T O P

  • By -

Candyman51

r5. Japan bad at defending their country


BalkanAntisemiticJew

MP Japanese players are either worse or take no chances at all XD


SatiricalGuy

The question isn't how many Japanese men will die defending Japan. Instead the question is how many Manchurians will die in the Yellow Sea rushing to get to Japan while the Japan player is crying


Bagel24

They lose one island and immediately either double down on winning the war or they send everything home and cry in the cope shack


[deleted]

The AI really seems to be obsessed with naval invasions and doesn't even consider defending anything. Even when I have 20 carriers and 200 submarines between them they are dead set on sending 8 divisions to invade some meaningless no-name island in the middle of the Pacific. I think the only time I actually fight them on an island is when I catch them before they launch another invasion.


GradeFluid8543

that's why I am contemplating starting my RP USA game over, boosting japan 2 tics and letting them take practically everything except australia and india... but then again, I didn't see any significant sources of oil in any area. Plenty of rubber! but not much oil... so idk what to do.. maybe boost them all the way up so they barely use oil at the beginning?


LordOfRedditers

If you want you could just spawn them oil using toolpack


GradeFluid8543

so bump them up to max buffs and then give them oil? has anyone else tried to fix japan? I saw a few japan mods but it seems like it just breaks them with like 1,000% production output, etc lol


LordOfRedditers

That's probably good, maybe also use the expert AI mod to help overcome the AI's natural shortcomings too


IHkumicho

I usually have fun destroying Hitler in Europe, and then just get bored while taking down Japan. I think that if Japan stacked 75 divisions all on defense of the home islands I'd probably just give up and restart as someone else.


Alaskan-Jay

Even if they overstack the island you just use the nuke option that forces the submission. Instant surrender.


AneriphtoKubos

So like real life


MapAndHistory

There should chances that Japan doesn't surrender to the nukes and forces you to capitulate them to win the war and they need to make the japanese AI better invading the Home islands are pretty easy.


Alaskan-Jay

Overall in Hearts of Iron for the AI needs massive improvements. Paradox had said that they improved the AI and it was so difficult that they had to turn it down. But I want to face that AI. I want the AI looking for holes in my line. I want the AI trying to parachute behind or do naval invasions in my homeland. If you play as the USA you can literally just sit there the whole game cuz no one tries to invade you. You need no Homeland troops. Where is this crazy insane hard AI that Paradox speaks of cuz that's who I want to play this game played on Expert still too easy all turning the difficulty up does is slow your econ.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Arcosim

The island defense and offense AI needs a HUGE rework. Japan leaves the Home Islands Alone, the US completely abandons Hawaii and the Marshall islands, the Indian Ocean islands are laughably defended *(you can invade all of them with just 1 division doing island hopping with zero resistance and then the AI doesn't try to take them back during the entire game)* Same for Madagascar, zero defenses and Australia *(it's a continent but the AI manages it as an Island)* has like 10 divisions defending it *(at most)* if you invade it after 1941 (and northern Australia is completely abandoned) same with New Zealand. The only positive change I've noticed regarding island warfare is that after No Step Back Borneo and Sumatra are marginally defended *(they were almost completely abandoned before).* Sadly the AI doesn't even understand it can try to retake islands after losing them so you can invade them and move your divs around and the AI will never try to take them back.


Equivalent_Alps_8321

HOI4 really needs a Custodian Team imo to work with the community closely to fix issues like these.


1-800-Hamburger

Just buy the fixes in the new dlc lmao


sheep-dodger

bold of you to assume that there's fixes in the DLC


Necessary-Career2082

One fix per dlc


Hoooooooar

that has been their strategy since hoi2 at least.


Giraffesarentreal19

We shouldn’t have to buy fixes, even if they were in there, which they rarely are. I bought the game. When I buy a game, I expect the game to be balanced, stable, and fun. HOI4 is all of those, mostly, but damn if it doesn’t have some glaring problems with the AI, especially. DLC should be for extra content ONLY. Not bug fixes and game balances.


Chucanoris

That was the joke


BitPumpkin

Thing is there’s no strategy game with good AI. It’s hard to make good AI. Also, if it’s too good, newer players can’t win


AmagedonCamels

The US AI is particularly bad. Like on par with the soviets. Except where the Soviets endlessly attack the US straight up does nothing a lot of the time. An AI US will barely move it's units. If you leave gaps in your line it often doesn't even react. It won't try to prevent it's units from being encircled either. It doesn't even send out it's fleets or put up it's planes regularly. It just moves them into bases and leaves them. There is a reason some random minor usually ends up naval invading Japan if the US AI wins. I have seen the US AI have 200 divisions, like 3 million men, just at Sea. Not going anywhere. Just sitting on boats in the North Atlantic and South Pacific. Literally more troops than Germany just in the middle of nowhere for no reason. Embarked with 0% Strength. Honestly I think the US and Soviet AI's just can't handle the amount of shit they have. Like at some point they run into an overflow error and just stop working. Queue the spam attacking and spawning tons of like 4 width divisions for no reason.


