Winter War

[Joseignacio]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Orm

But, remember, that in order to align Greece to USSR then USSR can't be neutral. In at least one of our games we were forced to make this double DOW even though we didn't want to. USSR was at war with Japan and we didn't dare risk that they aligned Greece to USSR.

----

I do not remember 5th edition rules well enough. I think there was some sort of multiple states of war rules. But I do remember that gamey things were common once. I seem to recall that it was very common for USSR to DOW Denmark, for example, just to mess with Germany. I think that in some version of the old rules it was common to declare war on the Baltic countries with Italy in order to mess with USSR.

It is no big problem for either Spain or Greece or Belgium or anyone that is DoW'd by the Axis to get aligned by Russia (as you say - as long as Russia is Active at this point). That does not mean that the axis power is at war with Russia. It does not mean the Nazi-Soviet pact is broken. It means it is at war with the minor. This is why there are MSoW rules that say you can attack anybody in a hex of a country that you are at war with.

So even if Russian units somehow get moved to those countries (and thus become "Peacekeepers" in WiF-slang), they will likely get massacred along with units of the minor, especially since they'd have a lot more trouble tracing supply then if it were CW that were sent in.

If Italy DOW Greece and Greece aligns with USSR then Germany is not at war with Greece unless Germany is at war with USSR. That was my original point.

But can USSR align it? Only if at war with Japan, isn't it?

[warspite1]

Yes to both questions above. The USSR needs to be active I.e. it needs to be at war with one major power to be able to align a minor

[Joseignacio]

Thanks, Warspite.

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Orm



There can easily be a situation where Italy goes to war with Greece when Germany may not be at war with Greece. This because Greece aligned with USSR and the pact can not (yet) be broken.

warspite1

Now my head hurts.... So to stop the Germans helping the Italians, the Allies just need to align Greece to the USSR?

Mmmmmmm...

Was that possible in 5th Edition can you recall??

Yes. Unless both Germany and Italy DOW Greece and then there is two US entry rolls for this.

But, remember, that in order to align Greece to USSR then USSR can't be neutral. In at least one of our games we were forced to make this double DOW even though we didn't want to. USSR was at war with Japan and we didn't dare risk that they aligned Greece to USSR.

----

I do not remember 5th edition rules well enough. I think there was some sort of multiple states of war rules. But I do remember that gamey things were common once. I seem to recall that it was very common for USSR to DOW Denmark, for example, just to mess with Germany. I think that in some version of the old rules it was common to declare war on the Baltic countries with Italy in order to mess with USSR.

If they are simultaneous, I believe only one roll. At least, in the USA entry actions card I read, action 16?

[Orm]

Just looking at the chart can cause some confusion about this, but the rules clarifies it. One US entry roll for each major power that dow that minor.


RAC: 13.3.2 US entry options
....
20, 31 & 32 Major Power declares war on neutral minor - roll once for each major power declaring war on this
minor this impulse.

[Orm]

This discussion begun because someone (read warspite1) was not happy that Germany could help Finland out with units during the Winter War.

He therefore suggested that "peacekeepers" should not be allowed. How such rule should be written I am not completely clear with but if it is something like follows.

If a MP is at war with a minor and not at war with the Major Power that has aligned the minor then the controlling MP may not enter the minor before going to war with the attacking MP.

In it is the winter war it would then be. USSR declare war on Finland and Finland aligns with Germany. German units are not allowed to enter Finland unless Germany is at war with USSR.

I think that most of us would be happy with the above. But with a rule like this then other things can happen. What if USSR declares war on Belgium instead of Finland. Then German units would not be allowed to enter Belgium unless Germany declared war on USSR. Same with Spain.

Then someone might argue that USSR can not attack Belgium but that is not true. USSR can invade Belgium from the North Sea. Or USSR could go to war with Japan. Send a TRS with a HQ to France and then attack Belgium from France. Same with Spain. So that USSR can not attack Belgium or Spain is not true. It might require some planning but it can be done. So then the rule above that seem to work for Finland need some modifications or exceptions or something. And then we are back to complicated.

