Author Topic: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables  (Read 8688 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MWDabbs

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 217
  • -Receive: 285
  • Posts: 1270
  • Gender: Male
    • Opera Mobile Store Blog
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #30 on: 03:04 10-Mar-2013 »
Looked a bit further -- as the Scenario start date is May 1939, the Munich Agreement had already been signed per end of September, 1938.   It is the kind of Event would lead to a very short war.

In that scenario, Axis best case is Germany - Czechoslovakia, but could end up with Germany vs. Czechoslavakia - France - Russia (and possibly England).  Italy may or may not support Germany at that stage.  Romania seeing France adhere to its defense agreement would also probably remain Allied.  Aside from that, the chance of a catastrophic revolt in the Wermarcht. 

Completely valid though.  This would be a major component if I could back up the scenario time frame a bit, which IS arbitrarily determined in part on events and in part to keep it in the 350 turn range.  There are a lot of events leading up to 1939 that do deserve to be played out - but some of them go back to the mid-1930's and some earlier than that. 

The other weakness to TOAW is that it only provides for 2 sides; if it allowed for 3... it would be an order of magnitude more interesting and complex.  I'd be game for developing a full 1934'ish - 1945'ish campaign if that were in play.

Special note of the Munich Pact and an inventory of what Germany got out of the bargain could be made in the scenario notes.  There were numerous, numerous opportunities to have prevented the "World War 2" that we know -- starting with the enforcement of inspections extending from Versailles. 

The really hard part of going too much earlier than 1939 is finding accurate Orders of Battle for all participants. 
We cannot afford governments that cannot afford to take care of our veterans.

Online Fraucha

  • Administrator
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 3116
  • -Receive: 4846
  • Posts: 7356
  • Gender: Male
  • What's the future ever done for me?
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #31 on: 16:52 10-Mar-2013 »
@ John:
The Ju87 - probably the best dive-bomber ever - had a range of 500 km (later versions somewhat more, but not relevant in 1938 and 1940). It was a tactic, not a strategic weapon, by Hitler called, 'airborne artillery'. Totally dependent on land airfields (Germany never had aircraft carriers) - which is one reason why the germs had to invade Denmark before Norway.
They would have had to find the Danish navy (if it had been mobilized and put to sea), which would have been split, since there were 3 staits to defend, and then attack. As for the forts, remember what happened to the 'Bluecher', when handled by such a fort.
Still, we talk game options, not history.


500km range with a 500k bomb. That's 250km in hex space. Talking in Game Turns it depends on the hit % and roll vs the saving % and roll...in computer terms this depends on the matrix applied. In board game use I would use them based on their historical use as well as their success rate over the duration of the war. Keep in mind that the airfields were mostly grass along the fronts anyway. I, would take to the air against the small Baltic area and hope for enough damage. Finding the navy depends on weather and cap as well as hexes searched.

The chances of a micro managed air and sea force in he current iteration of this game is unknown to me. But I can say with all honesty without a dedicated management system (air to air, air to surface, search and discovery etc) we are just looking at slugging it out on land, with limited bombing capabilities. If a system like the board game Flat Top could be implemented it would make a huge difference in playability. Because now you have to manage supplies and routes as well as screens for each convoy, u-boats ... in the longrun, supply is a huge factor and often in many old skool boardgames "supply" is the name of the game and the key to a successful simulation. If the new game engine can handle that, it would be awesome.

And yes the Bluecher fell to a FORT due to antiquated thinking. In game, simply bomb the poop out of it before you send ship past it's guns, the advantage of hindsight.
« Last Edit: 17:10 10-Mar-2013 by Fraucha »
Peace is the failure of the military to convince the government that it can and should kick its enemies ass.

Offline Claus

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2616
  • -Receive: 801
  • Posts: 2069
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #32 on: 17:24 10-Mar-2013 »
About Norway..

If you have not been there, then you missed the most blissed landscape of the world!

Now, Norway was (and is) a very long, very narrow country. Whomsoever wanted to conquer her (1938 - 1940), would face huge problems; the germs solved that by attacking France, but that's another story.

Norway had the 6th biggest commercial navy of the world. But Norway did not have a navy strong enough to protect it...
j'y suis, j'y reste!

