The Butterfly Effect: A British AAR

[TheButterflyComposer]

I expect there to be a tremendous fight between the carrier lobby and the rest in the admiralty over which carriers are going east. It's clear the raf needs something for more aircover, the japs have loads of carriers so the Brits need to send something, but the question/bloody debate will be what, and how many? Carriers are thirsty and complicated, and so are their planes. Putting loads in the Far East in peacetime isn't happening. So what goes, and what's better of finding in the med?

 

[Wraith11B]

Perhaps they don't go so far as Singapore? Perhaps we see the rise of the Indian fleet, at Ceylon, or Diego Garcia?

 

[Casko]

Perhaps they don't go so far as Singapore? Perhaps we see the rise of the Indian fleet, at Ceylon, or Diego Garcia?

However,not sending it to Singapore, would make Australians nervous again, and make them at worse feel that the Home Islands are being schemy again and thinking with their wallets, rather than making sure to keep them safe from the Japanese.

 

[El Pip]

An excellent discussion on British Far Eastern Strategy, truly I am lucky to have such an erudite readership who discuss such important and interesting things
(No-one cares enough about Domestic Japanese politics or Manchurian economic policy to discuss them. This is good.)

They think they can take the British on all by themselves with the British waiting for them to try? Or they think they can take French Indochina and possibly the Dutch stuff without the UK getting involved? I can see why there's might be people in both camps but I'm not sure either idea holds much merit.

People in both camps. Most of the 'realists' obsessed over the US Navy and industrial capacity, so while there is a residual respect for the Royal Navy due to how the IJN was founded and originally built that does lead to a certain under-estimation - the IJN's baseline is what the British taught them, since then they have moved on and developed, but they still associate RN with that baseline. The Abyssinian War has changed that somewhat, but the Japanese never really rated the Italians so not that much, consequently the UK is not seen as the big threat.

Sorry for the late reply, the new forum did not deign to tell me that you'd updated...

Damned inept Swedes!

As ever intriguing stuff - I am not sure that I have ever, really, been comfortable in my own efforts dealing with Japan (itself, rather than UK / US responses) in any detail so as ever a breathtaking level of detail and your usual flair in writing it.

You are too kind.

- d'you know, I (still) wouldn't put it past the Japanese to have a go; a couple of AAR developments aside, the British look weak in the Far East, reinforcements aside the Japanese know that the requirement for strong Mediterranean and Home Fleets, as well as a sprinkling of supporting squadrons, gives them a chance of a concentrated force with a decent supply chain to Japan. Every week that the British have means more, potentially, for Singapore and a strong Pacific Fleet. Wait for trouble in India, or a diversion in Europe, and then strike. Is this not a similar calculus to the OTL one - just substituting the UK and its Empire for US? BTW, I'm not saying that Japan would win, but the British wouldn't have it easy.

- but yes, the postwar bit will be hilarious, and the Australian element, as you say, is fascinating.

That is definitely one way it could go. The issue would be the infamous L word. Without taking French Indochina the distances are daunting, certainly no chance of getting land based air anywhere near Malaya let along Singapore and a couple of days of sea voyage for any invasion force. But Japan was happy to take big risks in OTL, so it cannot be ruled out.

The timing Would have to be immaculate but yes, can see them thinking that with the empire so far flung, with divided attentions and focuses, as well as 'knowing' the Far East is the weakest part of their defences, I can see them giving it a go. It is arguable that should a crisis commence in Europe again, the Japanese launching a surprise attack that knocks out or at least damages a good chunk of the Pacific fleet followed by lightning fast invasions all across the board could possibly work better than OTL Pearl Harbour in convincing the government or public that it's better to withdraw from the furthest reaches of the empire because there's much bigger potential problems in Europe.

Or so the Japanese might think. However, TTL the British have staked a lot on the empire sticking together and distancing themselves from the German/French question. They can't just ditch the Far East without losing Australia, New Zealand and India from their clutches as well, which is frankly unacceptable for the public and the government as I think now stands. The British would have a hard time of it, especially on land in the short term, but they are going to have to girdle up and fight it out. The new deals and increased control the empire is flexing on china especially as the Japanese attempt to muscle in on it is only going to inflame jingoism. Having already won one, possibly two colonial wars with distinction (depending on how Spain goes) recently, I can't see the military, the government or the public backing down to Japan.