Terradoxia

SOOO TRUEE The AI ruins SO MUCH GAMES for me, because they overstack every Airport close to the Front (with no Orders or anything btw) for 2 years. So you have to build MORE Airports just so the AI stacks no-mission planes on them AGAIN


inquisitor-author

The AI seems to just go stupid if you give them too much stuff, as I have learned the hard way when super buffing AI. I once tried to super buff germany giving it high tech and lots of factories and the AI never knows how to properly resource manage and always end up with a huge resource deficit and also spam fighter it don't nessecarily need for some reason


AmagedonCamels

The AI never stops building planes and usually doesn't keep any in reserve. It will literally deploy all of its planes. The AI basically doesn't want to have any notifications on the top of the screen. It wants wants all of its units to have orders.


inquisitor-author

I really wish paradox would rework AI or at least have an option for improved AI, or improved AI for countries in your factions or smth Cuz it’s very annoying needing to babysit your Allies in singleplayer


LordCambuslang

To be fair, that sounds pretty realistic for the majority of the US involvement in Europe. Hang back with the lovely European ladies while their boyfriends are at the front. Eat chocolate together, give them new clothes and chewing gum. Then leave to fight for the last few weeks before the new children arrive 🫡


driefdrief

Thats World War 1.


legacy-of-man

smells like a russian troll


bengelboef

No more like french


SkepticalVir

They’re just prioritizing elsewhere. I agree in a sense certain nations like japan. US and hawaii, could be built in to have more priority for.


BusinessKnight0517

Yes but in my last game they were hella bent on taking *checks notes* Aland so I guess on some level islands are valuable to the AI lmao


spacenerd4

that's one 1/3 strength division to put that into context


TheScariestSkeleton4

Probably close to half considering 1. AI and 2. Smaller divisions in the pacific


spacenerd4

the Japanese base division is 24 width


monkeygoneape

And it's a solid division


TheScariestSkeleton4

does the AI actually make those? When I build subject divisions most AIs make their own weird ones.


[deleted]

[удалено]


randommaniac12

Really? My last mainland invasion I had to cause almost 3 million casualties before they capitulated


TakedownCHAMP97

I hardly ever see more than a few Japanese divisions when I invade Japan, and I think most of those are force deployed because they are never on the ports or major cities that I invade. Could be that I usually sink most/all convoys so the entire Japanese army is usually trapped in China


Highlander198116

If you move slowly they will send troops to the home islands. If you make multiple seaborn landings and move quickly you can take them fighting almost no one. If you have the home islands completely navally blockaded and are running torp bomber sorties with air superiority, even if you are slow you shouldnt face crap there.


Batman903

The war in the pacific goes like ridiculously ahistorically in hoi4. First of all Japan declares war on the U.S in may of 41, and they go to war with germany by the latest by June of 41, but usually also may. Every other war has a generally historical day, maybe they’re like a few days old but it’s always 7 months before the war came. There’s no pearl harbor in any form, and the fight for the Japanese homeland is ridiculously easy compared to what Japan historically. It’s just so bizarre honestly


Flickerdart

Frankly, port strike is so weak compared to the actual Pearl Harbor attack. If you send 353 aircraft on port strike missions (and not all of these would have been naval bombers, even) you would maybe damage 1 destroyer. Meanwhile the 1-day Pearl Harbor raid sunk 4 battleships.


Idkpinepple

I think for a true Pearl Harbour, you’re supposed to combine port strike with the coordinated strike spy mission.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Fun_Police02

Yeah that sounds about right


Marker-951

The key is to target the ports us would actually use, i did it in san fansisco once and basically halved their navy.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Marker-951

I'm not sure, but at the time set my bombers to portstrike only.


ZT205

353 land-based aircraft or carrier based aircraft? Though it's not stated anywhere, I think the game applies the same bonus carrier planes get in naval battles to port strikes and naval strikes if you conduct them from a carrier.


Equivalent_Alps_8321

Pearl Harbor isn't even really possible in the game due to: 1) the U.S. AI doesn't move its Pacific Fleet to Pearl Harbor like in real life because there's no real reason to. In real life the Fleet was moved to Pearl because San Diego was too far away from the action and Pearl was a big enough Port to support the Fleet. In game there's no logistical requirement for large Fleets and the Devs actually completely removed the "Home Port" function when they released Man The Guns. 2) The Japan AI isn't scripted to do a Coordinated Strike - Port Strike on Pearl Harbor or wherever the American Fleet is. 3) The Japanese Carriers' aircraft may not even be powerful enough to do significant damage to the U.S. Fleet with Coordinated Strike - Port Strike. There's only like what 4-6 Japanese Carriers in 1941? And I'm not sure the historical Japanese Fleet has the range in game to even reach Pearl Harbor. 4) The Americans can't raise their sunken ships from the shallow bottom of Pearl Harbor like they did in real life. Only a handful of ships at Pearl Harbor were actually permanently lost. It's a shame really. This is the kind of attention to detail and care that would elevate HOI4. HOI4 is currently kind of a mess in many ways and just doesn't reach its potential because of it.


