Logan Hartke

Well, Night, that's about how it's been playing out for me on the first few turns. I think that the British bombers are a very interesting wild card. They are needed since German subs are so advanced and tend to dive +50% of the time. Also, how did you like the North Sea brawl against the Hindenburg and her sister ship? Anyway, it's going according to plan. It's easy against the computer no matter which side you play, but if you play against a human, it should be pretty well balanced. A human player might pull those level-5 French Armies back to Paris and sit for a while. Also, a human player should play the Russians VERY aggressively. Those 50 or so (okay, maybe not quite that many) tank armies are there for a reason. The early plunders were for two reasons. Firstly, they were the only way to make Yugo and Finland Russian and they are there to offset the cost of all the Russian operating moves. A good human player should attack headlong into the German forces, chewing up as many German armies as possible, then use the armies that were operated in for a blocker and the next wave. Also, a good allied player should try to get Turkey in the first 10 or so rounds. It makes a world of a difference. Play the game as the Allies and you might find it pretty well balanced. I'm playing as the allies right now and I'll easily make VE-day by 1942. To make it a bit more challenging as the Germans, activate the USA. Logan Hartke

Okay. Thank you, I didn't know. I just didn't remember it taking nearly that long back in the winter of 2002. Thanks again, JerseyJohn. Logan Hartke

I sent my two interface mods to him via e-mail four days ago and a modified version again today. He has neither responded to my e-mails, nor placed the files on his site. Is he gone, REALLY busy, or has he accidentally missed my e-mail? Does anyone know? Logan Hartke

Like where? Where would I upload it? I have no website. If some one here could do it, it might be possible. I could e-mail it to them, then they could put it on their website, but I don't think that I can do it. Logan Hartke

Check your e-mail, it should be there. Thanks again, JerseyJohn! Logan Hartke

That's okay. Hopefully I can interest a few other people in it. I don't want to swamp you even more. It's up to you. I've played it against the computer a couple times just to ensure that there are no horrible balance errors and I've not found any. I'm just hoping that a few other players with more experience than I have will test it out and tell me what they think of it. Logan Hartke

Do you want to playtest it against somebody else? Or maybe I should ask you this way... Would you? Maybe you could convince some of the other players on your level to playtest it, too. Two or three games is all that would likely be needed to test its balance and playability. House rules are to be decided by the players. I couldn't think of any off hand. Logan Hartke

