• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

unmerged(8371)

Private
Mar 23, 2002
13
0
Visit site
And my point was that in every Japanese plan the objective would be to kill the carriers. Even if the Pearl Harbour attack was never launched. It is a tactical objective that makes strategic attacks possible.

I get you now -- I misunderstood your first reply:)



My confusion about Japanese war aims and strategies in WW2 was what the hell they expected or desired from China. Could they have aborted the invasion or settled for a status quo ante?

It seems that Manchuria was/is pretty rich in natural resources: coal, iron & copper (everything that a growing army needs, except oil!). But still, I have to agree with you that facing a couple of hundred million Chinese to get at these resources is a pretty high price to pay...

One more tangent: while it would obviously be ahistorical, it would be interesting if HoI will allow a human Japanese player to diplomatically play Mao & Chiang Kai Shek off of each other. Maybe give concessions to one, in order to team up on the other. Again, it's ahistorical, but it would be kind of cool to do in a game:D
 

Derek Pullem

Stomping Mechs for the glory of Rome!
54 Badges
Apr 15, 2001
9.739
134
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • BATTLETECH - Beta Backer
  • BATTLETECH - Backer
  • Stellaris
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Diplomacy
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
Yes, it was a bit flippant:( Sorry.

I'm still at a loss to understand what Japan's war aims in China actually were. Where was the "end" of Japanese China? Did they actually get much in the way of resources out of China (or more than they could have purchased for the same expenditure on the army)
 

AlanC9

Field Marshal
16 Badges
Mar 15, 2001
5.081
320
Visit site
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Semper Fi
  • Magicka 2
It's not clear that the Japanese actually had any rational war aims in China. They don't seem to have ever put in enough resources to have had a chance of knocking out Chiang's government until very late in the war.

Then again, the China operation wasn't exactly planned by the government -- the seizure of Manchuria was initiated by the army, and by junior officers at that.

As for an invasion of Hawaii after Pearl Harbor, my understanding is that the Japanese Navy looked into this, but found that they simply didn't have the shipping to do it unless they cancelled most of the rest of their operations in Indonesia and Malaysia. Even if they had done this, supplying Hawaii would have been a big drain on their merchant marine.
 

Aetius

Nitpicker
15 Badges
Jan 11, 2001
9.204
1
Visit site
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Sengoku
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
The BBC has the following on the attack on Pearl Harbour:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/wwtwo/pearl_harbour_1.shtml

I remember a lecture where the professor basically explained the Japanese "strategy" as a series of ad hoc decisions:
We need resources so where can we get them. Manchuria is close by, if we get that we will solve our problems.
Ok we have Manchuria but our land is running out for our growing population so we better go somewhere else. Hmm China looks good and they are no longer the leaders of Asia, we are.
Ok, the USA got pissed off and they won't sell us stuff any more, we need other sources, hmmm there is some stuff in SE Asia, but if we attack them the Americans will for sure attack us. If we end up in war with the USA, we will lose eventually. But we will end up in war, so what is the best way to fight in that case a surprise attack obviously and we might be able to fight them to a standstill and then negotiate a peace.

My experience of Japanese, in general, is that they have a tendency of getting bogged down in details while forgetting the big picture, so it fits sort of. There are always exceptions of course. The Germans on the other hand usually were good at strategy and let the juniour officers work out the details themselves.
 
Last edited:
Feb 28, 2001
773
0
Visit site
Even if the Japanese didn't invade the Hawaiian Islands, I wonder if, as playing Japan, that I will be able to attack not only the US warships anchoured at Pearl Harbour, but also to attack the oil and dock facilities there as well.

Historians are agreed that the fact the Japanese left the oil reserves and harbour facilities intact at Pearl was a major blunder. The repair facilities meant that the damaged ships could be repaired; and the oil reserves meant that US naval operations (especially for the carriers) could still be conducted.

So I'm wondering if, or how, things like the oil reserves and harbour repair facilities will be modelled in the game? Will Japan be able to attack and destroy them?

Also, if the USA has its carriers at sea at the time I attack Pearl, it might be interesting to hang around to see I could find and destroy those carriers, before I head for home (heh - I'm bad. . .).
 

