Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war approach?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war approach? Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war approach? - 4/18/2013 4:30:37 AM   
rmonical

 

Posts: 1397
Joined: 4/1/2011
Status: offline
Now that I have the Toide AAR off my chest, I can ask the question that has bothered me since I realized how rigidly WITE hard wires the Germans into the short war strategy. While there are compelling reasons to do this driven by the very nature of the Nazi regime. Alternative design elements would be interesting.

The design elements I think hard wire the short war approach are:
1. Of course, First Winter Rules are the major design decision. No German economy of force/logistics measures alter the impact of these frankly bizarre rules. They are the reason I lost interest in WITE the first time I tried it out against the AI.
2. Inability to structure the ground force. The Soviets have enormous flexibility to build support units, headquarters or divisions. The Axis have none.
3. Inability to structure the air force. If the Germans adopt economy of force in 1941, Luftwaffe casualties will be lower. Unlike the Soviets, the Germans will not be able to do anything with the excess planes as they build up in the pool. Burn them or lose them.


< Message edited by rmonical -- 4/18/2013 4:31:19 AM >
Post #: 1
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 4:58:50 AM   
navwarcol

 

Posts: 629
Joined: 12/2/2009
Status: offline
I do not think a game should FORCE those who purchase it into any set strategy. Everyone already knows how things went in real life, if we just wanted to copy it, we could read a book. This issue led me mostly to give up what otherwise would have been a great game here, also. The total freedom of action allowed to the one side that was historically also bound by many of the same idiotic rules the German side was, while still limiting the German side to be bound by the mistakes they made in history, even if you as a player do not make them, just really ended for me to set aside one of the most expensive games I have ever purchased, and to be careful about recommending or playing any future games. It really has been disappointing, because it IS such a great game potentially. I hope the same mistakes will not go into a WitE 2. I also know there are plenty (most of the people who still post here) who do not see it as a mistake. I can sympathize to a point with them, also..but still come back to the point that after paying 80USD for a game, I should be able to expect more from it...not hard coded guarantees that if I play one side, no matter what choices I make, I will be bound as if the idiot-in-Berlin is still making the historic mistakes, while the idiot-in-Moscow somehow did not order his army to stay on the line as he did historically, etc. And instead allows them to fall back almost all the way to Moscow.

(in reply to rmonical)
Post #: 2
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 5:02:23 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6415
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
If they start the game on 22 June 1941, yeah, much is going to have to be hardwired. Too many decisions already made and locked into.

If you want to fix the logistical mess they found themselves in you have to roll things back quite a bit before then.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to navwarcol)
Post #: 3
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 5:13:33 AM   
rmonical

 

Posts: 1397
Joined: 4/1/2011
Status: offline
quote:

If you want to fix the logistical mess they found themselves in you have to roll things back quite a bit before then.


You do not have to fix the mess to prepare for the long war. You just have to not make IT AS BAD AS IT CAN POSSIBLY GET. The Germans could have done much to prepare for the long war when the results at Smolensk became clear. Instead, they "officially" pursued the short war myth.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 4
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 5:13:53 AM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 1980
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
Like 1936 lol.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 5
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 5:19:28 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 2410
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
If you want a ahistorical game then of course you need to change VC, game end in say 1948, atom bombs and the like. No thanks. I like the historical flavour, indeed more please.



_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 6
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 5:20:48 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6415
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Rmonical, bear in mind that both sides are locked into things here. The Soviets are locked into their ridiculous forward deployment and utter surprise.

Hindsight is 20/20, shrug.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 7
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 5:29:17 AM   
navwarcol

 

Posts: 629
Joined: 12/2/2009
Status: offline
Agreed, or, you could hold the Soviet side to the same penalties theyhad historically.. or could leave a random chance that the Japanese did not agree not to attack the SU, etc.. a wargame is supposed to be about "what if xxxx had happened, instead" as long as the 'xxxx' is plausible... was it plausible that perhaps Hitler would have done as his high command was pressing him to do, and for example, allowed a military person such as Manstein to assume command in a military hierarchy over the war effort? Yes, that was plausible, the German High Command was pushing for this for much of the war.. it should be at least a random option that they won, which would have changed a lot. The Japanese decision not to attack the Soviets, also could have gone a different way, the Allied landings at Normandy could have been repulsed, it was in their own words a close run thing. An allied failure there would have released the German units pulled from WitE, and allowed them to stay put. The most infamous of these hard coded forced decisions is the units destroyed with 6.Armee at Stalingrad, being removed, even if you did not lose them in the historic pocket. The Soviet ability to magically evacuate factories and manpower from surrounded cities to other cities all the way across the map, etc... there are just too many examples to name. If the hard coded choices and results were forced on both sides, it would not be better though, I do not want the Soviet side stuck with the Stalin orders of "stand fast", either.