So yes, I can see the Japanese starting a war, and should that happen the empire will pretty much be forced to fight and see It through to victory, bloody though it might prove.

As you say it is something Japan could think. In addition to the excellent reasons you outline (which are sufficient on their own) there is another reason for Britian to fight - Malaya was the biggest visible source of dollar earnings in the Empire (the City of London was considerably bigger, but the tendency to discount finance/investment/etc in favour of things you can see is not a new trend). In a world of trade blocks, cleared quotas, bilateral credits and other such delights this matters far more than it does today. Of course under a Bretton-Woods system it becomes critical, hence the Malay Emergency.

With no real need for a heavy Mediterranean squadron (like, leave Hood out there with some light cruisers and a gaggle of destroyers and they're covered), and the Germans not nearly the threat forcing the British to maintain a heavy presence in the Home Fleet, a very significant force could wind up being based out in Singapore. These newfangled aircraft carriers proved their worth, but they're not going to be carrying enough airframes to do any significant damage to a large port, could they? cough, cough.

Correct on the deployments. As discussed back in Chapter LXXIV (which was over a decade ago. Bloody hell) Hood is in for her long over-due refit but the Med Fleet has been cut back to a few 'R'-class battleships and a couple of cruiser squadrons to keep an eye on Spain and Turkey.

Given the Royal Navy has already carried out a major carrier attack on Taranto (and had been planning it since 1933 at the earliest) there is very little chance of them allowing themselves to be Pearl Harbour'd.

I don't think Pip will deploy an enormous doomstack at Singapore. He covered the vast expense of convoys to support ships that far east in the Singapore update.

Not just that but I am sure he will want to use the narrative potential of the cavalry rushing east to relive the small but plucky force out there holding their own.

Indeed. Main Fleet to Singapore is a wartime order, not something to be carried out in peacetime. There is an Eastern Fleet based in Singapore, but it is a long way from being a doomstack.

After all who isn't inspired by the seige of Peking during the Boxer rebellion?

A mighty inspiration indeed.

I'm not so sure about not needing a large Med squadron. The French still operate in the Med. More importantly, the Med squadron is an in-between fleet, even if threats in the Med are limited, the Med fleet functions as a backup that can quickly deploy to the Atlantic or (somewhat more slowly) to the Pacific. The Americans are the main naval rival, and it may become necessary to fight them in both the Atlantic and the Pacific, at some point. The Med fleet should be organised with the Far East in mind, and thus it should not just be able to counter the French, it has to be strong enough to be able to fight the IJN head on. That means you need Carriers in the Med.

Indeed, deploying a big fleet to the far East in peacetime is way too expensive (not really modelled in game). I'd actually argue for just keeping a bunch of Heavy and Light Cruisers in Singapore, Hong Kong etc. Maybe a small Carrier? Just enough to show the Japs the RN is there and that it can interdict Japanese trade while avoiding the larger surface units.

No-one is thinking about America as a rival in a shooting war. It's not impossible, few things are, but it would take some quite incredible events for the commercial rivalry and naval jostling to develop into anything more serious. Japan is the rival and that comes from government and the Committee for Imperial Defence, so that is where Admiralty planning and deployments will focus, subject to the limitations of cost that have been pointed out.

You have got the basics of OTL British naval strategy bang on. The Med was the swing fleet as it could be in the North Sea in two weeks and Singapore in a month, while the Far East got some modern cruisers and HMS Eagle to show the flag. The Sub Flotillas were also expected to help delay any reaction, either by sinking things or making the Japanese advance cautiously due to the sub threat. In Butterfly things are somewhat different.

I expect there to be a tremendous fight between the carrier lobby and the rest in the admiralty over which carriers are going east. It's clear the raf needs something for more aircover, the japs have loads of carriers so the Brits need to send something, but the question/bloody debate will be what, and how many? Carriers are thirsty and complicated, and so are their planes. Putting loads in the Far East in peacetime isn't happening. So what goes, and what's better of finding in the med?

Eastern Fleet in Singapore has two carriers, Courageous and Glorious are on first rotation, along with three Queen Elizabeths. As is noted this is exactly the wrong size force, big enough it's loss would alter the (short term) balance of power but too small to do the wartime job required of it. The Admiralty are not happy about it, neither are the Treasury, but a lot of political promises were made in the inter-war about the Fleet being deployed where the threat was and the Dominions and Far Eastern interest are calling them in.