[Joseignacio]

Orm, that are the explanations for the possible confuse actions:

The entry actions
The actions on the chart are mostly self explanatory. Those that aren’t are:

....

20, 31 & 32 Major Power declares war on neutral minor - roll once for each major power declaring war on this minor this impulse.

Now, if we go to the chart:

Axis declares war on minor:
Poland, Spain, Turkey or any in the Americas 12
Belgium, Finland, Rumania, Sweden or Switzerland 8
All other minors 3

The text explains that it's not totally comprehensive, it leaves only explains the more difficult options of the table, leaving the others as they are.

However, I agree this difference in rules/chart would look like the chart is obsolete.

[Joseignacio]

ORIGINAL: Orm

This discussion begun because someone (read warspite1) was not happy that Germany could help Finland out with units during the Winter War.

He therefore suggested that "peacekeepers" should not be allowed. How such rule should be written I am not completely clear with but if it is something like follows.

If a MP is at war with a minor and not at war with the Major Power that has aligned the minor then the controlling MP may not enter the minor before going to war with the attacking MP.

In it is the winter war it would then be. USSR declare war on Finland and Finland aligns with Germany. German units are not allowed to enter Finland unless Germany is at war with USSR.

I think that most of us would be happy with the above. But with a rule like this then other things can happen. What if USSR declares war on Belgium instead of Finland. Then German units would not be allowed to enter Belgium unless Germany declared war on USSR. Same with Spain.

Then someone might argue that USSR can not attack Belgium but that is not true. USSR can invade Belgium from the North Sea. Or USSR could go to war with Japan. Send a TRS with a HQ to France and then attack Belgium from France. Same with Spain. So that USSR can not attack Belgium or Spain is not true. It might require some planning but it can be done. So then the rule above that seem to work for Finland need some modifications or exceptions or something. And then we are back to complicated.

I would not like that either. Would be good if there wouldn't be any restriction to GE declaring war to USSR if they attacked Finland. Having to wait 1 or probably 2 years for this would mean there would be no Finland to support.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Orm

This discussion begun because someone (read warspite1) was not happy that Germany could help Finland out with units during the Winter War.

He therefore suggested that "peacekeepers" should not be allowed. How such rule should be written I am not completely clear with but if it is something like follows.

If a MP is at war with a minor and not at war with the Major Power that has aligned the minor then the controlling MP may not enter the minor before going to war with the attacking MP.

In it is the winter war it would then be. USSR declare war on Finland and Finland aligns with Germany. German units are not allowed to enter Finland unless Germany is at war with USSR.

I think that most of us would be happy with the above. But with a rule like this then other things can happen. What if USSR declares war on Belgium instead of Finland. Then German units would not be allowed to enter Belgium unless Germany declared war on USSR. Same with Spain.

Then someone might argue that USSR can not attack Belgium but that is not true. USSR can invade Belgium from the North Sea. Or USSR could go to war with Japan. Send a TRS with a HQ to France and then attack Belgium from France. Same with Spain. So that USSR can not attack Belgium or Spain is not true. It might require some planning but it can be done. So then the rule above that seem to work for Finland need some modifications or exceptions or something. And then we are back to complicated.

warspite1

I think a lot of my concerns have been allayed through chatting through the various scenarios. There are still areas that I do not like - the key one being Finland (Romania is in a similar position).

In that scenario my post 36 probably provides the least complication. Allow "peacekeepers" but in a much restricted (and more realistic) form. This would be no more difficult to administer than the minors leaving the country rule. Simply put, until the USSR and Germany are at war, Germany can only have 1 small infantry corps or 2 infantry divisions in Finland (and maybe one fighter unit). Those units can defend and attack normally.

Without that option in place my solution is to not allow Germans in Finland while the Winter War takes place. If Germany want to avoid the possibility of Finland getting crushed then they should allow the Finnish borderlands claim. If they want to take the chance then deny it.