Offline MWDabbs

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 217
  • -Receive: 285
  • Posts: 1270
  • Gender: Male
    • Opera Mobile Store Blog
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #33 on: 07:25 12-Mar-2013 »
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/09/living/higher-call-military-chivalry/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

A worthwhile article for the nature of this thread - and for the BS consideration for a Drone Operator "Medal" with greater value than the Bronze Star or Purple Heart. 
We cannot afford governments that cannot afford to take care of our veterans.

Online Fraucha

  • Administrator
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 3116
  • -Receive: 4846
  • Posts: 7356
  • Gender: Male
  • What's the future ever done for me?
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #34 on: 09:31 12-Mar-2013 »
Sometimes a chisel is just a chisel until it has the hammer of government to drive it.

We were once nothing more than tools in a box, now my hammer is my Ukrainian wife  ;)
Peace is the failure of the military to convince the government that it can and should kick its enemies ass.

Offline Claus

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2616
  • -Receive: 801
  • Posts: 2069
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #35 on: 16:06 12-Mar-2013 »
Back to Norway
Back in history she was an Atlantic power, controlling most of Ireland, devastating Scotland, colonising Faeroe islands, Hebrides, Iceland, Shetlands, western Greenland, exploring the east coast of what is today known as, 'America.'
Then for reasons not relevant for this thread, Norway became part of the Kingdom of Denmark-Norway, and these kingdoms integrated to a degree I never heard of anywhere else without uniting; in my lifetime (childhood) books were printed and published in one language, and still today I think that the beautiful Norwegian language is Danish with a Swedish accent.
Yes, I am a fan of Norway!
The Danish-Norwegian navy was mostly crewed and commanded by Norwegians. Norway produced all the ore and had most of the industry. The army was mostly Danish, and 80% of the food eaten in Norway was Danish (except perhaps the fish). Symbiosis.
Then, during and at the end of the Napoleonic wars - Britain destroyed that and handed Norway to Sweden (simplification).
Well, Norway was never a Baltic power, and still is not.
(Sidetrack, Norway is the only free Scandinavian country today, Denmark, Finland, and Sweden being submissive parties of The Fourth Reich).

In 1938 Norway was a constitutional kingdom (king a dane), with a social democrat government, a strong geography, and a typical/scary attitude: Do not f**k with our freedom!
« Last Edit: 20:33 12-Mar-2013 by Claus »
j'y suis, j'y reste!

Offline MWDabbs

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 217
  • -Receive: 285
  • Posts: 1270
  • Gender: Male
    • Opera Mobile Store Blog
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #36 on: 17:02 12-Mar-2013 »
I think most of Norway's merchant fleet went on to do work with the Allied convoys; along with at least some of Denmark's.  Sounds like a battalion (or the better part of one) crossed from Denmark to be interned in Sweden.   Also sounds like a number of Danish ships were scuttled in 1943 to prevent the Axis from having them. 

To what extent did Norway engage in partisan operations against the Axis?   I know there was a lot of "small unit" activity - squad-sized groups and smaller, but anything at company/battalion level?   

Vidkun Quisling was the main pro-nazi Norwegian and is of some interest in the overall scheme of things for having enough influence to have gotten General Falkenhorst "retired".   
We cannot afford governments that cannot afford to take care of our veterans.

Online Fraucha

  • Administrator
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 3116
  • -Receive: 4846
  • Posts: 7356
  • Gender: Male
  • What's the future ever done for me?
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #37 on: 17:54 12-Mar-2013 »

To what extent did Norway engage in partisan operations against the Axis?   I know there was a lot of "small unit" activity - squad-sized groups and smaller, but anything at company/battalion level?   



Not much here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6th_Division_(Norway)

I will have to quiz my ex-wife to see what if any of my WW2 library she still has and then try to get it from her. "Hello Satan? Is it cold down there?"
Peace is the failure of the military to convince the government that it can and should kick its enemies ass.

Offline MWDabbs

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 217
  • -Receive: 285
  • Posts: 1270
  • Gender: Male
    • Opera Mobile Store Blog
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #38 on: 19:21 12-Mar-2013 »
That sounds like it may involve going above and beyond the call of duty, Fraucha... heh...