RAF Far East is aiming for ~400 odd aircraft with a strong RAF/ RAAF / RNZAF / RCAF contingent of Hurricanes and (eventually) Wellingtons alongside the Hampdens, Flying Boats and a to-be-decided torpedo bomber. The RCAF are allegedly temporary while they get some experience on their new Hurricanes and Australia gets it's own production line going, but temporary commitments often prove sticky.

In any event, given the lack of any Japanese land bases anywhere nearby a few squadrons of Hurricanes for defence is believed to be more than enough.

Perhaps they don't go so far as Singapore? Perhaps we see the rise of the Indian fleet, at Ceylon, or Diego Garcia?

However,not sending it to Singapore, would make Australians nervous again, and make them at worse feel that the Home Islands are being schemy again and thinking with their wallets, rather than making sure to keep them safe from the Japanese.

Casko has hit the main point - Singapore was promised "if the international situation allows it". The international situation in Butterfly definitely does so it would be a full blown Imperial Row if some portion of the Fleet didn't got to Singapore. Plus an absolute fortune was spent on the place and it has the dry-docks, stores and guns to support a large fleet, while Trincomalee is an amazing harbour but lacking in facilities while Diego Garcia and Port T are just ideas in the Admiralty's planning file.

 

[Cromwell]

I feel you are really tempting fate there with those comments Pip. You know Freud would have said really you do want to see people bring up Manchurian economics and industry.

The ability to raise and support a great many troops from their colony could be of vital importance if they go to war with a certain northern power (and I'm not on about Pontefract!)...

 

[TheButterflyComposer]

(No-one cares enough about Domestic Japanese politics or Manchurian economic policy to discuss them. This is good.)

It's almost like we promised to be good if you updates.

 

[Casko]

(No-one cares enough about Domestic Japanese politics or Manchurian economic policy to discuss them. This is good.)

While I might have may have been willing to discuss it, you were quite throughout about it.
And my main thing is that its "interesting stuff" and I'd love to see how it goes down the line, in say 10 years time, and how well can Japanese go through with their Japanization efforts. as Manchuria is mighty huge place. and even if you can settle the coastline and the more urban areas with a mix of colonists and japanized locals, you're still stuck with a rather massive landmass of 1.554 million km².

Korea is also interesting, but so far it seems to be pretty same to OTL Korea. And we'll see if Japanese can hold onto it. As its quite literally the doorway to Asia for Japanese.
I Did appreciate the fact that you mentioned the successful colonization and Japanization of the Formosa, as this is often overlooked due to VARIOUS reasons.

Similarly I do wonder, if Japan was to loose to british, I do wonder how would the post war borders be. As I'd imagine British would be far happier to not utterly crush the Japanese Empire as Americans did. so things such as Pacific islands, and Taiwan could well stay in Japanese hands, and Manchuria be turned to some kind of disgusting "International demilitarized zone" to act as a massive landmass to deter Soviets, Chinese, and anyone else in the are from getting too uppity.

Given the Royal Navy has already carried out a major carrier attack on Taranto (and had been planning it since 1933 at the earliest) there is very little chance of them allowing themselves to be Pearl Harbour'd.

Americans were also quite into their own carrier airpower development in OTL... yet despite that....

 

[TheButterflyComposer]

Similarly I do wonder, if Japan was to loose to british, I do wonder how would the post war borders be. As I'd imagine British would be far happier to not utterly crush the Japanese Empire as Americans did. so things such as Pacific islands, and Taiwan could well stay in Japanese hands, and Manchuria be turned to some kind of disgusting "International demilit

Well anything that could threaten Australia will be taken away as a given, so their Pacific islands will probably get pinched and split between U.K. And Empire forces. The chinease mainland depends on how on the ball the forgiven office is in china proper, but probably some form of huge partitions/straight line border gore unless some warlords/the chinease government/the japanese impress the British or someone sensible is in the FO and is listened to.

Not crushing Japan is probably quite on the cards though because for a long time the British and Japanese quite liked each other. Lots of common ground and culturally similarities aids diplomacy, it's only after ww1 that things get sour for a while. If the Japanese can agree to a post war strategy of splitting south east Asia between the U.K. And themselves, there might be something in that. And they'll have some negotiating power, because whilst they will inevitably lose the naval, and thus land war in the Pacific and Asia, actually invading the home islands is probably beyond British power or will. Firebombing it flat might work but that would be distasteful. So there will have to be some form of agreed peace, unless the Brits developed nukes and use them. They might.