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 8
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 5:30:09 AM   
chuckles

 

Posts: 121
Joined: 10/26/2011
Status: offline
The wolf is slinking through the spring forest, He hears the quiet breathing of the bear in his hollow still asleep.
If he can just tear the bears throat out before he wakes.
Alas just as he gets a good grip, the bear awakens.
Game over.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 9
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 5:39:12 AM   
navwarcol

 

Posts: 629
Joined: 12/2/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: chuckles

The wolf is slinking through the spring forest, He hears the quiet breathing of the bear in his hollow still asleep.
If he can just tear the bears throat out before he wakes.
Alas just as he gets a good grip, the bear awakens.
Game over.

I somewhat agree chuckles.. but the ironic thing is that the bear only won with incredible effort, and valiant, heroic fighting, combined with a gigantic allied effort of shipping in supplies and weapons. To say it was a certainty, actually belittles those who fought it, and the millions of Soviets who sacrificed everything in that effort. The German army came within a hair of winning. The game seems also to assume the German side will win, without giving them incredible handicaps... so ironically we have the players being called "Soviet fanboys" (I disagree with the term, for the record) who despite their 'fanboy' view, seem to insist that unless you tie the Germans hands behind their backs, figuratively speaking, they are going to win ...

(in reply to chuckles)
Post #: 10
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 5:46:42 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 2410
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
People seem to forget that without said lunatics (Hitler and Stalin) there would be no war in the first place. We must have rules to reflect the political realities in a game of this scale. Indeed there should be more. Certainly concerning the Soviet running in 1941. Stalin simply would not tolerate any Commander doing that. Same for Germans running to Poland in the winter of 1941.

If a player wants to take on the role as dictator of Germany in WWII then WITE is not the platform for it. Read the bi-line for the game, you, the player is not Hitler or Stalin. You represent the High Command. You take your orders from Hitler or Stalin. Hitler wants a short war. So there you are.

If you want to be Hitler you need to play some WWII strategic level game where you can do pretty much as you please with your available resources. There are quite a few around I might add.


_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to navwarcol)
Post #: 11
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 5:52:54 AM   
rmonical

 

Posts: 1397
Joined: 4/1/2011
Status: offline
quote:

The Soviets are locked into their ridiculous forward deployment and utter surprise.


There is lock-in and there is lock-in. Compare your examples to say, historical arrival pattern for Soviet support units. A 2 point reduction in national morale if Leningrad falls. A two point reduction when Kiev falls. Another two points if Kiev falls before turn 10. A two point reduction in national morale if Smolensk falls before turn 6. etc. Those lock-ins would certainly tend to give the game a more historical flavor and are at least as reasonable as the blizzard German morale nerf. How about a 1 point reduction in national morale for every turn in July-September the Soviets make less than 20 attacks on the Germans.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 12
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 6:55:30 AM   
chuckles

 

Posts: 121
Joined: 10/26/2011
Status: offline
Hey I never said it was easy to get a wolf of your throat.

No need for any special rules to get the soviet to fight forward.

RRrate in baltic goes to 10 RRrate in the rest goes to 5 or better. (historical)

Soviet has to defend forward or its certain he will lose (or so Im told)

Remove the German spring surprise rule advantages. (gamey anyway)

The soviet now can defend forward. (playbalance restored)

I am a novice so I am relying on the seasoned players to think about this and tweak it here and there for "playbalance"
but that is the path the game needs to go down.

Best Regards Chuck.

(in reply to rmonical)
Post #: 13
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 8:48:13 AM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1661
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline
Germany attempted to fight short wars because they knew, Hitler included, they would be unable to win long ones against the big players of the day. That's not our hindsight, it was their own insight into their relative economic inferiority.