The Vemork heavy water facility was an allied target - for bombing and commandos which likely would have received local support.  Question how much and how persistent throughout Norway?

Almost every source indicates Germany had no chance to develop a nuclear weapon, but I'm a bit too deep into the conspiracy theories to be completely objective on that score. 

We cannot afford governments that cannot afford to take care of our veterans.

Offline Claus

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2616
  • -Receive: 801
  • Posts: 2069
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #39 on: 21:19 12-Mar-2013 »
Well, Mark.
Several issues.

All (well, 98%) Norway's merchant fleet joined the Allies. And the part of the Danish merchant fleet which was not in Denmark in 1940 did the same.

And yes, it is true that some 800 Danish infantry took the ferry to Sweden, armed and uniformed, in the morning of 9th April 1940; their commander knew that Denmark could not be defended and expected Sweden to be attacked as well, so better put the Danish army in Sweden. I know, because he was a friend of my father, and I met him often in my youth. They were interned, natch - but the 'funny' thing is, that no Swedish armed forces faced them - the late friend of my late father always puffed my father's cigars, sipping my father's whisky, and sighed, 'You know boy, we could have conquered Sweden that day, puff, pufff.'

1943 is a little more tricky. For a number of very complicated reasons, the germs did not totally  demobilise Denmark before then. If needed for your game, I can elaborate. As for the 1943 scuttle of ships, that was the entire navy (or 85% of it).

Norwegian anti-nazi (Norway never cared/gave a damn for 'Axis' - can you imagine Italians in their climate?). Well, first they fought very hard against germ invasion, navy and army. In 1940 at all and any level. Then, French and UK troops were withdrawn, because Norway was not that important.
After that, resistance divided (thechnically): Mountain-boys and Town-boys. Nothing much in common, except the desire to dispose of germs.

About Vidkun Quisling, the two most interesting facts are, that Hitler considered him a personal friend. But did not trust him with real power; that was given to Terboven...
« Last Edit: 21:25 12-Mar-2013 by Claus »
j'y suis, j'y reste!

Offline MWDabbs

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 217
  • -Receive: 285
  • Posts: 1270
  • Gender: Male
    • Opera Mobile Store Blog
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #40 on: 05:09 13-Mar-2013 »
Colonel Bennike made a unique point in history.    That's one thing I've never really found is how soldiers/pilots/sailors crossing into a neutral country are handled.  No game impact here, just a matter of curiosity and probably varies by country.  Internment suggests being placed in a prison, but I could imagine in many cases that would just be the local military or militia barracks "on their own recognizance". 

Thanks for the points on Vidkun Quisling - his friendship with Hitler explains the matter with Falkenhorst. 
We cannot afford governments that cannot afford to take care of our veterans.

Offline Claus

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2616
  • -Receive: 801
  • Posts: 2069
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #41 on: 16:26 14-Mar-2013 »
Mark,
two points:

According to Albert Speer and some other germ witers, Germany did not really care to develop nukes - they thought (correctly), that the war in Europe would be determined one way or another before nukes could be made practical.

How soldiers/pilots/sailors crossing into a neutral country are handled, depends. The Danish soldiers we talked about were disarmed and marched to a military camp north of Helsingborg, then just sent back to Denmark; they were so insignificant that neither Sweden or Germany cared. In early 1871 general Bourbaki led his army into Switzerland rather than surrendering to germs - what the Swiss did about them I do not know. Generally, it's my impression that in WW2 it depended on which side the 'neutral' country sided with (and that - naturally - would depend on the current power situation).
j'y suis, j'y reste!

Offline MWDabbs

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 217
  • -Receive: 285
  • Posts: 1270
  • Gender: Male
    • Opera Mobile Store Blog
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #42 on: 19:48 14-Mar-2013 »
The nuclear component - there's at least two positions to examine.   I agree with and have probably mostly the same sources regarding Germany not pursuing the nuclear bomb at least as of late 1942.  However, there is the 1,000 pounds of enriched uranium captured with U-234 - enough for 6 - 8 early bombs. 

One inclination I have is that it would be "more convenient" to suppress any notion that Germany was even close to building one, just as we suppressed several other Axis scientific advances.  The combination of V-2 and Nukes...