I'm reposting my description from "New Campaign Suggestions" here with a few changes, so if you already read it there, be warned. 1945 Alternate WWII/Delayed WWII. Hitler has finally gotten approval of the Poland attack by his admirals and generals. They are sufficiently convinced of Germany's superiority in the land, sea, and air. Germany, obviously, has made great strides in Gun Laying Radar, Rockets, Advanced Subs, Jet Aircraft Research, and Anti-Aircraft Radar researches, but are still very much be lacking in Long-Range Aircraft, Heavy Bombers, Industrial Technology, Anti-Tank, and (surprisingly to most) Heavy Tank research. German tanks have been on the slow track compared to their Soviet and French counterparts in the long run. Britain, believing that she had control of the seas, has relatively low naval research, but high levels in all aircraft fields (Jet Aircraft, Heavy Bombers, and Long-Range Aircraft). All tank and anti-tank research levels are pitifully low, but Anti-Aircraft Radar is level 5. Russia, spurred by the power-hungry Stalin, who, for those of you that didn't know this, already had plans in the making for an invasion of Germany in the mid- to late-forties, has incredibly high levels of research in all ground-based fields of weaponry and industry (i.e. Anti-tank, Heavy Tank, Rockets, and Industrial Technology). Russia also has moderate levels of Jet Fighter research, but not much else in any other field. Russia, however, has have taken control of Finland and is building up for an invasion of Turkey, Iraq, the Balkan states, and the Scandanavian countries. Many Finnish soldiers have escaped across the border to Sweden and Norway, knowing that the invasion of these two countries is imminent. They gained much experience, fighting advancing Soviet troops all the way to the border. Similarly, Soviet troops learned many lessons against the Finns during the campaign. France has surprisingly high levels of Gun Laying Radar, Jet Fighter, Anti-tank, and Heavy Tank research. For those of you that didn't know, France had far more powerful tanks on the drawing board than Germany had ever dreamed of when she was invaded in 1940, but these plans remained just that. Some plans, however, were built after the war and remain in service today. Designs such as the ARL-44, AMX-13, and the Panhard EBR all had their very advanced and powerful designs rooted in 1940 plans (the EBR was even at mock-up stage in 1940). She would also has a VERY large standing army on the German border with VERY high entrenchment levels, since the Maginot Line is now equipped and completed in its entirety, but it consists almost entirely of infantry armies with very few tanks spread throughout. Her navy would be formidable, yet is still conquerable by the Italians. Industrial Technology is at nil since the French socialist factories have been a military and economic disaster since their inception. The Italians, as usual would have low tech levels in most fields, but 3's in most naval and aerial fields. Like France, a goose egg in the Industrial Technology category would be accurate. All the superpowers are aligned the same way, but all have FAR more troops and equipment. Soviet troop concentrations in ALL categories are phenomenally higher with troops poised at the borders of most of its neighbors, ready for invasion. Germany has greater naval strength to Britain with an emphasis on advanced subs (Type XXI) and advanced superbattleships (Schlachtschiff H). The Kriegsmarine has two carriers as well. Italy has a huge force aimed at all areas of the Med. The USSR joins immdediately, ready for any excuse to overrun its neighbors, but America recently finished a long war with Japan, pushing the Japanese back to Tokyo unaided (the Japanese decided not declare war on the UK and the USSR saw no reason to intervene until near the end, where she declared war, took what areas of Manchuria she wanted with minimal resistance and stopped) and losing nearly a million men along the way in their costly invasion of Japan. The US is sick of war and casualties and will take no part in this European conflict. Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Turkey, Sweden, and Norway start off as Axis allies, feeling instantly threatened by Soviet expansionism. Denmark, and Spain also allied Germany from the start mainly due to the "bandwagon effect." Franco also expects a "piece of the pie" when the war is all over. Germany, having known that she'll start the war soon, aids these countries by sending significant amounts of planes and some personnel to augment her allies' forces. Germany also decided to send her fleet over to America on a "good will cruise" with every intention of declaring war when they reached the mid-Atlantic, thereby placing them in them in the middle of the Atlantic, ready to control the waves and not allowing themselves to be bottled in. The UK, however, in not naive, and has her fleet trailing them, ready to pounce if they try anything fancy. Yugoslavia had a revolution 1943, led by Tito and supported by the USSR. Stalin has secured his tentative support in the upcoming war, but Tito refuses to operate as an attached command under the Red Army. Overall, I would expect the war to play out much like a WWI where Russia would have been prepared and Italy would have remained allied with Germany. If the war goes like I think it should, Italy will take almost complete control of the Med within a year. Germany will destroy the RN fairly quickly, roll through the Low Countries and Poland and be successfully attacking France with considerable Italian support. Surprisingly, the Axis will likely control the waves for most of this scenario. German V2 rockets will likely shower her enemies with destructive firepower. All is not well for the Axis, however. The USSR is proving to be better-prepared than expected. Germany will have to rapidly try to hold back the Red Army while still attempting to deliver a knock-out blow to France. The USSR will be trying to drive down into Africa through Iraq. Mother Russia will likely wrest control of Scandanavia within the first year or two, endangering the German control of the High Seas. She will likely be making headway in Turkey, longing to sink her teeth into the Med through the Bosporus, but the "Glorious Yavuz" stands defiantly in her way. While the Kriegsmarine might have eliminated the Royal Navy, the British long range heavy bombers are on the prowl and looking for revenge. Operating from Great Britain and Soviet bases on the Baltic and the Med, her massive bomber fleet will likely sweep the seas of Axis ships within 2-3 years if not sooner. The seas will become a barren graveyard, no Axis ship venturing out of range of considerable German Jet fighter support (yet the lack of tech in long-range fighters will prevent any ships from going far). The Axis will likely be fighting a losing battle that will be decided in France and Poland. Although she'll have many allies, the poorly-equipped minor nations will be little more than experience for the Soviet war machine, gobbling up armies left and right. Germany's only chance is to set up on wall on her eastern border, then decimate the Red Army with the Luftwaffe in a veritable meat grinder (the Red Air Force being lacking in both aircraft numbers and jet technology). If the French can hold out (which they shouldn't be able to do), they can wait for British air power to arrive then allow the Germans to bash their head in on French defensive networks while the Anglo Airmen fly cover for them. If the Western Allies play it safe and stem the German land forces, yet keep from squandering the considerable Red Army early on, they should win without much difficulty (although, at first, the naval situation will appear depressing and hopeless). By contrast, the German player has to be bold, quick, and decisive in attacking in the West, yet without too much of a manpower expenditure. Use whatever meager ground forces that are at hand in the East and delay the Soviets as long as possible, whenever possible. Airpower will be decisive in the East, so don't throw it away in the West, yet keep enough in the West to keep the RAF from doing the same thing to the Heer as the Luftwaffe plans to do to the Reds. If balanced well enough, this would be a complex, yet very fun scenario with many new and inventive strategies. If you want to playtest it, please send an e-mail to me at comradeloganov@aol.com and let me know. I'll send it to you. Please, good players from the top ten would be appreciated. If AARs could be made when the game is done, that would be great. I just want to know what issues need addressed before I ask for it to be put up on SCHQ. Logan Hartke

