Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
[RG]Flanker1985

Battle of Manchuria Next Please

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I saw somebody post suggestions for the Battle of Berlin as the next Battle. Then this idea just hit me.
Let's do the Battle of Manchuria next. My reasons are as follow:
We can get the late war planes for both Soviet and Japan. Planes like N1K, Ki-84 and Ki-100. Because the late war planes from the US and UK have been made ( in the battle of Bodenplatte). Players who have bought can use those planes and simulate pacific ocean.

This will also reduce some workload for our developer team once they do decide to make a battle that is located in Pacific Ocean.

Also we can get some scenery changes as well. Getting some oriental flavors  :)

Now I know that historically, Japanese airforce was much weaker than the Soviet airforce. Some people may consider it as unbalance. But campaign mode was never fully accurate in this game. On top of that, we have an in game option to change enemy density. Therefore the accuracy of the historical enemy density is never an issue.

Edited by [RG]Flanker1985
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well here's an exotically interesting idea. Unfortunately this does not address the problem with japanese plane documentation translation, etc. And the building / landscapd differences would probably complicate matters further (although maybe not more than FC). But very interesting.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This would be a rather one-sided scenario. The only modern fighter aircraft the Japanese had in Manchuria that could compete with Soviet fighters were around 40 Ki-84's, the rest were obsolete types like the Ki-27 or Ki-43 flown by training units and a few Ki-45 heavy fighters. Moreover major combat operations were over after just one week.

Edited by Juri_JS
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Juri_JS said:

This would be a rather one-sided scenario. The only modern fighter aircraft the Japanese had in Manchuria that could compete with Soviet fighters were around 40 Ki-84's, the rest were obsolete types like the Ki-27 or Ki-43 flown by training units and a few Ki-45 heavy fighters. Moreover major combat operations were over after just one week. 

 

This is interesting to know. Also, can you give me the reference you are using please. I like to read up on those as well.
As for the "one sided scenario" issue, well, this is a game, I doubt other campaigns are following the airforce strength to the exact number. Besides, there is a option to change campaign difficulty at the center buttom for all campaigns.

Also you are right, the battle was over in 11 days. But we can fly multiple missions per day. We don't have to limit our sort for 1 per day? This way we can enjoy all types of missions under different time conditions (day/night)

Yes, I heard that many of the Japanese aircrafts are obsolete types. But I doubt there were only 40 Ki-84. Because at the time Japanese Kuantong army still have over 1800 aircrafts.

Besides, in those 11 days, there were still 5000 Soviet tanks fighting against 1150 Japanese tanks. Who could say no to see a battle like that. :)

Edited by [RG]Flanker1985
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Years ago I did a lot of research on Operation August Storm when I build a campaign for Il-2 1946, that's why I know this topic very well.

You can find the Japanese order of battle here:

http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/joe_brennan/order_of_battle.htm

 

The 1800 Japanese aircraft is a Soviet estimation. In reality the number of serviceable combat aircraft was lower and most of them came from training units. These training units formed combat detachments when the Soviet Invasion began and were mosty employed in ground attack missions.There was only one fighter regiment based in Machuria during this time, the 104th Sentai equipped with the Ki-84 and commanded by Yasuke Okazaki. Moreover there were two independent fighter squadrons flying the Ki-45.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Juri_JS said:

Years ago I did a lot of research on Operation August Storm when I build a campaign for Il-2 1946, that's why I know this topic very well.

You can find the Japanese order of battle here:

http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/joe_brennan/order_of_battle.htm

 

The 1800 Japanese aircraft is a Soviet estimation. In reality the number of serviceable combat aircraft was lower and most of them came from training units. These training units formed combat detachments when the Soviet Invasion began and were mosty employed in ground attack missions.There was only one fighter regiment based in Machuria during this time, the 104th Sentai equipped with the Ki-84 and commanded by Yasuke Okazaki. Moreover there were two independent fighter squadrons flying the Ki-45.


Awesome! Thanks for the link, mate.
But like I mentioned, we don't have to limit the actual number for Japanese fighter. And there is already an option to change enemy density and difficulty in game..

