JerseyJohn
-
Posts
6,549 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by JerseyJohn
-
-
Magnifying glass?
"Let's see, I know he answered it somewhere, it's got to be in that post, somewhere. If not between the lines, perhaps if I focus between those two letters? -- Or maybe those two?"
-
Thank you, Baron. Whether it's true or not it makes a great story. :cool:
-- A driver? Everyone who's ever been a passenger with me behind the wheel has always said I ought to have one. :eek:
In one of Kurt Vonnegut's novels the main character has an ancestor who looks and dresses like Abe Lincoln. He's walking around Gettysburg during the battle and is killed by a Confederate sharpshooter, who is himself shot a moment later. As Union soldiers gather around his last words are, "You can all go home now, boys. I just killed old Satan."
-
Thank you, Hubert, for the Definite Maybe!
Snowstorm, you are definitely spoiled. What Hubert said back there was a veritable treasure trove of information. You should have been around in the old days when a definitive answer was a single wink, and nothing more. Many a poor soul desperately waiting to be enlightened used to, well, sort of flip out. :eek:
AZGungHo. Thanks for the explanation, and the link. I went there and it's a great place to read up on these things. Seems to me that rotating troops in and out of elite forces is a very good idea, helps elevate the overall level and also prevents internal animosities. Also explains why one of my grandnephews who was in a combat unit in Iraq -- no idea if it was considered elite or not -- is being switched to a flightline unit for his tour in Afghanistan. Seems weird to hear that he's getting two tours in his first (probably only) hitch. That used to be unheard of (when I was in the AF), unless the trooper requested it.
-- He's stationed in California now and has just had his third car accident in as many months. I told him they ought to get him to Afghanistan right away, for his own safety.
-
Arado I think the USSR by itself could bulldoze its way through Manchuria, provided the support line was adequate. But if Hubert's supply representation is as good as I think it is, we'll see that the Soviet Siberian Army should have a good starting stockpile, but everything else will need to come in very slowly, squeezed through the Trans-Siberian Railroad. I remember reading somewhere that many of the troops sent from Siberia to fight at Moscow actually walked the whole way because the railroad system couldn't handle the load!
So, in that situation, 1,000,000 troops would be worse than having 100,000 because those other 900,000 would break the supply system!
Conversely, if the Japanese and Americans gain the offensive they'd also need to wait for a built up supply network after the initial gains.
-- Here's a question for Hubert: Is there any way to build up supply networks? I'm sure that would be needed almost anywhere in Asia before sizeable forces would be able to operate any distance from their main depots.
Interesting view of the Chinese in all of this. It's like what I was asking earlier, where would they fit in when the United States (their friend) and Japan (their enemy) form an alliance?
Not being locked into the historical alliances creates a lot of really great possibilities. I think the key, on a global scale, will be to handle diplomacy as well as the military and other major aspects of the game. Getting a key minor ally in strategically important areas where neither side has any great access will turn out to be very important.
-
Thank you, SeaMonkey. I agree with you, we have to wait for either Hubert, or one of the inner-inners to reveal a little more before we can speculate much further. And those victory conditions, that ought to be one for the ages!
PowerGmbH I've always wondered about that, about why Hitler didn't just keep taking the lopsided trade agreement with the USSR for another year while tidying things up in the Mediteranean/Middle East, and launching a truly nightmare submarine campaign against Britain. No doubt he honestly felt the Soviet Union couldn't hold out longer than the first two months. That being the case, and with him feeling the main enemy was the UK, it seems strange that he didn't plan policies for the east that would have gotten the population to see the Axis as saviors, rather than persecutors and enslavers.
AZGungHo Ah, so there's more to the screen name than I thought. As a young kid in the early fifties that Randolph Scott Gung Ho movie used to play all the time on TV and was one of my favorites. There were so many WWII movies, made during the 1940s, playing so often on fifties television that it was probably 1956 before I realized we weren't still at war with Germany and Japan. I had no idea what was going on with China and Russia since in some movies they were our friends, and in others they were our villains. :confused: -- A lot of those movies I still remember in fragments and they're never played anymore. I found out decades later in a pair of obituaries that one actor who always played fanatical Nazis, usually SS, was actually Jewish! While two other actors who played the most hated kind of Japanese were in fact Chinese.
