Blitzkrieg 1939 Scenario

[Martinov]

Hi. I have created a "realistic" 1939-45 campaign scenario, as per the details below. Hope you enjoy it. Advice welcome. Download via:

SC Blitzkrieg 1939 Scenario

Blitzkrieg 1939 v0.9

------------------------

This scenario gives players more strategic options than the 'standard' scenario. The order of battle is more historical and there is increased emphasis on the North Atlantic & Strategic Bombing campaigns and the battle for North Africa. The Commonwealth and French are significantly more numerous, while the Germans have an advantage in experience (tactical skill). Each nation has a basic research ability, quite large in the case of the USA and USSR, in order to better cope with German tech-rush. Many ideas come from Dgaad and others. Comments are welcome via the "Blitzkrieg 1939" forum thread. Regards Martinov.

U-Boat War

----------------

Allied sonar tech reduced to 0.

German sub tech increased to 4.

Atlantic U-Boats reduced to half strength.

Additional U-Boat in Kiel Shipyards but both half strength.

Bombing Offensive

------------------------

Allied bombing tech increased to 2.

Additional Strategic Bomber in UK but both half strength.

Research

------------

Commonwealth, France, Germany & Italy commence with a basic research establishment of one research scientist, while the USA and the USSR enter the war with four to represent their peacetime buildup.

Commonwealth

-------------------

All Commonwealth land & air units start at half strength to reflect ongoing mobilisation, except Gibralter.

Canada and Iraq start as part of the Commonwealth.

+HQ "Wavell", Army "8th Army", Tank Group "Western Desert Force" & Airfleet "Desert Airforce" in Egypt

+Army "BEF", +Corps "X", Airfleet "Fighter Command", in Great Britain

+Cruiser in Gibralter

-Carrier in Liverpool

-Canadian Corps

France

---------

All French land & air units start at half strength to reflect ongoing mobilisation, except 1st Army.

Armies deployed in the Maginot line start fully entrenched (level 8).

+6th, 7th, 8th, 9th & 10th Armies

+1st & 2nd Alpine Corps on Italian Border

+Tank Group "DCR Heavy Tanks"

+Airfleet "2nd FAF"

Soviet Union

----------------

Heavy Tank tech increased to 2

USA

-------

+5 entry to make entry date more historical

Nazi Germany

------------------

All German units start at experience level 1 to reflect their superior doctrinal & operational advantage at this stage of the war.

All German Corps and Western Front units start at half strength to reflect ongoing mobilisation.

+HQ "Kluge", +Airfleet "Luftflotte III" and +4 Corps on Western Front.

-2 Corps in Berlin & Vienna, +1 Tank Group and +1 Corps in Slovakia on Eastern front.

+Bombers "Luftwaffe Heavy Bombers"

+Battleship "Bismark" half-built.

Fascist Italy

----------------

-15 entry to make entry date more historical.

Misc

------

Positions of some units moved. Polish Southern Army & Warsaw garrison entrenched.

[I/O Error]

I disagree quite strongly with the addition of four tech points to the USSR, I do not think that representative of history at all. Another point in industrial tech, maybe. But four points that can be thrown in anyplace, that just doesn't make much sense.

I don't know about the Luftwaffe Heavy Bombers, what they called Heavy Bombers at that time really weren't.

The other changes seem good!

[JerseyJohn]

Martinov -- Great ideas though I heavily agree with I/O error on many points.

Especially the Soviet four -- that's an enormous advantage and really the only field they were advanced in was heavy tanks -- thanks mostly to a chasis and axle allignment originally offered the U.S. but spurned as America had wonders like the Stuart and Grant tanks, with the Sherman widow maker in the offing. Smart, real smart.

Judging by the Sturmovik, Soviet heavy tank principles extended even to their fighter planes.

-- Hardly an original observation as it was referred to by nicknames like "the flying tank" or "the flying battleship."

Also agreed with I/O on heavy bombers --luftwaffe doctrine in '39 held that every bomber had to be capable of dive-bombing, including the long range condor!

