Finland and Germany

[Liam]

During WW2, The Germans had sold out Finland to the USSR in a secret pact with Stalin. That was the Non-Aggression pact where Germany recognizes Russian claims to Finland.

Also Finland later declared war on Germany toward the end of the war when things went badly. Oddly not reflected too well in Strategic Command Series when Nations switch sides. Italy/Romania and Finland all switched at some point. Though you do not see any sort of this.. IF nothing else do you think that a 10 supply for Conquoring Allies for these regions? Italy naturally if linked by France and Romania and Finland via Russian territory. Making it imperative for the Germans to defend her Minors!

[Colin I]

Think for Italy and Romania we can consider these as surrender results; there was some limited conflict with German or German allies after the switch but it wasn't very significant on the scale of SC2.

With Italy I still press for alternative surrender conditions - perhaps based on number Allied units in Italy and other progress rather than just the fall of Rome. Kind of think Italy should have a larger armed forces, more MPP but lower morale and be rather prone to throwing the towel in. Italy always seems to do better in SC2 than historically; usually I get a few levels of gun laying radar and the fleet is genuinely dangerous - rather than scared rigid of the British.

Your idea is tough on game balance, SC2 really is 2 majors vs 3 or 4 (depending how you think of France) with the Axis bulked up with a lot of minors and some initiative and leadership advantages.

[Liam]

Colin, fairly accurate take on Italy. Italians did fight tough when they joined the Allies, hmmm, go figure and fought well in WW1. Their leadership was pretty bad in WW2. I could see several more corps and armies for Italy and lower their morale 25% default as well as readiness for the entirety of the game! Unless they're liberated

Italians now are quite deadly depending on where you deploy them. IW2 along with an HQ and perhaps AT1 or 2 with mobility tranforms her inept forces of 1940 by '42 into a Fighting Force comparable to England at least on Land. Meanwhile Historically she surrendered probably an entire Army in N.Africa alone in 1940 to England's New Zealanders alone? LOL Well, perhaps we should give all those CommonWealths 2 or 3 Bars instead of the Italian and Germans who conquor it! Well I know it took more than 1 CW Corp but Italians had no fighting spirit for Fascism.. I think it was all just a big bad HairDay For them in History

As far as Finland and Romania, I meant merely the cooperation at least. Finland I know! The Supply and MPPs would make them a bit more attractive and decent platforms for aggression in Regions now ignored by the game engine!

[borsook]

It is not that simple, some Italian units did fight bravely, e.g. Italian divisions assiagned to Rommel did very well.

[Liam]

You're right, perhaps what they needed what the right leadership, I would mind to see the ability for Rommel A SPECIAL HQ, to take under his arm 2 or 3 Italian units in N.Africa only!

It would be ultra kewl

Originally posted by borsook:

It is not that simple, some Italian units did fight bravely, e.g. Italian divisions assiagned to Rommel did very well.

[Bromley]

Why? If he can do it with Italians in NA, why can't he do it with Romanians in Russia?

[TFL]

Being Finnish myself I will comment some on the Finnish part.

Russians launched a major attack on Finland in the summer of 44. This attack was stopped, but Finland was weakened so badly it sought after a separate peace with the Russians. In the peace deal Finland lost some land to USSR and promised to kick the Germans out of northern Finland. Finns and Germans were old allies and hence no battles took place; the Germans walked north towards Norway and Finns followed a few days after to keep Stalin happy. After Stalin learned about this, few minor battles took place between Finns and Germans, but less then 5000 Germans were lost in these battles (number includes a 1000 killed, 2000 wounded and 1500 POWs).

These loses are hardly meaningful in the scale of SC2. What would be meaningful is that the Russians were able to forget about Finnish front and concentrate on going to Berlin. Note that Finland stayed unoccupied, gave no resources to Russian war efforts and russians were not allowed to use Finnish soil for any military operations. Of course we Finns are eager to remind about this, being the only European country in the war besides UK and USSR to not have been occupied at any point during the war .

I have no detailed knowledge about the events in Italy and Romania, but would imagine that their armies switching side was of little military importance as well. Maybe someone else has better/different knowledge about these?

[Alex Koponen]

Just for the sake of accuracy... Portugal, Switzerland and Sweden weren't occupied. Also Monaco and perhaps one or two insignificant (in SC2 terms) other countries. One could argue that much of the USSR was occupied...or at least fought over.

[ChrisND]

I think he meant countries actively involved in the war.

[SeaMonkey]

Got to hand it to you TFL, the management of the Finnish people/political representation of WW2 is to be admired.

Bravery and sacrifice when it was needed and diplomacy and mediation to avoid catastrophe when it was appropriate.

In the end accomplishing the goal and not undermining the self esteem of the Finnish people.

I salute your countrymen and I hope that in the future your country can be counted on to do the same.

[hellraiser]

" have no detailed knowledge about the events in Italy and Romania, but would imagine that their armies switching side was of little military importance as well."

Actually, Romania changing allegiance on 23th of August '44 had a major impact on the duration of the war. Not on the course of the war though.

Historians widely agree that what happened in Romania on the 23th of August '44, shortened the war with approx. 6 months. The major implications were: created the largest open flank known in military history; denied Germany her last major oil supply. After losing the romanian oil, the mobility of the Wehrmacht dropped to like 20%.

Some of the researchers even push it farther: they consider that by being 6 months short , Germany was never able complete the research and begin producing the A bomb.

Maybe the move itself was not supposed to mean so much but due to the fast reacting of the romanian army who managed to seize the Carpathians passes before germans could seal them, it saved the soviets a great deal of time and manpower needed to break this natural barrier. Think that it would have been something like Montecassino but at a far larger scale.