Also, you are the guy who helped develop the Manchuria campaign for the IL-2:1946? It is such an honor to meet you. I had a lot of fun and good memory in that game. I had flied it since the very beginning nearly 20 years ago. (OMG, I didn't even realise it had been that long). Thanks for develop that game. I really enjoyed it.  :) It marked the beginning of my flight sim life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good point about Manchuria was that we could have filled the late war Soviet roster without having to scratch the bottom of the barrel for 5 new LW planes, but indeed the brevity of the scenario and the lack of proper opposition by the IJAAF make the idea a little impractical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Khalkhin Gol would be much more interesting, but I doubt it would sell well.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

Khalkhin Gol would be much more interesting, but I doubt it would sell well.


What are the planes available in Khalkhin Gol?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

VVS:

I-16 Type 10

I-15bis

I-153

SB-2

R-5

TB-3

 

IJAAF:

Ki-4

Ki-10

Ki-15

Ki-21

Ki-27

Ki-30

Ki-32

Ki-36

BR-20

 

Edited by Juri_JS
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

VVS:

I-16 Type 10

I-15bis

I-153

SB-2

R-5

TB-3

 

IJAAF:

Ki-4

Ki-10

Ki-15

Ki-21

Ki-27

Ki-30

Ki-32

Ki-36

BR-20

 

 

I don't think the list was that long, I'll check Knox works later...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am only uncertain about the use of the Ki-32. There might be some confusion by some authors with the Ki-30. During the time of Khalkhin Gol the Ki-32 was flown by the 45th and 65th Sentai, but so far I've found no definite proof that the two units were active during the battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, Juri_JS said:

VVS:

I-16 Type 10

I-15bis

I-153

SB-2

R-5

TB-3

 

IJAAF:

Ki-4

Ki-10

Ki-15

Ki-21

Ki-27

Ki-30

Ki-32

Ki-36

BR-20


This does sound interesting. It is like the Spanish civil war, except with Japanese war planes.
Did the Japanese use the Nakajima A4N?

Edited by [RG]Flanker1985

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, [RG]Flanker1985 said:


This does sound interesting. It is like the Spanish civil war, except with Japanese war planes.
Did the Japanese use the Nakajima A4N?

 

That is a Navy fighter, only IJAAF planes in Nomonhan

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Alexmarine28 said:

 

That is a Navy fighter, only IJAAF planes in Nomonhan


I see. Thanks for the info, friend. It's good to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ki-4/10/32 and 36 can be cut out for for the low numbers available. If you cut out the TB-3 for the soviets you will have a 4+1 vs 4+1 planeset as all other modules, the japanese with more light attack and bombers and the soviets with more fighters (wich can double as ground attackers with bombs and rockets)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Alexmarine28 said:

Ki-4/10/32 and 36 can be cut out for for the low numbers available. If you cut out the TB-3 for the soviets you will have a 4+1 vs 4+1 planeset as all other modules, the japanese with more light attack and bombers and the soviets with more fighters (wich can double as ground attackers with bombs and rockets)


TB-3? You mean that carrier plane for I-16s? That would be very interesting if the manage to bring it into the game. I still remember the fun we had back in IL-2:1946. The first time I introduced that carrier plane to my friends, they dropped their jaws and had to pick them up from the flour. They couldn't believe that people have built things like that with pre-ww2 tech.
But still, I think Manchuria would be a great addition for the game. Plus, China didn't have any super cities in that region at the time. So it is easier to make the map.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and that ain't happening. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds too obscure to be appealing to buyers and to get any research or documentation for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2019 at 8:14 PM, 77.CountZero said:

map area would have to be extra big 1000+km

Manchuria_Operation_map.svg


 

We don't need to have map that big. The same map from the old IL-2 would be just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

If we get CBI (China/Burma/India theatre) as a Pacific after Bodenplatte release and then we get P-63 as a collector´s plane, then it could be possible to make.

If we get some Pacific scenario with Ki-84 and then get P-63 as a collector, it could be recreated on autumn Stalingrad map for example.

 

This together with Lapland war and other more obscure theatres of WW2 is sadly not attractive enough to be separate BoX chapter.

 

 

Edited by Ropalcz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Battle of Manchuria - I can already hear all of the wallets clamping shut.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Battle of Manchuria - I can already hear all of the wallets clamping shut.


Manchuria would be fun. I'd pay $70 for it.
Who's wallets are you talking about? I doubt you can hear anybody else's wallets sound unless you are tailing to steal it. lol
[edited]

Edited by SYN_Haashashin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, tankxsx said:


Manchuria would be fun. I'd pay $70 for it.

