Liam

JJ: over a quick review you've a realistic scenario, but a percentage of success for any of the scenarios discussed. Who says USSR could even enter the war until '43, they were unready historically until then about give or take 6 months. I suppose all these "what ifs" must be examined for the most likely and incorporated in a system. In this you could expand the diplo system and not vary too far from history with including 1936 or 1938 to 1946.. I'm sure that a temporary treaty is possible with USSR, and it's interesting how lucky the Allies were not to lose them! The Allies are very lucky! Italy would not of aided Axis endeavors. They had small successes without their leadership and with their brave men. Poor morale, little aide from Germany, and lots of wars over worthless territory. Italy should not have been in Greece or Yugoslavia. Nor Ethiopia or Albania. These are some of the poorest regions in Europe and it did not favor them one bit. Their failures in France, and in Egypt are a part of their overall undermining morale. By the time Egypt kicked off I think on the all the Italian morale had slipped into oblivion. They'd seen how they could not win a single confrontation and they knew that the war was doomed for them. Germany was holding that leg up up the entire war... Italians needed 5 or 10 years to prepare for a war... That or a a lot help! I think Italy favored the demise of Germany a Year or so As for the Atom Bomb, I think it would have been a great deal more complicated than 1945! The USA put some money into it and the best scientific minds of the age. Perhaps by the late 40s... without the motivation of war, few would put cash on it.. WHAT IF 10 Nuclear Bombers departed England to bomb Germany in 1945 and German Jets shot down a great deal of them!!! What if the Jet Screen of Germany couldn't be broken TerrorBombing was a devastating as conventional bombing in WW2, firestorms in Hamburg were as ugly as a Nuke

Yes, John is right on the money. That the Middle East or a Eurasian Axis Sphere including the USSR is the only possible way that Germany could have succeeded in "longterm" plans of world domination. It would have still only been a "world power," Not the premier power but it would have set the stage for the longterm. Japan lacked an army had a navy, the USA and the Imperial Colonial Powers would have bunted heads with the Japanese. The Germans with victories in Europe would've stabilized the situation by forcing Treaties on the Colonials, if the Germans brought these Colonials to their knees and included the Japanese it would've solidified their partnership. Meanwhile the USSR could've split up Eastern Europe and portions of the Mid East... I see this a likely scenario but a great victory in France and perhaps in the skies still necessary in Western Europe.. Then Deals and concessions! We could simulate Japan much the way we simulate the USA, a landgrabber getting much support from the USA, and wanting to break loose from that noose but unable to right away until maybe '42 or '43... With any sort of Territorial gains in South East Asia the USA would get touchy, it may not DOW but it would cut all resource shipments to Japan. This would keep the Scenario in WW2 context. Germany probably delaying Barbarossa until 1943 or '44 and possibly turning on the Russians then for once and for all. Winning it's historical victories and then forcing the British hand in Iraq/Syria.........along with limited U-boats guarding shipping lanes in mass this could turn into a bitter political battle. Historically the Germans were often able to attack the British on the surface but then the political tension abroad could arise if they do not force the British the Discussion Table... All this is possible, and in the end no saying the Germans could still best the Russians on land... and no saying that the British and US may not rejoin the French in some sort of Western conflict, perhaps on a time frame. P.S. For the Germans to have a good piece of the pie in the Mid East and control of the Suez it would've required a better Navy and time to utilize it. Don't know if this is possible in 6-7 years between '39 and '47 [ July 03, 2007, 12:55 AM: Message edited by: Liam ]

Before this debate departs too far, let us just say this.......Much of the West before the USA entered into it was sparsely settled. Even the Natives were not that thick in certian places. I will say that many many of them died in an interesting war something fun to read about but I'm certian terrifying to live. Now Mexico was dominant in the American SouthWest not anymore. England had their eyes on the NorthWest and the USA did need to make their move for expansion, Texas had fought Mexico in a very valiant effort to win their freedom... The USA is a very interesting yet young nation, with a meteoric rise, mostly due to the infighting in Europe I assume! As for Germany and Russia, I cannot fathom why these two could not be partners, I suppose the vast differences between Teuton and Slav. In WW1 these differences were not so bitter with racial intolerance though it was still present! As Jersey John mentioned about the German Nationalistic Vision, I must assume this is the case. Had they had a really wise Leader who would have stopped with any sort of combination of conquests in 1939 into 1940, perhaps the Germans may have actually consolidated and gone on to be a World Power. I know that Hitler's own books state his desire to settle with peace in the West with gains and a show of force I do not however know the specifics of this. Meanwhile carving a homeland out of the East. The East would have been a much better partner than the West! Stalin was more a powerhungry dictator than anyone partner in the West. Tokyo-Moscow-Berlin would have been a very good combination for a successful alliance, however shortlived it may have been. I cannot see the Ideology of Germany at the time Embracing this wise diplomatic move. So they were doomed.......

