thetwo

I don't believe the Japanese exploded a nuclear device at any time. They did do some very preliminary work toward a bomb, but didn't go any farther. So some scientists were aware of the potential. Even if they had wanted to go farther, they lacked the industiral resources to commit and the number of scientific minds (think of it as creative critical mass) to pursue the project.

Ah, excellent Cantona. For the benefit of those wondering, the asterisks that Cantona copied, very accurately, reference the following. [*Includes Wehrmachgefolge - those considered armed forces auxiliaries and in the direct employement, assistance or aid of the Wehrmacht, but not considered part of the Heer, Luftwaffe, Kriegsmarine or Waffen-SS. Inlcudes those from groups such as the RAD, NSKK, OT, etc. A word of caution regarding these numbers; there is no one single source for statistics and data on German casualties or service totals during WWII. As a result, numerous sources were checked and double checked to gather this information, and although some of the numbers seem to work out correctly, others do not. Taken together, these numbers should not represent an exacting view, but a more general one in which the trends and hardships can easily been seen. Those numbers with a '+' indicate a number that is not exact. We will likely never know exact numbers for all the headings listed above.]

Cantona, Can you provide the source for you numbers and the what those numbers contain? The base number for the German Army in 1939, was 3.8 million. Replacements in subesquent years came from "year groups" as a given year group came of age. (In-fighting between the services for prime year group replacements was intense.) This is made quite clear in General Franz Halder's war diary. It seems to me there was also a three-volume history of the expansion of the German Army, leading up to the start of the war, and covering the early war, that mentioned the same figure. The Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine would have had manpower over and above this number, but to get to 12 million seems a stretch. There weren't that many Germans. Even when age limits were pushed. I also have no recollection of there being 9 million German military personnel disarmed after the war. To me I think the correct number would be in the neighborhood of 2-2.5 million between prisoners of war captured in the last six months and those who captured as a result of the surrender. Now Hitler had a passion for creating "new" divisions, which drove the General Staff crazy. It stretched available "division" assets paper thin and would give an "on paper" strength many times actual, if division headquarters were just counted and multiplied by a gross number of troops estimated in each establishment. But 12 million? Thanks.

I need to correct my previous post, I forgot the date line. MacArthur had roughly 7-10 hours notice of the Pearl Harbor attack. Apologies guys, The above post is not my thorough best.

Jon_J, the naval leaders are sorely needed and would be a great help. The Having the option of making an attachment to a ship for that purpose would work nicely. I don't know if you intended to make such a fine distinction, but I commend you anyway. You have MacArthur as a legend and not a hero. Well done. MacArthur - Not on alert 24 hours after the Pearl Harbor attack. - Had not followed the war plan and stockpiled food on Corregidor. - Had the temerity to hold a grudge against General Wainright for surrendering. Well done indeed, Mr Jon_J. For a hero, may I suggest we don't need a fictional character. We can use Chesty Puller. If you see newsreels of him in action, the strain is written on his face. Hard bitten Marine who felt every casualty and kept fighting. SeaBees might be used to get resources into production faster or to increase captured resources from half production to full production?

This is somewhat off-topic, somewhat on-topic. Consider it a suggestion for Hubert that might rattle around in the back of his mind for the future. I have wondered about the possibility of a convoy event for an off-board entity. For example, in Storm of Steel, if I want to replicate, US coastal convoys or South American supplies (Chliean copper, Argentinean beef, and Venezuelan petroleum) being shipped north. (Often overlooked sources, also that U.S. was coordinator, not just producer, for world-wide supply effort.) Might also be used to create a Lend Lease pipeline to Soviet Union through Iran.