Intractable economic inferiority within the current global division of territories was driving Germany to war again, as it had in 1914. Had they not happened upon the use of armour to tear up the front, they may well have deluded themselves that they could start and win a long war. People, and particularly desperate people, have a terrible habit of self-delusion, but that's a whole different war and wargame.

For historical flavour, not only should there be mechanisms such as NM drops for the Russian '41 runaway, but Germany should have to get Ukrainian manganese production up and running within a time limit and keep it running, or risk economic collapse.

_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to chuckles)
Post #: 14
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 9:18:45 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6415
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Pffft. "Intractable economic inferiority" my foot. The impressive thing about Germany is how strong that economy has been for the last century and then some. They have been punching well above their weight the entire time.

They didn't have to go to war in 1914 for economic reasons, either. All Germany has to do to win is...what they are doing now, as a matter of fact. Sit tight and allow their productivity to zoom ahead and dominate the European market and assume inevitable political leadership of Europe. Ironically, they don't want it anymore.

War is for chumps.




< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 4/18/2013 9:45:57 AM >


_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 15
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 9:51:49 AM   
terje439


Posts: 6217
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline
The only thing I would really like to see for the Axis (espesially the Germans) are an ability to better manage your tanks. I do not intend to make an entire Tiger Division (would be neat though ^^), but to be allowed to not simply scrap my PzIIIjs because a certain date arrives. I would love to tell WhatEver#Panzer Division to keep their IIIjs, while Another#Panzer Division is allowed to update to newer versions.


Terje

_____________________________

"Hun skal torpederes!" - Birger Eriksen

("She is to be torpedoed!")

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 16
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 1:04:12 PM   
The Guru

 

Posts: 81
Joined: 12/24/2012
Status: offline
quote:

People seem to forget that without said lunatics (Hitler and Stalin) there would be no war in the first place.


Couldn't agree more. The very existence of such a brutal entreprise as WWII stems from a number of "psychological" conditions in the German leadership.
Players that want a WWII but with a very reasonable German leader in charge are asking for an historical aberration.
Players that want to play Barbarossa with a German High Command taking all precautions necessary to a long protracted conflict are asking for a historical aberration: had the Germans known, Hitler included, that the war in Russia was not going to be won in one single summer campaign, there wouldn't have been any Bararossa. full stop.

This is why I have always been a fervent advocate of VC that reflect the agressive nature of Barbarossa, that is, conquering strategic territory, instead of the current "let's invade Russia and try and loose as late as possible", leading to turtling up strategies. As I said many times, losing was not an option, whether in March 1945 or September 1945 made no difference at all.
Victory in wargames should measure performance relatively to the goals of the military entreprise portrayed, not the contribution to the delaying of defeat.

In the same way, Stalin is part of the WWII equation. The forward deployment the Russian player is stuck to (and should be) is only part of the very strategic conception that would have made a non-fighting general retreat before the Wehrmacht impossible.
The offensive doctrine was in-built in the Russian Army, only after incalculable disasters on the battlefield, and only then, did things start to change. Hence, also, my plea for elemnts in the game that portray that, and my earlier suggestions converge with rmonical's own:
quote:

A 2 point reduction in national morale if Leningrad falls. A two point reduction when Kiev falls. Another two points if Kiev falls before turn 10. A two point reduction in national morale if Smolensk falls before turn 6. etc. Those lock-ins would certainly tend to give the game a more historical flavor and are at least as reasonable as the blizzard German morale nerf. How about a 1 point reduction in national morale for every turn in July-September the Soviets make less than 20 attacks on the Germans.




< Message edited by The Guru -- 4/18/2013 1:11:18 PM >

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 17
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 1:51:43 PM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1661
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Pffft. "Intractable economic inferiority" my foot. The impressive thing about Germany is how strong that economy has been for the last century and then some. They have been punching well above their weight the entire time.

They didn't have to go to war in 1914 for economic reasons, either. All Germany has to do to win is...what they are doing now, as a matter of fact. Sit tight and allow their productivity to zoom ahead and dominate the European market and assume inevitable political leadership of Europe. Ironically, they don't want it anymore.

War is for chumps.




Yes, common sense tells us that strong growth is good. The truth of phenomena lies in their constantly shifting relationships, in which light, pluses often become minuses and vice versa.