I was never aware of peacetalks in 1942 with USSR and Germany. Though I'm certian that a delay of the war there would have been possible. I'm not sure which side this may have favored. The Axis were in a better position before the offensive in 1942 that had too many goals than the Russians were on the defensive. By late 1942 and early 1943 of course all this had changed and I'm sure that the whole world could forsee the inevitable. Hitler is a strange character, I've never read his book but from what few words I have seen from it he seems to have been a driven but narrow minded individual. His vision was narrow in that it doesn't take into consideration what the rest of the world is like. All over German ideas of inferiority of Russians is a idiotic point. Napoleon lost his Grand Armee there about a century previously. The British as a passive people that would throw their lot in with a Continental Agressor is highly unlikely. Who would that favor? About the best that Hitler could have expected is an armistice in that is if Stalin was the aggressor... Hitler's ambition stood well when localized but when it overstretched realistic goals it was doomed to failure. A new homeland in the USSR was not was Germany needed, nor was Wheat... The German people had acquired enough by 1939, the Corridor would have been an achievable goal. Denmark, Norway and Poland are not that great of a gain. No real natural resources... in 1941 Germany was fighting in North Africa for Dust. Was holding Norway a rocky, icy outcrop for some nickle. Not only that but trying to assualt Mother Russia at the same time. Plus the countless occuppied Minors throughout Europe. Germany gained most of it's early power from exploitation and rape of minors...

Colin, A good point, the weather 'may' hold the Axis in line until further into 1940 but I have lost Paris as early as 1939 because I did not understand that proper Defense is paramount! The Defense of France: I have learned French defense primarily from Terif, and from a few other of the Forum Players such as Rambo or Hellraiser, HR employs the slow method. You must cover your Capitol! Moving the full Strength Armies in front of the three Paris Tiles turn 1 is an excellent counter for the Allies. The Tank or HQ on the Capitol is fine. This along with weather usually will prevent a collapse! However is not 110% insured either way. If you should hotseat this scenario with France, you will learn the precise movements that will cost France nothing but will save her. If Germany operates enough units and has a quick takedown of Poland you may not have the time to prevent France from capitulating too soon but covering the Capitol and posting some of the weaker units in the Maginot is a fair defense! France then must decide will she throw herself at the Axis or will she let the Axis pick her a part slowly. I generally find that it is wiser to wait and let the Axis grind up in snow and mud. If you're lucky Norway will go well and you'll also pick off the Atlantic U-boat... Otherwise if things go poorly, you may lose the option of Brest which is a nice base for the UK and distraction for the Germans. Also if the German timeline is too easy North Africa will be bit harder to take if it's your strategy. Time means money for the Axis too and an aggressive Axis player will immediately take down any minor in sight that is a big profit. Allies must then pick and choose their options...

I have always pondered those little #s from the first time I noticed then in SC1, it was very helpful then. From what I understand and I'm not sure this is factual those #s are 100% accurate but they do not factor in the Dice and with tech in SC2 I believe the Dice are exponential... i.e. IW2 would have a factor of 2 strength points possible destroyed, likewise for defense I'm not the Math Pro here though

Colin, your point has merit, the slow and steady approach for the Axis is effective with weaker opponents. With more advanced opponents you will pay the penalty, IMO. If you gain Benelux & Denmark on turn 2 it will help offset the cost of all the operations required to take Benelux... Not only that but you will have a forward position on the French so they will have to answer to the Axis with a frontal defense of Paris turn 1! Similarly the French fleet isn't alive long enough to harm the Italians or the Germans. There so many advantages to Aggressive Germany against a more passive strategy. All this forces the hand of the Allies and though expensive and costly you'll learn you can quickly offset the costs and gain greatly. Good luck your Tournament Match

Sitzkrieg, do not follow History entirely Most players know how to conquor Poland and have a prefered path they choose. There really isn't a right way but mine outlined is just a sketch to make it easier. Next step is the Axis Operation West and move west. Some players know how to take both Benelux, Denmark and Poland all in one movement, they put enough troops adjacent to Benelux Turn 1 and they move their troops and air in range of Copenhagen and use ground troops with intelligent movement to take Warsaw. This is very powerful Axis opener if you utilize their forward momentum and their various unit types. Benelux and France are best assualted early... My opinion that there prime targets to take in early 1940 rather than later so you can think out other strategies. It is best to weaken the ground units with your air, punch holes with your armies and corps and fill them with armor. You may take losses but usually in the early stages of the game it is difficult for the Allies to prevent you from your goals. Here is a general movement for the Axis...

