Anyone interested in some intellectual exercise?

Updated positions for exercise (as of 04FEB2012 am)

General Moderator:

Supreme Council of Japan
Prime Minister/Council moderator: Belasar (Belasar)
Secretary to Prime Minister, Supreme Japanese Council: Colonel Bobimoto (USMCPrice)

Chief of Staff, IJA:
-Commander, Japanese Forces, China: General Toshizō Nishio (Ulrich-Gebirgsjaeger)

Chief of Naval Operations, IJN: Fleet Admiral Rikanaga (rkline56)
-Commander 1st Fleet: Admiral Karonada (Carronade)
-Commander Pacific Ocean Areas/Commander 2d Fleet: Admiral Michizane (Mikebatzel)
-Commander Home Fleet: Fleet Admiral Rikanaga (rkline56)

Secretary of State, Empire of Japan:
-Ambassador to the United States:
-Ambassador to Great Britain and the European Powers:
-Ambassador to Australia:

Minister of the Economy and Industry:


Intelligence Chief, Armed Forces Japan: Colonel Bobimoto (USMCPrice) ​

 

I see you have learned our slang, Ulrich-san. No schmoozing indeed.

 

Thank you Admiral Rikanaga, Sir! I do my very best.

 

Good ideas for the Navy. Remind us of these if we forget. Want to maintain good defensive picket lines and anti-submarine screens for commerce from which we can exploit offensive opportunities in China, S.E. Asia and Indonesia. IJN will definitely need improved tactics to gain the Emperor's glorious victory. From my standpoint I see no call to hire ninja assassins now or in the future. We sink or swim together.

 

Don't worry, I'll Nag, Nag, Nag!

 

In reply to your PM, General Toshizō Nishio, here is some information to help you with your planning.

OK, Japanese tanks were light and relatively lightly armed compared to tanks in the European/Eastern Front theaters. However, if you look at the early war in those theaters, they really are comparable to the PZ-I's, PZ-II's, PZ-III's, (Czech designed) PZ-38t, Soviet T-26, T-28, and BT-7. This is partly due to their need to be light to be transported by ship. The US itself had relied on the M3 Stuart early in the war until specialized ships and newer versions of landing craft were developed to handle the larger M4 medium tank. The Japanese tank designs evolved much more slowly than in the western theaters because tank warfare wasn't as important. Some of Japan's later designs such as the Type 3 Chi-Nu or Type 4 Chi-To, would have provided decent medium tanks but they were retained in Japan for defense of the Home Islands and never saw combat. For your purposes, against the Chinese the types available should prove entirely adequate, as they should against British, Netherlands and US types early war. I do think we should attempt to develop more capable types to meet the Soviet threat and to face the M-4 Sherman if/when the US enters the war. Steel shortages, historically, hindered Japanese tank development, most of the available steel going to the Navy and aircraft production. Maybe we can sufficiently increase our steel production capabilities or look at naval/aircraft types that can help us conserve steel.

Japanese tank info:
Japanese tanks of World War II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for anti-tank weapons the Type I 47mm was a potent little gun, while less effective against the M4 Sherman, it was still the major killer of Sherman tanks. Have you seen the M4's used at Iwo Jima with the wood plank and concrete applique armor? The little 47mm still punched holes through this plus the underlying Sherman armor.
Type 1 47 mm Anti-Tank Gun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How about this for base AA defense and anti-tank usage in fixed positions?
Type 99 88 mm AA Gun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How about this for anti-tank usage:
Type 90 75 mm Field Gun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How about this, it had good performance as an AA gun it became less effective in that role as the war progressed. Why not adapt it for the Type 90 carriage and reuse it in the AT role? You can do it in the game and recycling types that are losing their effectiveness in one role but retaining it in another, would save resources and production capacity.
Type 88 75 mm AA Gun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Japanese Army at the end of 1941 was highly proficient and gained the reputation of being supermen in their early encounters with western forces. High casualties in the IJA units in China had led to some decrease in their efficiency. As the war went on, the empire expanded and demand for manpower increased, army capability declined. The navy, the army and industry all needed more people and that drained the manpower pool. You could counter-act this to a degree if you can arrange to rotate your troops from the forward areas and give them additional training time. We also need to think outside the box. The peoples of Indo-China, Thailand and Korea had a long standing annimosity towards the Chinese because of invasions/conflicts over the centuries. Why not recruit and train divisions of these non-native Japanese and employ them in China? The Japanese like the Germans, considered themselves a master race. If we could overcome that predjudice and our commanders treated the local peoples with a greater degree of acceptance, maybe we could do something along those lines. (Japan did use large numbers of Koreans as service troops)

