were able to make some serious pushes into the interior, but a Nationalist China in most HoI2 games would be holding onto maybe 8 provinces around Chungking by December 1941.

That's because they have too little defensive power, especially in the western mountains and jungles, while too much offensive power, especially early on. Historically, the Japanese were able to mount offensives even in 1944! The Chinese should start with a worse GDE, but regain it after several months (or after two years, if the Soviets or the Japanese don't attack them). They should get defensive bonuses in harsh terrain, preferably by "guerilla" doctrine path. The logistical system should be rebalanced so it's not feasible to stack 200 divisions in a single province and occupied provinces/partisan activity should cause more TC drain.

 

[Easy1]

is the STR- and ORG-level historical as well?

At the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese War in July 1937 the Nationalist army expanded to about 1.7 million men: its official order of battle included 182 infantry divisions. 46 independent brigades, 9 canlry divisions, 6 independent cavallery brigades, 4 artillery brigades and 20 independent antillery regiments. A division had (again. officially) 2 infantry brigades, each of 2 regiments: an artillery batalion or regiment: an engineer and a quartermaster batalion, and small signals, medical and transport units.

Organization:

380 000 - Chiang Kai-shek's own pre-1934 army. Most of whom had been trained by German instructors, and the most loyal and therefore best-trained and equipped troops under KMT government.

520 000 - Traditionally loyal to Chiang, though not of his own creation.

300 000 - Semi-autonomous provincial troops divided between the provinces of Suiyuan, Shansi and Shantung in the North, and Kwangtung in the south-east.

The rest of the Nationalist army was made up of troops led by commanders who. while having no real loyalty to Chiang Kai-shek, were willing to fight alongside himagainst the common enemy Japan. These were:

170 000 - 80.000 soldiers and 90.000 militia from Kwangsi. Well-lead, equippet and disciplined.

250 000 - Sichuan. Described as the worst-trained and equipped, most undisciplined and disloyal of all Chinese Nationalist troops.

On paper China had 3.8 million men under arms in 1941. They were organized into 246 "front-line" divisions, with another 70 divisions assigned to rear areas. Perhaps as many as forty Chinese divisions had been equipped with European-manufactured weapons and trained by foreign, particularly German and Soviet, advisers. The rest of the units were under strength and generally untrained. The National Revolutionary Army expanded from about 1.2 million in 1937 to 5.7 million inn August 1945, organized in 300 divisions.

 

[Limith]

Any particular objections to the way the second Sino-Japanese war is abstracted in CCIP? Lower unit stats all around that vanish eventually, more starting units for Japan (all historical). It feels weird to me (as the dev of CCIP) to see these questions pop up again and again and makes me feel as if I did a poor job rebalancing (which I would like to know)

380 000 - Chiang Kai-shek's own pre-1934 army. Most of whom had been trained by German instructors, and the most loyal and therefore best-trained and equipped troops under KMT government.

520 000 - Traditionally loyal to Chiang, though not of his own creation.

300 000 - Semi-autonomous provincial troops divided between the provinces of Suiyuan, Shansi and Shantung in the North, and Kwangtung in the south-east.

The rest of the Nationalist army was made up of troops led by commanders who. while having no real loyalty to Chiang Kai-shek, were willing to fight alongside himagainst the common enemy Japan. These were:

170 000 - 80.000 soldiers and 90.000 militia from Kwangsi. Well-lead, equippet and disciplined.

250 000 - Sichuan. Described as the worst-trained and equipped, most undisciplined and disloyal of all Chinese Nationalist troops.

Would like to see the source, I have one in Chinese but without exact troop numbers.

 

[Easy1]

Any particular objections to the way the second Sino-Japanese war is abstracted in CCIP? Lower unit stats all around that vanish eventually, more starting units for Japan (all historical). It feels weird to me (as the dev of CCIP) to see these questions pop up again and again and makes me feel as if I did a poor job rebalancing (which I would like to know)

Would like to see the source, I have one in Chinese but without exact troop numbers.

Osprey, Men-at-Arms #424 Chinese Army 1937-49 World War II and Civil War (2005)

How many divisions do Japan have in the Sino-theater btw?

 

[Limith]

Osprey, Men-at-Arms #424 Chinese Army 1937-49 World War II and Civil War (2005)

How many divisions do Japan have in the Sino-theater btw?

Historically IJA had 34 "double strength" divisions (equal to 68 ingame divisions if we go strictly by double, reality was ~1,100,000 men or 110 ingame divisions). This ignores the IJN which also participated in the Battle of Shanghai for example (heck, none of the units that participated in the Battle of Shanghai on the Japanese OR Chinese side exists in game, instead we have crappy ahistoric "baoan" militia divisions) Reference: Wikipedia

What Japan has in game:
-25 Outdated Infantry (more outdated than CHI in some cases)
-6 Cavalry
-31 Garr
-3 HQ
Obsolete Divisions: 46
Obsolete Brigade: 10

I wonder why 25 outdated 1926 infantry/1921 garrison (that all have basically no strength) are failing to fight properly against 100+ 1921 infantry that instantly reinforce upgrade to 1931/1936....*/sarcasm.