I will continue this subject while I am able as there still doesn't exist a greatly detailed guide for some intermediate beginners. I however will never elaborate all strategies, people need to play to experience it and giving it away for free is not fair to players who do play and learn by losing Denmark is vital, and can be blocked. By either of the Ports or the straights if the Axis do not properly Block, it is a counterblow and alternative for the British. Germany needs to take this objective with wisedom, and that means as I mentioned early, GREAT FORCE it's really easy. British can always us Bombers, Battleships, or kamikaze units to attempt a sneak attack on the Kriegsmarine. A Pearl Harbour of the Baltic if you will. Terif has executed this with Adeptness in our current holding game. I thought I was SOOOOO Safe, beware the silent foe One has to becareful not to put the British Asleep completely she is a Very potent and powerful adversary on the High Seas and for Sneak attacks early on in the war. Since Denmark negatively effects Allied readiness that means it's a target that can usually wait, and German ports are great to post their ships on, their U-boats are not SOOOO valuable, 400 or so MPPs is not the biggest loss and any assualt on the Baltic will let the Atlantic U-boat likely escape Best sometimes if you see a suicide mission to ram the first Brit ship you can and pray for a hard hit... instead of wasting time with the Frogs. You see how you have to Counterbalance your strategies with many many possibilities... Never think your pieces are stuck or immediately dead, they can be all utilized, so make sure that every unit is utilized, on the move, and ready for the turn that you may need to bring it into play! Norway is an easy grab, garaunteed for the Allies, but it does mean she is short elsewhere so the Axis must utilize this time and manuever properly. I suggest Overgarrisoning Denmark for Newbs save your fleet, it is fun to play with but not essential for later in the game. Axis can never stop LR aircraft. Sweden also is a hard target, as it raises US readiness much too high. SO Norway is a great base for the Allies to use to kill the Kriegsmarine anyway, you may never be able to stop the Allies without total Scandanavian Domination then in the Baltic!!! Depending if he goes after you... As mentioned don't attempt to go there in the mud, mud is the nightmare for Minor Takedown! and Scandanavian Weather can be unpredictable! Any Questions, and then we'll move onto France! :eek:

Jersey John! Long time no see. I have been away too a little bit... I like your subject, This is at the basis of World War 2 strategy gaming... Historical Simulations and SSI did some good ones, I find that these Strategic Maps are a little more difficult and the Game Engines though more detailed are still really tricky to match to WW2 standards that a lot of folks have. Understandably, Hitler was a superb Politican, Speaker, Gambler he was even a visionary but no Military Tactician, he made the rank of Corporal in WW1. That is below the level that one of you are likely achieved in your own Military Careers or if you were to enlist with the amount of College you have Men that were Military Geniuses are what got Nazi Germany to it's Dominance in 1941. Hitler is the ambitious mind behind those men, and he did not meddle in affairs on the operational level as much as far as I'm concerned until after he started losing. OCD or obsessive personality disorder. I have this and I can relate to the Man himself when I speak and say that when I am successful with something I will not micromanage, but I may attempt to micromanage when I'm doing poorly. This is the case with Adolf Hitler and a big reason why he was losing much after a certian timeframe. He REALLY needed to heed his Generals warnings! Realistically, Great Britian alone could not defeat Hitler, Stalin would likely have dealt with Hitler on the understanding that great concessions were made. I do not think Stalin the megolmaniac some think him. He was a man who was a Megolmaniac in Russia and the Soviet States and what he believed was rightfully in his sphere of influence. He knew not to bite off more than he could chew. Hitler had no concept of this and that is why he was doomed to failure. Consolidation of His gains after France, which was a very Gifted Campaign for the Germans as the French were unprepared, and WHERE was the RAF? The best that Germany could do was probably a armistice with Britian and possibly a return of France... That MAY have appeased Churchill... If not Churchill would've played the Americano card, and perhaps Hitler could've played the Tojo Card... I'm not sure Regardless, Germany couldn't swallow every Minor and expect to Keep all of His Gains, just doesn't work that way. Great Conquorors never last, Ghengis, Napoleon, shortlived really... everlasting impacts, Even the British Empire, one of the longest Lived most Dominant and intelligent Empires in History. a 5th of the world!!! Very Roman!!