In summary, the empire isn't certain to be dismantled by the British, but the pacific bits will be, for the good of their own empire.

 

[Wraith11B]

The main reason that the Brits and the Japanese had the falling out in the Twenties was due to Americans "encouraging" the British that they would sign the naval treaties if the Brits terminated their alliance with the Japanese... Could the British reevaluate that decision given American weakness?

 

[Kurt_Steiner]

Britain should begin to kick bottoms in both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. First get rid of the Natsees, then of the Japsn, next come the Commies and finally the Yanks. Easier written than done, but in El Pip we trust.

PS: About the forum changes. Right system, wrong colours.

 

[TheButterflyComposer]

The main reason that the Brits and the Japanese had the falling out in the Twenties was due to Americans "encouraging" the British that they would sign the naval treaties if the Brits terminated their alliance with the Japanese... Could the British reevaluate that decision given American weakness?

Well I can understand the uk dropping Japan for an alliance or even better relations with their troublesome little creation that keeps trying to be just like mummy and build the world's largest navy. The new reality however is that the US are dormant and probably not coming out until the fifties at earliest unless someone's dumb enough to attack them. Japan on the other hand is ruthless, powerful, wants to empire build in Asia and, crucially, can't overpower the empire unless the commonwealth collapses. The two empires have a much greater chance of doing a deal that allows them to both exploit the heck out of china for the next fifty years than the yanks do with GB.

I am keenly aware I may be ignorant of a horrible detail which means that the British and Japanese became mortal enemies in the previous twenty years which makes any deal impossible until everyone on both sides is long dead but I'm sure el Pip will swiftly strike this down with furious anger if it is so. Besides, I seem to be getting things mostly correct at the moment. Who knew not being on drugs made you coherent?

 

[Casko]

someone sensible is in the FO and is listened to

foreign office, and sensible, is like asking for British to drink coffee, rather than tea. it just doesn't happen often enough.

The main reason that the Brits and the Japanese had the falling out in the Twenties was due to Americans "encouraging" the British that they would sign the naval treaties if the Brits terminated their alliance with the Japanese... Could the British reevaluate that decision given American weakness?

To be honest, one of the easiest ways for British to save their naval expenses, and to keep Australians happy at the same time, would no doubt be, to rekindle the Anglo-Japanese Alliance. After all, breaking this alliance was what made Australians so very unhappy in the first place. This however makes the Americans very unhappy as ever. But then again... Americans are isolationist, and stuck in their own little mess... so maybe they'd simply ignore it... But then again... Americans do have the nasty habit of poking their noses where it doesn't belong at the worst of times...

 

[Dragon50]

(Manchurian economic policy)

Wait this existed. I thought it was just a group of shady japanese businessmen.

Personally I doubt a far more assertive britain would allow japan to invade, for example the dutch east indies. Maybe French Indochina, but even that would be simply because of sheer dislike of the French.

While a Anglo japanese alliance might sound good on paper, I'm not sure how eager the Japanese elites would be for it.

 

[Casko]

While a Anglo japanese alliance might sound good on paper, I'm not sure how eager the Japanese elites would be for it.

Well, The original reason for Anglo-Japanese pact was fears of Russia in China... and let's say that Communists in china were to be receiving Russian support... Or that the Communist chinese score some big wins against the Nationalists could make the two island nations realize that rather than fight each other, its better to fight some communists instead. for example.
it really depends how things change around Japan as much as it does with Japanese.

 

[TheButterflyComposer]

Hmm. So Pippy has some leeway to go several directions?

We might be here a while...

Happy VE day

 

[Wraith11B]

Hmm. So Pippy has some leeway to go several directions?

We might be here a while...

Happy VE day

Because we weren't going to be here awhile anyways?

 

[TheButterflyComposer]

Because we weren't going to be here awhile anyways?

I suppose of all the great hoi2 AARs, this one literally has meandering as a Mission statement because it seeks to catalogue butterfly effects.