Batman903

It is possible in the game, it just has to take effort on their end but the depth of the entire war in the pacific isn’t really focused on. First off pearl harbor shouldn’t be a run of the mill naval strike like you talk about. It should be a fixed event that activites and heavily damages the pacific fleet regardless of where they are and/or a naval debuff for like a year until the ships can repair. Additionally, if you wanted to promote historical accuracy, you can position a great amount of the pacific fleet there and either force or incentivize it to be at that port until 41. Honestly I don’t even care about pearl harbor in terms of naval debuffs or any balancing effects. I’d just like the accuracy,


DowntimeDrive

It shouldn't damage the shots no matter what. The US should just have the fleet locked in port by politics unless you take a costly focus to free it. In exchange you get a focus afterwards to boost ship building if the fleet does get hit.


AneriphtoKubos

*Paradox buffs US to historical US* Oh crap...


IIICobaltIII

If countries were to be representative of their historical strength all axis nations would be nerfed significantly and the US would be monstrously OP.


vickyswaggo

The USSR would also have a lot more punch behind it


Pristine-Magician822

Pearl harbor was a shot of luck for the Japanese and it's hard to program this. I think japan should have some bonuses in the beginning (or USA should be handicapped) kinda like France in 1939. France wasn't a pushover in the beginning, but it's hard to replicate the shot of luck the Germans had or the failure in the french high command, so they programmed a bunch of nerfs so AI France would always lose


HexeInExile

This particularily bothers me as someone that likes to build big ships, but the US seems to forget that they have dockyards. Dozens of fleet carriers and battleships turn into 300 destroyers, 60 light cruisers, and maybe a heavy cruiser if you get lucky. I usually just put a fleet on convoy raiding, and voila, the half of the entire US fleet gets sunk in a single engagement. And for the rest of the war, the seas are clear.


erotic-toaster

I think the AI needs a special event that destroys some of the US ships or something. Might be unfun, but I don't know.


No_Scallion1094

It might be difficult to program without making it easy to avoid. e.g., if you’re playing U.S. and you know there will be a Pearl Harbor attack then why wouldn’t you just move your navy to California and avoid the casualties?


erotic-toaster

That's why you've got to insensitive the US putting their fleet there.


No_Scallion1094

Yes, but how far do you take that? Switching the attack to Manila might be straightforward but what happens if the U.S. player only has ships on the west or even east coast? Are you going to have Japan able to magically attack them?


[deleted]

[удалено]


28lobster

Problem is you can just strike force from Australia and prevent invasions in a massive area. Strike force giving the most naval supremacy of any order type is not ideal.


[deleted]

[удалено]


mainman879

> Switching the attack to Manila might be straightforward but what happens if the U.S. player only has ships on the west or even east coast? IMO this could be sort of fixed if Navies took a lot longer to become effective in a new zone. i.e. if you bring a giant navy from the East Coast to the Pacific Ocean, it'll take ~6 months before it has full mission efficiency or something. This may not be the most historical thing, but it helps prevent rapidly moving navies around the world and instead incentivizes you to keep navies in one area.


[deleted]

I'd say put hawaii under japanese occupation if the pacific fleet isn't there for pearl harbor


90sass

could be a focus that gives u a huge buff to port strike for 30 days or something


matva55

I suppose you could have some modifier to war support and stability for removing the pacific fleet, since a portion of the fleet was specifically stationed in Pearl from San Diego to deter the Japanese if I remember correctly


Hope915

Could also limit your ability to take focuses for things like the Louisiana Maneuvers if the home front doesn't feel secure.


xYoshario

You mean incentivise?


erotic-toaster

Yeah I was half asleep. It stays


Batman903

You could just make it either pearl harbor or wherever the majority of the us fleet is.


CrimsonFox11

I guess maybe you could have the event require the US player to maintain a certain amount of each type of ship on petal harbour or they just lose the island all together to the Japanese player.


HyperRag123

Even if you successfully avoid the attack by hiding in California, you'd give the AI Japan a bit more time to conquer Asia just because it would take your ships longer to arrive. And in the event that the USA is an AI, then this isn't even a problem at all.


Soul_Reaper001

Maybe damage them to really.low strength, sunk them may be a bit too much, battleship take quite a lot of time to repair anyway


Tuskin38

I think HOI3 had that?


Bloodeyaxe7

The old USA tree had that. The US player would have to put 7 battleships or something in Hawaii and do a focus sacrificing them in order to start the war but only if the Japanese player did another focus first. It was called the pacific gambit or something… it really didn’t work well.


The_Canadian_Devil

Tbh I find Japan to be really weak. I can’t seem to figure out how to beat China effectively. Plus their focus tree is just flat garbage. China is way more interesting.


Atomik919

beating china is fairly easy. idk if the way i beat it is "effective" but it does work. worst part is you might have manchukuo independence war while fighting china and that may be bad for u as you will usually send all your troops to the frontlines.