Germany, at the start of the war, seems to have shunned heavy bombers in favor of ground attack planes (largely Milch's influence) and put jet engine research on hold; Goering felt they were not maneuverable enough and lacked range. When they began researching them again many of the designers had to be located, some were running around with rifles in their hands.

With B-17s and Wellingtons filling the skies they came up with a great interceptor in '42/43 but Hitler, in his infinite wisdom, became it couldn't carry bombs!

There enormous mismanagement in the Luftwaffe from top to bottom and start to finish [example, on the very day of it's heaviest losses over Britain, Goering decided to reduce aircraft production!]. Many of the manufaturing decisions had more to do with favoritism and corruption than design quality.

That they built fine planes like the ME-109 and the Focke-Wolfe fighter under such circumstances is a wonder.

More typical was the ME-110, which was supposed to serve as a long range fighter bomber. In the Battle of Britain it was intended it make a bombing run, then find heavier bombers and escort them home. after a day or two it became obvious that, against Hurricanes and Spitfires, it needed escorting itself!

German engenuity came to the rescue in most cases, the majority of their designs were multi-purpose and, even if they failed in the intended role, succeeded somewhere else. The ME-110, for instance, became a great night fighter and, like the Stuka, was used in it's original role in the East and Mediteranean, where interception was less likely.

With really competent management Germany would have had jets and real bombers at the war's start. The Doernier, Junker and Heinkel medium bombers were cargo planes and transports in design, then converted to bombing roles, a drawback of being so adaptable -- look how vulnerable they were to intercepts.

A lot of your other ideas I like, especially the experience level for German starting troops; their army was expanded quickly but those guys were doing a lot training as forest rangers!

Also agree with I/O that U-Boats L-4 in '39 is an extreme solution, especially combined with rolling back British Sonar tech, though it makes sense with the spotting problem.

I don't see the need of stregnthening Poland as they were crushed by Sept 20th (actually, I think it was the 16th!). In the game it's difficult to achieve this. I've done it once vs the AI; the AI as Axis normally does it by late October or even November.

Altering the U. S. is a tough call because, despite it's low MPPs, it enters the war pretty strong, in reality most of those troops were still being trained.

In '39 the army air force and navy were given a lot of attention, but U. S. ground troops (prior to the peacetime draft) were in a league with the Dutch and Belgian armies (both countries had troops posted in colonies making them larger than they appear) -- the U.S. was well covered for a war with Luxemburg!

But the game has to do it that way to prevent gamey players from taking advantage of the map to invade the U. S. before it enters.

But for all that your idea is a Gutsy and imaginative approach. Looking forward to giving it a try; like you and dgaad and many others I'm in favor of putting more historical accuracy into this thing.

-- Before editing I downloaded from your site and will try it right away. Also looking forward to the improved graphics.

[ October 31, 2002, 12:40 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Martinov]

Thanks.

I should have noted that the Luftwaffe "medium" bombers start at half-strength to represent their "fledgeling" capacity. The introduction of this unit encourages at least a "token" battle of Britian.

No apologies for the "drastic" attempt to improve U-Boats! They are *crap* in the standard game, and these changes...maybe...make them a viable option.

The increased research should be taken in context, 4 for the Soviet Union seems high by itself, but by the time of the German invasion the Nazi's probably have 6+, and by then the russians certainly can't spare resources to build more. Perhaps its overcompensation, depending on feedback & more games played I might drop it to 3 per US & USSR. Mind you, the Soviets start with 2 normally so I have only increased their research by 2*12*0.5=1.4 levels a year. Introduction of the 5-4-3-2-1 solution will basically solve the problem anyway.

Lastly, computer opponents should be on +1 difficulty, which I imagine is usually the case anyway.

[ October 31, 2002, 12:59 AM: Message edited by: Martinov ]

[JerseyJohn]

Martinov --

No appologies needed for the "drastic" U-Boat measures or anything else -- aside from which, read on . . ..

Played the scenario as Axis through the Fall of France and enjoyed it a lot.

Set the AI on expert with +2.