First time I've heard that the marine raiders and the rest of the corps didn't get on very well. Hope you'll elaborate on that, sounds very interesting.
Interesting thoughts on that mega-Axis. The late historian Stephan Ambrose discussed that possibility and said it would have been the start of the modern dark ages.
-- I like the Civil War idea. I'd give them about 5 years, tops, before they began infighting. It seems most likely that it would have been Germany and Japan vs the USSR, nibbling at it from both sides like a pair of predators taking down a much larger prey.
-
Don't know the captain's name, but the tall unionist has to be Abraham Lincoln. :cool:
I remember someone saying "It's a good thing Early was late."
-
Snowstorm, When I suggested it I was joking, but who's to say, perhaps with your powers of persuassion Hubert might be inclined to put something like that in the game. The problem, of course, is any of us can look at a world atlas and know where to go drilling for oil, or speculating for mineral resources. So, perhaps some sort of randomizer too?
:cool:Arado, SeaMonkey In a game where it's
Germany-Russia vs US-UK-Japan, it would be like Thadeus Mahan duking it out with Liddel Hart; sea war vs land war.
Both are pretty perfectly laid out. The Axis has a huge connected interior front, but with the overwhelming majority of good lines of transportation west of the Urals. East of the Urals there would be the single line of the Trans-Siberian Railroad. Next stop Manchuria.
Presumably the USSR fighting a protracted land war in Manchuria and Outer Mongolia would, sooner or later, run into the same logistics problems that the Czar's army ran into in 1905. Could this be offset by the USSR troops better armor and heavy artillery? The Soviets defeated the Japanese twice during the undeclared war in Outer Mongolia, but are they logistically able to advance?
Meanwhile, Japan would be receiving US reinforcement and heavier equipment from across the northern Pacific. US air power supporting Japanese ground troops. I think Manchuria would be a stalemate with lines moving back and forth occaisionally, but without anything decisive happening. What else does Russia attempt? A drive through the Himalayas? One through Persia and/or Iraq?
Where does China stand in this, Japan have been its invader and the United States its friend?
In the Atlantic, as you said, SeaMonkey there's the old risk route from Brazil to West Africa. I think the Congo and Brazil would become very important and would see huge battles; the question is, on which side of that route would they be fought?
And, of course, if the UK is in the war, and Italy in the Axis, it's the historical WWII in Europe except Germany hasn't got a Russian front to drain its troops and resources. That ought to make things interesting. I can't see the Allies every successfully staging the invasion of Italy, or getting back into France. North Africa? The Middle East?
As was discussed earlier, if the UK falls before US entry, or if it is just defeated so the United States doesn't use the British Isles as a staging area, then the whole thing takes on a totally different look. Victory would have to be determined, as SeaMonkey said, along the periphery.
Deciding on victory conditions would really be a challenge. :eek:
-
In a global game Italy's East African colonies might become a factor.
Also, Arabian oil has been mentioned a few times in various threads. I'm not sure but I don't think Arabia was a major oil producer in 1940. Also, there's oil in Libya, but no one knew about it at the time. Wonder if there's something in the game for discovering and developing resources?
OW!! :eek: Hubert, I don't mind you throwing a book, but a brick?!! :eek::eek:
-
Large EDIT: I agree it is Dietl.. I`ve seen a few more photos.
@ JJ: may I ask which was your most beloved CW game? You would be amazed how many CW Reenactment groups you will find in Germany.. we are in the 65th year of american occupation, and some aspects of american culture find a lot of friends.
There is an interesting fact: I was interested in the CW since I was a teenager (North against South has certain similarities to the fight Germany against Russia, but just a few).. and after my 20th birthday my parents revealed to me that I`m a quarter american.. but this fact has nothing to do with my interest for that war.
Glad we're all agreed about it being Dietl. Had a good chuckle from your saying it might be a major asking Hitler if he wanted a cup of tea.