*sniff* *sniff* Hmm, what's that smell? It smells like... Hemingway. Logan Hartke

Oh, and by the way, that refitting thing works for prots, not ships. So, if a British battleship is damaged by a U-boat in the Atlantic, she can pull into a US shipyard and be fully repaired and not under the British restrictions. Similarly, any port captured has the restrictions of the country it used to belong to. In other words, the German-occupied French ports of Brest and Toulon are under France's more stringent restrictions, not Germany's. Unless otherwise mentioned, ports in minor allies should repair 1 per 2 rounds. Logan Hartke

...and another thing. I think that for every country that a country conquers, it should be allowed to build more units. If a country voluntarily allies, a country should get to build twice as many units. Germany had entire SS divisions of Norweigian and Dutch troops. Also, a large manpower force consisted of Russians, Ukranians, French (*shudder*), and Eastern Europeans. Similarly, Britain should be able to draw up an amry equal to Germany's in size because of her colonies and exiled troops. Also, something I was thinking about earlier, a country shoudn't get to refit large naval units like carriers and battleships quickly. Germany should be restricted to 1 point per round, USSR - 1 point per 2 rounds, Italy - 1 point per 2 rounds, France - 1 point per 2 rounds, UK - 3 points per round, US - no restriction. http://www.ahoy.tk-jk.net/macslog/WW2LibertyShips-TheBridge.html Another example is the USS Yorktown... http://www.steelnavy.com/Yorktown.htm Just to let you guys know how badly damaged the Yorktown was, the Japanese listed her as "sunk" after the battle because they knew that no ship in the world could stay afloat after being that badly damaged. The Americans had her battle-worthy again in 3 days without a shipyard (shipbuilding facility). Logan Hartke

