costard

I entered into the discussion because I thought I'd figured out why the West could not, for any sane reason, come to a peace treaty with Germany (does Germany get to keep Libya? What about Vichy France and it's possessions - how does this open up the Med and the Suez to the USSR if it decides to go through Persia? What about Italy and Greece?). This was an attempt to show that the postulate of a ceasefire in the west was not able to be arrived at through any real means (except insanity on the part of the leaders of the west: this is indeed a possibility, though remote and likely to be recognised and dealt with by the alternate political and military leaders of the time.) I guess the question becomes: at what point has Germany lost the war? By the summer of 1945, it has no infrastructure to bring what remains of the harvest under what remains of its lands to (what remains of) its cities. The populace must necessarily abandon the cities, the concentrations of capital that enable the factories and their support industries to exist. When did the tipping point arrive, when was it that the armies in the field could no longer be supplied? How much longer before did the drawdown of stockpiled resources begin and the inevitable result become set in stone? Examined in purely mathematical terms, where the relative and absolute productive capabilities of the warring nations is collated and compared, I suspect the answer is "As soon as Germany decided to start a war in Europe." By the fall of 1945, whether or no Germany still fields an army, the entire populace of Germany is being visited by starvation and famine: Germany's enemies aren't. The lessons of monkeying with infrastructure that supplies food to cities is well documented: China 1925-ish, Russia 1922-ish, post-war Germany all suffered similar population collapses (8 to 12% death rate) because the monkeys in charge did not understand what they were dealing with. The philosophy behind the war required the enslavement, true and literal enslavement, of entire populations to serve the Reich. By 1942 it was acknowledged that the "lebensraum" project required the liquidation of some 21 million people from the lands of Eastern Europe, with the subsequent transplantation of 21 million German people onto those lands so freed, so that Germany was self sustaining in terms of agricultural produce. Germany decided (at the Potsdam conference) to pursue this objective (and, frankly, tough **** to Germany when it suffered the consequences of this decision: the idea that the US and UK is somehow responsible is indescribably unfair to the memory of the murdered races of the Eastern European steppes). Such dislocations in the economies of nations are simple to describe, fairly difficult to effect and unlikely to end up being anywhere near as useful as envisioned: the R&D alone required for the processing and disposal of the six million or so souls that Germany managed to liquidate in attempting to achieve this program took most of ten years. In comparison the US, in three years, built an industrial infrastructure the size of its entire pre-war motor vehicle industry in the pursuit of something that was so fantastic as to have been unimaginable ten years previously: the nuclear bomb. This comparison describes, as well as anything else that occurs around the globe in World War Two, the efficiencies and capabilities of a voluntary and rewarding system of labour versus one of enslavement. It could well be the only worthwhile thing to come out of the conflict.

Oh Michael, you wound me so! Yes, yes, I understand that your group of friends is "exclusive": "imaginary" might describe it better. You have my condolences.

Undoubtedly more men and materiel would have made a difference, for as long as they could have been employed. Maybe push the end of the war out by three weeks, the possibility of a nuke being dropped on Europe? A different end result - no. As with the end of WW1, by the end of WW2 Germany was starving, it could not feed its population.

Apologies Aragorn. Cheers.

Given that by Fall 1944 the rational individuals still extant in Germany knew it was fighting for it's very existence and losing, I'd say there were precisely two options left, (tactically, strategically, whatever): fight and lose, or surrender. They chose both.

wot? ..........

Um, yeah, but in the meantime the US had developed the nuke, they had a standing army of a million plus just across the border and they had Stalin's eastern flank with the unsinkable aircraft carrier that is Japan. Plus, and this is important, there is no betrayal to avenge in the popular politics of leading masses.

Salt or fresh, clear or turbid, flowing or stagnant, dripping from 'twixt the thighs of a super-heated donkey or blown out the back end of Mark Emrys gas turbine, water is life. Micturated one bladder at a time into the Holy Piss-bucket, mixed to a mash of rotting grass seeds and smelly flowers, thence bottled and sold for the potency of its solvency - it dissolves memories and marriages, provides relief and excuse for those of us old enough to know that the past is what we struggled through, as is the future seen from somewhere we may not get to. Hope is gone - thank the Lord we have booze.