Even if German economy of today and 1914-45 were a constant (they are not), the environment in which they operate is quite different. Germany, until recently, operated peacefully because since 1945 the west had no conceivably necessary war other than one of unification with the east. To wage this, it was unquestionably too weak.

The strength of the German economy existed in relationship to the British and French empires, the rising US economy and, post WWI, the rapidly developing Russian economy.

The British empire, particularly, made the German economy look third rate. Both empires hemmed in the German economy to the extent that, lacking sufficient internal market and resources, its growth actually became a problem, however third rate it was. The empires became a brick wall to the German economy zooming ahead, a problem the US also began to experience as it saturated its immense domestic market. Both countries were virtually forced to war, they just did it different ways and on different sides.

German industry was artisanal and could not compete with the production technique of the US. All the economic might of her inevitable adversaries put together, and Germany didn't have a hope in a long war.

Germany's position since the war is not comparable with that of 1914-45. Post 1945,the US, sharing the same problems, found a temporary solution in opening its sphere of influence to freeish trade under its aegis. Germany, in a broad sense, won the war along with the US. Unable to sustain their empires and trade barriers, Britain and France lost.



_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 18
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 2:07:24 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6415
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
I don't think you can really compare the British Empire to Germany in the long run. While the world wars accelerated the breakup, it seems to me that it was bound to happen. So it's a question of comparing the long term performance of the UK to Germany. And Germany wins here. Colonialism generally wasn't going to last for anybody.

The German General staff had convinced themselves that preclusive war against Russia was necessary, true, and it is also true that Russia was growing very fast and that its military potential would grow with it. But given their two front situation, Germany would have been better off seeking a defensive solution, and detaching the British from the French and Russians, not invading Belgium, etc. Keeping Italy friendly or at least neutral would also be a good idea. Wilhelmine Germany's diplomacy was amateur hour.

Japan is an interesting case here as well. They actually "won" the peace post WW2. Showing that their previous policy of colonialism and economic autarky was unnecessary and self defeating. Although they now have a terrible deflation problem that should have been addressed long ago. (BOJ finally has decided to get serious about this.)



< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 4/18/2013 2:13:25 PM >


_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 19
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 4:44:24 PM   
rmonical

 

Posts: 1397
Joined: 4/1/2011
Status: offline
I am not proposing anything radical here. The underlying notion is that by August it was increasingly clear that Russia was not going to be defeated in 1941. Preparing for the 1942 campaign starting in August 1941 instead of January 1942 is not a far fetched idea. What precludes it in WITE are the first winter rules which are largely based on the notion the German's attack all out until December, are deeper into Russia, and are physically and logistically all played out. The decision to not "burn" the Heer and the Luftwaffe in October and November in pursuit of an implausible quick victory could have been made in August. So my recommendations supporting the long war notion are pretty simple:
1. Recast the first winter rules to have a strong foundation in logistics rather than voodoo.
2. Give the Axis some of the same force structuring capability granted to the Soviets.
It is T41 in my game as Axis with Mehring and there are almost 1800 modern combat aircraft in the pool. There are maybe slots for 300-400 of them in the available air groups. Those 1800 combat aircraft have almost 3000 high powered engines in them. And we are entering another low air activity period with mud predominating so these numbers are going to get a lot more lopsided. In this game, recall that I ignored the Ukraine but captured Leningrad and Moscow. There are 13600 Soviet air losses to 3700 Axis losses.

Of course the response to my complaint is: "well, if you had figured out how to employ the Luftwaffe as the designers intended (AKA - experience higher casualties) then you would not have all of those air frames and aircrew sitting around." But I did not. And now I have significant combat power that cannot be employed by rule not reality. The ability to create more bomber units is huge because their morale falls so fast. Even if they sit in National Reserve 60% of the time instead of 30% of the time, the capability they add to key situations and overall higher morale is significant. And deploying as many fighters as possible is almost a no brainer because they have such a small logistics footprint.

What should WITE2 do with runaway German aircraft pools?