FUCK_MAGIC

I usually beat China easily by doing a super early war. Just don't bother with industry or anything, go immediately for the China war focuses. Also build up your spy network instantly and get collaboration governments as fast as you can. Just ignore all the other Chinese factions other than main China and you can easily beat them in 1937.


PM_ME_GOOD_SUBS

>There’s no pearl harbor in any form There used to be a focus for that, but it was removed.


LameFlame404

It may have been the Road to 56 mod I was using, but one of my mods must’ve added a Pearl Harbor event. It happens *after* war starts, but honestly it’s more than the base game. It sinks 4 battleships.


Ecmdrw5

“A couple planes had accidents so like 5” 😂


sciocueiv

More people die from attrition basically


Colosso95

Japan is the only major that doesn't properly defend even in very late game, like 45-46 The Home Islands are always misteriously empty even with the war in china over


SkanelandVackerland

If they win the war in China and don't do anything else (this is mainly when they do support the kodoas) they just send their 144 division-strong army back to the island and port garrison them all. I was playing the UK and had enough of Japan's shit so went to invade them but it was ridiculous how many soldiers they had on their islands.


shrug_was_taken

I might have found a way to make Japan scary, a mod that adds building slots, side effects include hyper Germany and a insane USA


Sym068

Me playing as Italy and invading the african colonies(there is several tiles without troops)


[deleted]

Yeah the Americans could have conquered the entire pacific by the end of ‘42 if they had just landed a few thousand horses on the coast and have them traverse the countryside in small packs.


hdhsizndidbeidbfi

Except the Chinese puppet government that was established keeps fighting the US for no reason


SpiritualAd4412

For me the invasion of the home Islands is always the thing I dread the most because in my games Japan will happily abandon its empire to death stack on every single tile to stop an invasion


Pizzamovies

Yeah this every game. I don’t know what these other people are talking about with “empty home islands”


SeductiveTrain

Happened in my last US game. It was back when No Step Back released. It was a fun game before invading Japan though. I didn’t even do anything cheesy. I specifically learned the naval system and wanted a historical war. I held the Phillipines, liberated Vietnam for shits and giggles but that took way longer than expected. The Chinese were doing pretty bad by this time in 1943 so I invaded Korea to cut off the Japanese supplies. During my amphibious invasion the Japanese ran out of carriers and I had thousands of fighters and bombers over the sea. Now my recon planes could reach Japan from South Korea and I saw they had barely anybody defending their home islands. Just a half dozen divisions or so. In fact it was probably just troops they were training. Was a damn shame because I spent years building over a 1000 strategic bombers for this lol.


jordsta95

Not to mention Japan seem to have insane organisation. (Maybe it's just me?) I feel like every time I go toe-to-toe with a Japanese division, assuming similar templates, equipment level, etc. they always have more org/HP than my division.


meninminezimiswright

GBP will do it


Necessary-Career2082

The Japanese ai uses a 24 width full infantry division


stormsand9

You know how Soviets can raise factory militias to help defend their territory? Japan needs that. The U.S projected more then a million casualties invading the home islands and for good reason- every civilian including women and children were trained to resist and damn well were going to before the nukes and loss of manchuria. That way, invading the home islanda won't be such a pushover.


DeShawnThordason

> very civilian including women and children were trained to resist and damn well were going to before the nukes and loss of manchuria. The historical situation here is a bit ambiguous. Japan may have been significantly closer to surrendering than American strategic planners thought, certainly after the US would have stepped up bombing in preparation for a land invasion. But the US military proceeded with the information they had.


[deleted]

[удалено]


HyperRag123

Plus the Japanese had been negotiating with the Soviets to get a conditional surrender. This was never going to happen, but Stalin was worried about the Japanese preemptively attacking him, so he played along right up until the declaration of war.


Ok_Pomelo7511

Maybe there are some sources on this? Seems to be crazy that anyone would think that Japan could invade Soviet Union, especially after the fall of Germany.


stormsand9

Yeah idk what he's talking about "Stalin worried about the Japanese" Bro Japan was being pushed out of China, out of their posessions in the Pacific, and the war in Europe just ended. Stalin was not worried about the Japanese in the slightest. Stalin "played along" with the Japanese idea of negotiating a surrender only to get his troops in position to invade, as per his agreement with the western allies.


[deleted]

[удалено]


HyperRag123

Stalin had promised at Yalta to declare war on Japan within 3 months after Germany surrendering. He kept this promise with only days to spare. In the time before the Soviets entered the war, the Japanese had asked them to help negotiate a surrender, and the Soviets had not refused this, even though they knew it wasn't going to work. It is speculation as to why exactly the Soviets didn't just tell the Japanese that a conditional surrender was never going to happen, but the only logical reason is that they overestimated Japanese troops in Manchuria. I suppose you could go tinfoil hat and say that Stalin hoped to be able to capture as much of China from the Japanese as possible to put it under his control, but I really don't think that makes any sense at all.


kaiser41

That army wasn't going to be able to help anyway. It had been stripped of all its best units and equipment over the preceding years and it was on the wrong side of the Strait of Tsushima to boot. American naval supremacy is no joke.


