British India... or Japanese India

[BiteNibbleChomp]

I'm now about to start the last mission of Afrikakorps (screw you Gazala, Basra and Arabia ), and have just noticed that Rangoon was on the map, as well as most of Burma and Eastern India (this is alright as it is called 'India').

However, Burma and India as far as Imphal was occupied by Japan at the time the scenario takes place (mid '44), so how can the flags have become British? Japan had a fairly strong grip on that area at the time (actually it was in the U-Go offensive), so how would the British have pushed them out. And this is a weakened Britain that lost Suez 2 years ago and has lost so many Cromwells that it must be out of steel entirely! If anything, Japan's offensive would have been more successful, perhaps reaching the Ganges.

So, where did the forces to reclaim all of that land and fight Germany at the same time come from? Or, why wasn't the map cropped to not include the Jap regions? (or even better, add Japan to the scenario and cut it in half!)

- BNC

[ThvN]

Ah, Gazala, fun times . But seriously, I have no idea, although I've always wondered why this scenario is set to start on June the 6th of 1944... The ahistorical scenario branch is fun though, but just as realistic as invading the USA. But still, to come up with some vague explanation, just because I'm bored and waiting to pick up my car (I just got a call it will take a few more hours), STORY TIME!

I'm guessing the focus of the Allied shifted after the German push into the ME. The MTO/ME was never more than a secondary theater for Germany and the Allied, and 'Europe first' was still in effect. SEA/CBI (Burma theatre) was also of secondary importance compared to the PTO, so perhaps the advance of the Axis into the ME made the Allies shift their focus and decided that this essentially second/third-rate theater became the primary one. For the Germans to get that far, the Soviet Union must have been weakened enormously (see Persia, and did you play Caucasus? Now that is fun ).

In this situation, there's no chance of any European invasion, the USA decides to increase PTO activity instead, and the UK focuses on stabilizing the ME/CBI/SEA, logically by reinforcing India Command (?) and making them the foremost UK force. So that would mean that instead of Hurricanes and a few Lee/Grant tanks (still in use there in 1945!) all the efforts would be directed there. The Japanese wouldn't have had a stronger presence there locally, as the Burma theater was mostly an IJA (army) affair and their needs were always a distant second to the IJN (navy), which was busy being paranoid and preparing for the big decisive sea battle that never came. I've always wondered if these services were actually on the same team sometimes...

So... This would make the UK/USA war effort in the SEA/CBI and PTO much stronger, so the Japanese could have been driven out very swiftly? Handwaving around such trivialities as logistics/politics of course...

[BiteNibbleChomp]

(see Persia, and did you play Caucasus? Now that is fun ).

No, Didn't play Caucasus due to not having any 3* infantry. the good part of my core is one 5* bomber, one 5* Flamm and about 5 3-4* Tigers.

- BNC

[captainjack]

Getting control of Caucasus and Middle Eastern oil would have been a huge boost to Germany.
I don't know how bad the loss of the Lend Lease convoys would have been to Russia, but control of Persia (as it was then) would have added yet more oil resources, as well as extending the threat to Russia from the south. The combined effect of tying up troops, reduced lend lease supplies and oil and facing better-supplied German forces would have set back Russian counter attacks in Eastern Europe.

Even so, it's hard to see the Japanese weakening the forces near the Russian border to reinforce Burma, and if the US had put the resources from the Mediterranean into the Pacific theatre, the Japanese army in Burma probably wouldn't have been a priority. Add in the British/Indian pressure to secure that border in preparation for an attack on India from the West and it makes reasonable sense that the Japanese would have been driven out before the German attacks.

But as with all unhistorical campaigns, you don't have to be right to come up with an interesting and fun challenge.

