Seen a few posts about how Japan didn’t have SMGs. They did create and use the Type 100 in small quantities, but people keep saying “Well they need more SMGs since US has more models.” Well…Why? What’s the point in making this like chess, where both sides are outfitted the same? Sure, foreign models that they used probably will be implemented, and it would work fine, but we already are going to have some asymmetry when Tunisia hits, and we have smaller amounts of it now. So, let’s increase it in the case of Pacific: USA has more SMGs, okay, fine…Japan mounted bayonets to their Type 99 LMGs. So, how about starter squads have one machinegunner from the beginning, and their machineguns have less recoil. Pre-nerf recoil specifically. Boom, you have a tennoheika banzai-capable LMG.
Another option? Japan had more LMGs, bayonets, and knee mortars. The US counters with semi-auto rifles, shotguns, and SMGs.
Also, tanks. Some are going to be more against infantry than armor. For the Pacific starter tanks, I propose this: The first tank unlocks should be foldered in the campaign. We get both the Type 95 Ha-Go with a 37mm gun, and the Type 97 Chi-Ha, with the low-velo 57mm. One is good for anti-armor, the other anti-infantry. The US can get the M2A4 Stuart, and also the LVT-A(4) with the 75mm Howziter. The latter would start us down the road to amphibious vehicles, and open up amphibious invasions like Peleliu, Tinian, Saipan, Marshall Islands, you name it. For when something like the Sherman comes out, maybe the IJA should get the Lunge Mine before it, so IJA squads will have a close-range counter ready.
