ORIGINAL: Zartacla
ORIGINAL: Courtenay
Peacekeepers: the problem is that the rule is absurd. If any country intervened that way, they would be at war. I defy you to find a situation anywhere that duplicates the effect of the peacekeeper rule. If you put corps size ground forces in the way of an invader, you are at war with them.
But more importantly, the peacekeeper rule, like so many other WiF rules, is an abstraction.
warspite1
If it were an abstraction I could get comfortable with it – but it’s patently not. If there were an attempt to make it even remotely plausible I could get comfortable with it, but there isn’t.
Finnish Front
There is nothing in the rules to stop the Germans effectively fighting the Soviets in Finland (albeit they cannot attack the enemy). But with a few well-placed units, some air power and the Kriegsmarine, they don’t have to. The Soviets will have extreme difficulty in making any headroom – and it will cost them dearly.
So how could it work? If for example the Soviets invade Finland, and Hitler decides to help the Finns, he could send a limited number of troops.
- That number would be effectively reduced from the German OOB and given to the Finns (no need for different counters but for all intents and purposes the Germans are fighting in Finnish uniform – and across the front – not as a homogenous unit (that just requires a bit of imagination).
- That number would need to be limited – say two divisions or a small corps 4 or perhaps 5 strength but no more. In this case the German units could attack as part of a Finnish attack.
- No tank, motorised or mechanised units – infantry only
- Possibly minimal fighter aircraft support. Again, one counter and must be a second-line unit. E.g. No Bf-109.
- Certainly no Kriegsmarine support
Italy / France and the CW
Sorry but this is simply a NO under any and all circumstances imo. Churchill was desperate to keep France in the fight (and so was France funnily enough!). We are envisaging the following situation. We have to assume Mussolini decides he wants Corsica, French North Africa and Savoy. He doesn’t want any of the British Empire and so declares war only on France. It’s a stretch but I’ll go with it.
However, that is Mussolini’s side. What about Churchill and Reynaud? Italy has declared war on France but not the British. They launch an attack along the Mediterranean coast towards Toulon, supported by the Regia Marina. The French appeal for assistance from Britain.
Italian troops are being ferried to North Africa to seize Tunisia and Algeria and Morrocco.
"We need you to attack the Italian Fleet, they’re killing us here". Churchill chews on this cigar, sips a brandy and thinks about it for a nano second…. "Nah! I’d love to help seeing as I need my French Allies in the war and if the Italians break through it does not matter even if the Anglo-French forces hold the Germans in the north but you know what? I don’t think I’ll bother".
Where does that even begin to make any sense in the context of WWII?