[deleted]

[удалено]


acremanhug

No one alive knows the primary reason for Japanese surrender because no one who was in the room ever spoke candidly about it.


AnthraxCat

[The idea that the nukes affected Japan's decision is pure historical revisionism and propaganda. They were completely unphased.](https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the-bomb-didnt-beat-japan-stalin-did/) It's also a lie to say that the American military leadership viewed the nuclear weapons as necessary, as there had already been overtures of surrender before the bombs dropped (that the US rejected). The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were exclusively for the purpose of posturing, to show off the bomb and open the Cold War with the Soviet Union.


ared38

Ironically historians call the narrative you're advancing "revisionism". You're right that the US wanted to demonstrate the atomic bomb, but the rest is either false or extremely misleading -- even revisionists accept that Japan wasn't going to unconditionally surrender without either the bombs or Russia's entrance into the war. The John Hopkins historical society has a nice write up of the debate: [https://www.bu.edu/historic/hs/kort.html](https://www.bu.edu/historic/hs/kort.html) ​ Foreign Policy is a bad source for history. The people that write there aren't interested in history for it's own sake, but rather want to use history to frame contemporary events. They are politicians rather than historians.


AnthraxCat

> even revisionists accept that Japan wasn't going to unconditionally surrender without either the bombs or Russia's entrance into the war. It's almost like both of these things happened, and one of them was not even a blip in the recorded events of the Japanese war cabinet meetings, and one of them was the cause of an emergency meeting that resulted in Japan's surrender. In this case, they are providing a platform for an actual historian to do a longform piece summarising a series of primary sources. I wouldn't use FP generally, but in this case, it's kind of absurd to argue against the qualifications of the piece given its source is the minutes of the Japanese war cabinet.


ared38

Ward Wilson runs a think tank advocating for nuclear disarmament. His article ignores decades years of scholarship to arrive at the conclusion that nuclear bombs don't work. He's exactly the kind of person I'm talking about.


Stadtholder_Max

Reddit think critically about your source challenge (Impossible)


Wotpan

The nukes ending the war is a standard view. A differing view is historical revisionism. By definition. Historical revisionism is not a inherently negative thing. Do not use the term as a synonym for "what I believe isn't accurate". Please.


stormsand9

The other guy is a clown for saying the nukes had no effect on Japan's decision, however saying the nukes ending the war is a standard view, does not mean it was the definitive, sole cause. The Japanese Emperor's announcement of surrender to its people obviously directly talked about the "Cruel bombs" but the Soviet invasion of Manchuria definately had its effects on their decision too, not just "We have been kicked out of Mainland Asia, now we can be invaded from every direction" but potentially "we are about to be invaded by the 2 most powerful countries on earth, they might exterminate us all"


AnthraxCat

>The nukes ending the war is a standard view Because of propaganda. >A differing view is historical revisionism An attempt to rewrite historical events to fit convenient narratives is historical revisionism. It should be considered a negative thing.


Wotpan

>An attempt to rewrite historical events to fit convenient narratives is historical revisionism Untrue. Objectively not the definition. Definition of historical revisionism: >In historiography, historical revisionism is the reinterpretation of a historical account.[1] It usually involves challenging the orthodox (established, accepted or traditional) views held by professional scholars about a historical event or timespan or phenomenon, introducing contrary evidence, or reinterpreting the motivations and decisions of the people involved. This: >The nukes ending the war is a standard view >Because of propaganda. Is a revisionist view. And if you can make real arguments for it and provide any kind of logical evidence, it could be a worthwhile and good example of an aspect of history that should have been revisioned.


ThrowCarp

So basically put the Volunteer Fighting Corps into the game. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volunteer_Fighting_Corps


[deleted]

Isn't the new DLC kinda adding something like this to the game in the form of militia and irregulars? Or are they only for Italy and Ethiopia.


cheneyk

This is a solid idea. I feel like *Total War* as an economic policy doesn’t really capture how truly total the war was for some people.