< Message edited by rmonical -- 4/18/2013 5:03:10 PM >

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 20
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 4:56:13 PM   
timmyab

 

Posts: 1025
Joined: 12/14/2010
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
I certainly think it should be encouraged.The Germans knew they had to win quickly and they were right.If you allow them too much freedom of action then the obvious strategy is simply not to invade the Soviet Union, which as others have said was clearly their best option.
I think there should be strong VP incentives throughout the game which virtually force the Germans to fight as far into Soviet territory as possible.These VPs wouldn't normally be enough for an outright win, but they would count towards the final score and should be valuable enough to incentivise them to hold ground even when it could make them vulnerable.
If you applied the same idea to the Soviets as well, then assuming equally matched players, the two should roughly cancel out and all you'd be left with is both sides keen to fight as far forward as prudence allows.

(in reply to rmonical)
Post #: 21
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 5:20:38 PM   
rrbill

 

Posts: 696
Joined: 10/5/2009
Status: offline
Hope WitE 2.0 improves the play of the campaign in Russia, troopers & up, but should stop short of replacing or reconfiguring Joe or Wolfy, A-bombs, and early development of die Wunderwaffen. Think this very broad scale geopolitical discussion is interesting but is the basis for an entirely different game concept. This still leaves clever thinking to reflect 2nd front, 3rd front, & Pacific effects. For me, its the historical Eastern Front that attracts me. Some variability in equipment, command decisions, strategic plans suits me. How much, remains to be seen. Ex-theater effects should be historical and variable to some degree.

Someone said that the Axis needed a military leader to run the war economy. Thought Germans had someone better in Speer, but maybe not soon enough. Even so, read the national statistics for Germany and all its foes and then think through a victory plan for Germany. Always remember that the other guy can be pretty smart and often as fanatic as yourself.

Let's never see some things included in the game, e.g., Eisenhower loses nerve on June 7, Tojo kisses up to FDR, Papa Joe satisfied with 1/2 Poland, Doernitz negotiates with Churchill, etc.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 22
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 7:17:02 PM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1661
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I don't think you can really compare the British Empire to Germany in the long run. While the world wars accelerated the breakup, it seems to me that it was bound to happen. So it's a question of comparing the long term performance of the UK to Germany. And Germany wins here. Colonialism generally wasn't going to last for anybody.

The German General staff had convinced themselves that preclusive war against Russia was necessary, true, and it is also true that Russia was growing very fast and that its military potential would grow with it. But given their two front situation, Germany would have been better off seeking a defensive solution, and detaching the British from the French and Russians, not invading Belgium, etc. Keeping Italy friendly or at least neutral would also be a good idea. Wilhelmine Germany's diplomacy was amateur hour.

Japan is an interesting case here as well. They actually "won" the peace post WW2. Showing that their previous policy of colonialism and economic autarky was unnecessary and self defeating. Although they now have a terrible deflation problem that should have been addressed long ago. (BOJ finally has decided to get serious about this.)



Not in the long run, perhaps, but Nazi Germany was a product of, and confronted, two old empires that dominated the world and its trade.

Indeed, nothing lasts, colonialism included, but in the ebbs and flows of history, one cannot rule out bouts of neo-colonialism, even. Having different causes from old colonialism and taking place in a very different world, they will not be the same, but in the sense of occupying or controlling territory for the control of various resources and the denial of these to rival powers, history is far from finished with colonialism.

I really don't believe Germany was ever in position to fight defensive wars last century, not in the context of its needs and enemies. Britain has always followed a policy of supporting a weak continental power against the dominant one, for obvious reasons. I am well aware of Britain's dynastic ties with Germany, and after WW I, enthusiasm among much of the aristocracy and middle classes for fascism, not least Lord Halifax's faction, which wanted peace with the Nazis. That said, these sections of society were not formulating policy and they lost out because other, more powerful sections of the establishment were entrenched in a policy tradition that had worked for centuries. Churchill was a great leader of his class and he won that leadership because his policy had deep roots which were not yet ready to shift.

That being so, Germany last century could not have split Britain from France. So long as they remained united, starvation was always going to be the result of a long, defensive war. If the Kaiser didn't, Hitler definitely knew it. In WW II it is true that Nazi racial theory allowed the calorific deprivation on the continent to be concentrated in sections of society deemed 'sub-human' but this was not a long term solution. The basic fact is that Europe could not attain calorific self sufficiency with the prevailing methods of agriculture, if it ever could.

