Banzai question

[Michael Murphy]

Here's a question for all of you to consider. In Guadalcanal, the Japanese are stuck with the Banzai rule. In a nutshell, once the Japanese enter into Assault Combat they cannot voluntarily exit that hex. The time frame is late 1942 to early 1943. I have both Jungle Fighting and Kokoda Trail (both set in the same time frame) and neither has this rule.

Given that the Japanese didn't forsake Banzai tactics until the Peleliu campaign in 1944 I'd have expected to see this rule or something like it in JF and KT. Is this an oversight or a design change? Are we to ignore this rule when playing anything other than Guadalcanal?

While I'm at it it occurs to me that AP could do a supplement on Pacific Island battles such as Saipan. That battle was a relatively straighforward infantry slugfest with tanks and Banzai charges. The Japanese didn't use caves or hidden setups to any great degree.

What say you?

[Matt W]

I certainly would not use it in KT. The banzai tactics were highly influenced by individual leaders (I believe it was Kawaguchi and Col. Ichiki in particular but I can't remember the spellings) who were on Guadalcanal at that time. Using it for JF certainly seems to make some sense.

[Michael Murphy]

I certainly would not use it in KT. The banzai tactics were highly influenced by individual leaders (I believe it was Kawaguchi and Col. Ichiki in particular but I can't remember the spellings) who were on Guadalcanal at that time. Using it for JF certainly seems to make some sense.

I hadn't looked at this in that light. In a way this response makes sense. And yet, at the same time, this rule does seem to model the mindset of the Jappanese at this point in time. As I see it, this rule isn't simulating a real Banzai charge so much as a Japanese reliance on the bayonet and a corresponding reluctance to retreat when the assault breaks down. In order to simulate an all out, full scale Banzai charge, perhaps the Japanese should be subject to First Fire by the defenders. Defenders against a Banzai charge should also receive a +1 column modifier as they face the charge.

[Matt W]

The South Seas Detachment in KT was actually quite capable of punishing defensive tactics and really didn't use the offensive tactics used by less well trained units elsewhere. In a way the portrayal of the Japanese so far as relatively uniformly of absurdly high morale is perhaps in appropriate. While true from a fanatascism standpoint it loses something in the translation as this fanaticism was shown by barely trained service troops as well as the highly trained SNLF. Since Morale in PG encompasses both sides of that equation the system, in my opinion, has not been able to adequately differentiate between the highly variable quality Japanese forces.

[vince hughes]

Since Morale in PG encompasses both sides of that equation the system, in my opinion, has not been able to adequately differentiate between the highly variable quality Japanese forces.

And that takes us back to an early thread on this forum Re Soviet Morale and SSR's.

The same could apply for Japanese forces in that to simulate such situations you could have say a game morale of 8/7 with an SSR encompassing whatever morale bonus or deduction applied for certain scenarios. To me, it seems veru simple to implement.

[Matt W]

Vince:

I agree completely. To date the Japanese are shown as uniformly high morale troops. This is especially true with the scenario situations developed to date, namely Guadalcanal, Alaska, Kokoda Trail, and the paratroopers (I have to plead ignorance about the quality of troops in Manchuria). I think this changes as we move to the real land war in Asia as they were not always able to put their best troops in place. MacArthur found highly variable troops as he leapfrogged up New Guinea and the millions of troops in China were successful not due to their own qualities but due to the Chinese poor leadership and morale (Consider a battle of a 7/5 morale force against a 5/4 morale force).

The Japanese were certainly fanatical but that does not make up for the poor training of their garrison forces.