 

[Killerduck]

A bit offtopic, but have any of you tried Aurora? It's a 4x space game with pretty realistic mechanics (for a game) - ships need to be overhauled, crews need shore leave to maintain morale, combat is extremely detailed...

Never played it (plan to) but mention of Hood being in overhaul reminded me of these mechanics in Aurora, which are lacking in HoI. Seems like the closest thing for someone wishing to play a real navy (even if it's in space)

If there is something similar for history games, please let me know.

 

[El Pip]

I feel you are really tempting fate there with those comments Pip. You know Freud would have said really you do want to see people bring up Manchurian economics and industry.

The ability to raise and support a great many troops from their colony could be of vital importance if they go to war with a certain northern power (and I'm not on about Pontefract!)...

Freud said a lot of things, one of which was "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." This is an insight his predecessors failed to properly appreciate.

War with an evil Northern power that, if left unchecked will unleash great evil, and isn't Pontefract? I am glad you have come around to my policy of Invading and Utterly Destroying Sweden.

It's almost like we promised to be good if you updates.

Well yes, but the last thing anyone expected was for everyone to actually mean it.

While I might have may have been willing to discuss it, you were quite throughout about it.
And my main thing is that its "interesting stuff" and I'd love to see how it goes down the line, in say 10 years time, and how well can Japanese go through with their Japanization efforts. as Manchuria is mighty huge place. and even if you can settle the coastline and the more urban areas with a mix of colonists and japanized locals, you're still stuck with a rather massive landmass of 1.554 million km².

Korea is also interesting, but so far it seems to be pretty same to OTL Korea. And we'll see if Japanese can hold onto it. As its quite literally the doorway to Asia for Japanese.
I Did appreciate the fact that you mentioned the successful colonization and Japanization of the Formosa, as this is often overlooked due to VARIOUS reasons.

Thank you saying it was thorough, I do try. Korea is pretty OTL, probably some different generals running the garrisons and maybe a few different administrators, but policy remains the same; industrialisation to serve Japan and Japanisation of the inhabitants. Formosa is a lot further along that path and nothing has happened to change the plan.

Similarly I do wonder, if Japan was to loose to british, I do wonder how would the post war borders be. As I'd imagine British would be far happier to not utterly crush the Japanese Empire as Americans did. so things such as Pacific islands, and Taiwan could well stay in Japanese hands, and Manchuria be turned to some kind of disgusting "International demilitarized zone" to act as a massive landmass to deter Soviets, Chinese, and anyone else in the are from getting too uppity.

Australia was always ajitating about the South Seas mandate that Japan got after WW1, so I would assume the Carolines and Marshall islands go to Australia. Reduces Japan's ability to project power and makes Canberra happy, plus the islands were only ever a 'mandate' from the League and not Japan proper so it maybe stings a bit less to lose them?

Taiwan could go either way. It is worryingly close to Hong Kong, but that sort of thinking ends with you taking over the world (suddenly Taiwan is the edge and you need to annex the next place, then the next and so on). I'm not saying the British Galatic Empire would be anything but Great and Bountiful, but it is sadly not this story.

Manchuria is a surprisingly resource rich place, but it is also corrupt, violent and expensive to run. The British are not going to want the costs of running it so some sort of fudge would be very likely.

Americans were also quite into their own carrier airpower development in OTL... yet despite that....

USN pre-war carrier thinking was very different from RN, not just Pacific vs Atlantic but where the carrier sat in the fleet. So a carrier aircraft port strike was a part of British naval thinking in a way that it was not for their US counter-parts and they will be prepared for it. Instead they will make all new and exciting mistakes, because everybody does.

Well anything that could threaten Australia will be taken away as a given, so their Pacific islands will probably get pinched and split between U.K. And Empire forces. The chinease mainland depends on how on the ball the forgiven office is in china proper, but probably some form of huge partitions/straight line border gore unless some warlords/the chinease government/the japanese impress the British or someone sensible is in the FO and is listened to.

Not crushing Japan is probably quite on the cards though because for a long time the British and Japanese quite liked each other. Lots of common ground and culturally similarities aids diplomacy, it's only after ww1 that things get sour for a while. If the Japanese can agree to a post war strategy of splitting south east Asia between the U.K. And themselves, there might be something in that. And they'll have some negotiating power, because whilst they will inevitably lose the naval, and thus land war in the Pacific and Asia, actually invading the home islands is probably beyond British power or will. Firebombing it flat might work but that would be distasteful. So there will have to be some form of agreed peace, unless the Brits developed nukes and use them. They might.