Derek Pullem

Stomping Mechs for the glory of Rome!
54 Badges
Apr 15, 2001
9.739
134
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • BATTLETECH - Beta Backer
  • BATTLETECH - Backer
  • Stellaris
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Diplomacy
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
Originally posted by Aetius
The BBC has the following on the attack on Pearl Harbour:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/wwtwo/pearl_harbour_1.shtml

I remember a lecture where the professor basically explained the Japanese "strategy" as a series of ad hoc decisions:

My experience of Japanese, in general, is that they have a tendency of getting bogged down in details while forgetting the big picture, so it fits sort of. There are always exceptions of course. The Germans on the other hand usually were good at strategy and let the juniour officers work out the details themselves.

But this is the problem - any player worth his salt will not be fixated with China and will want to extricate himself from the mess before taking on the USA , Europeans and USSR. The Japanese didn't. Unless there is a huge disincentive to pulling out of China why wouldn't a player do this.

Any ideas what the disincentive might be?
 

unmerged(8371)

Private
Mar 23, 2002
13
0
Visit site
Any ideas what the disincentive might be?

A couple of ways that this MIGHT be achieved in the game:

1) 1936 Scenario: At this point in time, I think that the Japanese had already colonized Manchuria & installed a puppet dicatator there, along with establishing some light & medium industry. However, the Japanese weren't actively at war with Mao & Chiang. Depending on how resources are dealt with in the game, HoI could force the Japanese player to have to hold onto Manchuria in order to retain the resources & industry there by 1) making this stuff irreplaceable for the Japanese elsewhere (insufficent iron deposits in the Home Islands to function as an "industrializing country," for example) & 2) the AI playing the two Chinas aggressively, forcing Japan to either attack them first (while they're still weak) or hold them off from taking Manchuria (when they've become organized & stronger)

2) 1939 Scenario: At this point in time, Japan had already been fighting China for a couple of years. It would be pretty simple to just make the AI for the two Chinas very aggressive, as in they won't make peace until the Japanese are pushed off of the mainland.

While this is all speculation (until the game is released!) & I'm probably not even answering your question, I think a good chunk of the fun in playing Japan in this game will be exploring the boundaries in how much/how little you can ignore China before they fatten up & bite you in the ass...
 

AlanC9

Field Marshal
16 Badges
Mar 15, 2001
5.081
320
Visit site
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Semper Fi
  • Magicka 2
Another way to handle the 1936 scenario would be to make the Japanese army so insistent on the attack that making peace with China risks a military coup. While this would essentially force the Japanese player to attempt to conquer China, it's not an unrealistic portrayal of the Japanese government of the time. It depends on who the Japanese player is supposed to represent, I guess.
 
Feb 28, 2001
773
0
Visit site
The dilemma to invade or not invade China might be handled through domestic politics. Thus, if I'm playing Japan, the ruling party faction might have dictated that Japan MUST invade China by June, 1937 (or no later than September, 1938). The reason? To obtain resources to counter western embargoes and to fuel further military expansion. But I would be free to conduct other military operations until that date. . .

What happens if I don't invade China by June, 1937? The ruling party will give me two choices: either invade or be removed.

If I don't invade China, therefore, there is a percentage chance that I will be assassinated. This chance of assassination and/or removal increases each month I do not invade China. (Anybody remember being assassinated in Shadow President for taking some kooky actions like nuking France?) :p

If I don't invade China, and if I am assassinated, then I lose the game. This might help tie the player to real-world historical actions, and simulate the army/navy rivalry at that time. . .

Similar domestic/leader intrusions could be simulated for other countries such as Germany. If you play Germany (as a Field Marshall), your brilliant military plans might be over-ruled by Hitler's personal meddling. This would help to simulate actual historical events. Thus Hitler would have a percentage chance of pushing his own military actions/agenda over your own.

Thus, under threat of removal, you would be forced to carry out Hitler's wishes.

It might be possible for all major countries in the game to have this problem with domestic, political meddling. Every military action you take could be subject to review by your gov't. The game would then number crunch a variety of factors. If the numbers are in your favour, then you get to conduct that military operation.

If the numbers aren't in your favour, then you are over-ruled, and must either formulate a new military plan, or accept the plan offered by your gov't/political leader. . .

I think this sort of thing would create a lot of tension in the game for the player, since he would never know when one of his brilliant and/or risky ventures might be scuttled. . .
 