Reinforced the BB Bismark a point a time to maintain it's skill status, did the same with most other units.

Poland fought like hell and went under by late October, despite Warsaw's falling earlier. Good changes, enjoyed the fight.

France also fought like hell and surrendered in late July. The tank unit gives it extra punch but somehow France is always a hopeless cause.

Naturally I targetted the French Armor after breaking through, but that also served to give Paris itself a slight breather, though she fell soon afterwards.

I like the idea of a French HQ. He was in Bordeux, drunk, the day Paris fell. In gratitude we awarded him the Iron Cross, Order of Foreign Incompetants and provided free passage to England.

Their real commander didn't believe in telephones or communication with his subordinates, mostly he holed up in a villa and sipped wine while looking at maps. Probably the poor s.o.b. was manic depressed and who could blame him. He said his job should be done in broad strokes and was not concerned with Army operations. Sort of makes sense, but at least one phone for ordering pizza was a necessity!

The second CinC was a man in his mid-seventies replacing a man in his mid-sixties! By then it made little difference and neither did he, though he did install a phone, but once the fighting resumed they could never find anyone anyway. The one incoming call was to tell him the war in France was over. What a gyp!

With your changes Germany needs to do a bit more preparation for the Lowlands/French campaigns than in the normal '39 scenario, but that makes it more fun.

The U-Boat idea works, they inflict damage, though not too much, and best of all, thanks largely to your relocating them, both subs survive for later action.

No getting away from the fact The Battle of the Atlantic in SC could use revising, but your measure helps it work as is. I don't what effect Germany's U-Boat L-4 will have further down the road.

Actually, Doenitz didn't incorporate many new inovations from '39 thru '43, when they were forced due to improved Allied methods. Mostly, in the early years, the Germans replaced obsolete U-Boats with larger, better ones that were already designed at the start of the war; maybe they had L-4, or at least L-3 already!

The 1944 improvements would have finished the process, snorkel etc., but by then it was too late. So -- I'd hold off on changing it, but would give the Brits their L-1 sonar; I have a feeling when the Bay of Biscay becomes Axis operational Britain will need a few breaks.

Meanwhile some obnoxius Limey tanks are sniffing around Tobruk -- Momma Mia!

Terrific Job.

[I/O Error]

Let's try the not-so-friendly approach.

Originally posted by Martinov:

I should have noted that the Luftwaffe "medium" bombers start at half-strength to represent their "fledgeling" capacity. The introduction of this unit encourages at least a "token" battle of Britian.

So... after one turn of paying the paltry sum needed to reinforce to full strength, Germany possesses a real long range strategic bombing capability? Not QUITE supported by history in any way shape or form, let's just put it that way!

The manual describes Air Fleets in this way:

"In general, Air Fleets are normally made up of fighter, tactical bomber and transport wings all of which together comprised the normal day to day air operations throughout the war."

Seems to me that Air Fleets is all the Germans should have at the beginning of the game, both from the standpoint of game balance AND that of history.

No apologies for the "drastic" attempt to improve U-Boats! They are *crap* in the standard game, and these changes...maybe...make them a viable option.

Joy. So we're supposed to believe that the German went from Type IX boats to Type XXI boats with merely one added level of research?

There is a fine line between trying to fix a problem in the game and absolutely screwing up reality and making the situation worse. You're toeing it.

The increased research should be taken in context, 4 for the Soviet Union seems high by itself, but by the time of the German invasion the Nazi's probably have 6+, and by then the russians certainly can't spare resources to build more.

Ummm... I do pretty well against the AI and likewise when I'm playing Allies against other humans. (Or if I'm playing the Axis against humans, Russia eventually builds up their research programmes.)

You are definitely overcompensating. The entire POINT of the Eastern Front is a period of rapid gains by the Germans, only eventually overturned by the Soviets. The Soviets are quite simply NOT supposed to have that much research potential at the beginning! Allied players are supposed to dread those first scrabble and claw years when playing at the Soviets.