CSS, when I read your post, I generally agreed. I thought some of your comments were left hanging so I decided I'd try to help out and add some polish. After Japan's opening to the world, Japan's leaders were afraid of becoming another China. Their choice was to modernize as quickly as possible. To do this, they chose the “best in class” from around the world as their models. You get a snippet of this in the movie, The Last Samurai. (If I remember correctly too, some of the old samurai families became industrialists during this time.) The fear of being another China resulted in a split personality. It may well have happened anyway, because the most extreme beliefs, in my opinion, often come with their opposites. Be that as it may, the Japanese leadership believed themselves both extremely morally and culturally superior to anyone else in the world and simultaneously the weakest. This simultaneity led them, ultimately to very dark places. The destruction of Japanese democracy in the 1920's, which CSS alluded to didn't just happen. “Happen” is a nice passive verb that politicians and corporate executives like to use to avoid blame. Japanese democracy was deliberately and decisively undermined, because certain groups considered it weak. There are a few good, English language books on the subject, but its been many years since I've read them or seen a bibliography. One of the results of this systematic destruction of the relatively new governmental system, was that when the Army took charge (not the military as a whole) they, both with laws and with extra-legal means, set out to destroy all free media in the country. Something that is basically true to this day in Japan. (It might be debated that Japan has a free press today, but I would argue that Gen. MacArthur failed to destroy the Japanese Militarist press after the war and they still dominate, even the tabloids.) This is the period when the Army changed the history of the samurai and began the national indoctrination of the entire population into the “new” bushido. Combining a code of bushido that required all Japanese to give their lives for Japan, a press with one voice, and a Japanese superiority labeling all non-Japanese as sub-human and the the pieces were in place for Japan's aggressions. (Documentation for Japanese research into a microwave weapon during the WWII shows they used “monkeys” as test subjects. “Monkey” was a euphemism for human, prisoner test subjects.) Even though the Japanese had not wanted to become another China, they were perfectly willing to do unto others. Very quickly they developed colonial ambitions. This will seem odd to westerners, because in time frame we are talking about, (1920's and 1930's for the China War) some in the West were already wondering when the European empires would begin freeing their possessions. Japan was a latecomer and wanted to catch up. It wanted to be a major player. During World War I, Japan joined in the war against Germany in hopes of being rewarded later. It should be noted that Japan began making demands of China during WWI, while the Europeans were occupied elsewhere. Japan received the German concessions in China and that only whetted its appetite. CSS mentioned efforts to limit Japanese arms between the wars. I can only guess that what he is referring to are the naval building treaties that were attempts to avoid arms races between the major powers. In reading about those, in years past, everyone felt put upon by those treaties and individual country responses, through their building programs were interesting. To say that it was aimed only at Japan isn't accurate. All countries were strapped for cash, but economically, the US had emerged with the strongest economy and could have out built both the British Empire and Japan. The building program it had underway at the end of WWI would have done just that. The Japanese though had one handicap, one that would hinder them during WWII, American code breakers were reading their diplomatic mail. Historians for decades had wondered why Japan had accepted relative tonnage numbers that were so disadvantageous. While I have found some Wikipedia sites questionable (and others highly biased), the one for the Washington Naval Treaty gets this right. The American negotiators knew what the Japanese would accept as their rock bottom tonnage. Japan ultimately withdrew from the treaty. It should be remembered, that Japan had commitments in only one ocean, while the United States, the British, and French had obligations over much wider areas. The Japanese used this to advantage at the start of the war. To my knowledge, the Japanese invasion of Manchuria was the first outright aggression in the pursuit of resources. While I am quite knowledgeable on most of WWII for both sides, I must admit, that I am weak on details of the invasion of China. I recall that China was highly balkanized and the Japanese skillfully played local warlords off against each other. The documentation of the rape of Nanking is more extensive than some realize. There were Westerners in the city. If I remember rightly, one of the best records was from a German diplomat who recorded everything he saw and sent it out. As for the Japanese military being stretched to the breaking point then striking back hard, I have to disagree. The military was not being rolled back on any front and was fighting well. The only field of endeavor in which they had any difficulty was the limited aspect of fighting the Flying Tigers. (I should note here, that President Roosevelt first signed the order for terror bombing of Japanese cities in the first half of 1941. This was part of a authorization for 100 fighters and 100 bombers for General Chennault. Wish I could remember where I saw this document.) The Japanese were in a bind for resources and I think there was might have a been a foreign currency problem as well. Cutting off those resources can't be called illegitimate expressions of unhappiness. I find apologists for the Japanese expansion south disingenuous when they attempt it. There is a cause and effect relationship, but it is not exclusive and it since it is based on rationales it could have been decided differently.

By setting turn lengths for longer periods in winter is to speed game play and in some ways replicates the difficulties in mounting major operations in the worst weather. Some designers like to use equal turn lengths throughout a scenario to equalize production. This also allows grinding battles to be fought that favor the side with the most production.

As a quick, off the top of my head response, the most common error I've made with scripts is not setting the AI = 0 properly when I want to test.