Last edited:

Aetius

Nitpicker
15 Badges
Jan 11, 2001
9.204
1
Visit site
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Sengoku
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
You could use mission like objectives, the Japanese have to beat the Chinese before 1944 or you lose the game. It would be artificial though. Another would be to have the food supplies Japan needs in China.
The biggest problem is how to force the Japanese to engage the Americans, I sure as hell wouldn't in hindsight.
 

unmerged(6073)

Captain
Oct 14, 2001
340
1
Visit site
It might be possible for all major countries in the game to have this problem with domestic, political meddling. Every military action you take could be subject to review by your gov't. The game would then number crunch a variety of factors. If the numbers are in your favour, then you get to conduct that military operation.

If they do this, it would have to be something you could turn on and off in the options menu. Something like this could get REALLY frustrating, REALLY fast. What's the point of playing Germany, for example, if the virtual Hitler proceeds to lose the war for you every time you play? It's certainly realistic, but it's also unplayable.
 
Feb 28, 2001
773
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Aetius
You could use mission like objectives, the Japanese have to beat the Chinese before 1944 or you lose the game. It would be artificial though. Another would be to have the food supplies Japan needs in China.
The biggest problem is how to force the Japanese to engage the Americans, I sure as hell wouldn't in hindsight.

I woldn't engage the USA either. I'd steer clear of them. This would be fine, providing Hitler doesn't do something stupid and declare war on the US lol :)
 
Feb 28, 2001
773
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Chuikov


If they do this, it would have to be something you could turn on and off in the options menu. Something like this could get REALLY frustrating, REALLY fast. What's the point of playing Germany, for example, if the virtual Hitler proceeds to lose the war for you every time you play? It's certainly realistic, but it's also unplayable.

I thought about that - it being too frustrating. It's an idea I've thrown out there which is subject to modification.

The problem as I see it is, the player has perfect knowledge about what to do or not do in the game (such as avoiding attacking the US if playing as Japan).

Rather than gov't interference, certain objectives (with dates) could be made available for selection (as an option). You have the choice of selecting an objective and achieving a successful outcome by the specified date. Example: as the leader of Germany, you are free to wage war wherever you want. But, you must attack the USSR no later than Sept, 1941 (you are certainly free to attack the USSR at any time BEFORE this date).

Again, these are just some ideas to help stimulate discussion for improving the game and/or forcing the player to face some historical decisions. . .
 

unmerged(485)

Advocatus Sancti Sepulcri
Nov 24, 2000
9.971
0
Since VPs didn't do much to guide players in an historical direction in EU maybe give incentives based on popular support of your government. Certain situations make "missioms" worth popular support points for or against your government. Too little support and your government collapses and you lose.

Suppose the Japanese take Midway and Pearl Harbor. This might mean tremendous popular support for their govt. and a weakening of the U.S. govt. to the point where if the Japanese took L.A. the govt would collapse and the USA would be knocked out of the war.

Might have to be too many of the right circumstances for those mission events to occur though.
 
Feb 28, 2001
773
0
Visit site
One of the big dilemmas, if you are playing Germany or Japan, will be how to get the USA into the war, especially if the Axis players avoid attacking the USA. . .

This might be helped by having an "historical" option, which if checked might see the USA declaring war on the Axis players between Dec 7 and Dec 11, 1941 (if it is not attacked by then).
 

AlanC9

Field Marshal
16 Badges
Mar 15, 2001
5.081
320
Visit site
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Semper Fi
  • Magicka 2
Originally posted by The Federalist
One of the big dilemmas, if you are playing Germany or Japan, will be how to get the USA into the war, especially if the Axis players avoid attacking the USA. . .

This might be helped by having an "historical" option, which if checked might see the USA declaring war on the Axis players between Dec 7 and Dec 11, 1941 (if it is not attacked by then).

Maybe my brain's fried, but I don't understand this at all. Why would someone playing Germany want the USA in the war. And if he did, why not just declare war?

Back to the bigger point: there is a problem with modelling an event like WW2. The more the simulation accurately models the war, the less the simulation will model the experience of leading that war. All participants in the war had beliefs which were proven incorrect. We might as well just let the human do whatever he wants, and have the AI typically follow the historical options - with a small chance of picking a better path.