Okay, so let me get this straight... By your chart, Shaka, the Luftwaffe can be 2x as large as the USAAF and the Heer OVER 2x as big as the US Army?!?! Total US aircraf production = 303,713. Total German aircraft production = 119,871. So, let's assume that 2/3 of the US aircraft went to the Pacific (and I know that not nearly that many went to the Pacific). That still leaves a nearly equal number of planes for Germany and the US. Total USSR production = 158,218. So, USSR should get 6 if Germany gets 4. Total UK production = 131,549. UK should get 5 if Germany gets 4. More if you count Lend Lease and penalize the Americans for LL. http://members.aol.com/forcountry/ww2/ac1.htm Also, if you want a good restriction on army size, refer to this to get a good ratio worked out... http://members.aol.com/forcountry/ww2/pea.htm Logan Hartke

You can't attack the US. The game won't allow you to as Allies. Logan Hartke

Brad, did you get my e-mail? I got two error messages when I tried e-mailing the file to you with a vague description of the problem being caused by a "fatal and permanent error" with your e-mail. I'll try again if my first couple of attempts were unsuccessful. Logan Hartke

Oh, yeah. No problem. I can easily do that. That would be neat. I've always loved reading about Israel's wars. Do you want me to e-mail you my 1962 icons? Logan Hartke

I'll agree there. I think that we both see the problems in generally the same way. Logan Hartke

As far as European ASW warfare goes, I am honestly LOL when I think about them. Do you knwo what rotor blades do on radar screens? They say "Look, I'm a big slow target. Come shoot me." American Tomcats and Hornets would be happy to oblige. So, basically, all EU helicopters can be figured out of the equation when they're not operating within 100 miles or so of the European coastline. So, that leaves us with what? Two types of aircraft (assuming the UK sides with the US) that are the elderly, slow Atlantique and the exported Orion. The Americans know how to combat and evade Orions. Why? They built them. As for the Atlantiques, they have about as much chance as a Sea King, except that they can go farther out to sea, but in this case, that only brigns them closer to the hunters. First of all, all but three Typhoons are in some stage of scrapping, and one of those three is just a trials boat. Secondly, it would drain the treasuries of most EU nations to even bring one Typhoon into their navy. Thirdly, assuming by some miracle they manage to get one into service (after a few years) they are well known to the US and very noisy. The reactors of a Typhoon were emptied by experts in that field. They were American experts. Americans know Typhoons, inside and out. The Akulas are far better suited to the anti-sub duty. They would pose a much greater threat, but still are not up to even the Los Angeles's standards, so comparing it to the Seawolf is just plain absurd. ...and I quote... http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/nssn/index.html So, even the best the EU nations might have or buy wouldn't get them far. Also, where EU helicopters have to watch out for US carrier planes and Aegis cruisers, American ASW aircraft don't have that problem. Akula, meet the Viking/Orion/Sea Hawk/oh, well, you get the point. Logan Hartke

I am fully aware of all of those things. I didn't believe that the Seawolf is invincible, and I also knew that it isn't slated for continued production. The Virginia class of SSNs, nearly as capable as the Seawolf, is soon to enter service. Ummm, you need to do your research, Comrade. France and the UK have no diesel subs and Germany only has coastal diesels. The U31 was recently completed, but is still on trials and will not delivered until March of 2004. Also, now HDW (the builders) is controlled by an American company. The American Los Angeles, Seawolf, and Virigina-class SSNs can dive deeper, travel faster, travel farther, move more quietly, and detect better than any German-built diesel and most other diesels out there. The Seawolf moving at "silent" speed still moves at 20kts while the 212 moving at 20kts is doing flank speed and making a lot more noise doing so. Also, American submariners have exponentially more experience than European submariners due to Cold War lessons. Well, I'm convinced. That statement intimidated me right out of the thread. Oh come on. The USN has the best DDGs, SSBNs, SSNs, CVNs, and naval aircraft. How could the EU possibly win? They'd never gain control of the ocean. All major ports would soon be destroyed by US bombers, CVN-launched planes, and SSN-launched cruise missiles. The few subs and ships that might escape and not be blasted in port would soon be without options. Being diesels, they can't stay out forever... Logan Hartke BTW-Just to give you a bit of advice on tactics, it's got two C's.

