Fixing the Japanese vehicle stats

[Flayer]

I'm very pleased to finally have some Japanese units to play around with in Panzer Corps after the 1946 DLC. However, after running a couple of test games, the specs for their vehicles (I haven't looked too closely into the aircraft situation yet) are, forgive me for saying this, a bit of a mess. I'm well aware that the balance between units in Panzer Corps is more about feel and gameplay than a strict simulation of exact historical design characteristics. However, even by that standard, the feel for many of these units is just off. So I've made a list of all those units, what I think is wrong with them, and my suggestions on how to on how to rebalance them. For each entry, I've included the key stats as they are at present, followed by my analysis.

TANKS

Type 94 Te-Ke
Speed: 5
Initiative: 4
Soft Attack: 8
Hard Attack: 5
Defense: 8

Problems: None. The Type 94 is a stat clone of the Italian L3/33 tankette. Both weigh in around 3 tons, have about 12mm of armor, a top speed of around 40 km/h, and an armament of a single 6.5mm MG. Having the same stats in the game is justified.

Suggestions: Leave as it is.

Type 95 Ha-Go
Speed: 4
Initiative: 7
Soft Attack: 12
Hard Attack: 13
Defense: 12

Problems: Far too slow! To my eye, it looks like the Type 95 and the Type 89 had their stat cards swapped on accident - the Type 95 is slower and better armored, while the Type 89 is faster but more lightly protected. In reality, it should be the reverse. The Ha-Go has a top speed of 45 km/h and armor of 12mm thickness, while the I-Go can only do 26 km/h but has 17mm of armor. In terms of armament, the Ha-Go looks all right. Initiative of 7 is the same as the M3 Stuart or the Panzer 38(t), both of which are armed with 37mm guns like the Ha-Go. The M3 and the Pz38 have identical soft attack values of 12, but hard attack of 14, one higher than the Type 95. I believe this is justified, as the Ha-Go's gun was shorter (L/37) than either of theirs (L/53 on a Stuart or L/48 on the Czech tank). In terms of speed, the Ha-Go is on the borderline between tanks ranked at 5 and 6. I would err in the higher direction to give it a distinguishing feature from Japan's medium tanks, which should be lowered to 5.

Suggestions: Raise speed to 6, lower ground defense to 10. Leave attack and initiative the same.

Type 89 I-Go
Speed: 6
Initiative: 6
Soft Attack: 12
Hard Attack: 12
Defense: 10

Problems: As stated already, it's far too fast. It should also be slightly better protected than the Type 95. There's another problem which hasn't been addressed yet - the soft attack value. Both the Type 89 and its successor the Type 97 used very short, low velocity 57mm guns as their main weapons. No tank in any other nation's arsenal is fitted with anything quite like it. Compared with the 37mm weapon on the Ha-Go, this 57mm packs a larger high-explosive punch against infantry, but its performance against armor is no better (and if anything, even slightly lower because of its very low muzzle velocity). The hard attack value in the game looks fine - 12 is one point worse than the Ha-Go's 13. But the soft attack value is too low - it's also 12, which is identical to the Ha-Go. The British Crusader III and Churchill IV are both armed with 57mm 6-pounder guns and have soft attack of 13, so the I-Go should at minimum be at least on par with them. Given the Japanese gun's slant towards infantry support, while the British 6-pounder originated as an anti-tank gun, I would even feel comfortable giving the I-Go one or two points more than that.

Suggestions: Lower speed to 4. Raise defense to 11. Raise soft attack to 14. Leave initiative and hard attack unchanged.