Many of your other suggestions are quite good, these are not. (IMHO)

[ October 31, 2002, 03:44 AM: Message edited by: I/O Error ]

[JerseyJohn]

I/O

Sorry for being so friendly! :confused:

In my first post here I agreed fully with your observation about bombers -- Germany was way behind in this department to the point of using converted cargo planes. Additionally, it stands to reason I agree that the Axis should not have a bomber unit, but he's given England 2 of them and from what I've played so far the German bomber unit's main value is in spotting French units beyond the Maginot Line as there aren't sufficient fighters in the west to escort raids over France. Germany did have that sort of air recon capability.

In the Atlantic it seems Martinov's measures provide a quick fix.

It wasn't too drastic in the spin I gave it but, as I said, L-4 combined with Britain having L-0 on sonar might have drastic effects very quickly.

It's difficult to judge a lot of this historically. Things were done like sending U-Boats to the Med and having Itlian subs in the Atlantic (which can hardly be done in the game as Italy is not about to keep the Gibraltar harbor reduced). It made little sense as the Italian subs were not effective except as transports (they were larger than normal) and the clear Mediteranean water made U-Boats easy prey for aircraft.

Additionally, many German U-Boats were posted along the Nowegian coast. They might have been obsolete models, but Doenitz was upset about being forced to place them there, so it's just as likely they were updated models.

I would opt for U-Boat technology of L-2 as it was one of Germany's trump cards and the game does not reflect that; this is also a perfect split between the games L-0 and Martinov's L-4.

I also think Britain should have Sonar L-1; with the 2 Atlantic subs relocated their survival chances should be more than adequate.

Agreed on the research, as stated earlier.

Starting chits of 2 for Germany, Britain and Russian, maybe 3 for the U. S., and 1 for Italy and France should do the job. Everyone conducted some pre-war research so they would have staffs upon entering.

Russia came up with some good advances like the T-34, KV-tanks, Stalin Organs, and the AK-47, but I agree that these were achieved over time, and they're starting out with Heavy Tanks L-2 (the game has it as L-1) so they seem okay.

In other areas Russia never got very far, no radar and before caturing german scientists they had no inkling of jets -- two research chits shouldn't be excessive.

I like the way it's played so far, which is late July 1940, Poland, Low Countries and France havinh fallen, the Atlantic U-Boats are limping to port unsupplied after being attacked.

I should have gone for Denmark and Norway after Poland to test things more thoroughly. Might go back and give it a try to see how it affects the mix (two additional plunders, etc.).

I/O has a good point about the bomber unit; Germany had some four engine designs but they weren't buiding them, ergo they had no heavy bombers at the start and only condors later on. They flew a four engine model round trip to New York's Long Island during the war and had some technology but never built a heavy bomber wing.

I'd give that one to I/O and change Marinov's German Bomber to an air fleet. For one thing, a Bomber wing in '39 would influence the Denmark Norway campaigns I'm planning on the next run, and would be effective against British ships in the North Sea after Germany takes Bergen.

Will start the Martinov scenario again but with the following modifications: Britain has sonar L-1, Germany has U-Boat L-2, Germany, Britain & Russia start with 2 unnasigned research chits, U.S.A. starts with 3 (Despite initial unpreparedness America came up with many great innovations in only a couple of years), Italy and France start with 1 each. In playing pieces the German Bomber unit becomes a regular air fleet. No other changes seem warrented. I'll post the flow of play as I go along.

As it seems I need a change of image I'm ending things with a growl, no friendliness at all, a mad dog, see -- :mad:

[ October 31, 2002, 06:10 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Martinov]

Hmm, well, I will defer to the small but vocal minority...I daresay you have more experience with the game...I'll keep the german bomber though, it remains puny compared to british numbers and bombing tech, and if it encourages a little bombing of england, it has served its purpose.

v0.91

German U-Boat technology reduced to 3

US & USSR intrinsic research reduced to 2 points each.

