The Pacific War 7: Japanese Infantry Kits -1 reply

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#1 10 years ago

This thread should be a continuation to the Japanese infantry weapons thread.

Topic is: How would you like the japanese infantry kits to be like in the contingent FH 2 pacific war release ?

I'll start with some important issues

1. The Japanese had very few Submachine guns Every available source tells that the japanese lacked greatly in numbers of SMGs compared to their opponent and every other army aswell.Their main SMG - the Type 100 - entered production in 1942 and only some 30 000 were made. Prior to the Type 100 they used an unknown number of Type 28's. Propably a lot less than 30 000.

My suggestion is (in order to limit the number of SMGs for the japanese) to give the NCO/officer class a bolt action rifle (Type 38 or 99) instead of an SMG.

2. The anti tank kit Some 62 000 brittish boys anti tank rifle were manufactured. The japanese equivalent to the boys rifle was the Type 20 of wich only 400 were ever made. So imo it makes no sense to include the Type 20 in the japanese anti tank kit.

My suggestion is to re-introduce the anti-tank rifle grenades that were used i the Bf1942 FH. I really liked them back then.

Or alternatively they can be equipped with Type 3 HEAT grenade on 1943-and-later maps.

The Type 20 can of course surface as a selectable kit certain maps and/or as a loose separate kit near the spawn points.

3. A Knee Mortar kit ?

I don't think the knee mortar should be the primary weapon of this separate class, rather a side arm, a powerfull one at that.

http://members.shaw.ca/nambuworld/t89pix.htmThe Type 89 covered the gap between the range a hand grenade could be thrown and the range of a true mortar... In a standard Japanese infantry division, a regiment of 3,843 men had about 108 of these, or one per 36 men, according to the US Army Handbook on Japanese Military Forces, October 1, 1944, p. 22. By comparison, the regiment would have had 112 light machine guns and 36 heavy machine guns. The Type 89 was extremely accurate in the hands of a skilled operator. The Japanese made about 120,000 of them.

..in other words in a standard japanese regiment the knee mortar was as common as a light machine gun (type 96 or type 99) in 1944. I think the knee mortar deserves a kit of its own.

My suggestions:

scout bolt action rifle + binoculars

assault submachinegun (limited)

knee mortar bolt action rifle + knee mortar (limited)

assault bolt action rifle + AT rifle grenade

support light machine gun (limited)

engineer bolt action rifle + the usual

NCO bolt action rifle + katana + nambu pistol (limited)

I don't know if there are different extents of limitations among the limited kits, so I just write limited

I cannot find anything about wether or not the IJA light machine gunners used a pistol or not. I think they should have the Type 94 pistol.

And of course should the NCO have smoke grenades also.




MSPfc Doc DuFresne

The forums staffers think I'm Cool

50 XP

3rd January 2009

0 Uploads

182 Posts

0 Threads

#2 10 years ago

Very ambitious for a first post, and if you keep up with posts like this(gradually improving of course) you will go far here. However, you plagiarized the name. Note that EVERY other thread labeled Pacific War #X, Army of has been done by Megaraptor. I think he has dibs on the name, as well as the fact that the previous threads were in depth examinations of that country's arsenal in the pacific, with photos and background info, whereas yours is a suggestion or discussion thread.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#3 10 years ago

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think any Japanese enlisted men received a sidearm.

And @ MSPfc Doc DuFresne, its OK with me if he uses #8, after all it's about the Pacific War and it's a useful discussion. I'll just make my next post #9.




MSPfc Doc DuFresne

The forums staffers think I'm Cool

50 XP

3rd January 2009

0 Uploads

182 Posts

0 Threads

#4 10 years ago

As for comments, you are a bit premature, a bit vague, and a bit incomplete. First of all, we don't know which campaign will follow Normandy, which is barely started; there is probably around a %30 chance of the next one being Pacific (Russia, France, Poland, Germany 1945, Italy are also competitors) This is FH, remember? We are insane for accuracy and details, you didn't even specify the make and model of each weapon, of the limited models you covered. This thread is by no means complete by FH standards to cover the entire IJA and IJN. Also, we choose kits on a battle by battle basis, based on date and unit(Guadalcanal saw USMC equiped with no Garands, as they were not available in the USMC at that time. The Paramarines, when they make an appearance, will in all likelihood be equipped with Johnson 1941 rifles and Johnson 1941 LMGs.) Megaraptor usually puts 1-5 days into each of his threads, looking at each individual weapon ever used by that force(USMC using the Boys? he has photos. And have you ever heard of a Charlton Rifle?) These threads are a lot of work, so be careful what you try to start. And don't forget pictures; we're all suckers for eyecandy to break up walls of text.

That research on the knee mortar was good; more of that and you are set.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#5 10 years ago

I would do it this way:

Scout: Type 99 Arisaka, smoke etc.

Assault: Type 44, grenades

Rifleman: Type 99 Arisaka, grenades, "knee mortar"

MG-gunner: Type 99 lmg

engineer: Type 99 Arisaka, mines, etc.

AT: Type 99 Arisaka, Turtle mines

Officer: Nambu Pistol, binocs, sword etc.

no smgs, only pickup.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#6 10 years ago

SMGs should be more common at later war battles such as the Philippines Campaign, Iwo Jima and Okinawa.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#7 10 years ago

Type 100s or MP28s?




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#8 10 years ago
MSPfc Doc DuFresne;4755037Note that EVERY other thread labeled Pacific War #X, Army of has been done by Megaraptor. I think he has dibs on the name, as well as the fact that the previous threads were in depth examinations of that country's arsenal in the pacific, with photos and background info, whereas yours is a suggestion or discussion thread.

Sorry about that Megaraptor. I forgot to check that.




MSPfc Doc DuFresne

The forums staffers think I'm Cool

50 XP

3rd January 2009

0 Uploads

182 Posts

0 Threads

#9 10 years ago
'[WDWMegaraptor;4755049'] And @ MSPfc Doc DuFresne, its OK with me if he uses #8, after all it's about the Pacific War and it's a useful discussion. I'll just make my next post #9.

...I don't think he would mind.




azreal

FH2 Betatester

50 XP

15th July 2006

0 Uploads

809 Posts

0 Threads

#10 10 years ago
MSPfc Doc DuFresne;4755059As for comments, you are a bit premature, a bit vague, and a bit incomplete. First of all, we don't know which campaign will follow Normandy, which is barely started

Think of it as campaigning for the next theatre. Which I hope it is because then I can convert my awesome, yet unfinished (FH1) Battle of Tinian map over to FH2.




  • 1
  • 2