Type 97 Chi-Ha
Speed: 6
Initiative: 7
Soft Attack: 12
Hard Attack: 13
Defense: 12

Problems: Same armament issue as discussed with the Type 89. It's also too fast. The Japanese tanks from here on down are all speedsters with a movement of 6. This is not justified by their actual performance. The Chi-Ha had a top speed of around 38 km/h, which is merely average, so it should be bumped down to 5. The Chi-Ha, with frontal armor of up to 27mm, is still very lightly armored by the standards of other nations, but notably more than the I-Go or the Ha-Go. If those two are adjusted to 11 and 10 respectively, then leaving the Chi-Ha at 12 may be fine (same as a Pz38 with 30mm frontal armor). It could also be justified at 13, same as an M2A4 light tank (with 25mm armor). The Chi-Ha used a new (and very slightly longer) model of the 57mm main gun from the I-Go, though the difference in performance was marginal. I believe it should have the same hard attack value (armor penetration was unchanged) but 1 extra point in soft attack instead (along with the extra point in initiative it already has).

Suggestions: Lower speed to 5. Raise defense to 13. Lower hard attack to 12. Raise soft attack to 15. Leave initiative unchanged.

Type 97 Chi-Ha II / ShinHoTo
Speed: 6
Initiative: 7
Soft Attack: 12
Hard Attack: 16
Defense: 16

Problems: I'm calling this the Chi-Ha II to avoid the cumbersome name. The Chi-Ha II was upgunned with a 47mm L/48 anti-tank cannon, with less volume for HE but a very improved performance against armor due to its high muzzle velocity. A comparable weapon is the 47mm L/40 which equipped the Italian M15/42. The Italian tank is modelled with initiative 7, soft attack 12, hard attack 18, and defense 16. The Chi-Ha II's attack stats actually look okay (if anything, the M15/42 could stand to lose a point or two in hard attack, the base model M4 Sherman with its 75mm gun only has 17). However, the armor value is too high - a whole 4 points higher than the basic Chi-Ha, when there was no upgrade at all to its protection, only the armament. The Type 1 Chi-He, which is not modeled in the game currently, should fill the gap between the Chi-Ha II and the Chi-Nu, with the same armament as the upgunned Chi-Ha, but additional armor protection.

Suggestions: Lower speed to 5. Lower defense to 13 (same as the basic Chi-Ha). Leave attack and initiative unchanged.

Type 3 Chi-Nu
Speed: 6
Initiative: 6
Soft Attack: 11
Hard Attack: 10
Defense: 14

Problems: This one is an absolute mess. It's presented as a downgrade from the Chi-Ha II in terms of armor protection and initiative, with lower attack stats as well (offset by a Rapid Fire 1.5x trait). None of this is correct. The Chi-Nu's 75mm L/38 had nearly double the armor penetration ability of the Chi-Ha's 47mm L/48, while incorporating frontal armor of up to 50mm - double the thickness of a Chi-Ha's plating. The Chi-Nu's 75mm cannon should be comparable to (if slightly weaker than) that of the base model Shermans. With the 57mm Chi-Ha re-statted to soft attack of 15, the Italian P26/40 with a 75mm L/34 gun at 16, and the basic M4 Sherman at 20, the Chi-Nu would fit comfortably with a soft attack of 18. A hard attack of 18 would place it on par with the P26/40 and the 75mm M4A3, and an appreciable 2 points above the 47mm Chi-Ha. Finally, in terms of armor, the Chi-Nu was an improvement upon its predecessor the Chi-Ha, but still over 10 tons lighter and much less protected than a Sherman. Defense value of 16 (which the Chi-Ha II currently, and unjustifiably has) places it on par with the M15/42 but below the 18 of the basic Sherman.

Suggestions: Lower speed to 5. Raise initiative to 8. Raise soft and hard attack to 18. Raise defense to 16. Remove Rapid Fire 1.5x trait.

Type 4 Chi-To
Speed: 6
Initiative: 7
Soft Attack: 12
Hard Attack: 16
Defense: 17

Problems: Same stats as a Chi-Ha II, with one extra point in defense. This is wrong, wrong, wrong. The Chi-To, weighing in over 30 tons, is comparable to the Sherman in size, and almost twice the weight of any tank in the Chi-Ha family. The Chi-To's armor was thicker than the Chi-Nu's (up to 75mm) and it was upgunned with a more powerful 75mm L/56 main weapon. The Chi-To should have armor around the level of a Sherman, with attack values closer to those of the Sherman's 76mm variants.