 

Maybe buy the stuff they've actually produced first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

Maybe buy the stuff they've actually produced first.


I purchase the modules I like. Why? Is that a crime?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, tankxsx said:


I purchase the modules I like. Why? Is that a crime?

 

Did I say that it's a crime?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

That’s great 

15 hours ago, tankxsx said:


Manchuria would be fun. I'd pay $70 for it.
Who's wallets are you talking about? I doubt you can hear anybody else's wallets sound unless you are tailing to steal it. lol
[edited]

 

It probably would be fun for some, but not many and certainly not marketable. 

 

Edited by SYN_Haashashin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to the Far East, I’d rather we get New Guinea. It would have iconic Japanese, Australian, and American aircraft, and have more interesting terrain IMO. It’d also be more marketable to the large English-speaking audience due to familiarity with the Pacific War (and we already have four games that will be appealing to Russians, and six for Germans).

 

A Manchuria game could appeal to the large Chinese market, but it could easily be banned from that market. AFAIK Hearts of Iron IV was banned for portraying WWII China as being divided. Given that one of those divided states was Manchuria... 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, [Pb]Cybermat47 said:

When it comes to the Far East, I’d rather we get New Guinea. It would have iconic Japanese, Australian, and American aircraft, and have more interesting terrain IMO. It’d also be more marketable to the large English-speaking audience due to familiarity with the Pacific War (and we already have four games that will be appealing to Russians, and six for Germans).

 

A Manchuria game could appeal to the large Chinese market, but it could easily be banned from that market. AFAIK Hearts of Iron IV was banned for portraying WWII China as being divided. Given that one of those divided states was Manchuria... 

 

I think it was more for the KMT-CCP "division" than being under occupation of Japanese forces I think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

That’s great 

 

It probably would be fun for some, but not many and certainly not marketable. 

 


Really, contrary to your claim, I have a bunch of friends in China want Manchuria to happen.
I don't know what's the basis of your claim. I certainly would like to see your market research report in formal, including the methods of research and result figures.

 

6 hours ago, [Pb]Cybermat47 said:

When it comes to the Far East, I’d rather we get New Guinea. It would have iconic Japanese, Australian, and American aircraft, and have more interesting terrain IMO. It’d also be more marketable to the large English-speaking audience due to familiarity with the Pacific War (and we already have four games that will be appealing to Russians, and six for Germans).

 

A Manchuria game could appeal to the large Chinese market, but it could easily be banned from that market. AFAIK Hearts of Iron IV was banned for portraying WWII China as being divided. Given that one of those divided states was Manchuria... 


The Ban of hearts of Iron was because they portray Manchuria as an independent nation. but in IL-2, it is not.
Also, just check the Chinese website and you will find more market here in China than English speaking community. The English speaking community have already gotten one battle, so I think Chinese community should getting one as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Alexmarine28 said:

 

I think it was more for the KMT-CCP "division" than being under occupation of Japanese forces I think

 

19 minutes ago, [RG]Flanker1985 said:

The Ban of hearts of Iron was because they portray Manchuria as an independent nation. but in IL-2, it is not.

 

The Chinese government specifically cited Manchuria’s accurate portrayal as a seperate nation (Japanese puppet) in the game, and the accurately depicted occupation of Taiwan, as reasons for banning the original Hearts of Iron.

 

So either the game accurately depicts Manchuria as a nominally independent Japanese puppet state and is banned by the CCP, or it inaccurately portrays Manchuria as being annexed Japanese territory and is banned by the CCP.

 

Quote

 

The PC game, "Hearts of Iron", was accused of distorting historical facts in describing the Fascist regimes of Japan, Germany and Italy during World War II. 

Moreover, "Manchuria", "West Xinjiang", and "Tibet" appeared as independent sovereign countries in the maps of the game. In addition, it even included China's Taiwan province as the territory of Japan at the beginning of the game. 

"All these severely distort historical facts and violate China's gaming and Internet service regulations," the MOC said. "The game should be immediately prohibited."