Yes, Japan was also a winner, but that doesn't prove their previous policies were unnecessary. Autarky has long been used as a shield from an intrusive and powerful outside world. The peace imposed on the world by the US, then the world's biggest creditor nation, completely changed the game. Bit by bit it's been unravelling ever since, but it made possible the massive expansion in productivity and wealth that lasted into the 1970s.

Japan's been unable to solve its problems for decades, but not for want of trying. It was the 'carry trade' of low interest money from Japan to the US that helped inflate the speculative bubble that burst in 2008. Trouble is, you need to produce values to sustain a capitalist economy, and sell them at a profit. The powers that came out of WW II on top, today predominantly speculate and borrow. Germany is the exception, but Germany too, must find resources and markets.

_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 23
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 10:28:36 PM   
turtlefang

 

Posts: 334
Joined: 7/18/2012
Status: offline
1939 is an entirely different argument, but Flav is correct about Germany in 1914.

Germany had NO RATIONAL reason to go to war in 1914. If it had waited, it could have put both France and Britain "under" by economic power. It's performance during WWI was far and away above both France and British Commonwealth combine. During the war, German manufacturing increased by nearly 480%; French and British, even with US imports, by about 210%.

Britain, as a trading nation, was simply cut off by 1900 from most of the markets it needed to sell its goods. And when the US cut itself off from Britain and France, their major market simply disappeared - over night - literally. (Except, by the way, for banking).

While colonialism works great for getting cheap labor and commodity resources, if your major markets set up protectionist trade barriers - as the US did, to stop purchasing your high tech goods, your colonies can't afford them. And ultimately, they will become a drain on your resources. As a trading nation, Britain suffered when the "trade" literally dried up as everyone decided to do what Britain did to build their manufacturing industries up - tariff the heck out of imports.

Germany, on the other hand, had a number of "captive" internal markets that actually worked well for it until WW1 started. Austro-Hungarian, Russia due to prior relationships, many of the Balkan countries due to cheap rail transport, and Turkey. These export markets helped spur the German manufacturing growth. And these markets weren't going to disappear or be a drain on German resources unless it went to war (which it did).

And in the years before WWI:

Table 1: Percentage Distribution of the World's Manufacturing Production 1870 and 1913

(% of world total)
Country 1870 1913
USA 23.3 35.8
Germany 13.2 15.7
U.K 31.8 14.0
France 10.3 6.4
Russia 3.7 5.5

Going to war, as Mehring point out, Germany lacks one thing - food. Unless it could knock Russia out by 1916, it would starve. There simply wasn't enough land to grow the crops needed to supply the people.

So what did Germany do? Go to war.

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 24
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 10:28:44 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
What is 100% clear is Germany would have won very easly IF Hitler had committed all the troops to eastern front in June 1941.

As I have posted before Germany had another 1.5 million men on other fronts.

I have played this game enough to know if GHC had another panzer gruop or 2 more infantry armies Leningrad/Moscow and Stalingrad would have fallen easly. Then 1942 would have been nothing more then a mopping up operation.

Russian did not stand a snowballs chance in hell of holding off another 750,000 Germans which could have been easly moved from the western front to the eastern.

2by3's will have to really handy cap, hog tie Germany when the full War in Europe comes out.

Defeating Russia will be a cake walk with 2 or 3 more infantry armies.

Poeple really have to put blinders on to make them selfs believe Russia had a chance.

If Germany had simply committed ALL there troops to eastern front Russia did not stand a chance.

As has been pointed out more then a 1000 times.

Hitler and Stalin were morons, but WitE makes sure Hitler is still in charge by hog tieng Germany. Then they remove Stalin from the picture.

If you simply gave the German players the same freedoms that SHC players have the game would end in 1942 easly.

This is also not including the 1.5 million other German forses that could have been commited in June 1941.

How poeple can draw a historical out come from a game that hog ties one side and gives the other total freedom is silly.

Its ok to look at the numbers with and open mind and see that germany would have won easly, but thats counter to the what we been told for the last 60+ yrs.

We won the world is free. I had family fight, die lose limbs ect, but I can see what would have happened IF Hitler was not a dum ass.

In the end the USA would have won because we had the A-bomb.