Suggestions: Reduce speed to 5. Raise initiative to 9. Raise soft attack to 20 and hard attack to 22. Raise defense to 18.

Type 5 Chi-Ri
Speed: 6
Initiative: 9
Soft Attack: 22
Hard Attack: 26
Defense: 25

Problems: The Chi-Ri was a little strange. Larger and heavier than the Chi-To, at over 37 tons, it nonetheless was to be equipped with the same main gun, and armor around the same thickness. Its 75mm cannon however was equipped with an automatic loading system, and it also featured a hull-mounted 37mm cannon. Between those two features, I believe that Rapid Fire 1.5x would actually be warranted on the Chi-Ri, which it currently lacks. The downside is that the tank's hard attack and defense values are too high and ought to be lowered. The addition of the 37mm could justify an extra 2 points of soft attack and 1 point of hard attack over the revised Chi-To, while a defense of 20 (same as a Panzer IVH) would give it 2 points over a Chi-To for being larger and bulkier, but not actually having thicker plating.

Suggestions: Reduce speed to 5. Reduce hard attack to 23. Reduce defense to 20. Add the Rapid Fire 1.5x trait. Leave initiative and soft attack unchanged.

ANTI-TANK

Type 1 Ho-Ni I
Speed: 5
Initiative: 10
Soft Attack: 2
Hard Attack: 16
Defense: 12

Problems: Not too many. The Ho-Ni tank destroyer's closest analog is the Italian M42 da 75/34, with a similar weight of around 15 tons and a main armament close to the Ho-Ni's 75mm L/38, which it shares with the Chi-Nu. The speed on this vehicle is actually correct for once, and the defense stat is about right (one point lower than my proposal for the Chi-Ha on which its based, justified by the fact that the Ho-Ni is an open-topped vehicle). The gun actually looks a little on the weak side, though. The Italian semovente has 3 points of soft attack and 20 points of hard attack, and my proposal for the Chi-Nu raised its hard attack to 18, which the Ho-Ni should be bumped up in order to match.

Suggestions: Raise soft attack to 3. Raise hard attack to 18. Leave the rest unchanged.

Type 3 Ho-Ni III
Speed: 5
Initiative: 10
Soft Attack: 2
Hard Attack: 18
Defense: 14

Problems: The Ho-Ni III featured an identical main armament to the Ho-Ni I. It was just better protected by including an enclosed roof. The Ho-Ni III has an attack bump over the Ho-Ni I at the moment; that will be eliminated by bumping the Ho-Ni I up to match. At 14, the Ho-Ni III's defense will actually be higher than my proposed 13 for the Chi-Ha and should be lowered accordingly. The roof should also provide a couple extra points worth of air defense.

Suggestions: Raise soft attack to 3. Lower dense to 13. Leave the rest unchanged.

ARTILLERY

Type 2 Ho-I
Speed: 6
Range: 1
Initiative: 4
Soft Attack: 16
Hard Attack: 11
Defense: 10

Problems: The closest analog to the Ho-I is the American M8 Scott; both weigh in around 16 tons and feature a similar main armament (a 75mm L/19 howitzer on the Ho-I and a 75mm L/16 for the Scott). The M8 has a speed of 6, range of 1, initiative 4, soft attack of 12, hard attack of 8, and a defense of 16. The Ho-I is also comparable to the German StuG IIIB, with 75mm L/24 main gun (speed 5, range 1, initiative 4, soft attack 12, hard attack 8, defense 16). Comparing the three, the Ho-I's gun seems overpowered, while its defense rating is too low (it had frontal armor of up to 50mm like the Chi-Nu, comparable in thickness to both the StuG and the M8). Its top speed of 44km/h was much closer to that of the StuG (40km/h) than the Scott (56 km/h).

Suggestions: Reduce speed to 5. Reduce soft attack to 15 (same as proposed for the Chi-Ha) and hard attack to 8. Raise defense to 15. Leave the rest unchanged.