We can also change the TOE of our units. To keep it realistic I'd suggest we edit in a new TOE if so desired and upgrade units to the new TOE when they can be withdrawn to a rear area and the requisite weapons become available. Remember though we are petroleum poor. We need to keep the logistical load as small as possible, at least initially. One way you might accomplish this is to design your TOE for a light force, also create independant battalions of tanks, heavy AT guns, etc. that require more logistical support. In normal use the unit would operate in the light configuration, if their mission required the additional assets you could attach them as needed. The Japanese frequently copied the designs of weapons from other countries for use by their armed forces. Why not copy the British carrier as a prime mover for your artillery and AT guns? It's small, lightweight, reliable and would have a lesser fuel requirement than larger, heavier vehicles. The Japanes copied the US M2 Browning .50 cal HMG but did it in a 20mm version. Why not copy it exactly and use it as a HMG, AA weapon, and as the main armament in our aircraft. The standard 7.7mm mg used in the aircraft had trouble dealing with the more sturdily built, heavier armored US aircraft types. Lots we can do, we just have to decide what would get us the most bang for our buck.

 

Japanese setbacks and heavy losses in Shannxi, Guangxi and Changsa in 1939 should have indicated to the high command that taking on the U.S., Britain, etc. might be a little bit of a reach in 1941? Better for the IJ Armed Forces to figure out how to control the Chinese mainland and the South China Sea or a great deal of it and exploit the resources which they had to offer - including all the western aid currency that was flooding the economy. Graft levels in China, historically rampant to begin with, skyrocketed to unprecedented heights. Nationalist troops were notorious for abandoning their Allied equipment during battles with the IJA and the Communists.This irritated Stilwell enormously.

In a nation where graft had made the world go around forever the new level of corruption was no easy achievement.

So, it makes me wonder what was in the Japanese Council's kool aid. They easily bit off more than they could chew, taking on the industrial might of the Allies. I was always told, "Let sleeping dogs lie."

 

I meant the British representative. I'd try to represent Churchill, but I'm not sure if my liver would hold up....

Hi Gebirgsjaeger, I've got a fair amount of info on the 25th Army operations (Malaya/Singapore), I made a forces diagram for the Southern Area Army group.
The Japanese used about 12 divisions for the assault against the US/UK/Thailand & Dutch, with another 3 or 4 garrision divisions to secure captured territory


View attachment 15740

 

Hi freebird,

many thanks for the list. I´ll use it too. I collected a lot of information yesterday on available tanks, artillery, aircraft and some info on the strength of my Divisions. Sadly is no informations to the garrisons of the Chinese Army, where exactly which unit was stationed or where they had their stocks for ammo and so on. For the plan that i have, i need some information about those things. If i sometime need some ships for a Invasion, i hope that i can count on our glorious Admiral Rikanaga.

Honourable Bobimoto-san, who is responsible for our Airforce? I´ll need some air support too. And thank you for your informations!

With deepest respects

General Toshizō Nishio

 

I think you will be General Nishio. Both the Army and Navy ran their own air arms.

I picked up this game over the weekend and toyed around with it. Need to get a better understanding of how it works but just looking at units and the map gave me a much better idea of whats going on.

 

Thank you Admiral Michizane!

Thought they had a similar structure like the Wehrmacht, but this is much better for me.