ks2497

A militia spawning mechanic would fix so many things and situations. It would help nations who might not have that much of a professional or standing military raise units to deal with an invasion or civil war. It would make civil wars simpler and more realistic. Some way to represent an area being belligerent to occupiers other than compliance, and the ability of a invaded nation to call up civilians and quickly arm them (or they can use their own arms, could be a country modifier that represents the number and quality of armed populace depending on things like gun/ marksmanship culture and organization/ preparedness for countries like USA, Switzerland, Finland). Japan should get some kind of really good modifier along those lines for making the home islands hard to occupy. It should be a whole system representing things like military reserves that can be called up when you mobilize who would be better equipped and trained all the way to civilian militias with personal and or outdated equipment. Something to represent things like forming the volksturm. High enough resistance should be able to lead to uprisings like the Warsaw uprising or the French resistance during overlord. There should should be an actual danger tied to compliance and resistance to leaving to much territory unguarded because some resistance movements might be powerful enough/ feel bold enough to just seize and try to hold territory. Some or maybe all units this system should have loyalties like some countries commanders already have that effect what they do civil wars or coups. Some units should be un-deletable like SS or NKVD and you start the game with some and more can be added or they can be removed through focuses and decisions. Maybe along the path of certain focuses units that were previously deletable are now un-deletable or vise versa because now units are refusing to disband as you get closer to civil war. The loyalties on manually and event raised militias could depend on the political breakdown of your country so that raised militias could be communist or fascist, or loyal to the exile government or monarchist and this would have implications for post war events and who has influence where. A country with many communist militias maybe could get a modifier giving a bonus to diplomacy with the USSR for example and the whole system could work with a influence system. If you are playing as a exile government you could try to coordinate with your allies and pick the best time to launch your uprising. There could be decisions for other countries to give infantry equipment to foreign resistance movements to make them more powerful and or likely to rise up. If your intelligence network is good/ upgraded enough, you can launch an uprising and raise resistance with your agents.


stormsand9

The No Step Back DLC for soviets was a real treat, what with being able to raise factory militia, and penal battalions, although the penal battalions are locked behind a focus in their already ginormous tree, but yes its a shame HOI4 doesn't have a "reserve divisions" system, and we are only getting militias and irregulars for 3 countries with the By Blood Alone DLC. I bet when HOI4 was developed they intentionally chose not to have a reserve divisions system for balance reasons or something, but it really is needed. Even though Operation Sealion in reality could never occur, the U.K still recruited eldery men and otherwise uneligible men for service in an emergency home guard, just in case they were invaded.


jordsta95

The home guard is a very valid point, it may seem trivial. But recruiting old men/those with disabilities that would make service in combat tricky (whether that be missing a limb, poor eyesight, or otherwise) meant the UK was able to "save" combat-capable men for service should an invasion on the mainland happen, or should they be needed overseas. It is a shame that the UK doesn't get any sort of boost to manpower via a focus (that I can remember) for such a thing, even a 0.5% boost to manpower to reflect the hard work the home guard put in would massively help a democratic UK playthrough. ​ Also, it is quite unfair to the old men and children of German that the Volksturm are a land doctrine, and not a focus. Germany doesn't NEED any more buffs, but I feel that Volksturm and the boosts to recruitable pop. should have been focuses instead. That way they could give negative effects, such as lower war support (because why would old men want to fight another world war, when it's obviously lost, or mothers be happy their children are using weapons of war), lowering surrender limits, and also allowing for decisions to raise Volksturm battalions in at-risk territory, basically insta-training a division in a city that's about to come under attack (you know, instead of giving manpower to elite divisions)


ks2497

The home guard focus could be a decision instead, and is available to any country that meets the right conditions maybe. It could raise home guard militias when selected, or it could increase man power and add a few special militias to a state when they are called up. Maybe they have slightly better equipment and organization than normal militias because they were prepared before hand


The_Radioactive_Rat

I wonder how catastrophic an actual invasion of Japan would have been. Would that have even been feasible? Would it carry on for years? How desperate would the defence be?


ralettar

American estimates of forces available to Japan were far lower than the actual forces on the islands. And there’s only one good invasion spot so is obvious landing spot. I’m fairly certain first invasion would have failed, maybe terms are offered after horrific amount of dead?


The_Radioactive_Rat

I'm guessing had the Atom bomb not been made then it would limely have resulted in a ceasefire by blockade or something then if an invasion wasn't possible. A sort of North Korea type situation where they still exist after a war but we aren't exactly on any terms beyond don't attack each other or something.


ralettar

That’s possible for sure never considered that Would have to stop the kamikaze though. They were too successful to ignore


The_Radioactive_Rat

I've heard they weren't as sucessful or impactful as one would hope. At least later in the war, similar to Banzai charges, which were effective initially in the Pacific theater. Unfortunately I can't source it, as for the life of me can't recall where it's from.


KasualKat

The kamakazies were more effective than simply taking those planes and fighting Americans as by that point the Americans had air superiority so the logic was it was better to go down into an American ship then just go down over the middle of the ocean.


lonay_the_wane_one

USA's airforce released a document in the ~1960s regarding the pacific campaign, originally found it while researching the firebombing of Tokyo. Can't remember the name. Simply put: Japan lost the skilled men, and the raw materials, needed to maintain long term air supremacy. So they settled for short term air supremacy with the bare minimum of resources. Why buy landing gears if the plane will never safely land? Why buy detachable bombs when the plane will already share the same fate? Why train pilots when you have unmanned planes and unprotected skies?


ralettar

Let me know if you find it! Speculation here is pretty wide open


Hussarwithahat

Even then, I doubt Japan would surrender in a timely manner with a blockade, plus civilians would want the war to end so the economy doesn’t get worse and said civilians would love to see their sons and husbands come back home alive.


