Pre-empted Barbarossa

[SeaMonkey]

Through my journeys into the historical realm of WW2 I have recently been exposed to data from a number of sources that the USSR had viable plans for an attack on Germany.

I won't go into the particularities of the reference materials, each of you can conduct your own investigation. I will however cite some of the references if you wish some direction in your quest.

It seems the first occasion for the planned Red Army attack was Sept. 18, 1940, with 168 divisions and 6422 aircraft. The second opportunity was to occur sometime in May of 1941 with 258 divisions and 6600 aircraft.

Whether all this was possible is obviously subject to much debate and I'm sure we could have it right here, right now. But that is not the intent of this post. No... it is to examine the possible impact of the "what if" to SC2. Isn't that what SC2 is, a game to explore "what ifs" in the context of WW2?

Here is the loosely proposed scenario:

Through the use of scripts, two possible events have a certain percentage to allow the USSR to DoW the Axis prior to the start of Barbarossa.

Effect: The USSR player would now have an incentive to forward deploy and arrange his builds and tech research to take advantage of the % possibility, but he does not have to. Needless to say the USSR player does not know the exact date that these DoW opportunities will occur, only that they have a window of time and a percentage that it may happen.

2nd Chance: After the initial attack opportunity has occurred(in 1940)or not, the window closes, a one turn shot. Later there exists the second possibility that the DoW of Axis nations can happen per the second script in a manner of the first. This window would be in 1941. Again the Soviet player does not have to initiate the planned attack, it is always optional.

Consequences: Pretty apparent, Sealion repercussions, North African deployments, a protective screen in the East has to be maintained, etc, etc.

Sound like a different game? Historically viable?

Pure nonsense?

[Blashy]

I think the dates are just thoughts the Russian had going, not actual plans they would have gone through with it.

Although the plans to attack in 1942 were quite "official", something even Germany was aware of (I think).

[SeaMonkey]

I wouldn't be so sure of that Blashy, like I once was also. The Red Airforce lost 4600 aircraft by the end of June 1941, sound like a minimal threat?

Remember Hitler's words after the initial invasion's uncovering of the vast extent of the Soviets' deployments, "If I had known about the amount of tanks they had, I would never have invaded".

Take a look at Heydorn's "Soviet Deployments in the Bialystok Salient", an enlightening read.

And lastly, the forces available to the USSR in the initial stages of SC2 don't allow for offensive operations?

[Konigs]

It was real, the Russian generals pushed for a pre-emptive, Stalin was unwilling to start the war until '42. He new he had to fight Germany eventually(he had read Mein Kampf and new Hitler's plans), but he wanted to wait till '42. He never thought Hitler would make an irrational decision to invade Russia with Britain still at his back.

[JerseyJohn]

Great thread, SeaMonkey. Very interesting historical premise. I agree 100% with Konigs post.

As far as I can tell, the only thing holding Stalin back was his own concern about the depleted officer corps.

And possibly logistics. I don't know if Soviet stockpiles were sufficient for very large scale offensive operations at that point.

Blashy also has a good point because, after the deal in August 1939, Soviet officers would have been very hesitant to voice plans for an operation against their new friend, Germany.

[Blashy]

That is exactly my point Konigs, it might have been real, but the Head persona AND party in power said no.

Make the statement: "If Staline was not there".

Well then you have to go back to when Lenin died and start about 1000 "what if" because who knows how things would have turned out with whomever would have replaced him.

I see your points in how interesting things could have turned out but that is not the point of conducting a historical game. We play these games with the idea that we follow the doctrines of each nations and try to do better by changing "mini" what ifs , example, not going to Stalingrad and instead cutting of the Caucausus, no sub campaign or early DDay by the Allies, stuff like that.

[SeaMonkey]

Sorry Blashy, disagree. The SC2 platform is for the big, as well as the little, "what ifs".

Do you think that I would have pushed, as well as others, for an Editor the scope of which resides in SC2 if it weren't meant for bigger things.

The proof in the designer's wishes and the substantiation that HC created such an editor is all I need.

Now back to the idea that the General Staff was not complicit with the early attack. On the contrary it is exactly that staff that postulated such an idea.

And the idea had commenced planning as far back as the autumn of 1939 by the Soviet General Staff with Stalin's approval. The author being Major General A.M. Vassilevsky who was acting under.......yes.....that's it....Zhukov's orders.

Look I'm not going to defend this premise, the recent release of USSR archives, declassified in 1991, speak for themselves. It was not me who arrived at this conclusion, but the many Russian scholars that examined the documents.

All I'm saying is as a skeptic to almost everything, I have seen the possibility as very real.

[JerseyJohn]

Blashy,

What it amounts to is you take an extremely narrow view of what should and shouldn't be speculatred on.

I think we should speculate on situations, not personalities. If all we can do is mimic what we think the actual historical figures would have done, we're depriving ourselves of most of the fun that's to be had in these things.

[Blashy]

You HAVE to specualate on the personalities because THEY are the cause of situations.

Humans create history, not situations.

The editor was created so we can do tons of stuff, historical or not, you can create a chess game if you want.

I'm just saying if you wish to see if you would have done better than what actually occured you can't start to extend the way you propose because that makes it pointless on trying to do better than the historical figures IN place.