So am I misconstruing facts and figures to prove an unrelated point? That's typically what that statement implies. I was trying to show that in some cases, there should be no losses taken. Those 134 AFVs lost by the Germans would take them months to replace, but Americans, at the height of wartime production were producing more than 50 tanks a day. A loss of 21 tanks would be a drop in the industrial bucket, and, on average, only one crewmember died when a Sherman was hit, so manpower losses to the Americans in a battle like that would've numbered less than 40. If one point of damage was taken, it would require, what, about 20-30 IPPs to replace, which, in this game, is about 15% of US production in a turn, which is a ridiculously high amount of industrial expenditure to replace losses like that. It just wouldn't be accurate. That system would not accurately reflect combat losses. The current system, works, but I think that there should be a manpower limit placed on countries. Germany shouldn't be able to create a border to border force on the Russian Front; they didn't have enough people. A country should not be allowed to create as many units as its industry can equip. THAT is what's not realistic or fair about the Russian Front fighting. Logan Hartke

See, zapp, this is where all that typically useless historical trivia comes in handy. There is a very effective way of killing very experienced units. The Red Army employed this method a lot and they weren't too bad at it. I assume that you run into this problem the most often on the Russian Front when playing as the Soviets. All you have to do is what the Soviets actually did. I like to call this the "Stalingrad" technique. Now, I'm not going to try to make this sound easy, because against a human, it's not. What you have to do is isolate X number of experienced units. There are two ways of going about this. One is to bait the experienced unit with a juicy target; say a city or an HQ. Leave only a narrow corridor of armies to advance down with no apparent cap at the end. Make sure that the enemy force is allowed to penetrate at least two hexes into your rear area or this tactic WILL NOT work. When said unit goes back into your rear lines, eliminated whatever inexperienced unit is following it, then plug the hole with a fresh army. This army is the most important one and will have to bear the brunt of an attack from two sides. Once you have isolated the unit in question, just wait until it runs out of supplies (say... 3 turns) then attack it. The playing field will have been evened and it will be an easy kill. Do this as many times as you can. The other way of isolating good enemy units involves killing the inexperienced units on its flank, then surrounding it, holding for at least two turns, killing the unit, then pulling back to your original lines and refitting. Also, when playing as the Germans, don't let yourself fall into the same trap. I've even been able to employ the first tactic on a very large scale against the computer. I put myself at a severe disadvantage against the computer who was playing the Axis. I opened a two-hex hole in my line to let 1-2 enemy units in to trap. Instead of 1-2 units, the computer sent a half-dozen including an HQ. At first, I didn't have to forces to react to this breakthrough. To make long story short, I destroyed 3-5 enemy units including an HQ and only let a couple break back through to their own lines. It put such a hole in their line and cost them so many experienced armies and panzer armies, that the computer never recovered on the northern front. Immediately after destroying the isolated units and refitting, I went for the recently plugged hole of green, second-line troops with my armies and tanks that gained experience killing off those incredibly experienced German armies. I punched a hole that was never patched; their whole front line broke down, and a few months later, I took Berlin. All the result of a small-scale trap I laid. That's how you slay the dragon. Logan Hartke

I don't know about that, zappsweden. I'd have to disagree. Experience actually might not play enough of a role in the game. Take, for example, the 4th Armored Division. Many examples of their successes can be cited, but one in my mind sticks out particularly well. After only 4 and 1/2 months (max) of fighting experience, the 4th Armored Division had to go up against the relatively inexperienced 5th Panzer Army. The 4th Armored was largely equipped with Sherman 75s at the time, while the 5th Panzer had recently been largely equipped with Panthers. The Shermans 75s, on the offensive ended up scoring incredibly high kill ratios against their less-experienced German counterparts. In one attack, 7 Shermans attacked 22 German panzers, knocking out 17 confirmed enemy tanks for the loss of only 1 Sherman. The other 5 German tanks fled. The result of the battle that the 4th Armored fought against the 5th Panzer near Arracourt between 19 September and 22 September 1944 was an American loss of 14 Shermans and 7 Stuarts and a German loss of 107 tank (many Panthers) and 30 StuGs. Experience matters; the numbers don't lie. Logan Hartke