[JerseyJohn]

Martinov --

After looking at your scenario in the editor I found a few surprises -- kept U. S. A. at 4 research chits, changed German U-Boat Tech to L-2 and put Jet Tech back to 1; British Sonar at L-1, Soviet German and Brit research at 2 chits, Italian and French at 1 each. Decided to keep the understegnth German bomber; with all the discussion, Germany can simply build one after taking Poland -- only a mild stretch of things.

I think the levels now discussed are good.

Will start from Poland again, add Denmark and Norway campaigns before France, and let you know how it plays.

[ October 31, 2002, 06:36 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Zeres]

Very interesting thread. What about starting Germany with Level 2 or 3 subs but giving them a few more boats in the water? It's been said before but I also think that subs should do less damage when they attack ships (except transports) and ships should do less damage to subs. It should be a little harder to destory naval units. " wolf packs" get destroyed too easily. I think it would be cool if you were able to "limp back" to port with a sub or two. realistic. Currently this doesn't happen very often. Aircraft should be the real terrors of the seas. I'd like to see the Americans put in a position, where they have to buy a few carriers to even have a prayer of getting across the ocean. Also when you think about "Liberty Ships" and all that. The speed that America was able to put boats into the water. It seems to me that American ships should be cheaper to build than their European counterparts at the same tech level. I'm not saying this is the way it should be. It's just a thought.

[JerseyJohn]

And a very good one!

America built more ships in '42 & '43 than Japan built in the 20's and 30's. Once the American economy became geared for the war it was a collosas. I think the game represents this by starting the U. S. with army sized units -- by the time they'd get across the ocean a huge support system would be required and it's invisible in the game, but accounted for.

The liberty ship entry is interesting but nobody has to worry about the size of their merchant marine, so it doesn't go directly into play.

The carriers are also a good point -- in this case the small escort carriers weren't much use against either capital ships or in combat against shore positions; their only real use was against U-Boats. During the war the U.S. posted only one full-sized carrier in the Atlantic.

Escort carriers were usually converted cruisers that moved slowly with all the added weight, around 20 knots, which was faster than merchantmen but slower than troop transports (which were rarely attacked by U-boats; ofthen they peacetime luxury liners like the Queen Mary. When the convoy was attacked by U-Boats the escort carrier tended to be vulnerable and a prime target. Several, including the original ship, were sunk.

I like the idea of wolf packs limping home and the ships that attacked them limping back to their own ports, which was the situation I got from Martinov's scenario. A quick fight, only one BB instead of the whole combined fleet, damage to both sides, and a successful break afterwards.

The two damaged wolf packs might have stayed where they were and sunk the attacker, but at least one would have been lost and the other, having remained in place, might have been found by other ships and sunk as well, so I skedaddled to have them fight again later. It seemed similar to real North Atlantic action.

[ October 31, 2002, 11:37 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[JerseyJohn]

Martinov --

Tried your basic scenario with German U-Boat set at L-2 and British sonar at L-1 with the following initial results:

The two starting Atlantic U-Boats, after sinking shipping for two turns in the Canada region, were found by 1 French BB initially, and 1 British BB and one British aircraft carrier the following turn, both subs were heavily damaged but survived, fleeing south each at "1" stregnth point of their original "7." Not sinking shipping, they were not found on later turns and managed to limp into the Bay of Biscay after it fell to German control.

To me that was a success and I recommend using those settings (Sub L-2 & Sonar L-1) instead of Subs L-4 & Sonar L-0.

The rest of the scenario plays well. Denmark and Norway were invaded between Poland and the Low Countries, all with good results.

The USSR has an unfortunate tendancy to prepare for war during the Spring of '41, which wouldn't be realistic -- they were utterly unprepared at the time (due largely to the purges) and, far from preparing for war, Stalin was pulling preparations back so as not to provoke a nazi invasion. Didn't notice the USSRs initial settings, if it's zero then it ought to be neutral with the proviso that it gets turned to Random sometime during the Spring of 42 -- I still don't buy the idea of a Soviet preventive war, but it's a game concept and all that.