Actually, I'd believe he had a general who did that, not a major. 
I was doubting it as well, but Xwormwood and Kuni convinced me.The American Civil War from Sumter to Appomattox put out by Interactive Magic back in the early Windows days is the one I like best. Unfortunately it has some kind of flaw in it and will only work properly for the first year or two game time, then the supplies drop to zero or something, and, of course, everything goes haywire.
Very interesting about your being part American. I'm part German and Austrian, a little Irish but mainly Italian.
Never really thought of Germany as being under American occupation all this time but I suppose that's one way of seeing things. I remember the late sixties, when I was in the Air Force, and Germany was one of the choice postings.
The American Civil War was the first wargaming area I got into. That's because the centenial came up when I was 12, but interest really started a year earlier in 1960. There were Civil War games all over the place, most of them just toy soldiers on a map. And a lot of movies, TV shows etc.
I remember buying one of Avalon Hill's early board games, Battle of Gettysburg and I thought they forgot to put the rules in the box. A few years back I looked it up on the Internet, read an article about it and it turns out they didn't actually have any written rules, just a mapboard with a grid and cardboard pieces. Some were tiny squares marked OP and HQ, other large rectangles were infantry divisions, and smaller rectangles were cavalry brigades and slightly smaller rectangles were artillery units, I think they were II & III markings. My fellow eleven year old buddies liked the idea of not having rules because it meant we didn't have to ignore them, we always made up our own rules anyway.
-
AZGungHo, sounds good to me.
I think American entry into WWI was a combination of factors with the Lusitania and publication of the idiotic Zimmermann Telegram finally pushing it all over the edge.*
I got a chuckle from the line in the movie Reds where the American journalist John Reed boils it all down American having too much capitalist interest in Great Britain to allow that country to lose. The reason I got a chuckle is my father (who was born in 1914) used to say that whenever we got into a discussion involvning WWI. -- Reed appears to have said that at least two years before the United States became involved.
Anyway, I'd say some formula for adding up different provocations would be great. Perhaps a 3/4 DOW event attached to Germany occupying, or annexing, Iceland. And a 100% DOW attached to Germany annexing, or occupying, any part of the Western Hemisphere proper.
It would be fun to add a Zimmermann Telegram type wildcard. :cool:
*A copy of the telegram, already sent to the Mexican government, was found in an attache case accidentally left on an NYC subway car by a member of the German embassy. Afterwards the official was jokingly referred to as an Ambassador Without Portfolio.
-
This, in itself, is an interesting topic. About the only threat I can imagine Hitler and Stalin giving the U. S. is they'd be considered enemies if they gave aid to the non-Axis allies.
My guess is an Axis attempt to occupy a conquered country's territory in the Western Hemisphere would do the trick. Say, Iceland is declared independent after the conquest of Denmark and Germany sends a garrison to occupy it. The same would be true of various Dutch and French holdings in the Caribean.
-
Except there was no way the United States was going to enter the war without having been attacked. We lost a gunboat in China that the Japanese deliberately attacked, and two destroyers on convoy duty in the Atlantic. FDR seemed to think that would get the American people in a sort of war fever of indignation. It didn't. Instead they asked why we had ships serving in a war we weren't a beligerant in.
Americans really did not want to get into the war.
-
Kuni, Many thanks, I'm pretty sure that's him. The odd part is I had a feeling he commanded mountain troops and was in the Finnish theater, and he was. Also commanded the 3rd Mountain division at Narvik. It's good to have a name for the face. Thanks for coming up with the answer.
Hyazinth, I don't know if that description would fit him, but apparently he was a fighting general. His bio describes him as one of Hitler's favorite generals, I'm sure there were many routes to that place, but I don't think this particular man chose that one.
He died in a plane crash in 1944. He was a generaloberst at the time (US four star general).
-- I think you're right about being one of the few Germans interested in the American Civil War. Online I haven't seen many Europeans who either know much about it or are even interested. Which surprises me because I think it was one of history's most interesting conflicts, and took place at a time when weapons and tactics were going through crucial changes.