Stop fooling yourselfs, give GHC players the same freedom as SHC or add in another 250,000 to 750,000 GHC men and its game set match.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 4/18/2013 10:38:50 PM >


_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to rmonical)
Post #: 25
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 11:20:45 PM   
rmonical

 

Posts: 1397
Joined: 4/1/2011
Status: offline
quote:

Poeple really have to put blinders on to make them selfs believe Russia had a chance.

If Germany had simply committed ALL there troops to eastern front Russia did not stand a chance.


Considerations:
1. The readiness of some (32) of those divisions is questionable (wave 13-15).
2. There remains the same logistics issues that faced the original sized force.
3. Many of those divisions not present on 6/22 were already allocated as East Front reserves.

Based on years old research, I count 221 Active divisions on 6/22. 76 were not deployed east. Of the 48 divisions in France 10 were enroute East and 12 more made it into the fight by Feb 1942. 23 of the remaining divisions were wave 13,14,15 divisions and of sketchy quality. Only 3 "experienced" divisions in France on 6/22 did not make it into the fight by February 1942.

Other deployments: Afrika (3); SE 8; Norway/Denmark 8 These other fronts included 8 wave 13-15 divisions.

Of the 64 Divisions not already allocated East, I count roughly 930K personnel including 421K in the Wave 13-15 divisions. (In game terms). I suspect many of those divisions were typically not up to strength given their deployment to inactive areas.

< Message edited by rmonical -- 4/18/2013 11:27:34 PM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 26
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/18/2013 11:44:29 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 2410
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Who is going to keep all the conquests under control? I guess you figure the subjugated people will be quite happy to live under the Nazi yoke even when they are no longer around. Maybe some Nazi scarecrows would do the job.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to rmonical)
Post #: 27
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/19/2013 12:40:32 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 722
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
Yeah. Like back to 1933!

Some of the logistical problems are inherent in the resources available (or not available) to the Germans.

But I agree with other posters, the crazy degree of freedom allowed the Soviets is, in many ways, worse than the constraints the Germans have to operate under.

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 28
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/19/2013 12:48:08 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 722
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
What is 100% clear is that your assertions are 100% wrong.

Manpower isn't everything, logistics is.

They didn't have the logistics capacity to add all those men to the East even if they'd been able to strip the garrisons in the west and balkans bare.

Wishful thinking won't change that.

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 29
RE: Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war app... - 4/19/2013 1:08:49 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: aspqrz

What is 100% clear is that your assertions are 100% wrong.

Manpower isn't everything, logistics is.

They didn't have the logistics capacity to add all those men to the East even if they'd been able to strip the garrisons in the west and balkans bare.

Wishful thinking won't change that.

Phil


Not true check the maps.

Kiev did not fall until September, its very clearly NOT a logistic nightmare to think another 2 armies could be not supplied that close to Germany is sticking ones head in the sand.

Open mind look at logic not political correctness.

MT I agree it would be hard, but even 300,000 more men would be say 20 divisions. Many of the 1.7 million men were simply sercurity units. So your still leaving 1.4 million in the west.

Also a very crappy German division is more then a match for 85% of SHC units in 1941, they would simply be used for flank protection. The better divisions would press the fight. Again simple strategy.

Be honest. Stalin was a complete moron, he sent everything he had forward,forward, forward and then forward some more. Not to hard logisticly to counter that when he is serving up the poor russian foot soldiers.

What ifs work both ways not one way.

and there are allot of SHC scarecrows that have been around for yrs that really need to be burnt.

Like the myth that Russia could solo Germany. Complete hog wash.

Russian population 176 million
German population 86 million

ratio = 2.04 to 1

Combat ratio on eastern front was at the best 3.75 to 1 from 41 - Dec 44. Much higher from 41 - Dec 43, 5 to 1

Germany was very easly bleeding Russia white. With out the Western allies Russia was toast, if you have an open mind and simply look at the numbers, which poeple have a very very hard time doing.

Poeple just have a hard time looking at the numbers only, when we have been told for decades the opposite of the numbers.

Thats fine I will simply go with the numbers and not feelings.

Heheheh see how Russia does without land lease trucks heheheheh

< Message edited by Pelton -- 4/19/2013 1:28:25 AM >


_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to aspqrz)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Should WITE2 force the Germans into a short war approach? Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.184