I am shocked by the Russian manpower...it is insanely high with their losses. They should be down around 30% but instead have no issue. That is worrisome if they can hold out as they did in this game. IN fact all countries should be low on manpower...especially the UK and the Russians. Both stated in everything I have read that they had nothing left...what was marching was what they had.
Germany was down to less then 10%.
But I guess if more games can make it to 45...and they can actually be fights we will see if there is a real issue.
Outside that it was a fun game.
I wish the rules had not changed in the middle...But when you have to upgrade you have to upgrade.
With respect to Russian Manpower:
1. Barbarossa didn't begin until 1942. This meant that I was able to "save" additional manpower during the extra year by building additional large corps. Then after Barbarossa I could disband these corps from time to time and regain the Manpower. This is why the Russian Force Pool shrunk from a high of over 2200 to only about 1800 by Wars end.
2. Russia has had very few casualties for the last several turns of this game and I haven't built any new Russian units in quite a while. So it has been gaining about 36 manpower per turn for almost 6 months now.
3. Russian casualties in this game are a pittance to what they were historically. In game terms, historical casualties were probably more like 5000 to 7000.
With respect to British Manpower, I found this on the web (not sure if it is accurate or not)
"The reduction of the British infantry divisions in the 1944, was ultimately a POLITICAL decision, not a military one. Churchill decided to built up the Navy, and keep the RAF at a fairly large size, while industrial/Farm production was kept at full blast. The Army, especially the infantry was given low priority. The British had perhaps 20 divisions (UK Only) fighting on the Western Front and Italy. Compare that to WW 1, where you had 50 UK Divisions on the Western Front alone in 1918. And this was after, the British army had suffered 500,000 KIA in 1914-1917. Throw disabled through wounds and POW's and the Uk permanent losses up through 12-31-17, must have been at least 1,000,000. Yet, the British maintained 50 infantry divisions and fought massive battles in 1918, including the German Spring Offensive and the final 100 days.
Compare that to 1944-45, where the permanent Army losses were only 250,000 through May 1944. And KIA in the NW Europe Campaign were only 30,000. The British had gone to war in 1939 on the understanding there would be no more Sommes or Pascahandeles. And Churchill was willing to take only a certain amount of Army losses. The other point, which someone else made, is that given the much larger size of the Soviet Army and the US army, it made no sense for England to twist itself into knots trying to put another 10 Divisions in the field. Better to just concentrate on the Navy and RAF and keep up the standard of living."
At the end of WWI the British had an army of 3.8 million. At the end of WWII it was only 2.9 million. But they had 1,000,000 men in the RAF.