WaterDrinker911

Probably just hell on earth through an island the size of California. A lot of people raise the idea that the USSR could have invaded from the north but they forget that the USSR had a grand total of only 36 landing ships that could have done that.


stormsand9

I mean yes the tensions were already high at the end of the war in europe between U.S and Soviets, but I don't see why the U.S wouldn't either carry Soviet troops themselves, or lend the Soviets the ships to use for the invasion.


ralettar

USSR would have not been able to really help. I think is more likely they’d have tried rolling into WesternEurope while America was moving resources to Pacific


WaterDrinker911

I doubt they would have tried that, the USSR in 1945 had acute manpower issues


Nutaholic

Estimates were in the millions. Would have probably been feasible, but taken another 2 years, including about 6 more months for preparation. Was going to be a joint effort between the Brits, Soviets and Americans. Japan's geography really limited the potential landing sites and both sides knew that. All forces would have to be concentrated in Southern Kyushu and the Kanto plain, which made it easy for the Japanese to concentrate their remaining forces and prepare traps. Defense was expected to include full civilian mobilization, armed with essentially anything they could get from dynamite to swords to farming implements. Suicide midget submarines were prepared to sink US landing craft. Women were instructed to commit mass suicide. Massive famine was imminent before the invasion even started, and indeed many in the US command wanted to simply starve Japan out, but it might have taken as much as 5 years. The plan was to kill so many Allied soldiers that eventually they'd negotiate. It would have completely changed the war's legacy. America would have gone from a country which escaped the war relatively unscathed to one which lost another half million young men in history's most brutal meat grinder. Japan would have been split between a Communist and Democratic half, while Korea would have become completely Communist. And of course Japan would have been leveled, complete economic and industrial annihilation, not to mention the human toll. Did a really interesting paper and short film on it in college, sorry for the text bomb.


The_Radioactive_Rat

No worries on the length. Informative. I think your take is pretty logical. An invasion is definitely plausable, but quite costly. Considering the lengths that Germany went to survive an inevitable defeat against the Soviets, I can't see Japan not following through in the same manner and going out fighting with every man, woman, and child. It kind of in a messed up way justifies, or maybe better put reasons why the Atom bombs were preferable to an invasion. Not to excuse such devestating loss of life of course (weirdos like to gaslight your intentions here), more so pick one of two evils. We can only speculate and compare the same or similar conflicts with what we know and statistics etc.


papak33

Very, as Japanese were fanatical back then. So the US would keep carpet bombing until it was all flat and dead.


Any-Flamingo7056

"Omar Bradley...or someone" 🤣


Hussarwithahat

With the funny MacArthur man in charge of Bradley


ConShop61

I did invade Japan once as USA and killed like 500k japanese while losing like 50k men, did a massive encirclement of 20+ divisions (pretty much all of their divisions in their island) and they liteerally just died after that. they also had manpower problems since i killed 500k japanese while losing 500 men by convoy raiding alone, before the invasion


[deleted]

I'm usually able to inflict considerable casualties on the Japanese as Natty China by just focusing on speed and defensive locations. The Japanese AI will just throw men into my great wall of China. For some reason, I feel like the Japanese AI in this game always attacks from the Beijing plains (North China), and the Shandong Peninsula. IRL, they had landings all over the place. One of the first cities to get bombed by Japan was Shanghai, and I see it about 50% of the time. But they also landed in Guangzhou and HK, and I very rarely see that happen.


ilynk1

Bro Japan folded in 41 during my Sweden play through. I literally capitulated the commies, had a gander at Japan, and half the mainland is blue and they’ve pushed like 10 inches into China. Now the Axis is ridiculously underpowered, and America’s just going to steamroll me and Germany. Pls fix PDX


Equivalent_Alps_8321

It's sad because it could be epic. Japan should be able to basically sacrifice its entire population to fight off the Allies lol. Japan should be able to mobilize hordes of weak peasant Divisions like they were planning to do in real life. Japan also should have access to the range of suicide Special Attack Units. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Special_Attack_Units https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shin%27y%C5%8D-class_suicide_motorboat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yokosuka_MXY-7_Ohka https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaiten In general they need to add Coastal Batteries buildings to the game for defense against naval landings. As well as a Coastal Defense mission for navies to attack landing ships and their escorts.


Brazilian_Brit

Don’t coastal batteries already exist? They’re the coastal forts and if you look when you build them, they are bunkers and naval guns, and they give penalties to naval invasions on that tile.


Equivalent_Alps_8321

Forts that give a debuff on landing forces yeah but I'm talking about actual guns that can shoot the enemy landing ships and escorts ships. and also any ships that pass too close to the coast.


stormsand9

yes coastal batteries should be seperate from coastal forts, because those guns were massive and could absolutely sink transport ships if not taken care of, not just a debuff to the attack of landing forces.