I've seen several PC games on the subject, but the best of them kept crashing after a couple of years gametime. Very discouraging, because it was otherwise a very good game that caught the feeling of the times.
-
Baron, very pleased to have gotten that one, sir, even though it was on the rebound with you providing additional clues.
Very interesting things here. You're filling in a lot of things I didn't know about the Civil War. Glad Longstreet lived so long after it ended; he's always been one of my favorites. I think I remember reading many years ago that both Jackson and Lee died with A. P. Hill in their last words.
I'd love to see a really good American Civil War strategy game come out, as I'm sure you would.
...
Here's something trivial, but it's been driving me nuts for years.
Can anyone tell me the name of the general on the left side of this photo (to Hitler's right)? I believe this picture was taken on Hitler's birthday, 1942. His Operation Blue generals presented him with a cake in the form of the Caucasus. Hitler cut Baku out for himself, saying he wanted the choicest piece, which is probably what they were laughing about in the picture.
-
Baron, Jim's name seems to come up often. He was very well liked. Also, the two of us were banned together after the Christmas Riot a long time ago because we were mistakenly ID'd as the same person. With his usual sense of humor he contacted me and asked if we were doing some sort of Prince and the Pauper routine.
The matter was soon cleared up and we were both reinstated. Rest in peace well deserved. I think he was in his forties. Ironically he lived near to where I'm living now, in Central Florida -- at the time of the incident we shared I was living in Central New Jersey.Okay, the Old Warhorse would be James Longstreet!
I didn't realize he was killed in battle. I know that after Gettysburg he was sent west and fought at Chickamauga, then had an independent command, I think he tried to take Knoxville, not sure.
-- JEB Stuart didn't receive Stonewall Jackson's command, he replaced Jackson as corps commander after Jackson was shot. When the battle was over Stuart resumed went back to being commander of Lee's cavalry.
I don't think it would have made sense to place Stuart in command of an infantry corps either; he was only a battlefield replacement.
-
Well, if you were able to award expensive sports cars for winning answers you'd have to call yourself a Mountain William instead of a hillbilly, a description I refuse to believe even for a second.
Regarding the question. My first thought was A. P. Hill, who as a divisional commander in Jackson's corps led his light infantry division very effectively. But Hill died about the time that Pickett was at that shad bake instead of leading his troops, and that would have been two years later, not one, and also much farther south from the Chancellorsville area.
My next guess would be J.E.B. Stuart, the famed cavalry commander who temporarily commanded Jackson's corps after he was shot, and was shot in battle himself in, I think it was April 1864 at the action of Yellow Tavern. Not sure if that's near Chancellorsville.
So, my answer is J. E. B. Stuart, who would have been Jackson's Replacement.
It's too bad we didn't do this several years back. The late Jim Boggs, who everyone liked, was a true Civil War buff. I'm sure he'd have really enjoyed these questions as much as some of the rest of us are. :cool:
-
Agreed 100%, Snowstorm. I don't know if I'll be doing any myself till I have a shot at the actual editor, but even if I don't I'm very eager to see what others come up with. And, of course, to play the mods that come with the game. :cool:
-
It reminds me of the world George Orwell described in his novel 1984. Except there are two sides rather than three. So Orwell must have been thinking along the same lines, that progress would be made when one of the three powers changed its alliance to the other, then those gains lost when one of them shifted again; constant instability.
In this scenario I think the trick will be to combine actual military victory with diplomatic successes. If the allies can establish themselves in a large coastal region, and at the same time get a nearby large neutral to join them, and they can reinforce it quickly, then it might break what otherwise have been a stalemate.
A-bombs shouldn't be overly impressive as the thousand bomber raids were even more devastating. The old style A-bombs will take a lot of production time (after all the research required earlier) and will also require a great delivery system to be effective. The only advantage I can see is a devastating attack can be conducted on a city with just one key aircraft surrounded by a large number of escorts. It should have a high probability of success unless the other side's intercept tech and radar is very high, and they've actually got a force of those advanced interceptors stationed nearby.