The alternative is a freewheeling game where all these factors are randomized. Maybe mobile warfare simply doesn't work. Maybe terror bombing does work. Maybe US morale will collapse if struck a sharp blow. Maybe German morale will collapse if Hitler cuts civiian production. This would simulate the experience of command; it would not simulate the actual war, of course.
 
Feb 28, 2001
773
0
Visit site
Originally posted by AlanC9


Maybe my brain's fried, but I don't understand this at all. Why would someone playing Germany want the USA in the war. And if he did, why not just declare war?

That's just the idea I was getting at: since any player playing the Axis would not want the USA in the war, then the BIG question is: How does the game eventualy bring the USA into the war.

What I mean is, the human player knows that the USA is not degenerate (as Hitler assumed), and the USA will fight to re-take all captured land (something the Japanese assumed would not happen). Therefore, the human would not attack the USA. If the USA doesn't enter the war, won't this provide unbalanced results for the Axis player?

So I am wondering if there will be historical options, which if checked, would provide for some historical events that would help balance out the game. . .

Or failing this, can anyone think of any plausible events that would allow the USA to enter the war, even though the Axis powers don't directly attack it?
 

unmerged(8733)

Recruit
Apr 14, 2002
2
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Aetius
What might be a bigger problem:
what will prevent the US invading South America and Mexico and what will prevent the Soviet from attacking the weak states to the south of them? They could just take out China and Persia in 1936... Even a thrid class army would do for that.

We Actually did this in a role playing thread of WWII, and i dont think that the U.S would invade unless Germany tried to sabotage the U.S using agents and Mexicans.....which is what the German Player tried to do in the role playing thread....I know that has no relevance here, but the AI could be programmed to do such things as Covert operations such as this...the German players actions were partly based on history also, of the Germans using Mexico as a base for there agents to try and cross the U.S border and sabotage key industries....and infrastructure.

Also about the U.S invading South America, well certainly these actions could lead to a U.S invasion and the U.S could use that as a pretext to invade.
But what i did was to actually counter by offering the Mexicans farm machinery to grow there cash crops.....and also develop there road and rail links.....then buy the crops in exchange for building the roads and rairoads, thus the U.S being a democratic nation would be more likely to buy off its neighbours rather than go to war with them,though that option should remain with the A.I though.

But more likely the U.S would develop infrastructure to move its military faster to such regions as the Panama canal, and also exploit these nations for there raw materials to feed the U.S war machine.

As for the Soviets.....well i dont know what they would do, since the Chinese are communists it is unlikely that they would invade unless they felt there identity as a communist nation would be threatened by Japanese aggression.... or that the non communist forces were becoming too powerful, but this would lead to hostilities with the U.S and also weaken the Russian front against Germany, while making the Asian front look more secure.
But also the Soviets would be like Germany fighting a two front war so there is the possibility of that option, and also that the U.S might also impose sanctions against Soviet Agression.

Thus the whole war could be changed by that one action of the Soviet Union, and could have infact prolonged the war, that is an option also that could be programmed in.....

So hope those variables discussed helps out.....

As in the WW II role playing i turned the whole of the Southern American region and also Canada into one Giant Breadbasket for the U.S war machine.....and also began to develop industry in these nations also to ease the U.S burden and utilise the workforces of these nations to produce food, while the U.S concentrated on arms, and then also slowly introduced arms production plants into these nations after they were trained in U.S factories, thus the U.S was actually producing more than what it did in WW II using the above methods.....some food for thought there!

Also with the U.S looking after Canada that eased the Burden on Britain considerably as the U.S could arm Canadian troops......

Maybe all these suggestions and variables could be used by the programmers....
 

unmerged(8733)

Recruit
Apr 14, 2002
2
0
Visit site
Originally posted by The Federalist


Or failing this, can anyone think of any plausible events that would allow the USA to enter the war, even though the Axis powers don't directly attack it?

German agents sabotaging the U.S industries and railinks as there were agents actually sent to the U.S to carry out these goals in WWII, but they were caught by the FBI.

Or as i stated above the U.S tries and turns Mexican opinion against the U.S, and recruits agents to sabotage U.S infrastructure, by using Mexicans that supposedly want to work, but instead are there to Sabotage.....They get found out by FBI agents, or Mexican Government is loyal to U.S and captures German agents....

Thus thouh that is not a direct attack, would be enough to get a nation to go to war one would think the attempted sabotage of Key Industry by foreign nationals.....