Hi guys back for a bit at least. I am watching with eagerness HellRaiser will be a tough player to best!!!

No Zeke went after Denmark and attempted too many things at once, to block Norway also from the British Fleet... This was opportunistic for me, Norway option was lost, I didn't want to send my guys home I look at the biggest payoff. Really I didn't intend to successfully stop Denmark, but I cost him up until Clear weather over Denmark and his entire fleet. 1 Corps landed above the German corps in Denmark, another under him, locking his fleet and his corps off supply, both had come out to greet me... In bad weather the Luftwaffe was grounded so there was no escape... DOWing Denmark would be worth it if you 110% could kill the German Fleet... IMO

both sides have lost a lot of strength, a war of a Neutral Attrittion...

Great Blunders Part I: The Allies and The Axeman You will never hold France as Axis unless you demoralize your Foe, most mistakes with Axis revolve around attempting to take early Naval Dominance in the wrong places and or attempting to do half arse job of a conquest... This is something I'm extremely guilty of, I have been repeatedly beaten by Terif by attempting to Dominate his Navy with my Air or attempting to engage his fleet in unfavorable terms... and even more by a poorly planned invasion of a Neutral. Rules are you shouldn't engage an enemy fleet unless the Terms are extremely favorable for you. Especially against a very skilled player, it may be a trap. Secondly Air Fleets in SC2 are way too expensive for the Axis to waste on firing away at Ships unless the goal is a longterm one...rarely is... Lastly, Neutrals must be carefully thought out and you must invade with the utmost secrecy and if not, the most firepower.. Though Axis are on a timeline you are going give the Allies plenty of time to react and plan their manuevers so doing what you have to do as quickly and as unexpectedly as possible without pattern AND with FORCE is the best way... I have lost 20 games to Terif in SC2 just because I didn't come with all my guns blazing!!! He's a player who'll not permit a weak move...be decisive Here is a turn of Zeke's I'm playing, he has chosen a Slow Path into France and he failed to take Denmark on turn 2, I used this opportunity to kill his Fleet and take his Resources out in the North, this engagement has cost him his TimeLine, large portions of the Kriegsmarine, and I think that you'll see the end of the game as the UK now will own Denmark and Norway... and the entirety of Scandavia, lets see if Zeke is innovative enough to hit me where I am weak!

My Axis Opener: We all weigh up the basics here for the Axis. To start with is timeline, Axis have one. Poland is a tough cookie if you strip forces to attack Denmark and Benelux and move into position for an early Conquest of France. Primary goal in Poland if you're operating West to Kill Benelux/Denmark is to open a hole and the South is the Easiest place so far that I've seen to do this... Try to get at least 2 or 3 units adjacent to Warsaw as soon as possible before the weather gets bad and keep the rest of the Polish units cut off... kill the The Capitol and protect your flanks do not get isolated or lose Konisberg!!! Very Vital!!!

I have noticed the dozens of questions posted every week and the dozens of questions I have had and how rare it is to find answers and to get past the learning curb for a lot of you. If anyone would like I am going to post through an AAR and put some basic and indepth strategy in it to help a few players through, plus some Screenies... Think I shall include 2 PBEM Games I am playing. One vs Terif, the Master of Strategic Command Period. Plus another vs Zeke Tucker a very jubilant young Commander who can be good but has been away.

I am not sure how Destroyers, how many there will be for each nation? How many tactical strategic bombers will be included? Generally in Fall Weiss Scenarios you'll find it rare for a nation like Germany to afford a Heavy Bomber.. That is fantasy.. unless of course the ultimate goal is use it as a strategy, but regardless she is fairly limited in protecting her Ports in France or elsewhere, only the Mighty Royal Navy and the Allied Bombers tend to dictate that... I can see Terif's Fear here, amphibious invasion is easy as pie. Especially for an adept Player! Though there may be some solutions too, like pillboxes?? Quick cheap fortifications, that an Engineer can build in less turns but provides less return... As air will decimate defenders near a coast now. BTW: Interesting Rails and Roads

Taking Malta isn't worth the price in my opinion. The Fortress makes it costly for air to kill it and the garrison there is sufficient to cause a bit of havoc should someone wish to go on the offensive somewhere and replace it with a fighter or bomber. Think over the course of the game the cost Malta Effect, it is genuinely annoying to any Axis Player but you really can put your forces to better use elsewhere usually like Finland!