Type 4 Ho-Ro
Speed: 5
Range: 1
Initiative: 4
Soft Attack: 18
Hard Attack: 14
Defense: 11

Problems: The Ho-Ro's closest counterpart is Germany's Grille self-propelled gun, which is rated at speed 4, range 2, initiative 4, soft attack 17, hard attack 8, defense 16. Both carry a very similar 149mm L/11 infantry gun. The Ho-Ro is a hair faster at 38 km/h to 35 km/h, weighs more (16.3 tons as opposed to 11.5), and has a bit more more armor (up to 25mm vs up to 15mm). In game, its implemented as an assault gun like the StuG instead of an SPG, just a slower but better statted version of the Ho-I. It should have a distinct role as a range 2 artillery piece with more firepower but less protection than the Ho-I.

Suggestions: Reduce hard attack to 8. Increase range to 2. Leave the rest unchanged.

ANTI-AIR

Type 98 AA Truck
Speed: 8
Range: 2
Initiative: 14
Soft Attack: 8
Hard Attack: 7
Air Attack: 1
Defense: 4

Problems: This vehicle's stats are completely busted. Even when its in anti-aircraft mode, it only has 1 point of air attack, making it completely useless in its intended role. Make no mistake, this should be a very weak unit, but not this weak. The closest counterpart in the game is the Italian CMP Ford anti-aircraft unit, which similarly consists of a 20mm anti-aircraft cannon bolted onto the bed of a utility truck. The CMP's stats are speed 8, range 2, initiative 14, soft attack 4, hard attack 8, air attack 6, defense 6.

Suggestions: Raise air attack to 6, lower soft attack to 4.

RECON

Type 92 Tankette
Speed: 8
Initiative: 5
Soft Attack: 8
Hard Attack: 7
Defense: 15

Problems: Much too fast and too well-armored. The Type 92's closest analog is the Soviet T-38 tankette. Both weigh in around 3.5 tons and have a top speed of 40 km/h with similar levels of armor protection (or rather, lack thereof). The biggest difference is that the Type 92 has a better main weapon, with a .50 caliber machine gun versus the .30 caliber on the T-38. The T-38's stats are speed 5, initiative 6, soft attack 11, hard attack 7, defense 10. The T-38's attack stats are probably overrated slightly.

Suggestions: Reduce speed to 5. Raise soft attack to 9. Lower defense to 9.

Type 91 So-Mo
Speed: 8
Initiative: 5
Soft Attack: 12
Hard Attack: 12
Defense: 10

Problems: Too fast, too well-armed. The Type 91 was underpowered for its relatively heavy size (7.7 tons) and had a maximum speed on roads of only 40 km/h. Armament consisted of a single mounted light machine gun, along with rifle ports for crewmen to fire small arms from. A fairly unique feature of the So-Mo was its ability to run on rails, where it could reach speeds about 20 km/h faster. Coding a switch mode that allows it to become a rail vehicle with additional movement points when its on an appropriate tile would be cool, if it can be done.

Suggestions: Reduce speed to 6. Reduce soft attack to 7 and hard attack to 5 (on par with the machine gun armed SdKfz 221). Add a rail switch mode which allows it to reach a speed of 8 when it's on tracks.

Type 93 Kokusan
Speed: 8
Initiative: 6
Soft Attack: 12
Hard Attack: 12
Defense: 10

Problems: The Type 93 was smaller and lighter than the So-Mo, weighing in about 4.5 tons, and capable of reaching an 80km/h speed. It was also better armed, mounting one 7.7mm machine gun and four 6.5mm weapons. Armor protection was thinner, up to 11mm versus up to 16mm on the Sumida. Its armament still consists entirely of light machine guns, so it should be no better in hard attack, but it should have an edge in soft attack, and perhaps Rapid Fire x2 instead of x1.5

Suggestions: Lower soft attack to 11 and hard attack to 5. Lower defense to 9.



There are also plenty more Japanese units that have yet to be added, but those will be the subject of a future post.

[bebro]

That's a very good summary, thank you. I agree with you mostly, found also some stats for aircraft I wondered about.

However, I don't know if there are any plans to change those fundamentally as long there's no Pacific content.