Given that Germany did not really move to a war economy until mid 1942 - deserves a measure of relief that they didn't start in 1941, or 1940.... or even 1939.  The jets, the infra-red scopes, air-to-sea and ground to air wire guided missiles, a variety of super heavy tank, etc. arrived too little and too late.  But despite strategic bombing, production of most equipment steadily increased in 1942, into 43 and late 44.
We cannot afford governments that cannot afford to take care of our veterans.

Offline Claus

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2616
  • -Receive: 801
  • Posts: 2069
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #43 on: 20:29 14-Mar-2013 »
Mark,
you seem to know quite a lot. Details. But look at the overall pic.

1) Germs did not want to bother about nukes, the war in Europe would be over before nukes could be applied. They knew that.
2) Germany did not move into 'total' war, until they (knew that) they already had lost it; a dictatorship can't.
3) Technology - germ all and everything was always better than anything the allies had, perhaps except the Katyusha; but wars are won by numbers.
4) Germans are stout, tough, dilligent, and hard working.

The victory of the allied powers was due to superior production capacity.
One example: The Sherman tank was not so very good, but if you apply ten-thousands of weaklings against a few hundreds of giants (Tiger and especially Panther) - shrug.
Another example: The Stormovik plane was nothing special, but it was easy to mass produce... And the far better (in every respect) Fw190 lost.

Clout matters more than quality.  :)
j'y suis, j'y reste!

Online Fraucha

  • Administrator
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 3116
  • -Receive: 4846
  • Posts: 7356
  • Gender: Male
  • What's the future ever done for me?
Re: World War II Project: Political-Economic Variables
« Reply #44 on: 06:24 15-Mar-2013 »
I must contend that though the nukes would not have been used in Europe, I suspect they would have been used on the US and also used as a deterrent against anyone else(Japan). To think that the Germans did not want to bother about nukes is short sighted. The Germans were way ahead of the curve and if it wasn't for a heavy intelligence network bearing down on them the US would not have had the capability at the time that they did to use the only two they had against Japan. What makes you think they had not planned on using them against the Russians? After all that is where their main thrust was, their main threat in numbers and production. Nuking the new Ural factories with V2s would have made a significant difference. Cowing a population that was used to being mind controlled by a government anyway would have been easier with long range rockets.

As production was key, in game terms it will be also. If U-boat production facilities were better protected, if the Luftwaffe was more effective... you could kiss the supplies goodbye coming across the Atlantic. Targeting troop transports would be of the most value given that they (soldiers, our young boys)  would never make it over. A call to get out of the European war would be so great that there is a chance we would, and only concentrate our efforts in the Pacific?? Maybe...remember we did have U-boats off the East Coast.

The whole point of this simulation and any simulation is NOT to repeat history. History we can read, we can repeat any scenario for historical value but the challenge would and should be a Nazi Victory and a Japanese Victory either together or separate. Beating a computer is tough as it relies on historical stats. Beating another human who has the PLUS capabilities of their respective side is better than kicking his/her butt in chess. Starting in the hobby when I was 9 was one of the most rewarding things I have ever done for myself, as it opened up a deep world of history and literally forced me to read hundreds and hundreds of books and took me to a place I would have never gone if all I ever did was watch the TV.

So as Mark develops his game, I look forward to the Germans sewing up Europe and a good portion of North Africa. Nuking the new Ural factories with V2s and gaining the vast resources that the Soviets. One People, One Country One Ruler....right? Adding diplomatic options only makes it much more fun. At this point and as most every game I have ever played ends in the usual Allied victory, not that I am never unimpressed with the Russians. But for one time, I would like to see the underdogs(Germans) see their Third Reich come to a harvested fruit and see if they can hang on to what they have. Imagine ... a Nazi Europe, Africa and South America? A Japanese Asia and the USA as the bone in the middle waiting to be chewed?

I digress. (Clearly I am not yet Ukrainian as I am thinking long term variants).

Ah...dreams before coffee lol

« Last Edit: 06:27 15-Mar-2013 by Fraucha »
Peace is the failure of the military to convince the government that it can and should kick its enemies ass.