-
The sea convoys SeaMonkey mentioned will get particularly hairy when both sides are crossing each others paths, probably along the coast of West Africa and the Indian Ocean. It will be especially interesting to see how South America will fit into various situations.
It seems to me the United States will always need a large navy to protect both coasts and also to conduct operations in either ocean, but, as was Lampcord mentioned earlier, it will need to adjust its production mix if it doesn't have to worry about fighting the Japanese.
I agree with AZGungho that the U. S. would need to place even greater emphasis on air units than it did historically, which is mind boggling! SeaMonkey's reasoning about these new land campaigns might be near to impossible for the U. S. once it gets beyond naval air support, as SeaMonkey said earlier. So it will be necessary to move inland, establish a perimeter and build up land based air superiority. That's a variation on the U. S. approach to the Island campains of WWII. It was always work within a perimeter, building air fields and, when the range overlapped into the next perimeter it was time to move into it with landings.
Very interesting possibilities at every turn.
-
My pleasure SeaMonkey. At this point I think all the European possibilities are well worn with us, and that would be an understatement.
We discussed many of these things almost to death in the old SC-1 Forum before there were even any definite plans for SC-2.
The difference now is we'll be able to put them into plausible scenarios.
-- I had a post in SC-1 specifically about that first and last meeting between Hitler and Franco. If the discussion swings back that way I'll try to find it, and paste it here somewhere. It would be just as relevant to these discussions as it was to the ones we were having five or six years back. :cool:
-
Excellent explanation Hyazinth, and very gracious of you. With the wisdom of King Solomon we decided how we'd share that Ferrari 458 Italia. Kuni's going now for a chainsaw. I'm all excited about my half! :eek:
-
It's great to have this kind of flexibility. There were a lot of alliances that could have come into place with slightly different variations of what happened during the 1920s and 30s. What will be really interesting is I'm sure this game will be producing a lot of player mods turning things inside out and backwards from actual history. We started asking for that in the SC-1 days and instead of dismissing the requests, or just changing things a little, Hubert's found a way of doing what we've wanted for so many years. Really looking forward to playing it. :cool:
:) -
Baron, I'm in Orange City, around 30 miles NE of Orland and about that far SW of Daytona, right outside sleepy Deland. Guess it's about 150 miles or so from Port Charlotte.
I agree about the summers here, this past year it was like being in an oven, or a steambath on other days. I lived in Orlando during the late 70s and it seemed a lot better than it is now. People who have lived here all the way through told me it's warmer down here now than it was back then. Then we managed to have a pretty cold winter, though nothing compared to winters in most of the rest of the country.
Mountains sounds like a good idea. :cool:
I had the same reasoning for Hitler, perhaps that will turn out to be the correct answer through some quirk, denying me the top prize of a private jet aircraft. :eek:
-
Baron, Hitler wasn't an officer coming out of the First World War, which was when, presumably, he would have been placed in the reserves as a civilian.
-- Very good American Civil War question, I would never have guessed Van Dorn.
:cool:
I was doubting it as well, but Xwormwood and Kuni convinced me.
1939 Alliance Of Evil Scenario
in Strategic Command - GLOBAL CONFLICT
Posted
I'm afraid it's too late, Mr H., no use closing the stable's door now, the horses are already out and running away. Those of us who know how to read your hidden in plain sight postings have already got it all figured out.
SeaMonkey, Glad you enjoyed that scene. I started off looking for Snowstorm's magnifying glass, then thought back to the memories you conjured up in your post and realized what a hidden meaning hunter would really need for deciphering Hubert is, a microscope!
Snowstorm, I came up with plenty. Mainly that Kuniworth and myself and a few others are not going to see SC3 and a return to hexes for a while yet.
-- Not a biggie, it's been so long since I've played on a map with hexes that I've already forgotten what I used to like about them. Also, I've been making my Favor John Heavily scenarios for CivIV and am actually starting to like tiles. Or is it the Favor John Heavily scenarios I'm crazy about? Hard to tell. Anyway, I always end up being king, which is more than I can say for real life, be it tiled or hex. 