Sounds neat, Night, but there are a few things that you are forgetting. First of all, Russia and the EU are not really allies. Russia is pretty darn close to a wild card, that might actually sign with the US, realizing that the US will not be overrun, and therefore using this as an opportunity to have the US support its economy. Secondly, there is no good way to represent the naval disparity in the game. You'd need level-5 subs to represent US Seawolf class subs and, by comparison, level-0 subs at a starting strength of 4 to represent Swedish subs, German subs, etc. The class 201-212 of German-built and designed subs are good diesel boats, but a Seawolf could destroy 10 before worrying about anything. Similarly, there is no way to represent the US seismic detectors on the Atlantic. By rights, the US would have complete intel on every enemy ship in the water. Also, American nuclear subs and carriers should not decrease in readiness. They have nuclear reactors. What, are they going to run out of fuel? Also, how would you represent US stealth aircraft or the US ability to launch B-2s from Missouri, hit Afghanistan then come back to MO w/o landing anywhere along the way. How would the inabilty of the Germans and Italians to build fighters like the Typhoon w/o the Brits be represented? How would the world's best intel unit, the Mossad be shown? They've hit and destroyed Iraqi nuclear reactors in France w/o getting caught. The discrepency in experience, competence, and readiness of Israeli troops compared to Arab troops could only be represented by the highest level heavy tanks and anti-tank weapons with level-4 experience, full supply, and full entrenchment. Also, Israeli has shown that it will use nuclear weapons if it feels that the country may not survive. How will that be represented? Sub-launched Harpoon and Tomahawk missiles cannot be shown in the game. By all rights, a US Los Angeles-class sub can hit Berlin from the Baltic. To represent the destructive firepower of US carriers, you'd have to put together 5 level-5 carriers together to represent one battlegroup, not to mention other screening ships. Also, the ability of Americans to land an entire corp behid enemy lines, then TANKS to support them cannot be represented in the game. Honestly, Night, I love the idea in a game, but you just can't do it, especially with this engine. Also, I've been part of a couple of military forums for years. One of the forum's regular posters is a retired US military analyst and former US Airborne LRRP Vietnam War veteran. He's proven it, too. The rest of the posters have all shown me their competence in military research. We looked at a scenario like this in a number of threads such as "EU vs. USA." Finally, we came to the conclusion that if all of Europe, including the UK teamed up against the US, Europe's conventional forces as cohesive units would be liquidated within weeks. All European airpower and seapower would be gone within days. Remember, this is including the UK in the EU! The only two options left would be nuclear war or guerilla warfare. Neither of them can be accurately represented in this game, so it cannot be played. Obviously, you can just do this for fun, but the outcome will be about as historical as the movie "The Battle of the Bulge." Like I said, make it if you want, but the only way to have a near-accurate outcome is to flood the game with American units, especially naval, make them all high tech and high experience. All enemy units would need to be under-strength in comparison. One might argue that that is inaccurate since the Leopard 2 is pretty darn close to the same thing as an Abrams. This might be true, but the tank icons represent whole armies. No army in the world can match, has ever matched, nor will it ever match the US supply system. All secondary and support units would contribute a tremendous margin to American units, not to mention recently upgraded US communications. Also, Germany is sick of war. They won't even fight the French anymore, so why would they declare all out war on the US? That's suicide if nothing else. If something on this scale ever happened, it would only end in MAD, and that's no fun to play. So, again, I stress, you can just do this for fun, but the outcome will be about as historical as the movie "The Battle of the Bulge." Logan Hartke

