Denmark-Norway Option.

[JerseyJohn]

This Option would simulate the German transport in disguised cargo vessels of invasion troops to Norway and the quick, almost bloodless takeover of Denmark. The two invasions were conducted almost simultaneously with small invasion forces in early Spring.

Germany seized Norway using limited ground forces sneaked in on cargo vessels, disembarked from destroyers in norther fjiords, or parachuted upon Norwegian airfields. The initial force of approximately 10-15,000 was quickly reinforced when the airfields and ports were secured. British and French landings were quickly defeated and even more troops were brought in creating a strong garrison in relation to the local population.

By incorporating this rule, Germany would displace the Norwegian corps in Oslo and Bergen and the Danish Corps in Coppenhagen with German Corps in each of those cities.

The option could only be used once and only if Norway and Denmark are both neutral. The double invasion is unvavailable if Germany has already launched an invasion of Sweden.

Procedure:

Germany places three full stregnth corps on the coastal hexes adjacedent to Kiel. When ready to launch the invasions, Germany expends 125 MPPs (not to be deducted from the plunder!) representing transport expense plus lost destroyers and damage to several cruisers.

During the historical action Britain lost an aircraft carrier and some escort ships mainly to land based aircraft. As there is no direct British/French interference in the game, British naval losses and Anglo-French troop losses, which were not severe in terms of overall Allied forces, are not removed from the Allied OB.

The Option could be activated after the surrender of Poland but no earlier than mid- April 1940 and could be put into effect any time thereafter.

An Allied attempt to spoil the option, i.e. a declaration of war against either Norway or Denmark would result in both countries joining the Axis. And a higher than normal diplomatic penalty with the U. S.& USSR.

Upon Implementing this Option the following actions take place:

[1] 125 MPPs are deducted from Germany's balance.

[2] The Norwegian and Danish Corps are removed from the map.

[3] The 3 German Corps at the 3 Kiel coastal hexes are removed and placed in Bergen, Oslo and Coppenhagen.

[4] Both Norway and Denmark immediately surrender are plundered by Germany.

[5] United States and U. S. S. R. war readiness increases as though both nations had been invaded individually.

[6] Everything occurs in a single game turn.

Historical Notes.

The British/French Expeditionary Force was fairly small and operated primarily north of the game map, in the Narvik region. After minor engagements the Allied troops were disembarked, leaving behind a sizable number of prisoners and the overall effect was primarily humiliation and a the toppling of both, the French and British Governments!

Though the fjiord mining and landings had been Winston Churchill's idea, he emerged politically unscathed while Neville Chamberlain, already suspect for his Munich failure, took most of the blame. After a stormy session of Parliament and some behind the scenes political maneuvering Chamberlain resigned and was succeeded as Prime Minister by Churchill.

===

Many Axis players would prefer to invade Denmark very early and Norway later on, not using the option at all. However, aside from being historically more accurate than a conventional invasion, this option offers a viable alternative and an added tactic for all Axis players.

I think the idea could be adapted to SC in it's present form, something like the UK arrows for going around The Cape of Good Hope Arrows. . If not, I'd like to have it considered for SC.

[ March 01, 2003, 10:52 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Minotaur]

And up to the top...

That's an possible thing, assuming SC2 have a bigger map... The Allies landing was at Narvik, where Germany lost all is ships in the area, if I'm not mistaken... It was far north than Bergen or Oslo...

But I'm not sure about it though... SC is a good game because there are few special rules (supply lines being the most complicated IMHO)... The more we add, the less it's enjoyable because you have to check how and when these specials rules applies...

But of course a more sophisticated wargame should include this...

[ March 01, 2003, 11:36 PM: Message edited by: Minotaur ]

[JerseyJohn]

Minotaur

Agreed, I'm not a big fan of special rules myself, but I find this particular situation in the game very belildering.

Also, it was originally written as part of the SC-2 Weather Forum.

If more realistic landing rules would be imposed then an amphibeous invasion of the Norwegian coast should be very unlikely in March or April. The Germans got around this by sneaking their troops in on cargo ships and destroyers.

It was a unique operation to be covered by a special rule. As it was a single operation that included the Danish invasion the two needed to be combined.

Meanwhile, players would be free to invade either or both countries in a more conventional manner.

[jon_j_rambo]

Sir Jersey --- Once again, another good take on WW-II. Maybe the History-Channel should give you a guest speaking opportunity. Any game developer of WW-II should use you as a resource.

What's your take on WW-III which is still in the future?