The simplest and most accurate thing is not to nerf China's GDE but to buff Japan's laughably weak army.

Sino-Japan Japan Strength: (from wiki)
3,900,000
900,000 Chinese Collaborators
= 480 divisions total of units. I highly doubt Japan can come close to this amount in game (just in the sino-japan theater), even with reinforcement.

Sino-Japan China Strength:
5,600,000
3,600 Soviets (1937–40)
900 US aircraft (1942–45)

 

[Rotten Venetic]

That map shows Shantung peninsula occupied by Japan in 1905. Apparently it was signed away by Deng Qirui peacefully in 1919 for a freaking loan. It was given back to China in 1922 however.

Limith: If I remove the Chinese free division builds, the Japanese have an adequate OOB in time for the war. I don't really know when their serious buildup started.

 

[Easy1]

Historically IJA had 34 "double strength" divisions (equal to 68 ingame divisions if we go strictly by double, reality was ~1,100,000 men or 110 ingame divisions). This ignores the IJN which also participated in the Battle of Shanghai for example (heck, none of the units that participated in the Battle of Shanghai on the Japanese OR Chinese side exists in game, instead we have crappy ahistoric "baoan" militia divisions) Reference: Wikipedia

What Japan has in game:
-25 Outdated Infantry (more outdated than CHI in some cases)
-6 Cavalry
-31 Garr
-3 HQ
Obsolete Divisions: 46
Obsolete Brigade: 10

I wonder why 25 outdated 1926 infantry/1921 garrison (that all have basically no strength) are failing to fight properly against 100+ 1921 infantry that instantly reinforce upgrade to 1931/1936....*/sarcasm.

The simplest and most accurate thing is not to nerf China's GDE but to buff Japan's laughably weak army.

Sino-Japan Japan Strength: (from wiki)
3,900,000
900,000 Chinese Collaborators
= 480 divisions total of units. I highly doubt Japan can come close to this amount in game (just in the sino-japan theater), even with reinforcement.

Sino-Japan China Strength:
5,600,000
3,600 Soviets (1937–40)
900 US aircraft (1942–45)

I agree. The low quality of the Japanese army is not even historical, hence the relevant problem. Japanese infantry should be no less than four times better than Chinese infantry (with a possible exeption to some of Kai-shek's elite units) . And even so, the grand majority of the chinese army should be milita. Some 85-90% of the Chinese army should be militia as they were untrained. The Japanese army should be close to European standard and up to date.

 

[Rotten Venetic]

The Japanese had 35 divisions and 39 independent brigades in China at Pearl Harbor. Due to many of their divisions being indeed very large (all divisions numbered under 100 were quadratic with 20000-25000 men apiece), I'd say split the difference and call it 74 in-game divisions. At the start of the war they had a ridiculously small army of 17 oversized divisions as described above, which come out at about 25 in-game divisions, but they picked up the slack quickly and had doubled their forces by the next year.

The obvious solution for me is to upgrade all the starting units to infantry-8 (1931) and give Japan 10 Infantry-9 units (1936) which are all at 5 strength. The expectation is that they will build the other 15 to represent the historical OOB on their own. This also compensates for my locking their island garrisons (now GAR-4, 1931, as well), and the fact that the Chinese OOB is now somewhat larger, with 20 infantry and 39 militia. The Japanese AI seems to like building 12-15 infantry serials with my jap.ai settings. Their 6 cavalry units don't really seem historical, but I left them in peace.

Edit: Made them 70 str model 1931 because the existing Japanese divisions are at 70 too, and the Japanese might have been modern but they were at no point in the time period the most advanced army in the world.

 

[Gort11]

Human players can defeat China handily as Japan as long as they build nothing but militia for a while - after a bit the fact that Japan has twice the IC of China begins to tell.

Perhaps editing the build-order for the Japan AI so they do this too would produce a better fight.

 

[Limith]

The Japanese had 35 divisions and 39 independent brigades in China at Pearl Harbor. Due to many of their divisions being indeed very large (all divisions numbered under 100 were quadratic with 20000-25000 men apiece), I'd say split the difference and call it 74 in-game divisions. At the start of the war they had a ridiculously small army of 17 oversized divisions as described above, which come out at about 25 in-game divisions, but they picked up the slack quickly and had doubled their forces by the next year.

The obvious solution for me is to upgrade all the starting units to infantry-8 (1931) and give Japan 10 Infantry-9 units (1936) which are all at 5 strength. The expectation is that they will build the other 15 to represent the historical OOB on their own. This also compensates for my locking their island garrisons (now GAR-4, 1931, as well), and the fact that the Chinese OOB is now somewhat larger, with 20 infantry and 39 militia. The Japanese AI seems to like building 12-15 infantry serials with my jap.ai settings. Their 6 cavalry units don't really seem historical, but I left them in peace.