Would be great to see the exactly starting point of the game to set up the moves accurate for the game.

 

So Mike, am I to understand that you sprung for War in the Pacific:Admiral's Edition? $90. bucks ain't cheap for a game but I don't think you'll be disappointed.

 

Pretty good link. I am sure some of you have seen it. What do you think of the accuracy?

The Imperial Japanese Navy Page | Nihon Kaigun
SENSUIKAN! Stories and Battle Histories of the IJN's Submarines | Nihon Kaigun
Kido Butai! Operational Histories of Japanese Carriers | Nihon Kaigun
http://www.combinedfleet.com/senkan.htm

View attachment 15742

 

Someone please tell me thats the Prime Minister's Yacht!

Let me do some math here, Honorable Bobimoto talked his son, friend and Adml. Michizane to drop $90.00 on a video game. Is there a spiff for Honorable Bobimoto here somewhere?

 

Admiral Rikanaga, I have seen the site and I enjoyed it and have read much of the information contained there.

As for the Honorable Prime Minister's comment, I've already accomplished one of my original goals, and sparked some more interest in the theater and people interested in giving it the "what if" type thinking Germany seems to always inspire. I admit, before I bought the game I went back and forth with myself before actually buying it. My son got hooked playing mine and his friend got hooked on listening to him talk about his. I never dreamed that one of the people here (Mike), that I was discussing the exercise with would buy the game. I think he will be pleased with the purchase, except it will place a strain upon his available free time . When I first decided to use the editor and realized just how much historical data they'd researched and compiled, I actually thought the price was very reasonable. The vast majority of the time I've played as the US. From that perspective I've often thought, "man we're lucky Japan didn't do this or we'd have really been screwed". Even simple operations are much more complex than in other theaters, because of the time and distances involved with Pacific Operations. As good as the AI is, there are some areas that it can't really replicate. As good as many of the "what if Germany/Japan" had done this discussions, on this forum are, in the end it comes down to opinion. Nothing is ever really validated or invalidated. Here I'd like to explore the ideas and let the game validate the concepts, our human component will minimize AI weaknesses and the game will minimize the effect of opinion.

One change I would like to discuss, for participants approval, is to move the scenario start date to October 1941 from the originally suggested 30 November date. We'll still kick off the computer game and military operations on 30 November, as originally planned, but will use the extra 30 days for diplomatic maneuvering and deciding which military operations to undertake based upon how the diplomatic situation shakes out. We'll also use it for Council discussions to determine needs, weapons systems we'll produce and organizational changes we'd like to make. Let me know if you approve or disapprove the change.

P.S. Honorable Belasar-san, your cut of the commission is in the mail.

 

No Honorable Belsar-san, Bobimoto did not talk me into it, but his discriptions and this conversation alone was enough to warrent looking at it in my mind. I'm a real softy when it come to strategy games, and this was right down my alley, though I bought the $80 direct download version over the $100 disk version. I've actually had some pretty comical screw-ups already, like invading Attu with 10,000 troops and having my transports drop off only 200 support personel and flee with the rest of the division still aboard.

Im good with the date change, and wanted to ask about a few things. It seems to take a couple days to load Fleet Oilers and such and was wondering if we would have time to load said types of ships to support attacks on Dec. 7or if they are already loaded. The date change gives more time to prepare such things as well as any re-deployments that might be needed.

 

I´m good with the date and have some questions on my Armies at China and the given weapons and equipment. Is there a limit on the types of anything or is anything usable which was developed by the Japanes to this time? If you have a list Bobimoto, it would be greatly appreciated to have it. Next question is, is only the fuel situation limited or are other things short too?

 

We'll still kick off the computer game and military operations on 30 November

Does that still mean that we kick off the game with my carriers and several of Michizane-san's oilers in the middle of the North Pacific? If the system permits, I suggest we back it off at least before Nov 26 - Kido Butai sortie from Hitokappu - or time enough to make any changes anyone else wants.