Blashy, OUCH... 600 MPPs per turn... I imagine she would have had to do about 5 years of consolidation to get there. Though when you say comperative techs, i.e. Jets, Heavy Bombers = Me262s, Migs, etc... B-29 Fortresses using near nuclear capabilitites then 5 IT should represent a MEGA effort by the nation to mobilize! so 600 MPP Double a basic IT is realistic... but would take awhile or a lot of resources! but once acquired OUCH as for the upgrades in Armor, no way that British landed with the same armor as in 1940 and my British tank is discarded as is my Italian one pretty early. Historically and realistically it is making a unit obsolete that shouldn't be so your plan for a few techs would be very very valuable, though beware across the board as a lot of exploitation could occur, though I suppose counter-exploitation also as for your comment about the fall of the Reich vs Russian and American production. The Figures I see are staggering, the Germans had a relatively tiny Manpower pool. In order to win a major victory was needed or a succession of to completely wipe out the East and West at some point or another totally hindering their efforts with morale. Though I'm not certian Russians needed morale they knew the lesser of the two evils... I can envision tens of millions of Americans, thousands of Ships...tens of thousands of airplanes in 1 battle vs a Tiny Germany, unable to ever match this...even tens of thousands of tanks!!! Allies had lotssssssssss of Oil, lots of Armor, rubber and men to sacrifice..... Germany died from '43 on because she was iceskating uphill

Blashy, interesting table. Certianly those techs were historically researched but since there are so few units to actually gain why would Italy or the UK every invest say in Tanks? Makes it a profitable idea to invest in everything perhaps when a unit might even get discarded late game.. I like some of the words on German production increases.. They had a great increase in German production and diversification throughout their constant issues, they even extracted oil from coal way ahead of us. It does payoff certianly if you hit them early, as also mentioned but it's an ify thing. typically now, The Axis overexpand and do not bother to ever go the route of IT or Production as they're "What Ifs" however conquoring is a For Sure thing. USSR Goes IT and heavily on production along with the USA so they can produce a bunch of cannonfodder... Fact is you cannot really take the risk of 500 MPPs in tech early no matter if the payoff is big or not, especially since Germany is not a garaunteed payoff and cannot afford the gamble like the USSR or USA so it should be cheaper or bigger pay off.

I don't see that, the average Germany starts at about 1 and qtr MPPs, hits about 200 in late '40 early in '41, then is about maximum in '42... Allies hit their Max around the same time! IT and Production is usually not worth it unless it, and I do not think would change the outcome of a game if removed altogether! Has anyone who mentioned their name in the above topic ever really bought the tech for a serious game?

Hubert, we want better industry for the Monster German Reich, that in WW2 never mobilized, but had it, then history may have been different. Industry tech doesn't properly simulate anything gained, at maxed levels, even if you're lucky enough to get to it level3 it's nowhere near what history would be. It should represent the fact she can increase her production and industry together by 100% at least minimally to be a wortwhile pursuit. For teh USSR or USA its a backbone but for the Axis it's a waste of cash!!! Cheaper to invade another Minor

All what is said is correct, I think that the most valuable investments for Germany is Long range Air with Infantry Weapons. Long Range air lets you attack a lot of far away targets plus precision targets......and keep your air safe away from possible land counterattack. Infantry Weapons allows Germany to kill most of her enemies early. AntiTank is just a plus along with heavy tanks......those two are second to the first two Along with AntiAir, Advanced Subs and Industrial Tech all can be good... Especially over a VERY long game as those are goody techs that will payoff in 1945 sometimes or '46, do the math

Well, I do not think after what happened on Prodigy the first Major American On-line Service with a Graphic Interface, anyone would want a modern day repeat. A NeoNazi got to share antisemitic ideas, or something of the sort and it was published in the New York Times. SOMETHING like that I recall as I was on the very bulletin board and it was a very humiliating thing for that On-Line Service back then. These guys today do not have to worry about that as Internet Free Speech allows Neo Nazis to own their own website and exchange Bombbuilding techniques online !!! anyway, Hubert wants a peaceful and funloving Wargaming crowd, but we all have egos, as Wargamers tend to... and that conflicts, and so do ideologies since were International it can get a little bit tense in here... Regardless, it does get a little extreme... I think it may also be to keep the mess of the SC2 Strategic Discussion boards and force people to move it to the General Area where this may fighten away customers. It's all about the Money and the Game here Which we should appreciate I do not want to go through 90% debate to find out how to invade RUSSIA

Kuniworth you hijacked my topic your Russian... Like Zeke I'd like to take you with both my Allies and my Axis and put you on my SC2 notch! So far in PanzerLiga, only Zeke has tied me!!! And terif of course -25