Germany attacks France in 1939 instead of Poland

[killmore]

Anyone made campaign like that?

This would make interesting change.

[ev]

Wow.

This is thinking outside the box in a big way. I really like your idea.

The Polish fronier was very long and difficult to protect. Germany would have needed many troops to guard this frontier.

It would have been political suicide to attack France while living only a couple of units to protect two or three big cities in east Germany and Prussia. Relations with Poland were already very tense, and the Poles were much more mobilized than the French.

If you are going to model this scenario, you should leave 4-5 corps and 2-3 armies to guard the Polish Frontier. Are there enough units left to do the job in France? I don't know. I am tempted to try it.

[John DiFool]

Originally posted by ev:

Wow.

This is thinking outside the box in a big way. I really like your idea.

The Polish fronier was very long and difficult to protect. Germany would have needed many troops to guard this frontier.

It would have been political suicide to attack France while living only a couple of units to protect two or three big cities in east Germany and Prussia. Relations with Poland were already very tense, and the Poles were much more mobilized than the French.

If you are going to model this scenario, you should leave 4-5 corps and 2-3 armies to guard the Polish Frontier. Are there enough units left to do the job in France? I don't know. I am tempted to try it.

I threw together a quickie scenario along just

these lines a couple of months ago (anyone can do

the same after 5 minutes with the editor).

Against the AI it is pathetically easy to hold

them at bay with most of your starting corps,

while the rest of your army goes westward (keep

in mind the Poles have no HQs and suffer severe

readiness losses the farther they go from Warsaw).

What would be >really< ballsy would be to play

the default '39 campaign, instantly op-move the

bulk of your army westward right from the

beginning, attack Low Countries on turn 2 or 3,

and leave the Poles for later. This would

prevent the Frogs from being able to save up

enough MPPs to build a coherent defense-and if

you catch them with their ships out of port, by

the time they can get back and do some emergency

disbands the Wehrmacht may already be in Paris...

John DiFool

[jon_j_rambo]

No, that wouldn't be "ballsy", that would be dumb to attack Low Countries / France too early. I prefer to waiting longer to attack, build-up that air with the Polish / Danes plunder. Plus you don't want to be engaged with Low Countries / France if the Brits go after Italy's fleet.

By the way, if you don't know that's okay. You know me now.

I DON'T LOOSE AS THE GERMANS.

jon_j_rambo@yahoo.com

[Kuniworth]

Question remain if Ribbentrop-Molotov pact would have been possible if France were attacked first. Without it an attack on the french surely would have ended in defeat. But I guess this wont happen in SC:s 1939 scenario.

[ev]

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

No, that wouldn't be "ballsy", that would be dumb to attack Low Countries / France too early. I prefer to waiting longer to attack, build-up that air with the Polish / Danes plunder. Plus you don't want to be engaged with Low Countries / France if the Brits go after Italy's fleet.

By the way, if you don't know that's okay. You know me now.

I DON'T LOOSE AS THE GERMANS.

jon_j_rambo@yahoo.com

When is the earliest you would attack Rusia?

[jon_j_rambo]

ev --- What's the earliest I'd attack Russia? That's a very easy question! Lets play a PBEM game & I'll show you how a professional does it.

Post your e-mail & I'll send you my first move. The first turn I bitch-slap Poland & invade Denmark.