[captainjack]

screw you Gazala, Basra and Arabia

Gazala - I finally found a way that seems to work consistently (send almost every available unit south except for some artillery to help clear out the northern city - the one with the AA units, 6 pounder and 7.2" gun - so you can get to Tobruk).
Basra - the slow and methodical clear out seems to work, if you ignore the lower right hand objectives until the main city has been cleared out, and then hit them from the back.
Arabia - totally agree. Whatever I do, there's always something goes wrong and often in two places at once. As usual, I blame the general! I wonder what I'm missing, or is it actually a tough one?

[IttoOgami]

I'm now about to start the last mission of Afrikakorps (screw you Gazala, Basra and Arabia ), and have just noticed that Rangoon was on the map, as well as most of Burma and Eastern India (this is alright as it is called 'India').

However, Burma and India as far as Imphal was occupied by Japan at the time the scenario takes place (mid '44), so how can the flags have become British? Japan had a fairly strong grip on that area at the time (actually it was in the U-Go offensive), so how would the British have pushed them out. And this is a weakened Britain that lost Suez 2 years ago and has lost so many Cromwells that it must be out of steel entirely! If anything, Japan's offensive would have been more successful, perhaps reaching the Ganges.

So, where did the forces to reclaim all of that land and fight Germany at the same time come from? Or, why wasn't the map cropped to not include the Jap regions? (or even better, add Japan to the scenario and cut it in half!)

- BNC

Its game mechanics. In an alternate history setting, if Germany ever got that far and would also hold Russia at bay (Caucasus scenario), there would not have been much left in India. "Storywise", I also do not like that angle where you beat Arabia and then go to east Africa by sea - I mean, you hold Egypt, so anyone would just push south. I buy that they would not make the final scenario so easy, but still, I would have liked if they have put in at least a weak japanese force in the east so you could link up.

[IttoOgami]

screw you Gazala, Basra and Arabia

Gazala - I finally found a way that seems to work consistently (send almost every available unit south except for some artillery to help clear out the northern city - the one with the AA units, 6 pounder and 7.2" gun - so you can get to Tobruk).
Basra - the slow and methodical clear out seems to work, if you ignore the lower right hand objectives until the main city has been cleared out, and then hit them from the back.
Arabia - totally agree. Whatever I do, there's always something goes wrong and often in two places at once. As usual, I blame the general! I wonder what I'm missing, or is it actually a tough one?

I love the Gazala scenario, there are so many ways to do it, and its definitely one of my favorite in all PG/PC scenarios. Basra is not that hard I think, you just have to switch the play style (moreso in Caucasus). But Arabia I should have included as a pick in the "most hated" list. All in all, its not even that hard. But in the beginning stages, the enemy can take out some core units, and in the whole, I think this scenario is somehow very uninspired. I also do not like that there are no victory hexes and still you have go to for the enemy. If you don't need any places, why go for them and not forming a straight defensive line? If there are scenarios as such, at least it should be more like an open battle and the AI should not hold back, but try to destroy your force as well.

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Even so, it's hard to see the Japanese weakening the forces near the Russian border to reinforce Burma, and if the US had put the resources from the Mediterranean into the Pacific theatre, the Japanese army in Burma probably wouldn't have been a priority. Add in the British/Indian pressure to secure that border in preparation for an attack on India from the West and it makes reasonable sense that the Japanese would have been driven out before the German attacks.

But as with all unhistorical campaigns, you don't have to be right to come up with an interesting and fun challenge.

If Rommel had gone as far as Persia, it is quite likely that Torch wouldn't have been launched and most US forces in the PTO would have moved to the battles fought before India. Then Guadalcanal would have been poorly defended, same for New Guinea, causing Japan to have some forces free, which they WOULD have moved to Burma/India because the British presence would have been weak. This coupled with the U-Go offensive in March-July 1944 would have made it certain that they would be at least as far as Bangladesh.

Also, most of the British army is dead from losing Alamein, the Mid. East, Arabia, Sudan and Pakistan. They wouldn't have had the strength to take Burma back. (Instead they're probably defending Australia from the Japs)

- BNC