Okay, guys, this is a long one, but worth the time and containing a lot of detail... One, which is admittedly difficult and, I'm sure, not new, is the 1945-1947 alternate WWII. Hitler has finally gotten approval of the Poland attack by his admirals and generals. They are sufficiently convinced of Germany's superiority in the land, sea, and air. Germany, obviously, would have made great strides in Gun Laying Radar, Rockets, Advanced Subs, Jet Aircraft Research, and Anti-Aircraft Radar researches, but would still very much be lacking in Long-Range Aircraft, Heavy Bombers, Industrial Technology, Anti-Tank, and (surprisingly to most) Heavy Tank research. Most good historians know that German tanks were on the slow track compared to their Soviet and French counterparts in the long run and the superlative German tank designs from WWII were largely triggered by events in the opening weeks of Operation Barbarossa. Also, Germany's Anti-tank weapons during WWII were largely a result of captured American bazooka technology and early war anti-tank experience, neither of which they would have in this scenario. Britain, believing that she had control of the seas, would have relatively low naval research, but high levels in all aircraft fields (Jet Aircraft, Heavy Bombers, and Long-Range Aircraft). All tank and anti-tank research levels would be pitifully low, but Anti-Aircraft Radar would likely be level 5. Russia, spurred by the power-hungry Stalin, who, for those of you that didn't know this, already had plans in the making for an invasion of Germany in the mid- to late-forties, would have incredibly high levels of research in all ground-based fields of weaponry and industry (i.e. Anti-tank, Heavy Tank, Rockets, and Industrial Technology). Russia would also have moderate levels of Jet Fighter research, but not much else in any other field. Russia, however, would likely have taken control of Finland and Iraq already and would likely be building up for an invasion of Turkey and possible passes at the Balkan states and the Scandanavian countries. France would have surprisingly high levels of Gun Laying Radar, Jet Fighter, Anti-tank, and Heavy Tank research. For those of you that didn't know, France had far more powerful tanks on the drawing board than Germany had ever dreamed of when she was invaded in 1940, but these plans remained just that. Some plans, however, were built after the war and are still in service today. For those of you that didn't know, designs such as the ARL-44, AMX-13, and the Panhard EBR all had their very advanced and powerful designs rooted in 1940 plans (the EBR was even at mock-up stage in 1940). She would also have a VERY large standing army on the German border with VERY high entrenchment levels, but it would consist almost entirely of infantry armies with very few tanks. Her navy would be formidable, yet likely conquerable by the Italians. Industrial Technology would also be at nil since the French socialist factories had been a military and economic disaster since their inception. The Italians, as usual would have low tech levels in most fields, but 3's in most naval and aerial fields. Like France, a goose egg in the Industrial Technology category would be accurate. All the superpowers would be aligned the same way, but all would have FAR more troops and equipment. Soviet troop concentrations in ALL categories would be phenomenally higher with troops poised at the borders of most of its neighbors, ready for invasion. Germany would have nearly equal naval strength to Britain with an emphasis on advanced subs (Type XXI) and advanced superbattleships (Schlachtschiff H). The Kriegsmarine might have two carriers as well. While obviously possessing a larger army, I'd wager that it'd be no more than 200% the size of the 1940 army. It would just have a much larger navy and air force backing it. Italy would have a very large force aimed at the Balkans and a huge force in all areas of the Med. I would expect the USSR to have a very high join percentage, but America might remain neutral altogether, comfortable in its complacency. Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Turkey, Sweden, and Norway would likely start off as Axis allies, feeling instantly threatened by Soviet expansionism. Switzerland, Denmark, and Spain might also be considered allies of Germany from the start, but they are a bit more iffy. Overall, I would expect the war to play out much like a WWI where Russia would have been prepared and Italy would have remained allied with Germany. If the war goes like I think it should, Italy will take almost complete control of the Med within a year. Germany will destroy the RN fairly quickly, roll through the Low Countries and Poland and be successfully attacking France with considerable Italian support. Surprisingly, the Axis will likely control the waves for most of this scenario. German rockets will likely shower her enemies with destructive firepower. All is not well for the Axis, however. The USSR is proving to be better-prepared than expected. Germany will have to rapidly try to hold back the Red Army while still attempting to deliver a knock-out blow to France. The USSR will be trying to drive down into Africa through Iraq. Mother Russia will likely wrest control of Scandanavia within the first year or two, endangering the German control of the High Seas. She will likely be making headway in Turkey, longing to sink her teeth into the Med through the Bosporus. While the Kriegsmarine might have eliminated the Royal Navy, the British long range heavy bombers are on the prowl and looking for revenge. Operating from Great Britain and Soviet bases on the Baltic and the Med, her massive bomber fleet will likely sweep the seas of Axis ships within 2-3 years if not sooner. The seas will become a barren graveyard, no Axis ship venturing out of range of considerable German Jet fighter support (yet the lack of tech in long-range fighters will prevent any ships from going far). The Axis will likely be fighting a losing battle that will be decided in France and Poland. Although she'll have many allies, the poorly-equipped minor nations will be little more than experience for the Soviet war machine, gobbling up armies left and right. Germany's only chance is to set up on wall on her eastern border, then decimate the Red Army with the Luftwaffe in a veritable meat grinder (the Red Air Force being lacking in both aircraft numbers and jet technology). If the French can hold out (which they shouldn't be able to do), they can wait for British air power to arrive then allow the Germans to bash their head in on French defensive networks while the Anglo Airmen fly cover for them. If the Western Allies play it safe and stem the German land forces, yet keep from squandering the considerable Red Army early on, they should win without much difficulty (although, at first, the naval situation will appear depressing and hopeless). By contrast, the German player has to be bold, quick, and decisive in attacking in the West, yet without too much of a manpower expenditure. Use whatever meager ground forces that are at hand in the East and delay the Soviets as long as possible, whenever possible. Airpower will be decisive in the East, so don't throw it away in the West, yet keep enough in the West to keep the RAF from doing the same thing to the Heer as the Luftwaffe plans to do to the Reds. If balanced well enough, this would be a complex, yet very fun scenario with many new and inventive strategies. Logan Hartke (All I did in the post, for thsoe who might have aready read it, was divide it up into paragraph-sized chunks which should make it easier to read through without losing one's place.) [ July 29, 2003, 11:27 AM: Message edited by: Logan Hartke ]