 

Carronade wrote:

Good questions, Admirals. What I had in mind was to start the thread sometime in late October, 1941, and describe the situation as it existed. We, will allow our, real live people to attempt to negotiate some type of acceptable (to us) compromise to delay war. If we do delay war we will need to still concentrate in moving forces, building/developing weapons, infrastructure and prosecute war in the areas we are already engaged. We will decide in Council, which targets we will attack, using which assets are available in the event the diplomatic negotiations fail. Admiral Michizane, it depends upon our plans. If it is determined in sufficient time that the tankers will be loaded and at such and such a location, I will edit the game to make it so. If we decide on the 29th of November that we need a tanker loaded we'll do it in game time. I think that will be most realistic. Your input on how we should handle this, would be appreciated.
Admiral Karonada, if we as a War Council decide we are going to carry out the historic attack, your ships will be where they were historically. If we decide on some other course of action, we will edit fleet composition, location and target to be attacked into the scenario and that's where you'll start.
Our date of commencing any attacks can be from 30 November 1941 onward. We are not obliged to attach on December 7th, we can do it sooner, later or not at all. Our decision.
It's my understanding from the Honorable Prime Minister, that once we begin it will be in a seperate thread under the Alternate History Area. We should do all discussions there in character. We can continue to use this thread for housekeeping and tweaks. The earlier date will allow for our diplomats to negotiate with those of other powers, we will be able to push our own strategic visions, listen to those of other participants, arrive at courses of action, discuss allocation of assets to each of our objectives, discuss what weapons systems we might want to develop, etc. I'll start inputting orders into the game for the 30 November start date. If a unit located in Tokyo Bay is needed in Truk, I'll put it there, either by actually sailing it there or editing it there, whichever is appropriate. If we decide on developing some weapon that wasn't historically researched, I'll edit it into the development tree, Example: The development of the German medium tank was PZIII ausf. A to N, you would need to develop the B before C etc. The III branches off to the IV which develops (in parralell) from ausf. A to J and each improvement needs to be developed. At some point in time medium tank development branched off again into the Panther and it developed through it's different versions. This would be the historical development path and you could redirect development along any or all paths depending upon the resources devoted to each path. You could reduce resources devoted to the PZIII at the E level and redirect them to PZIV development (being researched in parrallel) and get it to progress more quickly through it's development levels, but at the cost of the PZIII's next model becoming available later. If you decided that you'd like to put a diesel engine in your PZ IV, you'd need to research that engine, once it became available you could put it in your tank. You'd edit in a seperate data tree we'll call it the PZIV(d). I'd input the data for each version of the PZIV ausf. A(d) to J(d). You can't use these types until the engine is developed and available, but once it is, it can be put into any version of the PZIV up through the currently most advanced. So if you're on the F model when the engine is developed you can mount it in any PZIV tank ausf. A through F and any newer model once they are developed. So when the ausf. G becomes available you have the option of the PZIV ausf. G or the PZIV ausf. G(d)

This is one of the reasons I've asked about weapons types you'd be interested in. We can follow the historical development trees, and progress faster, slower or at the same rate, as happened historically. These weapons include any type Japan used or developed in WWII. If we want to develop something not historically available, I need to know what it is so we can edit it into the development trees.

General Nishio, I haven't forgotten you. I still haven't figured out how to get the spreadsheet to work properly. Once I do I will get you your data. If I don't figure it out in the next couple days I will gather the data manually and type it up in a useable format and get it to you. In the meantime, I think you've learned much about the historical situation Japan faced. Now, I'd like you to concentrate on what assets you'd like, including weapons types, so I can see what we have and what we'd need to edit in.


Your Honorable Servant,

Colonel Bobimoto

 

Freebird,
I am interested in having you represent Britain and the Netherlands for diplomatic negotiating purposes. We might also ask you to represent Australia until such a time as they may choose to pursue a different diplomatic course from Britain. We're still looking at how to handle diplomatic negotiations, to keep them private from one another and to keep the internal discussions within the Japanese War Council hidden from opposing diplomats.