It is the similar with Romania. If they do not want the USSR poking around Ploesti then allow Bessarabia to the USSR. If they want to take the chance then deny the claim and the USSR can invade Romania. If they do then Germany can send in "peacekeepers" as per Finland OR I would allow the Germans to cancel the Nazi-Soviet Pact. The Germans simply would not have allowed Ploesti to be threatened by the Soviets in real life.

This would be a variation on Joseignacio's comment re Finland. I WOULD NOT allow Germany to cancel the pact over Finland - but I most certainly would over Romania.

[Orm]

If USSR is aware that there can be German units sent to Finland and prepare for it then there is usually no real trouble with peace keepers in Finland. Or that has been my experience anyway. Not that we have see USSR claim the borderlands that often. But this is more because of the US entry penalty for the DOW than the difficulty to conquer Finland.

[Joseignacio]

ORIGINAL: Orm

If USSR is aware that there can be German units sent to Finland and prepare for it then there is usually no real trouble with peace keepers in Finland. Or that has been my experience anyway. Not that we have see USSR claim the borderlands that often. But this is more because of the US entry penalty for the DOW than the difficulty to conquer Finland.

Tell it to my mate. I had two GE corps in my TRS and AMPH and 1 div in a cruiser. And he did. In the first turn of the game! I sent later 2 more corps and some planes and it was all the same, he went on.

Finland is very weak even with the poor USSR forces in 1939. And the air superiority of the RU is overwhelming.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

ORIGINAL: Orm

If USSR is aware that there can be German units sent to Finland and prepare for it then there is usually no real trouble with peace keepers in Finland. Or that has been my experience anyway. Not that we have see USSR claim the borderlands that often. But this is more because of the US entry penalty for the DOW than the difficulty to conquer Finland.

Tell it to my mate. I had two GE corps in my TRS and AMPH and 1 div in a cruiser. And he did. In the first turn of the game! I sent later 2 more corps and some planes and it was all the same, he went on.

Finland is very weak even with the poor USSR forces in 1939. And the air superiority of the RU is overwhelming.

So how did it go? How long did it take? And how was the losses distributed? The end result?

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

ORIGINAL: Orm

If USSR is aware that there can be German units sent to Finland and prepare for it then there is usually no real trouble with peace keepers in Finland. Or that has been my experience anyway. Not that we have see USSR claim the borderlands that often. But this is more because of the US entry penalty for the DOW than the difficulty to conquer Finland.

Tell it to my mate. I had two GE corps in my TRS and AMPH and 1 div in a cruiser. And he did. In the first turn of the game! I sent later 2 more corps and some planes and it was all the same, he went on.

Finland is very weak even with the poor USSR forces in 1939. And the air superiority of the RU is overwhelming.

warspite1

I must confess I am amazed - presumably the Soviets rolled some pretty impressive dice!?

When I look at:

- the weather for much of the time in that region
- the number of lakes and swamp (meaning the hexes that the Soviets can attack from are limited). Just taking the hex north of Helsinki must be a nightmare. Presumably Tampere has to be taken out first - and that does not look easy?
- the amount of forest and swamp (halving aircraft factors and making movement slow)
- the poor quality troops (and numbers) that the Soviets have available

[warspite1]

So two questions for the Grognards please.

1. How often do you see the Soviets seeking the Finnish borderlands? Do they generally steer well clear?

2. How often (and why) would you expect to see Bessarabia being denied to the Soviets by Romania?

Thanks as ever.

[Extraneous]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

So two questions for the Grognards please.

1. How often do you see the Soviets seeking the Finnish borderlands? Do they generally steer well clear?

2. How often (and why) would you expect to see Bessarabia being denied to the Soviets by Romania?

Thanks as ever.

I don't claim to be a Grognard but here is my 2 cents worth.


Why have to deny Bessarabia? The Germans can declare war on Yugoslavia and align Rumania. With Rumania aligned the USSR cannot claim Bessarabia.


If Rumania cannot be claimed there isn't much left for the USSR to do but claim the Finnish borderlands. Preferably not on a winter turn which shortens the USSR supply range.