Precisely. Stuff happens. It's war. Get over it. Logan Hartke

I don't remember the details, but I remember recently reading about a British destroyer that was hit and, I believe, sunk by a bomb dropped from a Ju 88. While this might not seem too lucky or random, it does when you consider the fact that the bombs were not aimed. The Ju 88 was being attacked by enemy fighters (Spitfires, I believe) and decided to abort its bombing mission since the element of surprise had been compromised. The Ju 88 crew decided to jettison their load of bombs to gain speed. By random chance, the bombs acheived a direct hit on a destroyer. The Ju 88's bombardier had just jettisoned the load without aiming at all. he ended up sinking a British destroyer. That is the kind of randomness that happens in war. While this cannot be accurately or fairly replicated in strategy games, one should nto complain when it does. The story of arguably the most important battle of the war is a story of a great deal of "lucky breaks." Midway was won because the American plan didn't happen as anticipated. When a Japanese scout plane found the American ships, its radio went out. When the torpedo bombers arrived too early without a coordinated attack and without fighter escort, it was considered disaster. This, however, allowed the Americans to win the battle. It kept the Zeroes on the deck while the Dauntlesses found four of the Japanese carriers, devestating 80% or the Japanese air power in one action. Things like that happen. One cannot predict it, nor can one rely on it, but the element of is there. Call it random chance, luck, or divine intervention, but whatever it is, it happens. While I don't think a game designer should work it into a game, it happens and there's nothing someone can do about it, so stop complaining. Logan Hartke