Japan - Should I bother with China?

[BBBD316]

So as the title suggests, is there enough in China for me to bother with war against them?

Is the tension with the US worth it, as an alt-history is it better to build up for taking Indo-China, Singapore, DEI, etc?

I know that some will say that it is not WW2 without a 2nd Sino-Japanese war, but from a cost benefit point of view do the resources and IC gained from what i can grabbed (and law changes) match out with the increase in WT and lack of power to project into other regions?

I was thinking of not starting the war and taking any negative effects from reigning in the army and then using the extra 2-3 years build up to be able to create a more navally mobile force to be able to control SE Asia.

Thoughts?

 

[Mac Lazer]

Personally, I would still attack China. The factories and dockyards would do well for your empire, and will strengthen you for the future conflicts with the United States and other Allied Powers, assuming you do well in China, of course.

 

[Beagá]

IMO attacking China should be a trade-off between extra internal stability and the external cost (both diplomatically and industrially).

From a pure strategic POV attacking the soviets to cut LL from Vladivostok and a bigger naval and air build up versus US should be the overall better choice, the question is how to not make it a no-brainer.

 

[calebmarkle]

Japan will have massive resource issues and won't be able to maintain an effective war industry. Going to war with the DEI and Indochina for resources will also help, but they will lead to war with the US regardless. I would say the early resource gain not the mention the industry and manpower gains from china are worth it. I'm not quite sure how manpower is going to work for occupying countries, but even if you only get 5% available you would get a ton from china

 

[Will Steel]

I would still do it for manpower, if not anything else. You get at least some manpower from occupied provinces, right? And once I win I can use that huge manpower to build a giant wave army to put up against Soviets.

 

[Bhaal]

I will be attacking them as well, if for no other reason than to eliminate them as a threat. Say I do not attack them and they then join the allies when I attack southeast Asia? Then I have let them build up and wind up at war with them anyhow. I will dust them every time, to many positives to not attack them in my opinion.

 

[Chukada]

The biggest gain you'll get is combat experience. A lot of combat experience.

Kind of an argument for stalemating China theater.

 

[henzington]

Resources and manpower as far as combat experience isn't the vast majority of combat in the pacific going to be naval and China didn't really have a navy.

 

[Chukada]

Resources and manpower as far as combat experience isn't the vast majority of combat in the pacific going to be naval and China didn't really have a navy.

Japan will probably lose the naval war fast if it can't take the Philippines, Malaysia, and Singapore.

 

[CrasherZZ]

What to do with China can only be decided within the context of what Japan's plans for the US are. China is not important if Japan is going to focus on it's naval and air forces for war with the Allies and the US. If Japan can take Indochina, Malaysia, and Indonesia, and hold off the US, it doesn't need China at all. Conquering parts of China can be useful for gaining experience and some resources as long as it doesn't cause a premature war with the US.

If Japan plans to avoid war with the US, then part of China must be taken for it's manpower, resources, and industry. It will need them for eventual war with either the Allies or the Soviets.

 

[krieger11b]

I think we need a DD about what the effects of occupation are on getting resources/industry to determine how much it's worth while. Otherwise it's a guess.

 

[BBBD316]

I suppose, I guess you could probably hold out the US till 1942-3 if you keep WT down though.

Spend the extra time building factories and dockyards, then unleash hell on the SU from the rear.

 

[AlexNightingale]

I remember the Japanese leader of that time said, "In order to conquer Asia, we must conquer China."

From a realistic point of view Japan should always try to first conquer China before it's unified and becomes a big threat.

But hey, this is a game and you can do whatever you want.

 

[Diwtop]

Do we know the ressources of china?

Maybe steel and ...?

 

[Oddb@ll]

The biggest gain you'll get is combat experience. A lot of combat experience.

Kind of an argument for stalemating China theater.

This might be reason enough

 

[griffor]

i would imagine some oil not a lot but maybe enough to help offset the amount of synthetic factories i'm sure japan will need.

and a ton of tungsten and steel to possibly trade to other axis powers who want to build up their militaries for future war and the ability to develop your country a bit faster at the same time.

 

[Emma354]

No infrastructure, mountains and generally awful terrain.

China is begging to get blitzkrieged

 

[Loke]

So as the title suggests, is there enough in China for me to bother with war against them?

Is the tension with the US worth it, as an alt-history is it better to build up for taking Indo-China, Singapore, DEI, etc?

I know that some will say that it is not WW2 without a 2nd Sino-Japanese war, but from a cost benefit point of view do the resources and IC gained from what i can grabbed (and law changes) match out with the increase in WT and lack of power to project into other regions?

I was thinking of not starting the war and taking any negative effects from reigning in the army and then using the extra 2-3 years build up to be able to create a more navally mobile force to be able to control SE Asia.

Thoughts?

Based on historical Axis.

#1 To little information to answer, yet.

#2 Historically I would say no, it is not worth the tension and war vs the USA.

#3 Also, to little information available on IC, manpower and so on.

#4 Sounds like an interesting idea you will probably need oil/steel.

My thoughts...

If the Axis is to have any chance they should concentrate on one enemy after fall of France.
Axis should go for the UK or Russia in a joint move.

Everything that keeps the USA out of the conflict as long as possible benefits the Axis and if that means no Marco Polo then stay at peace with China.

 

[jcd000]

Based on historical Axis.
My thoughts...

If the Axis is to have any chance they should concentrate on one enemy after fall of France.
Axis should go for the UK or Russia in a joint move.

Everything that keeps the USA out of the conflict as long as possible benefits the Axis and if that means no Marco Polo then stay at peace with China.

I quite agree.
Japan only attacking the SU (and noone else) in Spring '41, then Germany joining in 2-3 months later could result in axis victory.
Maybe the same if the IJN went to europe to fight the RN.

But if it is not multiplayer game, Japan would never be interested for these, as they gain almost nothing.
From a pure gains viewpoint, hitting and beating just China is better. They can win there and there will be no repercursions for it.

 

[77Hawk77]

In Hoi3 it felt like attacking china was really silly, compared to spending all your resources to build a competitive navy.