Partisans and China

[unmerged(36987)]

Will the Chinese territory that Japan occupies at the start of 1939 and later scenarios be subject to partisans and reduced production efficiency, or will it be treated as Japanese home territory as it was in HoI1? The HoI1 way was so unrealistic to treat occupied Chinese territory as Japanese home territory that it was actually banned by the Chinese government. I doubt I'd want to buy HoI2 if it suffers from the same blatant historical flaw.

 

[kucing]

IIRC, HoI is banned because Sinkiang is not part of China. And not buying the game just because of that reason is absurd.

 

[unmerged(8783)]

Will the Chinese territory that Japan occupies at the start of 1939 and later scenarios be subject to partisans and reduced production efficiency, or will it be treated as Japanese home territory as it was in HoI1? The HoI1 way was so unrealistic to treat occupied Chinese territory as Japanese home territory that it was actually banned by the Chinese government. I doubt I'd want to buy HoI2 if it suffers from the same blatant historical flaw.

It's not a historical flaw, it was facts on the ground at the time.
China was hardly 'united' in this timeframe.

Also, the ChiComs were pissed that Tibet amongst others was independent,
as it erodes their claims that 'China' as it exists now is essentially 'China',
and not an 'empire', which only us Imperialist Dogs and such do.

It's a case of political hacks being scared by historical reality.
Happens everywhere.

---Ank

 

[unmerged(36987)]

IIRC, HoI is banned because Sinkiang is not part of China. .

The official Chinese press release stated that it was banned for "distorting history" and while Sinkiang was one of the specific history distortions mentioned, its wording left open the possibility that the occupied territory treated exactly as Japanese home provinces was another of the distortions of which it disapproved. Taiwan being treated as a Japanese home province in the 1936 scenario was specifically mentioned.

And not buying the game just because of that reason is absurd.

A historical distortion of that magnitude may be indicative of other flaws, historical and otherwise, such as the significant number of ctd's reported by Strategy Informer in their review.

 

[unmerged(36987)]

It's not a historical flaw, it was facts on the ground at the time.
China was hardly 'united' in this timeframe.

So political unity is a prerequisite to be able to engage in partisan and guerilla warfare?

If Chinese guerilla warfare was so insignificant, why does Encarta state that "the Japanese army had to fend off constant guerrilla attacks, even in territory they occupied."?
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761566679&pn=10

 

[unmerged(22082)]

The Chinese will ban anything that so much as mentions the country, and does not portray it and it's leader as invincible gods.

 

[unmerged(8783)]

So political unity is a prerequisite to be able to engage in partisan and guerilla warfare?

Not in real life, but as I was not a beta-tester, I cannot speak to that game
aspect.

I can say that Manchuria by 1936 was a puppet Japanese state, and was
not a part of China per se.

If Chinese guerilla warfare was so insignificant, why does Encarta state that "the Japanese army had to fend off constant guerrilla attacks, even in territory they occupied."?
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761566679&pn=10

Whoa there, chuckles. I NEVER said that Chinese guerillas were ineffective.
I DID say that China was mad at Paradox for ((accurately)) depicting some
parts of what is NOW known as China as independent. Yes, there were lots
of partisans in the rear areas, but that was to be expected. There was no
way that the Japanese could adequately garrison ALL of China, much less the
coastal enclaves that they held.

---Ank

 

[unmerged(36987)]

Yes, there were lots
of partisans in the rear areas, but that was to be expected.

It's not to be expected in HoI2 for the Chinese territory that Japan controls in 1939, based on Kucing's reply.

 

[unmerged(11874)]

Taiwan being treated as a Japanese home province in the 1936 scenario was specifically mentioned.

Refresh my memory, but didn't the U.K. and France have many colonial provinces as "national" provinces in HoI1? Japanese Formosa is different in what respect?

Home provinces in HoI were used for claims, not for any internal purpose--because, well, in HoI, provinces barely had any internal purpose.

I don't believe, due to game mechanics, the Japanese even drew manpower from Taiwan, did they? But they did occupy it. They did claim it. Just like Korea.

Is Manchukuo still a quasi-independent puppet? I've said it before and I'll say it again, I sure hope not. (Phillipines too.)

 

[unmerged(8783)]

Based on Kucing's reply, it's not to be expected in HoI2 for the Chinese territory that Japan controls in 1939.

So have him address that, and not me.
I don't know if the Manchurians were altogether more or less likely
to engage in partisan warfare against the Japanese.

I do think it would be a mistake to assume that since Manchuria
is a part of China NOW, that it would have fought like the Chinese THEN.

---Ank

 

[Alexander Seil]

It is, and rightfully so. Philippines too And Inner Mongolia (Mengukuo on one screenshoot?), I think.

 

[unmerged(11874)]

((accurately)) depicting some
parts of what is NOW known as China as independent.

Well, it wasn't that accurate--re: Sinkiiang in earlier patches--but it was well-meant. Hopefully, the disintegrated situation in China is better-modeled here.

My basic belief is that the Red Chinese simply hate the way the game portrayed the Nationalists as (indeed, rightly) the most powerful Chinese faction and the one most likely to rule. It didn't turn out that way, but the set-up historically and in-game favored the NatChis, and this is correct.

 

[Alexander Seil]

China in HoI2 seems to be much more fractured - there are two or more new factions involved (not counting Inner Mongolia).

 

[unmerged(11874)]

It is, and rightfully so. Philippines too And Inner Mongolia (Mengukuo on one screenshoot?), I think.

Damnit, the fragmentation lobby won. (Edit--which is fine for China, but that's about the only place more actual countries are needed.)

 

[unmerged(8783)]

((accurately)) depicting some
parts of what is NOW known as China as independent.

Well, it wasn't that accurate--re: Sinkiiang in earlier patches--but it was well-meant. Hopefully, the disintegrated situation in China is better-modeled here.

My basic belief is that the Red Chinese simply hate the way the game portrayed the Nationalists as (indeed, rightly) the most powerful Chinese faction and the one most likely to rule. It didn't turn out that way, but the set-up historically and in-game favored the NatChis, and this is correct.

Yes, and I am certain that having Tibet independent really stuck in their craw.
The ChiComs go bananas whenever some areas are mentioned as having NOT
been a part of China once, as if they believe in some weird sort of retroactive
ownership.

---Ank

 

[unmerged(37378)]

The official Chinese press release stated that it was banned for "distorting history" and while Sinkiang was one of the specific history distortions mentioned, its wording left open the possibility that the occupied territory treated exactly as Japanese home provinces was another of the distortions of which it disapproved. Taiwan being treated as a Japanese home province in the 1936 scenario was specifically mentioned.

Taiwan was Japanese territory at the time. It was annexed after one of the Sino-Japanese wars.

 

[unmerged(11874)]

I still think the argument put up on here about how the horrible situation of the CCP in 1936 actually makes the real guys look like real masters of history was a good one, but I guess in the PRC they've always been at war with Oceania.

 

[unmerged(8783)]

Taiwan was Japanese territory at the time. It was annexed after one of the Sino-Japanese wars.

1895, wasn't it? Perhaps 1910, can't remember now.
They had it before the outbreak of WWI, that I remember.

---Ank

 

[unmerged(11874)]

1895.

 

[unmerged(8783)]

1895.

Mange Takk.

---Ank