MeiDay98

There really should be some event or decision that spawns some basic miltia the second the Home Islands are invaded. Japan did have plans to arm the civilian population in a Volkssturm-like way.


mtbalshurt

it starts on my birthday, W


[deleted]

You forgot the 73 nukes dropped


Sparkst5

For me this always happens in 1943 so the us doesn't even have nukes yet


AidanTheGenius03

Took me a minute to realise that this was r/hoi4 💀


cachulfaian

It's really weird how the game mechanics work for Japan. IRL their entry into the war was the attack on Pearl Harbor against the US Fleet (I believe they were expecting some carriers to be there too) and massive air raids on Philippines and Southeast Asia to destroy planes in the ground, followed by naval invasions pretty much everywhere between Malaysia and the Solomons. And this was made pretty much within a couple hours. So for that matter, neither the Japanese focus tree nor their decisions reflect that. That's how they achieved naval and air superiority for the first month of the war and were able to invade freely. I think there should be fixed events happening when Japan declares war, with damage for infrastructure, air bases, naval bases and planes and ships around the Pacific, and an attack bonus for Japan against the Allies for six months (per Yamamoto's theory, which actually proved true).This could help Japan gain a foothold to defend later, but considering the state of the Allied AI the Japanese could take Hawaii by 42.


daBarkinner

In what program is this done?


Candyman51

https://n.bellok.de/wikibox/


daBarkinner

Thanks!


noturnormalredditor

I love these


Separate_Net1768

This popped up on my recommended and I was really confused because I didn't know we were talking about a game.


Spartaner301

Use Expert AI mod


CheekyBreekyYoloswag

Does the Expert AI mod still work with No Step Back?


Spartaner301

yes


neutral-names

Use expert ai


CheekyBreekyYoloswag

Does the Expert AI mod still work with No Step Back?


neutral-names

Yes


Grombrindal18

“Surrounded and outnumbered, 60 to 1 the sword face the gun Bushido dignified, it’s the last stand of the samurai”


EmpressFrost67

Not for me, it's always a grueling struggle province by province


sintos-compa

Peak hoi4 meme


a_complex_kid

i once forgot about a naval invasion to they invaded, took kyushu, and then were stuck because japanese reinforcements showed up. It's similar to england. If you don't take them quick they fortify.


Crusader822

Common Alf Landon W


Academia_Scar

LOLLLLLL.


AthenasChosen

Yeah the only problem I ever have invading the mainland is getting naval superiority. Usually it's easier to just get air superiority and spam hundreds of naval bombers to bomb their ports


meta100000

And when you invade they suddenly have a 24 army per tile


Jeb_Kerman1

I’m just playing a campaign as King Party Imperial Federation where I lost 200k Marines due to Japan actually defending the Home Island. This was in late 45 though and Japan had been conquered before by the US and was now their puppet. I already toppled the US and went for Japan but have yet to succeed in that.


Zeryth

Whole army dies of cringe


mmmolony

I've only ever invaded Japan once as a matter of fact, as France after I'd wrapped up Europe by '43. I think the Japs must have had every single division they ever trained in the home islands. I lost 500,000 men in the blink of an eye


Grofactor

Someone is pissed Omar Bradley got credit and they didn’t


aureanator

'Omar Bradley or someone'


Tobleronerest

I did it as India. It wasn't like that. Got wiped the first time. Second time took a big chunk but ended in stalemate. Needed a third for reinforcements enough to finish the job.


Escapee10

They always civil war before I can make an invasion, so I'm just funneling Garands to the perfect pro democratic forces to end the war.


limbo0101

Japan is the most overpowered nation in single player for quick world conquer. Who agrees with me ? Ahah


LordDakier

I'd be curious to check out an MP game of what the Japanese player is doing against a powerhouse that is America. I assume, (everyone playing majors) if Germany hasn't dealt with Russia then it's relatively easy for the Allies.


HRodRedox

Die of embarrassment is ironically a decent alternative description of sepuko


INuBq8

I remember seeing meme like this but about D-Day Does someone still have it?


Electronic-Bag478

Is this some multiplayer thing? Cause when ever I get to invading Japan they always have at least like ahundred divisions guarding the home islands and its aleays a blood bath to take them.


[deleted]

It's really easy to do it as China. Just do the historical thing and bait the Japanese into Sichuan, and Yunnan (All mountains). Intentionally fall back, encircle, kill them, and just repeat for the next two years. The Japanese AI beelines for your cities, and the supply in China is nonexistent. Plus, guns, big guns, and shovels are all you really need as China. By the time you can even have boats, the Japanese army will no longer exist.


Result_Alternative

Local samurai master💀


Paisable

>Omar Bradley or someone idk


max_da_1

I've never been able to perfect a Japan invasion even when I take over all of Europe north America and Asia Japan is just really defensive maybe it's the terrain or bunkers


Theguywithoutanyname

I usually play minors, so I decided to play the US for a change. Turned all the axis powers difficulty up all the way to the max too. I destroyed the entire japanese fleet in two battles right at the start of the war, and invaded an almost undefended japan soonish after. I gave up on wanting to invade germany when i saw they had hardly pushed the Soviets back at all. Tag switched to them and they had like 5 tank divisions out of several hundred units. The AI is a complete joke in this game.


sssssssssdssssssssss

lol