fattoler
This has already been posted on the console forum but I feel that the PC Weeabos need to be nullifed as well.
Japan was one of the largest players of the Second World War, some may argue that WWII really begins in 1937 when Japan invaded China after consolidating their hold on Manchukuo. Japan would then enter the European War in December 1941 when they attack the American Naval Base Pearl Harbour, Hawaii and subsequently the British and Dutch colonies in South East Asia.
Japan was also an ally of Germany and a member of the Axis in the form of both the Anti-Comintern Pact and the Tripartite Pact (signed in 1936 & 1940 respectively). Despite this fact the co-operation between the two countries during the Global Conflict was minimal due to distance. (apart from the withdrawal of Alexander von Falkenhausen from China and a planned but never carried out invasion of Madagascar)
Japan would then fight against the Commonwealth in the South, the Chinese in the West, and the Americans to the East in a series of bloody engagements, finishing in the rout of Japanese forces from Burma and the Atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However due to diplomatic reasons and a unwritten mutual agreement that war would distract forces from more pressing fronts, the Japanese were not at war with Russia until the German Surrender in April 1945.
Now understandably many of us RUSE players would wish to have Japan in this game, alongside the serried ranks of the other nations in this game. After all it would complete the set of major players in WWII (if we count the UK as a representative of all Commonwealth nations) and give us some 'cool' units like Zero Fighters Val Bombers and Sendai Infantry.
HOWEVER
As I mentioned earlier the co-operation between the nations of the European Axis and the Co-Prosperity Sphere was minimal, why? Distance. Now if you look at a globe you might see how far apart Europe and North Africa is to Japan and the pacific in general, if you were to look a bit closer at a map which also showed the physical terrain or climate you will also notice that the climate and terrain of Europe and South-East Asia is also vastly different. The main difference is that in Europe the climate is temperate, and the terrain varying in extremes from deserts in North Africa to tundra in Russia, but overall the climate and terrain is moderate, hills, woods and arable land making up the majority, with several heavily populated or industrialised areas dotted all around, there is also far greater infrastructure with motorways and paved roads spreading all over the continent like a spider's web, some dating from the times of the Roman Republic.
Conversely the climate of South East Asia and the pacific is tropical, and the terrain is mostly, Jungle, mountainous, and hilly, with marsh-like rice paddies in more settled areas. Cities are few and far between, most of them being either ports or glorified towns with little to no industrialisation, and subsequently there is a huge lack of infrastructure in the region, most 'roads' are dirt paths and rail lines only beginning to appear.
Due to this fact the art of warfare and field craft differs greatly between the Western and Eastern Theatres. In the West, there is a emphasis on large scale battles covering many miles of land, with co-operation between a vast array of battlefield roles such as infantry, tanks, artillery, planes, and mechanised units. Strategically there is a greater emphasis on movement, which is allowed because the superior infrastructure allows troops and supplies to be moved more quickly.
In East, warfare has a much larger emphasis on dismounted infantry units, fighting though Jungle terrain where visibility and vehicle movement is restricted. Artillery is mostly light because the roads do not allow large field guns to be moved, likewise tanks are very much smaller, most of them being light tanks like the Stuart or the Type 95 Ha-Go, the heaviest being the Sherman or the Type 97 Chi-Ha. Due to the jungle terrain and paddy fields tank movement was minimal, and for the large part was used for infantry support. Planes could do very little to support ground troops due to the jungle limiting visibility. Overall, fighting was a much slower affair in the far east and strategically the lack of infrastructure in South East Asia made advances a ponderous business, in the pacific it was based on very risky beach landings and 'island hopping', with fleet trains keeping Marines in supply.
Finally the aesthetic and materiel make-up of the forces involved in the pacific theatre was very different to the European one. The American and Commonwealth forces in the East had very different equipment to their comrades in the West. For reasons which I mentioned earlier tanks and vehicles were on the lighter end of the spectrum, with things like the Cromwell, the 17 pdr. and the Pershing making a no-show for example, the fact that these weapons were needed more in Europe than in the pacific is also a important reason why they were not sent to fight the Japanese.
Now R.U.S.E. is a WWII strategy game ostentatiously set in the European or Western theatre, therefore the factions involved are based on their appearance in the Western theatre, which for most of them (Italy, Russia, and Germany) was their only theatre. R.U.S.E. Also has all of it's maps based on European climate and location. Even the general mechanics of game favour the Western style of warfare which is based on grand battles, with much less emphasis on micromanagement.
Thus due to all of these factors the addition of a Japanese faction to the current game, or even the creation of a new game based in the pacific and the subsequent movement of the current factions intact would not work at all. The fighting styles do not fit together, nor do the mechanics.
tl;dr Version:
The pacific theatre was a very different place to the European Theatre; you didn't get half the units you see in the current game like Cromwells, Pershings, and Comets (oh wait those aren't in the game, how silly of me), the fighting style was different, with a greater emphasis on jungle fighting and beach landings, which is because of the terrain. So basically the armour base would be useless and poor old Japan would suck hard on a European map. With all those wide open spaces where it's Banzai charges and puny tankettes would be useless.
Conversely, Germany would have it tough on a Pacific map, no wide open spaces for Blizkreig, no breathing room for it's planes as they get shot down.
Long story short, Japan wouldn't fit into the current RUSE.
Reply With Quote