More likely, being Stalin and in charge of a world beating military, he'd have ended up in the Med, all over the Middle East and in control of the Suez (not to mention half of Europe under his control), whereby the US and UK would have had to fight him. This would be why a treaty with Germany (with or without Hitler) was a non-starter for the West.

BF is a little worried that they won't get their next modern out before the fireworks begin for real, at which point it has to be sanitised. Also, that they have a habit of picking the next battlefield. Boo, I really don't know how I confused "98" with "2", but I suspect it was a mod/rem thing and I glitched on the number of times I went through my digits. I know you understand.

In Africa? At the back in the middle. The Sherman in front of it seems to be sporting plumes.

If we're going to have the momentum thing count, we need to have runaway guns rolling to the bottom of slopes, into creeks, upside down in ditches, etc. Good immersion value added, fantastic for those of us that thrive on frustration. Battlefront has severely and deliberately limited the influence of the cock-up, in my opinion.

Possibly an attempt to get the military to give out some information about what actually happened (information that can then be examined and cross-examined, with the threat of being found guilty of perjury and/or contempt of court for those unwilling to tell "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth".)

Good one Jason. Scarcity of intellectual capability, scarcity of intelligence (accurate knowledge of the circumstances), scarcity of resources all needing to be managed. Command delays turn the game into less of a game - I'm not inclined to sit around waiting for my lost tank column to turn up, wondering why they're not where they are supposed to be. Realism has its limits as far as entertainment is concerned.

Seanachai got lost on a canoe trip up his own fundament, I think Madmatt got a big serving of importance and can't be seen to mix with the likes of Emrys.

The land where a mammal evolved with a poison claw. Ok, an early, primitive mammal. There's a few down here and they don't all wear clothes. Noba, fer example, 'cept without the cool claw, the clean personal habits and the duck's bill. We're top of the food chain, and we're not about to relinquish it to the spiders or snakes. Sharks and crocs bring some grief to holidaying ignorami, but a hidden glee to the locals - it helps if you believe the big signs that clearly show people being et by crocs, big red letters, exclamation marks - five or ten different languages go on those signs, but common sense doesn't. In the old days and further north and west where the hard people survived, the tourist often wouldn't be missed for two or three days. It was often the case that there would be no remains to be found (protein gets used quickly where you have a fauna able to support multiple apex predator species) - another reason to rejoice. If one of the clubs could swing it, a relative was invited to a wake and presented with a piece of crocodile, possibly the one that et the afflicted. Much beer and jollity. So the apex predators serve a purpose under the sun, and are in some sense a true measure of the wealth of the land we live in. The remainder of the extant organisms are mostly addled by heat or choice, and show the barest signs of sentience, let alone intellect.

John, I agree that making a scenario in CM isn't a trivial exercise and it is for that reason that I think that it behooves us, when criticising, to allow for this. A kinder, gentler criticism is called for when addressing the efforts of people who invest so much time and effort in creating something they hope we will enjoy: it is to be expected that they will react to negative statements regarding their creation. A sincere apology goes a long way in repairing damaged relationships. Trivialities aren't worth noting (in public, unless asked for) and apparent discrepancies in the intel provided are par for the course in the game (just as they are in real life). Avoid provoking the Good Scenario Creator, else he will in future refuse to exercise his creative skills and we will all be poorer thereby. Also, he will band with his fellow creators in ridiculing and denigrating the critic, a fate to be avoided unless one delights in masochistic tendencies.

You're too nice John - assert your first amendment rights, publish and be damned! sburke isn't really a wuss, nor precious for that matter, he's just a control freak taking advantage of your good nature. Seriously, just don't describe every seeming failure of a scenario design in such concrete terms - at least, not until you've had a go at designing one yourself and submitted it for public criticism. Screenies would be nice.

Moar, MOAR! Woot!!!ONE!!1l!!woot!!i

Eat the Blancmange, Emrys! Save us all!

That's very... Brokeback Mountain of you Michael.

CM: Pining for the Fiords

The fox had class and a dearth of fleas, unlike our self-confessed one-man bio-hazard. The only similarity is that they're both stuffed. Do you have mange, Michael?

Played Les Charne recently - highly recommended. No idea where to get it.

You give a woman crabs, of course she's going to dump you. I hope you de-loused.