In summary, the empire isn't certain to be dismantled by the British, but the pacific bits will be, for the good of their own empire.

The Japanese mandates don't really threaten Australia though. Truk Harbour, the big Japanese base is ~700miles from the nearest bit of Papa New Guniea. Nearer 1,200 miles from some part of PNG you might care about like Port Morseby. Obviously if the Japanese are utterly free of distraction and have naval supremacy then they could project power over that sort of distance, but if that happens many, many other things have already gone wrong.

Plan against Japan was take the outlying parts, thrash their fleet back into port and then blockade. Because of course it was, why vary a plan that has worked so well in the past? If Japan doesn't accept any terms then just starve them a bit more. Or as you say Bomber Command will happily demonstrate why traditional japanese home construction is so conductive to starting fire storms. I'm not saying this plan will work, or even happen, but it is the strategy that is planned for.

The main reason that the Brits and the Japanese had the falling out in the Twenties was due to Americans "encouraging" the British that they would sign the naval treaties if the Brits terminated their alliance with the Japanese... Could the British reevaluate that decision given American weakness?

Well I can understand the uk dropping Japan for an alliance or even better relations with their troublesome little creation that keeps trying to be just like mummy and build the world's largest navy. The new reality however is that the US are dormant and probably not coming out until the fifties at earliest unless someone's dumb enough to attack them. Japan on the other hand is ruthless, powerful, wants to empire build in Asia and, crucially, can't overpower the empire unless the commonwealth collapses. The two empires have a much greater chance of doing a deal that allows them to both exploit the heck out of china for the next fifty years than the yanks do with GB.

I am keenly aware I may be ignorant of a horrible detail which means that the British and Japanese became mortal enemies in the previous twenty years which makes any deal impossible until everyone on both sides is long dead but I'm sure el Pip will swiftly strike this down with furious anger if it is so. Besides, I seem to be getting things mostly correct at the moment. Who knew not being on drugs made you coherent?

Japanese complaints about not being treated as an equal at Versailles were not entirely groundless. They always glossed over the whole "You weren't in the trenches, so shut up" part of the argument, which I personally feel has a lot of weight to it, but equally the racial equality clause was shot down by Australia and the US mostly because they were worried about Japanese immigration and wanted to favour European migrants, so there is some bad blood from that. Then there was Japan's relaxed approach to intellectual property and licencing in the inter-war, not quite Poland bad (no-one was) but it did wind people up. Finally Britain had (mostly) committed itself to an internationalist/organisational approach in the 20s and 30s; the League, the Naval Treaties, Lorcano, that sort of thing. Japan decsively rejected that even before they quit the League, so again a big divergence.

Fundamentally the issue is neither want a partner in carving up China, they have big commercial rivalries (cotton, shipping, Japanese exporters trying to break into East Africa, etc) and no big external threat to justify an alliance. OK the Japanese are paranoid about the Soviets, but Britian isn't, or at least not in a conventional conflict sense.

Britain should begin to kick bottoms in both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. First get rid of the Natsees, then of the Japsn, next come the Commies and finally the Yanks. Easier written than done, but in El Pip we trust.

PS: About the forum changes. Right system, wrong colours.

That would obviously be the dream.

foreign office, and sensible, is like asking for British to drink coffee, rather than tea. it just doesn't happen often enough.

Why would anyone want that barbaric bean juice? The graph of Coffee Consumption vs Collapse of Empire is compelling, sadly.

To be honest, one of the easiest ways for British to save their naval expenses, and to keep Australians happy at the same time, would no doubt be, to rekindle the Anglo-Japanese Alliance. After all, breaking this alliance was what made Australians so very unhappy in the first place. This however makes the Americans very unhappy as ever. But then again... Americans are isolationist, and stuck in their own little mess... so maybe they'd simply ignore it... But then again... Americans do have the nasty habit of poking their noses where it doesn't belong at the worst of times...

The Americans would be very annoyed about it and I doubt Australia would be that much happier. The memory of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance is more pleasant than the reality, it was falling apart even before the naval conferences, one of the reasons Britain was happy to let it lapse.

Wait this existed. I thought it was just a group of shady japanese businessmen.