 

 

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-05/29/content_334845.htm

 

 

Edited by [Pb]Cybermat47

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, [Pb]Cybermat47 said:

 

 

 

The Chinese government specifically cited Manchuria’s accurate portrayal as a seperate nation (Japanese puppet) in the game, and the accurately depicted occupation of Taiwan, as reasons for banning the original Hearts of Iron.

 

So either the game accurately depicts Manchuria as a nominally independent Japanese puppet state and is banned by the CCP, or it inaccurately portrays Manchuria as being annexed Japanese territory and is banned by the CCP.

 

 

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-05/29/content_334845.htm

 

 


This actually proves my points. In IL-2 game, Manchuria is just a name for the region, not an independent state. That is why IL-2:1942 wasn't banned.
If you want to avoid any sensitivity, you can also call it Northeast of China. Simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, [RG]Flanker1985 said:


This actually proves my points. In IL-2 game, Manchuria is just a name for the region, not an independent state. That is why IL-2:1942 wasn't banned.
If you want to avoid any sensitivity, you can also call it Northeast of China. Simple.

 

But even if the devs suddenly decide to censor history and ignore the fact that Manchukuo was a nominally independent state in the mission and campaign briefings, they’ll still be depicting an area of China under Japanese control. Which is why the CCP banned HoI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, [RG]Flanker1985 said:


Really, contrary to your claim, I have a bunch of friends in China want Manchuria to happen.
I don't know what's the basis of your claim. I certainly would like to see your market research report in formal, including the methods of research and result figures.

 


The Ban of hearts of Iron was because they portray Manchuria as an independent nation. but in IL-2, it is not.
Also, just check the Chinese website and you will find more market here in China than English speaking community. The English speaking community have already gotten one battle, so I think Chinese community should getting one as well.

 

With respect.

I'm sure people in Manchuria would love it - but how much of the customer base does that account for?

 

As far as research, feel fee to do your own,

Post a poll, with every other theater, including Solomons, New Guinea, Midway, Coral Sea, Japan Home Islands, Normandy, Italy, and another Eastern Front...also add Manchuria.

 

Watch the results and get back to us.

 

If you say this hardly tells the whole story, true...but neither does "my friends in Manchuria"  ;)

 

There are a lot of interesting little corners of the war, and this is one. Early Japanese types vs early Russian, and you just cant' beat early war.

They need well known, popular theaters and aircraft types to sell this thing however, theaters with wide appeal.

That rules out Manchuria even more than Spanish Civil war, another theater that will never happen for the same reasons.

 

Anyway this is hardly a worthwhile debate...about a theater that is in no danger of happening.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

With respect.

I'm sure people in Manchuria would love it - but how much of the customer base does that account for?

 

 

If you say this hardly tells the whole story, true...but neither does "my friends in Manchuria"  ;)

 


With respect? "people in Manchuria would love it"? I am fairly certain he said "friends in China love it". Why are you deliberately misquote him by separating Manchuria from China? 
Are you deliberately trying to trigger a fight. What are you trying to pull exactly? Yet you even have indecency to claim "with respect"?
How laughable!

What do you mean by "do a poll" exactly? You know this forum is an English forum and the only people who would come and vote are from the english communities. So how can a poll represent the market?

http://bbs.dof.cn/index.php?showforum=137
Take a look at some of the Chinese website and you understand how big of a market China is. I say, Manchuria would be a big success. I would love to see Manchuria battle in the game. Even though I still prefer Berlin first.

Edited by tankxsx
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

China - my mistake.

[Edited]

Edited by SYN_Haashashin
Rude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, tankxsx said:


http://bbs.dof.cn/index.php?showforum=137
Take a look at some of the Chinese website and you understand how big of a market China is.

 

               http://bbs.dof.cn/index.php?showforum=137      IL2 BOS/BOM/BOK/BOP  sub forum post numbers  total       120823

 

 

               https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/                           IL2 BOS/BOM/BOK/BOP  sub forum post numbers  total        543549  ( not including "Free Subject Posts")

 

          If you are trying to use the above website to validate how big the Chinese market is , let us then have a look at the post totals to verify how big they  are when compared to each other. The above totals show where the "lion's" share of the market is based on your reasoning and it isn't in China. The developers are going to go  where the numbers are (potential sales) and judging by these comparisons, don't hold your breath waiting for the Manchuria theater to happen any time soon.

 

 

                                                                                      

 

 

 

                                                                                       

Edited by bzc3lk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...