Edit: Made them 70 str model 1931 because the existing Japanese divisions are at 70 too, and the Japanese might have been modern but they were at no point in the time period the most advanced army in the world.

All of the 5 strength divisions should be those that were "reactivated" in 1937. I found quite a few on wiki with that description (essentially reserves) that were the basis for the "reform X army" events in CCIP..

I disagree with making most of China's units militia. This was inaccurate with the official policy of the KMT, and the latter status of the KMT Army (since you can't convert Mil to Inf). Instead, make them incredibly outdated (to represent lack of modern supplies and training) and remove an infantry tech to prevent reinforcement upgrading. Japan's units should be at least four times better though.

-Better supplies
-Better training
-Larger size

I made Japan's units have double stats and CHI units have half stats in CCIP to abstract this as well (without splitting the Japanese Divisions). I think in terms of vanilla, splitting the large divisions (1,700,000 men in 1941 in 51 divisions, that's 170 non-garrison in game divisions represented by 51 divisions) is the easiest way to go. That, and making Chinese units super outdated.

Also, something needs to be done about:

From 1943, Japanese troops suffered from a shortage of supplies; especially food, medicine, munitions and armaments largely due to submarine interdiction of supplies and losses to Japanese shipping, which was worsened by a long-standing and severe rivalry with the Imperial Japanese Navy. The lack of supplies caused large numbers of fighter aircraft to become unserviceable for lack of spare parts and "as many as two-thirds of Japan's total military deaths resulted from illness or starvation."

 

[LiamRiordan]

After a quick game as Japan, here is a fun fact.

I took almost all of Sibera, before I could even finish my Chinese campaign. I had then devoted all my airforce into trying to destroy the Chinese units. Still a very, very hard slog, MTN units are a god-send.

 

[Limith]

After a quick game as Japan, here is a fun fact.

I took almost all of Sibera, before I could even finish my Chinese campaign. I had then devoted all my airforce into trying to destroy the Chinese units. Still a very, very hard slog, MTN units are a god-send.

I can take Siberia as Natchi with just 9 outdated divisions (aka I have done it before). AI Soviets don't defend it properly.

3x Cav/Motorized - Encircles and cuts off supply
3x Inf - Holds the Front
3x Cav/Motorized - Encircles and cuts off supply

~10x Militia to garrison in back.

 

[LiamRiordan]

How about when I wiped out around 100 Soviet units with my airforce, but can't do anywhere near as much damage to Chinese troops due to the horrid terrain.

Bait-bombing doesn't work as well against the Chinese compared to the Soviets, no matter how much the air force is concentrated on one province, once the double digit stacks come in, I lose air units way too quickly, and dislodging them to bomb them again becomes a tough challenge. Its so much easier with the Soviets, while they do have stacks, they're nowhere near as bottled in as the Chinese ones that act like foot fortress'.

 

[Cybvep]

The Chinese SHOULD be hard to dislodge from the western mountains! The fact that the Soviets are poor at defending their Far Eastern holdings doesn't change anything. Again, we come back to the logistical system. It should be hard to supply troops in Siberia because of overstretched supply lines and poor infrastructure. It also shouldn't be possible to supply superstacks - AOD and HOI3 got rid of them in their own ways, now it's time for DH to do it

 

[Creslin]

I think the balance actually isn't that bad as some makes out it to be. In my relative few game so far, Japan tend to win out even while carrying out full scale pacific campaign at same time in 1.01.

Any time you have human control of either side, it can not be taken into account when balancing.

 

[Cybvep]

Any time you have human control of either side, it can not be taken into account when balancing.

The whole point is to make the campaign challenging for both sides. How fun are easy wars, anyway?

 

[Gort11]

Any time you have human control of either side, it can not be taken into account when balancing.

I dunno. If a human finds one side really easy and the other one one of the toughest fights to be found in the entire game, it's probably indicative of a need for balancing.

 

[Creslin]

Players got vastly different playing style and skill level. So same player find one country easy and another difficult is not an automatic reason for balance.

For example I may find the French campaign very simple on normal as Germany, where a different player may find it very difficult.

 

[Cybvep]

For example I may find the French campaign very simple on normal as Germany, where a different player may find it very difficult.

French campaign is a cakewalk. Even with massive economic bonuses (I gave them sth like +80% to IC, 120% to MP, 20% to research efficiency etc.), France will fall easily every single time, unless you are playing against a human opponent who pursues "all or nothing" French strategy and transfers all Commonwealth divs to France (very unrealistic).

If the majority of players find sth difficult or easy, then it must be taken into account IMO. What I oppose is balancing various theatres by analysing AI vs AI performance only. This will never work and will always result in screwed balance if one side is played by a human opponent and every other factor stays the same. If the AI needs help in order to pose a credible challenge, then so be it!

 

[von Sachsen]

How are people finding China in the new beta?