Those words could also be used to describe the mainland Japanese economy, the critiques of the zaibatsu were not without merit.

Personally I doubt a far more assertive britain would allow japan to invade, for example the dutch east indies. Maybe French Indochina, but even that would be simply because of sheer dislike of the French.

While a Anglo japanese alliance might sound good on paper, I'm not sure how eager the Japanese elites would be for it.

French Indochina would be a big ask for Britain to defend. Paris' failure to turn up has annoyed pretty much everyone bar the hardcore Francophiles. Japan holding Indochina would make Singapore more vulnerable, it would certainly make Hong Kong even less defensiblev and harder to reinforce. If France asked for help and there was some quid pro quo going on then yes, but I could see the British staying out.

And an excellent point on the Japanese not necessarily wanting an Alliance. There would be factions in favour (the modernisers, the Strike North lot, Treaty faction of the IJN, those rare officers who could count industrial capacity) but equally many against (Strike South, the Banzai mob, anti-treaty faction, merchant class, seom of the Zaibatsu).

Well, The original reason for Anglo-Japanese pact was fears of Russia in China... and let's say that Communists in china were to be receiving Russian support... Or that the Communist chinese score some big wins against the Nationalists could make the two island nations realize that rather than fight each other, its better to fight some communists instead. for example.
it really depends how things change around Japan as much as it does with Japanese.

The Nationalists did get a great deal of help from the Soviets, Operation Zet and all that. So there is potenital there. Though if there is no war then Chiang doesn't get desparate so Zet never happens.

Hmm. So Pippy has some leeway to go several directions?

We might be here a while...

Happy VE day

Because we weren't going to be here awhile anyways?

Damn right we were going to be here for as long as it takes. Nothing hasty or preciptious about this.

I suppose of all the great hoi2 AARs, this one literally has meandering as a Mission statement because it seeks to catalogue butterfly effects.

Lies! There is no such mission statement, because I have standards and will not have any truck with such waffle as mission statements. What Butterfly has are pillars, specifically;
• Slower-than-real-time speed
• Terrifyingly and excessive levels of baroque detail
• Derailment away from the main plot
• Techporn

A bit offtopic, but have any of you tried Aurora? It's a 4x space game with pretty realistic mechanics (for a game) - ships need to be overhauled, crews need shore leave to maintain morale, combat is extremely detailed...

Never played it (plan to) but mention of Hood being in overhaul reminded me of these mechanics in Aurora, which are lacking in HoI. Seems like the closest thing for someone wishing to play a real navy (even if it's in space)

If there is something similar for history games, please let me know.

I don't think there is such a thing, but if anyone is aware please do speak up because I have played Aurora 4X and it is a terribly wonderful timesink. It's spreadsheets in Space and a bit niche as a result, but I do like the detailed ship design and that keeps dragging me back in.

 

[TheButterflyComposer]

Plan against Japan was take the outlying parts, thrash their fleet back into port and then blockade. Because of course it was, why vary a plan that has worked so well in the past? If Japan doesn't accept any terms then just starve them a bit more. Or as you say Bomber Command will happily demonstrate why traditional japanese home construction is so conductive to starting fire storms. I'm not saying this plan will work, or even happen, but it is the strategy that is planned for.

What I expect the british will try is pretty much that. Use the bigger and better navy, flatten the japs at sea, take all their outer islands and airfields then blockade the heck out of the home islands whilst land garrisons defend their borders.

This is probably the cheapest, least complicated and most traditional plan the british can come up with so they'll probably try it first. Of course, they may have trouble finding and sinking the jap navy decisively. They got lucky in the med since it's both not very big, the Italians couldn't leave, and they knew pretty much where they were going.

Taking their pacific islands, turning then into airstrips and garrisons isnt going to be cheap and simple either. The brits may well decide building a lot more carriers would be more worth their while (since they probably aren't planning on keeping the entire pacific afterwards aside from the bits Australia wants).

Ok so we all assume japan is going down fairly hard (I pretty much agree unless they do something good on land) so what are we thinking post war? We've all sort of mused about Australia getting a few bits, which they probably will, but but what about malaya, Taiwan, manchuria, Korea, china etc? Most of these places are valuable but complicated and I dont think the british are that into taking super big empire projects anymore. Commonwealth realms, colonies, protectorate, keep with japan, what are the options and what will happen?