I have some thoughts on the subject of subs and economic warfare in game terms. 1. Submarine technology advances do not seem to decrease detection. This is logical extension of the technology. I can illustrate. I remember an incident on the day or day after Germany surrendered. All U-boats had been ordered to surface and surrender to the first Allied ship(s) they encountered. The Allied naval ships at sea were nervous as hell. They were worried that some dyed-in-the-wool Nazi would rather do down fighting and try to sucker them into lowering their gaurd. Off the coast of Norway, a hunter/killer group of Allied ships, dedicated just to hunting U-boats was patrolling. A type XXI U-boat had received the order to surrender and the boat's captain intended to do so. BUT, he also wanted to find out how well his boat could perform. He ran a series of attacks on the hunter/killer group. Everything was real, except that no torpedoes were fired. He made two or three runs. All were duly plotted and logged. He was running rings around his targets too. All while submerged. He approached the group and surfaced. The Allied ship's crews went nuts at first, as you can imagine. They lead ship, not really a flag ship as I don't recall a flag officer being in the group, signalled that the U-boat's captain was to report aboard with his logs. The captain did so, with his exec and had a cordial drink with his captors. During the visit, the Allied officers were very interested in the new U-boat that was keeping formation with them. The skipper proudly described his boat's capabilities and then told them about his attack runs prior to surrendering. The Allied offiers scoffed and thought he was making the story up. When he produced his logs and then sent over to the boat for the plots, the hunter/killer group officers realized that the U-boat could have sunk any one of their ships at will, with the only detection coming with the explosion of the first torpedo. The type XXI boat was the direct forerunner of every advanced submarine in the world. As air-independent propulsion was developed in tandem with increased submerged speed, oxygen reprocessing, sensors, torpedoes, increased depth, surviveability, evasion, and endurance. While arguements can be made, with justification, that Germany put its research eggs into too many baskets, it is much more accurate to say that few actual weapon systems could have decisively affected the outcome of the war if they had been developed earlier and in larger numbers. The type XXI boat is one of those few of which this is a legitimate question. Too few resources devoted to its development early on slowed it, then when it was ready to produce, they chose manufacturers with no experience in submarine or maritime production to build it. Absolute lunacy. Much as my comments in the V1/V2 thread, you get a good system, but the production system fails. Anyway, I suggest that research advances in U-boats decrease detection by ship as well as by air. This might also impact speed and evasion. In game terms, I've been considering a type VII-C a tech-2 boat. (Something else that may be relevent here is that the Allies didn't know how sturdy the type VII boats were until they captured one and ran tests. That's when the Allies upgraded their depth charges.) 2. Note: This next is not historical and is more game of a game-dependent strategy. There are two oddities that play into trying to fight an economic war with submarines. First, if you look at the upgrades possibilities for carriers, battleships, and cruisers, you will see that they can receive anti-submarine warfare upgrades. I can only guess that this represents not actual upgrades to the platforms so named, but rather to task group as a whole, around which that class of ship is formed. This means that in order to successfully use submarines, you have to be prepared to fight the entirety of your opponent's navy, not just his traditional anti-submarine forces. This is something of a traditional WWI naval view, but it applies and using can reduce your stress level. If you can break your opponent's navy, then you can create a situation in which it is your subs against his destroyers. You may still have the problem of his air power. Partly historical, partly not (see my first point concerning submarine technology advances). Second, there are no penalties for concentrating all your ships to kill a single submarine. That is, unlike historically, you can take every ship in the Atlantic Ocean and concentrate it, to hunt any one submarine at a time if you want. In WWII, by my estimate, the economic overhead for the U-boat campaign was about 1/10th the Allied cost of the merchant marine, escorts, coastal sea patrols, maritime patrols, and air patrols. You do not have any of that overhead and you do not have to worry about human costs. You can concentrate your entire force to hunt down one submarine at a time. You also have the benefit of being able to rotate naval forces out to repair at more nearby bases than the U-boat player. (Something I'd like to see the AI do better is repair ships in a more timely fashion, in the face of a concerted naval offensive.) If you want to get a more accurate Atlantic campaign, I strongly recommend turning off, Undo Moves. At least then there is no repeated searching with one unit to try to find U-boats. (Side Note: For my own use, I have a modified Storm of Steel scenario, that I keep tinkering with. I've added other convoy routes (US coastal convoys, US-Soviet Lend Lease), and instead of constructing Bismarck and Tirpitz had the Germans opt for the the alternate Z-plan. Then I had the British build their corresponding (response) naval program. Interesting battle of the Atlantic.)

I've updated my SDW mod on CMMods. It contains some fixes, but no real changes as yet. - Benelux for Allied player can not purchase units, because they won't be able to deploy them. - I realize the Vladivostok map pop-up is too big, but it is a very good graphic. I cropped it reduce it a bit. - Main part of the fix was that I had made a mistake in the victory conditions. That has been corrected. - Fixed maximum Soviet research on artillery.

I have noticed some things that need fixing and will take care of them today (as soon as my son and his fiance leave to go home). I'll post here when the update is posted.

The only time I have chosen not to create Vichy France was when I intended to capture those territories anyway and didn't want to generate extra go-to-war percents for opponents. I would have to say historically, for both Germany and France, the reasons to create it were much more in favor.

Hello, I've posted a new Stalin Drives West mod on CMMods. My first attempt at this kind of thing in many years. My pop up graphics are more descriptive than pretty, but should do what they are intended to do. There is obviously much behind the mod and I'll be happy to discuss. My thanks to Edwin Fager (the original designer) and to Hubert for his work on the game. Description: This mod has a period feel. The Allied European OB will look familiar. Popups and events document how people were thinking at the time. This scenario is Stalin's go-for-broke gamble and the politics reflect it. The extent of communist influence by country, as well as the power and limitations of Western industrial might are accounted for. The AI has been updated as well.

Hello Gridley, Some thoughts about the accuracy and reliabilty of the vengeance weapons. If memory serves, the V2s were decidedly complex weapon systems and were assembled using slave labor in old underground facilities. The rush to meet production quotas permitted the laborers to sabotage parts and assemblies and quality control was, if you will forgive the term, hit and miss. The underground facility also lent itself to corrosion of parts too. Further, by that point of the war, the German's intelligence system inside in Great Britain had been partly rolled up and the remainder had be doubled. The British were using this network and falsified radio broadcasts to mislead the Germans about where each V2 landed. By doing this systematically, they were able to "walk" the German rockets out of the most populated areas. It was quite a feat. So both actual and perceived accuracy were issues.