Guys, it's a Legend thing.

[JerseyJohn]

General Rambo

Thanks for the support and I hope the History Channel looks at this site; don't mean to constantly cite their programs but they've had a lot of good ones the past few years, especially regarding WW II.

Regarding WW III . When I was in First Grade, which was a whole lot closer to WW II, my teacher tought us how to get on our hands and knees under our desks. She said everything would be fine if we followed that simple procedure. No doubt she's residing in a more spiritual realm these days, but I still trust her advice. "Duck and Cover like you saw the turtle doing in that Civil Defense film and you'll stay safe and sound." Duck and Cover -- good advice in any life-situation!

[ March 02, 2003, 01:55 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Liam]

the two invasions were very easy for Germany in the game they're a task

you're right John

[xwormwood]

"During the historical action Britain lost an aircraft carrier and some escort ships mainly to land based aircraft".

But Britain would have lost much more ships if the Germans wouldn't have had this terrible torpedo problem...

[Panzer76]

I dont even own SC, but happend to stumble over this post.

Regarding the invasion of Norway:

German forces landed in Oslo also, but here they lost Blusher, with several thousands soldiers on board. This gave the norwegian goverment time wnough to evacuate the goverment and the royal family.

The southeren part of Norway was taken over in 3 weeks, the northeren part 3 months.

Germany suffered it's first defeat of WWII in Narvik, and was on the defensive. Norwegian and a British/French force held Narvik and was attacking south. BUT, the invasion of France led this force to be evacuated and all military help to Norway stopped.

This led to the fall of North Norway.

So, as you can see, it's not a given thing that the axis player should be able to just take over Norway by just expending some points.

If the allied player is willing, he could, as historical, stop the german advance, and if he wanted to go the whole nine yards, maybe expell them.

[JerseyJohn]

Liam

Glad you like the idea.

Xwormwood

Agreed, a good what-if along with the torpedo problem the U. S. had during the first year of the war.

For losses in this option, however, I have to base the idea on actual historical losses and I think it's safe to say that, in proportion to the overall size of it's fleet, British losses would not show up on this scale; nor would German losses except as part of the operational expense reflected in expended MPPs.

Panzer76

True, the heavy cruiser Blucher was sunk by shore batteries, but the task force went on to Oslo where the troops disembarked, joining troops who had already arrived, taking the city.

There is film footage of German troops walking down gangplanks in Oslo, offloading from cargo ships with military bands on the street below them playing marches.

There were Allied landings at Invelsness (not sure of spelling) and further north at Narvik.

While fighting at Narvik was heavy and a number of German destroyers were lost in a fjiord due to an idiotic order of Hitler's that they were not to leave the landed infantry. But for all intents and purposes, the Allied troops were never in a postition to expel the Germans and, other than some brief firing from shore batteries, there was little resistance from the standing Norwegian army.

It did take a few months to gain control over the entire country but the essential areas, including airfields and harbor facilities were taken very quickly by the Germans.

The country was taken by 8,500 German soldiers landed by sea! There is no unit in SC that is anywhere near that small. Making a special rule perfectly justified. The MPP cost remains the same, not including the loss of Blucher or heavy damage to heavy cruiser Hipper as nothing is deducted from British and French MPP totals to reflect their own fleet losses.

The following link details the German amphibeous operations in the Norwegian Campaign.

[Norwegian Campaign]

[ March 02, 2003, 02:11 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[JerseyJohn]

Added material downloaded from timeline site:

9 April 1940: INVASION OF NORWAY

German forces invade Norway. One major goal is to seize the port of Narvik from which Germany receives a major part of its Swedish iron ore.

10-13 April 1940: DIETL CUT OFF

The German Gebirgsjägers (mountain troops) in Narvik are cut off from naval support as the Royal Navy completely destroys the German naval force around Narvik. Mountain troop general Eduard Dietl orders 2 600 of the stranded German sailors to join his land force.

14 April 1940: ALLIED FORCES IN NARVIK

British, French and Polish forces start landing around Narvik from this date. A total of 24 500 allied troops disembark in the area. The Germans in the area can only be supported from the air, and with great difficulty.

18 April 1940: GERMAN MEDICS THROUGH SWEDEN

The Swedish government gives in to German demands and allows a German train with medical supplies, food, clothing and medical personnel to pass through Sweden to the almost encircled forces of general Dietl. This causes alarm in Sweden but the government decides to let the transition of German medical supplies continue camouflaged as goods purchased by a Norwegian firm in Narvik. Many sources testify that ammunition and German soldiers were among the medical goods and personnel.

