AHC and WI: Early Japanese Victories in WWII

I'm not good at writing about wars, but I have this timeline idea that I REALLY want to try out.

In most of the incidents where there's a clash between Chinese and Japanese troops (the early ones), Japan loses. Not all, so it's not ASB.

Like Mukden, Marco Polo, and Shanghai. If they're Chinese victories (the question is how), I feel that:

1. Japan will be more hesitant in WWII, leading to delays in the actual war.
2. The independent Japanese generals won't be as independent and aggressive.
3. Huge morale drop for the Japanese until they start winning some victories.
4. If we're lucky, Japan will end up not continuing the war because Tokyo has greater control over the rogues.

But I'm not sure about exactly how probable it is. Any tips and hints?
 
China was pretty terrible at wars compared to Japan - and that doesn't say much, since Japan's still stuck in WWI in terms of tactics and strategy. For Shanghai OTL, for example, "early victory" was the main reason why the most-trained troops were sent in - but then they all got defeated, of course. Furthermore it was in China that Japan first saw successes in the "Banzai charge", which was a pretty terrible idea at that - shows how well the Chinese were trained in warfare.

In conclusion? The Chinese probably have very small possibilities at success.
 

Pangur

Donor
China was pretty terrible at wars compared to Japan - and that doesn't say much, since Japan's still stuck in WWI in terms of tactics and strategy. For Shanghai OTL, for example, "early victory" was the main reason why the most-trained troops were sent in - but then they all got defeated, of course. Furthermore it was in China that Japan first saw successes in the "Banzai charge", which was a pretty terrible idea at that - shows how well the Chinese were trained in warfare.

In conclusion? The Chinese probably have very small possibilities at success.

I am a little puzzled about this. I could and I am almost certainly wrong here but surely a Banzai charge is a sign of desperation and if the Japanese are using them then things cant be that good ?
 
China was pretty terrible at wars compared to Japan - and that doesn't say much, since Japan's still stuck in WWI in terms of tactics and strategy. For Shanghai OTL, for example, "early victory" was the main reason why the most-trained troops were sent in - but then they all got defeated, of course. Furthermore it was in China that Japan first saw successes in the "Banzai charge", which was a pretty terrible idea at that - shows how well the Chinese were trained in warfare.

In conclusion? The Chinese probably have very small possibilities at success.

But it's just 3 battles. Isn't there any way we can change the outcome?
 
I am a little puzzled about this. I could and I am almost certainly wrong here but surely a Banzai charge is a sign of desperation and if the Japanese are using them then things cant be that good ?

What I know is that there were such attacks used by Japan during this time, as a demonstration of the "superior" "Yamato Spirit". They tended to be very successful because the Nationalists easily fled in fear.

But it's just 3 battles. Isn't there any way we can change the outcome?
On Mukden:
Zhang Xueliang's small air force was destroyed, and his soldiers fled their destroyed Beidaying barracks, as five hundred Japanese troops attacked the Chinese garrison of around seven thousand. The Chinese troops were no match for the experienced Japanese troops. By the evening, the fighting was over, and the Japanese had occupied Mukden at the cost of five hundred Chinese lives and two hundred Japanese lives.
On Marco Polo, I'll deal with the Battle of Beiping-Tianjin since that was the actual war:
The Japanese then issued an ultimatum to General Song demanding the withdrawal of all Chinese forces from the outskirts of Beiping to the west of the Yongding River within 24 hours. Song refused, ordered his units to prepare for action, and requested large reinforcements from the central government, which were not provided.
(I thought this basically summarises the situation - peace between the warlords were still tenuous and, like the failed modernisation plan, nobody wanted to give up their troops.)
On Shanghai:
The Chinese soldiers had to rely primarily on small-caliber weapons in their defense of Shanghai, against an overwhelming onslaught of air, naval, and armored striking power from Japan.[4] In the end, Shanghai fell, and China lost a significant portion of its best troops, while also failing to elicit any international intervention.
Changes in tactics don't help in this case. We need a strong POD much farther back to allow China to win these initial battles.
 
Last edited:

Pangur

Donor
What I know is that there were such attacks used by Japan during this time, as a demonstration of the "superior" "Yamato Spirit". They tended to be very successful because the Chinese easily fled in fear.

Thanks, I had always thought that the attacks were mass suicide attacks rather than as you have described
 
Top