It is my opinion that Romania meant a lot for Germany. Perhaps even more than Italy. Certainly Finland meant something as well, tough troops, anticommunists but as an economic value, Romania was probably one of the most important Axis assets in Europe.

[jon_j_rambo]

Romanians sound like fair weather fans. You can't be on both sides.

"Either you're with us, or against us" --- President George W. Bush.

[Liam]

I am not sure of the Actions of Romanian Troops during the switch. However I can tell you this, that oil was a staple for the Axis. There was more Axis aircraft on the ground than in the air. Production nolonger mattered in the end, they ran out of fuel. Ploesti I'm certian was the #1 provider of all oil for the German Tanks and airplanes. It wouldn't have meant 6 months, as I feel the oil would've been difficult to retrieve, it would've delayed the Russians from storming into Hungary and Berlin however. Possibly into late Summer! That depends however on how suicidal Stalin was going to get. It was agreed on who'd take Berlin it was just a matter of time. Mutual collapses on both fronts it was ended the whole thing. That and the Ardenne offensive of 44 and 45 ate up the last of the German reserves.. that and tiny fiasco in Hungary barely noticed shortly after.

Some speculate what would've protracted the war, however remeber this, the USA would've had an A-Bomb in time for Germany had she kept going and was able to hold her reserves and fuel long enough to say last till early '46...

It was over 1 way or the other way... Just when. Romanian Oil I would say was far more valuable than Italy. Probably 2Xs. Italy was a liability in that she dragged Germany's feet in the mud, in the end delaying Barbarossa with Greece-Yugoslavia and forcing the Germans to send precious units to N.Africa! Romania failed at Stalingrad and other locations but her Army wasn't her Ace, her Oil was!

[hellraiser]

It would have been 6 months, Liam. The red army after the advance past Iasi-Kishinew line had to face something far more tougher: the Carpathian mountains and from the Carpathians to the Black Sea, the Focsani - Namoloasa - Galati fortified line, considered one of the most powerful defensive positions left in Europe. The defection of Romania and the quick actions of romanian troops (as I mentioned before) rendered all those defensive barriers (on which the German HQs calculations were based) useless.

@JJR -> 'Romanians sound like fair weather fans. '

It is the way we survived as a nation thru the centuries. Check again the geography and you'll notice we were in the middle of everything for thousand years.

'You can't be on both sides.' - this is an option for other people not for us - surrounded by enemies and lacking sufficient firepower, your main concern is to stay alive thus you gotta develop certain skillz - for example how to play one side against another in order for you to survive. Do not compare romania to UK or america for example, they have water between them and potential enemies. Having a moat outside your castle allows you to play proud and cocky

[hellraiser]

"Either you're with us, or against us" --- President George W. Bush.'

These are the exact words as used by the romanian fascist organization Iron Guard back in the 30s-40s. Or by the romanian communists after '45.

It is an idiotic way to think about people and situations

[Epaulard]

Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it.

Instill fear of "others" in your population is a way to control it. History fact

[Liam]

I've no clue to the extent of the Romanian fortifications, nor as to their use in WW2. You would know it's your nation. I do know that Romanian is the stomping ground for the past 600 years of nations like Russia, Ottoman Empire, Austro-Hungary-and endless power struggles in the Balkan Region. I do know the Carpathians by wargames, reputation, novels, maps. They look passable, better to go around then to station troops in! Sort of like the Alps...

Isn't this the same terrain that Napoleon had is famous duel with Tsar Alexander and Austrian Forces which was considered one of his finest hours, Austerliz close to or quite similar to this region?

Regardless few can complain as to Romanian's involvement it was out of Political neccessity. She didn't betray Russia, she was going to be eaten by Russia and Hungary if she didn't join. She was looking out for self interest I assume. USSR-Germany pact would've been split Romania, much like Poland I'm sure had the two worked together a little further down the road. Then again Hitler wanted that Oil and I do not know the extent of Nazi infiltration by Germany into this region. Bulgaria was upset about the Great War that is why she joined and Hungary was on the 1st bandwagon and too small and too close to Germany. All easily infiltrated weak Governments.

As far as the Romanian people, I know some here in my City. Interesting Folk, they're doing a lot better than me financially own a used car lot, psychic reader business. Survivors in a Small Place really... Without Ploesti, it's likely Romania could've remained Neutral or at least passive like Bulgaria

I assume Romanian wanted pieces of the Ukraine! Some of that territory has her Banner on it to this day? Moldavia?

Originally posted by hellraiser:

It would have been 6 months, Liam. The red army after the advance past Iasi-Kishinew line had to face something far more tougher: the Carpathian mountains and from the Carpathians to the Black Sea, the Focsani - Namoloasa - Galati fortified line, considered one of the most powerful defensive positions left in Europe. The defection of Romania and the quick actions of romanian troops (as I mentioned before) rendered all those defensive barriers (on which the German HQs calculations were based) useless.

@JJR -> 'Romanians sound like fair weather fans. '

It is the way we survived as a nation thru the centuries. Check again the geography and you'll notice we were in the middle of everything for thousand years.

'You can't be on both sides.' - this is an option for other people not for us - surrounded by enemies and lacking sufficient firepower, your main concern is to stay alive thus you gotta develop certain skillz - for example how to play one side against another in order for you to survive. Do not compare romania to UK or america for example, they have water between them and potential enemies. Having a moat outside your castle allows you to play proud and cocky

[TFL]

Originally posted by hellraiser:

*SNIP*

Certainly Finland meant something as well, tough troops, anticommunists but as an economic value...

*SNIP*

You are absolutely right here about the economics. I think the finnish contribution to the German war machine consisted of ~37 boxes of matches plus three wollen blankets, which were given in return for the hundred ME109s and 1000 AT guns received from the Germans. Finland wasn't exactly an economical powerhouse on those days .