Japanese command culture was not mechanically rigid

Would Japanese junior officers have been too constrained to act after command casualties?

Formal discipline mattered. Experienced commanders could still foster initiative by giving objectives rather than prescribing every method.

Announced discipline is distinguished from the way commanders train officers to pursue an objective. Some 1930s claims about Japanese severity also served as public statements about order and national strength rather than exact descriptions of every shipboard practice. As a Royal Navy comparison, the Articles of War prescribed punishments that individual captains such as Thomas Hardy did not always use. The experienced Japanese cruiser captains in the scenario could likewise train junior officers by assigning objectives while leaving the method open. The army's more violent culture and naval factionalism ashore are also separated from the greater pragmatism required aboard ships, where replacements and medical help were harder to obtain. Formal rules, service culture, and practical command behaviour can therefore diverge, especially in a sudden and violent engagement.