17 May 1940: NO ENTRY FOR GERMANS

The German foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop requests that three trainloads of weapons and fighting troops be allowed to pass through Sweden to Narvik. The Swedish government does not concede, German combat units are under no circumstances allowed to pass through Sweden.

28 May 1940: NARVIK CAPTURED BY ALLIES

Norwegian and other allied forces capture Narvik from the Germans. The remaining small German force retreats towards the Swedish border. However, the same day on the continent Belgium capitulates as a result of German Blitzkrieg.

7 June 1940: DIETL RETREATS TO SWEDEN?

Norwegian forces successfully battle the remaining German troops by the Swedish border. General Dietl considers to retreat across the Swedish border into the Swedish county of Norrbotten and be interned together with his soldiers.

9 June 1940: The Norwegian Government ceases resistence and DIETL, instead of retreating to Sweden, CAPTURES NARVIK AGAIN!

** Ending Norwegian Campaign -- JJ **

15 June 1940: SWEDEN FEELS THREATENED

With the fighting in Norway being over the German government uses the Swedish government´s own words to make the Swedes open up their country to German troop transports. During the campaign in Norway the Swedish government had stated that it could not act against its stridande broderfolk, literally "struggling brother people". This argument appealed to the Germans as "brother people" sounded like national socialist jargon. However, as combat operations now had ceased the Swedes should "naturally" permit transition of military goods and soldiers on leave. If Sweden would not allow this it would be considered as a "directly unfriendly act". The Swedish government reckoned this was close to a threat of war against Sweden.

18 June 1940: GERMANS ON SWEDISH RAIL

The Swedish government allows the German armed forces to use Sweden's railway system for transports to and from Norway. However, the German soldiers are to travel unarmed and not be part of unit movements, they should only be on their way to or from leave.

26 June 1940: GERMAN UNITS THROUGH SWEDEN

The German troop transports start rolling through Sweden and from the very first transport Trondheim-Östersund-Kiruna-Riksgränsen the 26th of June the Germans break against the rule of only transporting soldiers on leave. Thus the concession of the 18th of June is the starting point for three years of German transports through Sweden, many in violation of Swedish rules. A total of 2 140 000 German soldiers and over 100 000 German military railway carriages cross Sweden until the traffic is officially suspended the 20th of August 1943.

27 September 1940: GERMAN BASE IN LULEÅ

After several months of preparations by the German military attaché in Stockholm, general Bruno von Uthmann, a German military supply base is founded in Luleå. At its peak period the base will consist of three main areas: several warehouses in the city centre; the largest storehouses on the Karlshäll side of the Karlsvik peninsula and the sheds in Gammelstad. New rail is laid to make a direct connection to the national railway system, making it possible to load two trains per day that are sent off to the occupation troops in Norway and later to the troops in Finland attacking the Soviet Union.

4 October 1940: SS TROOPS TO LULEÅ

A top secret German naval troop transport through Swedish waters reaches the iron ore port of Luleå. The ship Isar is escorted by the Swedish Navy. The ship carries the complete and fully armed second battalion (1 000 men) of the SS Totenkopfstandarte (meaning death´s head regiment) "Kirkenes". This completely motorized unit is then transported from Luleå by train to Narvik and from there to the Norwegian province of Finnmark which borders the Finnish Petsamo area, beside Soviet Russia.

Additional Material downloaded from Timeline Site:

January 1941: ZINDEL TAKES COMMAND IN LULEÅ

The German supply base in Luleå gets a new commander: Oberleutnant (lieutenant) Walther Zindel, a veteran of the campaigns against Poland and France. He does not wear a uniform in Sweden and is no nazi. Initially he eats lunch every day at the Stadshotellet (City Hotel) together with the town elite. Swedish police and customs officers are assigned to him, to run and guard the German supply base.

[ March 02, 2003, 02:22 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Panzer76]

The problem with your suggestion, as I see it, is that the game is enjoyable to play because you can ALTER history. So, in game you could help defend Norway and thus denying it to the axis.

Else you could say that many of the battles in WWII could be options and you should just pay some points for it to happen. But it's not much fun, and kinda defeats the purpose of the games, dont you think?

[JerseyJohn]

Panzer76

This suggestion is for an option to be used or not used at the player's discretion.

The player remains free to alter history any way he disires.

