Why would the USSR ever accept the Revised Borders and Friendship Treaty?

[OxfordGuy3]

Why would the USSR ever accept the Revised Borders and Friendship Treaty? The USSR moves 5% towards the Axis and Germany is much closer to Brest-Litovsk. Sure you get Lithuania (and Germany doesn't), but does that really make up for it, especially as if Germany doesn't annex Lithuania (as there is the trade-off of increased USSR mobilization), you still get Lithuania anyway?

[Taxman66]

If the Axis plan is for a strong/early Barbarossa, and not to crush Egypt ASAP, then they will DE Lithuania and will in all likelihood mean Leningrad will go down before the winter of 41.

[OxfordGuy3]

But if the Axis wants to do that, they don't have to offer the Revised Borders and Friendship Treaty in the first place.

[Taxman66]

True, but that tips the Axis hand a lot sooner.

Could also be the case of the Axis being flexible after the fall of Poland.

I think Germany Annexing Lithuania is a 7-10% USSR mobilization hit.
I'd be curious to how much MPP that actually amounts to from March 1940 until Barbarossa launches.

[OxfordGuy3]

Well I can understand why Germany might offer the Revised Borders and Friendship Treaty, but less why the USSR might accept it...

[PvtBenjamin]

To answer your question they wouldn't. The DE really only trips up very new players.

[OxfordGuy3]

It now seems more worthwhile to offer (and for the Soviet's to accept) the Revised Borders and Friendship Treaty in parch 1.25, no?:

1939 Campaign
- If the USSR has been offered, and rejected, a Revised Borders Treaty then it will now swing only 3-5% towards the Allies rather than 7-10% if Germany annexes Lithuania via DE 633 or DE 634 (AshFall).

- If the USSR has been offered, and rejected, a Revised Borders Treaty then it will now swing 7-10% towards the Axis if it annexes Lithuania, should Germany have failed to do so. To make this work, dummy Decisions 457 & 458 have been added, and Lithuania now starts pro-Allied rather than purely neutral, though still at 0% Mobilization. (AshFall).

[klschult]

IF you're playing the AI, no friendship treaty is a great option.

Sure Lithuania is closer to Leningrad,
1. BUT Lithuania is also a critical 3 hexes closer to Moscow.
2. From Wilno you can take Minsk on turn one, possibly leaving it with 5 supply so you can Operate troops in.
3. With luck a paratroop drop can take Orsha. (AI usually has a fighter there.)
4. With a bit more luck, you can force march to the hexes between Orsha and Minsk and Orsha will also be supply 5, if not it should be a 3 or 4..
5. This gets you a railhead15 hexes from Moscow, more than half the distance from Warsaw.
6. You strategic bomb Smolensk, and the Russians can't Operate troops in to defend it, kill the one army, and you take it on turn 2.
7. AND, if you're playing against the AI, it will fill in all the small towns west of the Pripyat Marshes with infantry units
- (Be sure to leave the RR line from Kiev to all those towns open so the AI can rush the walking dead in.)
- Then you the chance to kill them far west, rather than further east
- Where your supply is better,
- And You're already concentrated,
- AND you can surround all those units before killing them so they can't rebuild. (I just love surrounding Russian Corps with garrison units and letting them die of starvation, don't you?)
- And you do all that without delaying your main supply lines east: Wilno-Minsk-Smolensk/ Riga-Luga-Leningrad / and Odessa-Kharkov.

[Scottydawg]

As the USSR I never accept these revised border conditions. This is because of the reduced income for Russia, which I simply find unacceptable.

This means an almost immediate loss of Riga along with the at start forces surrounding this city. So what!!!

(the extra money will go a lot further toward thwarting the Axis advance than a few extra hexes in front of the German spearheads...if Leningrad isn't sufficiently fortified (fortressed) by this time it usually won't matter anyway)