In North Africa the Brits (as AI) attack Tobruck with an armored and army unit, hit it for a few turns, don't manage to capture it and turn around again; not unreasonable. Perhaps if the Itais hadn't ventured into Egypt in 40 and been cut to pieces (outflanked and forced to surrender en mass when their source of WATER! was cut off, and simply remained fortified in Cyrenica, as the Generals advised, the North African campaign would have proceeded this way.

It's a more than reasonable assumption and reflected in the scenario -- on the other hand, if the Brits (as human player) want to go nuts on the issue, committing air fleets and aircraft carriers, I'm sure Italian Tobruck would indeed fall, so to me you've achieved a good balance.

Among the other changes or levels settled upon were: Soviets, British & Germans each get 2 research chits; French and Italians 1 each; Americans 4.

Germans Jets L-1 (changed from L-0).

A Good Scenario, historical and fun as well.

[JayJay_H]

Martinov,

The German Battleships Name is 'Bismarck' (with C)

[Martinov]

Thanks for the feedback. I made the scenario with 2 player games in mind, but interesting to hear. I'm really pleased with results from my recent 2 player games actually - very nice.

I haven't touched USSR entry so thats due to the game. I rarely see Denmark & Norway invaded, maybe the computer is doing it more frequently due to extra forces, and maybe USSR is responding?

Against a human the U-Boats still struggle, so I think tech 3 is best for them. I'll probably return sonar to its default of 1 - I mistakenly (?) thought it affected chance of targeted subs diving, but apparently it only affects the ship's defence strength vs subs?

I'm glad you agree with 'intrinsic' research, I've gone for the formula 1 per nation, +1 if USA/USSR due to late entry for simplicity, and to minimise deviation hubert's original, but I can see the reasoning behind your allocation. I can see the german +1 jets logic too, but as the germans have gained +1 experience across the board I don't want to overpower their air units in france.

[Martinov]

Martinov,

The German Battleships Name is 'Bismarck' (with C)

LOL. Thanks...I wrestled with that one, but couldn't remember!!!

French army deployments need tightening up too!

[Karhu]

Martinov, many thanks for the great campaign. Have just played it through as Axis on expert/+2 and had a lot of fun.

France put up more of a fight than usual, and after a quick Sealion the Soviets had me pushed right back to the Oder - I had little or no answer to their powerful infantry, and I thought the game was up. However, I was saved by two things:

1) as my armies gained in experience and my tech crept up, I was able to gradually push the Red Army back and eventually overwhelmed them. They didn't seem to invest in tech at all.

2) apart from one brief outing early on the US never even attempted an invasion of Europe, even though they had amassed some 5500 MMPs by the end of the game. For most of the war I was stretched quite thin in the west, and an invasion could have really hurt.

Am now having another go as the Allies. Thanks again and well done!

Edit: spelling (sigh)

[ November 04, 2002, 11:27 AM: Message edited by: Karhu ]

[Martinov]

I have uploaded v0.92 with more accurate French dispositions & designations if you are interested.

I'd guess the Soviets just got hell unlucky with their tech rolls.

The american play sounds disappointing, but I can't imagine it had anything to do with the scenario, you mentioned sealion, maybe its not yet designed to cope with fall of the UK. I have been quite impressed with the AI play generally, especially compared to other games.

If you remember, let me know Italian entry date, I'm tossing up whether I've tweaked them to arrive a fraction late.

[pzgndr]

This scenario is starting to look good. I was initially turned off when I saw L4 subs and L0 sonar proposed, but recent revisions appear more reasonable. I'll have to play it when I get a chance.

So, should this scenario and Dgaad's historicity mod be in competition or collaboration? Ultimately, there should be a single "official" campaign scenario with appropriate notes discussing the historical situation. :cool:

[Karhu]

Martinov, I don't remember exactly when Italy joined the war, but AFAIR it was after the fall of France. Italy actually did very well in the game, taking most of the Balkans, Iraq, Turkey and Southern Russia.

The US has never attempted an invasion after a successful Sealion in any of my SP games as the Axis. Is this a set feature of the AI in SC, because it's a real shame if it is.