This will reduce the German/USSR Trade agreement by 1 resource and gain the Finnish borderlands.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

So two questions for the Grognards please.

1. How often do you see the Soviets seeking the Finnish borderlands? Do they generally steer well clear?

2. How often (and why) would you expect to see Bessarabia being denied to the Soviets by Romania?

Thanks as ever.

1) About 1 game in 3.

2) Less than 1 game in 10. The reason to do so might be;
a) Germany plan to attack USSR in the near future
b) A USSR DOW on Rumania has the consequence that USA may never DOW EuroAxis.
c) Late in the turn and likely that the turn will end so that Germany can force peace. (Note that depending on how the USSR units are placed this might not be possible even if it is late in the turn.)
d) No oil rule in play
e) Germany has plenty of units ready to be send to Romania.
f) Axis deems it worth losing three oil in order to delay US entry.
g) USSR has almost no units to invade Romania when the claim is done so that Germany will be likely to force peace.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

ORIGINAL: warspite1

So two questions for the Grognards please.

1. How often do you see the Soviets seeking the Finnish borderlands? Do they generally steer well clear?

2. How often (and why) would you expect to see Bessarabia being denied to the Soviets by Romania?

Thanks as ever.

I don't claim to be a Grognard but here is my 2 cents worth.


Why have to deny Bessarabia? The Germans can declare war on Yugoslavia and align Rumania. With Rumania aligned the USSR cannot claim Bessarabia.


If Rumania cannot be claimed there isn't much left for the USSR to do but claim the Finnish borderlands. Preferably not on a winter turn which shortens the USSR supply range.

This will reduce the German/USSR Trade agreement by 1 resource and gain the Finnish borderlands.

And reduce the trade agreement with yet another resource by aligning Romania.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

ORIGINAL: warspite1

So two questions for the Grognards please.

1. How often do you see the Soviets seeking the Finnish borderlands? Do they generally steer well clear?

2. How often (and why) would you expect to see Bessarabia being denied to the Soviets by Romania?

Thanks as ever.

Why have to deny Bessarabia?

warspite1

Because of the importance of Ploesti (especially if playing with oil). I did not know the rule about the Germans being able to align Romania because they have declared war on Yugoslavia.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

So two questions for the Grognards please.

1. How often do you see the Soviets seeking the Finnish borderlands? Do they generally steer well clear?

2. How often (and why) would you expect to see Bessarabia being denied to the Soviets by Romania?

Thanks as ever.

1) About 1 game in 3.

2) Less than 1 game in 10. The reason to do so might be;
a) Germany plan to attack USSR in the near future
b) A USSR DOW on Rumania has the consequence that USA may never DOW EuroAxis.
c) Late in the turn and likely that the turn will end so that Germany can force peace. (Note that depending on how the USSR units are placed this might not be possible even if it is late in the turn.)
d) No oil rule in play
e) Germany has plenty of units ready to be send to Romania.
f) Axis deems it worth losing three oil in order to delay US entry.
g) USSR has almost no units to invade Romania when the claim is done so that Germany will be likely to force peace.

warspite1

1. I am surprised its that many - it just looks like a Soviet graveyard and I'm not even playing with peacekeepers!

2. Thanks - these make sense.

[Orm]

1. I am surprised its that many - it just looks like a Soviet graveyard and I'm not even playing with peacekeepers!

As USSR I usually do not make the demand in the winter but in the spring or summer (if I make the demand at all). Makes a huge difference. If I would demand the borderlands during the winter then I would have recalled the Siberian units. That would reduce the effects of snow.

[composer99]

If I'm playing the USSR, I like to set up to claim Bessarabia straight away (that is, the second Allied impulse of the game). I have a fast unit in place to occupy East Poland in the first impulse and be in position to walk across the rail lines to block off German reinforcements. (All this weather permitting, of course).

That usually gets the Germans to either acquiesce or declare war on Yugoslavia in order to align Rumania.

Then, I have time to rail units up to claim the Finnish borderlands in the summer of 1940 when Germany's busy in France, if I feel like claiming it.