[ March 03, 2003, 04:51 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Shaka of Carthage]

The problem with Norway and Denmark, are that the native units are too large to represent the actual forces the Germans had to "fight".

While event driven items have there place, I don't feel its appropriate here. I am assuming, but I belive the intent was to make it easy to conquer these nations, but not too easy. Problem is, 10 str point unit makes it too "difficult".

Since we are talking about software changes to "fix" it:

Add a new unit to SC. A "brigade" unit. That has a max strength of 2 or 3. (This unit could also be the one used for partisans and paratroopers)

OR

Allow us to edit the units in a neutral nation thru the Scenario Editor.

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

This suggestion is for an option to be used or not used at the player's discretion.

Yes I understand that, but my point still stands. You could have many a such option which would not improve the game as I see it. For instance, if you are playing against a human Im sure he would have like the oppertunity of defending such countries which he is denied thorugh such an suggestion.

Ultimatly is's just different views on how the game should be played. I see that we differ in this view.

[JerseyJohn]

Shaka

Yes, I think scale is at the root of this problem. The brigae idea sounds good. They could serve both as partisans and rear area garrisons, leaving the larger units free for front line service. I think an overrun rule would probably have to added, though, to avoid brigades being used as cheap cannon fodder unrealistically holding back army and corps sized attackers.

[ March 04, 2003, 10:20 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[JerseyJohn]

Panzer76

Perhaps we do differ on this idea, but not as much as you suppose. My first draft of this option included Allied counter measures. Shaka's remarks as to scale point to the reason I threw all that out of the present draft. It became overly complicated and weighed the basic issue down with numerous details way out of proportion to the subject's real significance in the game.

Why not add some ideas incorporating Allied counter measures into this topic? The entire operation, including reinforcements amounted to about a corps for each side.

I think a special rule option would cover it better than having Germany send an Army and an HQ and a corps attacking Oslo with two or three luftflottes supporting it from northern Denmark!

Combining ideas from both perspectives might lead to an option where, instead of an automatic German victory, the matter is in dispute and an Allied corps appears in Norway to augment the defenders, who would now be their allies against Germany. This would also be an improvement for the Allies because, as it stands now, the UK has no chance at all of blocking a German invasion.

Looking forward to your response.

[Panzer76]

I see your point, and I support the allied having the ability to perform a counter measure if the axis would have such an option. But, the fundemental difference in our opinion is that Im against ANY such options. Rather, as there is a problem with the current implementation, SC2 would maybe include differnet unit sizes, as it already has been mention.

[JerseyJohn]

Panzer

Excellent. As I've said from the start of this thing, I'm not a big fan of special rules and invasion options either, but I've found the Denmark-Norway situation very unsatisfying and it is one of the few cases where I favor such an action.

After allowing for more discussion on this matter I'll rework the original idea into a more precise form incorporating an Allied countermeasure and post it in a new forum.

Meanwhile, if you have any thoughts on how the idea should be revised this is a good time to post them. I'd like to have it in a combined idea (measure/counter measure) form before it goes into a new forum.

Alternatively, Immer Etwas has come up with some good Marine Operation ideas that have led to a new forum on the subject. The ideas being explored there might well make this whole topic academic, which would be fine with me providing the basic task is accomplished.

Link to the Amphibious Landing Unit Forum.

[ March 04, 2003, 05:46 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[disorder]

obviously i am new to the game but i would still like to express an opinion on this issue.

SHAKA said--Add a new unit to SC. A "brigade" unit. That has a max strength of 2 or 3. (This unit could also be the one used for partisans and paratroopers)

it's great to envision accuracy and fairness across the game but it won't happen. is it ok to try? of course but with each change, some of the original "playability" is lost.

this game first hooked me because of it's similarity to axis&allies. a couple of years into playing the a&a board game we wanted to alter some of the technology developements.

in real life the Japs had some amazing subs.cargo carriers of huge size. sea planes with small payloads launched from jap sub decks.bomb carrying balloons credited with the only ww2 jap-induced casulties on the u.s. mainland(oregon, i think).in real life it happened. should all subs throughout a game system be allowed to launch planes from their decks? of course not!

boy, i do ramble on. anyway my opinion for what it's worth would be a single "specialist" piece which could assume a different skill or value depending upon investment. marine, commando,paratroop, etc. with all differnt kind of skills available, but it would still not be brought to the point of equity with a normal army force. this would just be an adaptation of shaka's comment. instead of a "brigade" unit available to all, each piece would be specialized and adapted to each countries needs.