[Carl G. E. von Mannerheim]

The only peeve i have with this campaign is that it is too easy to perform Unterneimen Seelowe. The Fall of France works well, i was abke to get them to surrender on the exact historical turn. But the conquest of Britannia was just too easy. Suggest adding exp. points to RAF (i did this through putting the game on Expert.). All in all great campaign, Right now, one of my various campiagn projects is an historical Fall gelb, Barbarossa, Typhoon, adn NEW WORLD,

nice camp.

CvM

[JerseyJohn]

An early Sealion is a recurring problem with these scenarios. As the Axis I find it the only route; at the very least you get London quickly and, with only a few armies and two Luftflottes + HQ in the country, you can make your way north and, over the course of a few months, take everything even if fighting against the Russkies.

The only solution has to be reinforcing Britain from the start -- after Dunkirk Britain was quick to muster it's overage WW I veterans into a homeguard.

Not having a mobilization schedule there's no way to do this in the game. The next best thing might be an understegnth army posted in London at start named "Homeguard" with a couple of half sregnth supporting corps, HG 1 & HG 2 posted near the city with the "Acuchinleck" HQ half stregnth and midway between London and Manchester. They would be too weak to be of much use in France and could be gradually reinforced to defend against an actual invasion.

In reality there was only a one month window of opportunity Germany missed for a quick try at seizing Southern England. It could probably have been done as an airborne operation seizing a channel port with it's airfields, then bringing reinforcements and supplies in by air till the beachhead was expanded to include the other channel ports and their airfields, at which point they could have been shipped them in.

The converted barge substituting as landingcraft idea was ridiculous and would never have come up (it was the equivalent of the Normandy Invasion being conducted by troops in Higgins Boats setting out from the British Ports and going straight to France!).

Unfortunately, game mechanics don't take these things into account so I think the only viable solution is the homeguard suggested earlier. It isn't inauthentic as, by the late fall of 1940, Britain had infantry divisions in place along likely invasion areas and had placed barbed wire and other obstacles in the appropriate places.

By the Spring of '41 a German invasion would have met very heavy resistance.

[ November 05, 2002, 02:29 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Martinov]

Bill, well, this scenario has a catchier name! Obviously at least half of it originates from Dgaad's seminal work. I'm making an effort (hard work) to accept criticism in the interests of making an popular mod, though I really can't see the fuss about the subs or the german bombers (tell Coventry the jerries didnt have bombers!

Carl, I imagine Seelowe is harder than in standard, due to the allies starting relatively stronger - the mainland UK forces have been increased by an (admittedly weak) army, a fighter, a bomber, extra prod & a research point. Maybe I will give them an extra battleship, or extra ground as per Jersey sugg.(they had considerable quantities mobilising) or maybe the RAF experience as you say.

As mentioned its best "2 player".

[ November 05, 2002, 02:48 AM: Message edited by: Martinov ]

[Karhu]

Martinov, tested the scenario through again on expert/+2, this time as the Allies. It played very well, and was evenly balanced for a long time.

Germany cleaned up Poland and France very efficiently, and took Denmark (but not Norway or Sweden). No Sealion was attempted, despite clear advantage in numbers and quality (but see note on bombers below). The subs withdrew into the North Sea (!) where they were destroyed. Italy joined as France fell.

One interesting thing about air power. The Axis had air fleet superiority until the very end of the war in June 44, when Germany and Italy surrendered on the same day. I was never able to catch up with their initial advantage, but the British bombers were great! They did a wonderful job on Antwerp and Brest, in effect preventing a Sealion even if the AI had wanted to do one. They were also excellent right through the invasion of Europe, being tough enough to stand up to Axis interceptions. It was fun to have units like this that I would never normally buy, but that now had a chance to show what they could do.

All in all it seems the scenario is well-balanced and has an even more historical feel to it than the original 39 campaign. Well done again.

[Kuniworth]

Martinov!

I really liked your scenario. This feels a lot more realistic than the original scenario.

[Martinov]

Great Kuniworth! I remember you from war in russia site, or panzer general site, or somewhere....