I don't care about the recent USSR archives, bottom line is Stalin was going for it in 1942 and he's the guy who was in power.

Do you wish to play a WW2 game with the 1000000 possibilites if Stalin had not been in power or do wish to play a WW2 game to see if you can do better than them within their doctrine?

If you want to go that far than I want something the permits me as Germany to sue for Peace RIGHT after France by making a HUGE Media campaign throughout the world that Germany no longer has any more goals for conquest and we want to be friends with everyone.

See my point? It can be NEVER ending.

[xwormwood]

When we can agree that it can be "NEVER ending", why is it so hard to offer customers at least a handful of the most possible ones?

[Curry]

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

Blashy,

What it amounts to is you take an extremely narrow view of what should and shouldn't be speculatred on.

I think we should speculate on situations, not personalities. If all we can do is mimic what we think the actual historical figures would have done, we're depriving ourselves of most of the fun that's to be had in these things.

Excellent thread Seamonkey. I have to agree with JJ. We speculate on the situation, not the personalities. Who here plays the Axis as if they were Hitler? Or the USSR as if they were Stalin. It is of course all speculative, but I dont speculate on the persons but on how the situations turned out and could be changed via a game.

[Mr.Dozer]

I read somewere it was declasified that the Russian strike was going to be on june 16 1941 but Rudolf Hess flew to england and stalin was worried Britian would make peace so they didnt launch it then the germans attack a few days later.

[SeaMonkey]

Thanks Curry. I see your point Blashy, but your applying the media of today, the propaganda, with the efficient worldwide communications, to a time that was completely different.

Forget about the hyper-crap from today and step into the world of communications that was the 1940s.

Many of these decisions hung in the balance and could very well have gone the other way given the whimsical nature of the personalities and a slightly different set of realities or misinformation that was prevalent in that time.

In my mind, it is not so hard to imagine. I know we tend to address the larger decisions, the ones with the greatest impact, but there are many little decisions that can accumulate to parallel the same consequences that the larger ones do.

I know that's your perspective Blashy and I can agree with it, but I can't turn a blind eye to the larger ones either. SC2 wields the capability,...what?.... I'm suppose to ignore it?

[Edwin P.]

Adding the potential for hypothetical strategic decsion points within the standard 1939 campaign would vastly increase the replayability of SC2.

Example:

What if the the French decided to fight on from their African provinces (Algeria), instead of agreeing to Vichy France? Highly unlikely but it makes for a totally different opening game.

What it France and the UK accepted the German conquest of Poland to let the Germans and Soviets fight it out? Another interesting scenario that totally changes the game.

What if Germany decided not to divide Poland with Russia, would Russia have attacked Germany?

[Blashy]

Those what ifs are simply that "what if" and they can't be implemented in a game because we have NO idea what are the chances of that occuring.

So now you add in all those what if and "guesstimate" what the % would be of this occuring.

Putting in all those "what if" and guesstimating the chances don't really give the experience of replaying WW2. It gives the experience if replaying history through X millions of possible alternate realities.

That's my point, you have to stop and one point and play within the reality of that era.

A) Germany wanted to expand AFTER Poland, AFTER France, it wanted Russian land and be the great power in Europe, eventually the world.

UK was never going to accept having another country be such a big player in Europe, let alone the world.

C) France, see B, just like UK. Both these countries did not want to loose the power they had.

D) Russia wanted to assert her great power and was gearing up to do so... quite slowly.

E) USA was never going to accept letting a country become such a great power the way Germany intended. They had their own goals to be the dominant power (more economically but they got both because of WW2).

Now you can relive WW2 and simply try and do better militarly wise with some minor diplomacy than the players of that era.

[Retributar]

Im for both 'Very REAL HISTORICAL' related MOD'S as well as Neuro-Psychotic-Mind-Bending-MOD's.

I like very much SeaMonkey's Hypothetical MOD idea... because it is based on real historical information/Archive's. Also i would like just a little bit more information as to why Stalin was considering this possibility as a necessesity?.

Now for my Psychotic game idea, it has been brought up before by me [and totally dismissed by the community],...and that is after the War in Europe has been decided [Axis Victory], i would like to have a MOD dealing with the Invasion of North America!. The Atom-Bomb could be included or excluded here, i prefer not to have it included, and now have both the Japanese & German's/Italian's coming for the final kill!.

[TaoJah]

Originally posted by Blashy:

Those what ifs are simply that "what if" and they can't be implemented in a game because we have NO idea what are the chances of that occuring.

Euh, say that again ?

Two of the most important factors in the game are "what if" : weather and research.

Mind you, I don't like these factors to be randomized and I don't like what-if chances, but your argument doesn't hold.

More to the point : I don't want to put these what-ifs chances in the game, I'd like to totally get rid of randomness in weather, research, diplomacy, supply breaking Malta or Partisans, readiness jumps... The reason is that bad luck breaks your game totally. With bad weather, you can forget about invading France early and do Sealion. With bad luck at Malta, you can loose units in north Africa. With bad luck in research, you loose without even a chance of winning.

I am even against randomness in indivdual fights (just give the results as shown in the estimates), but I can live with that because there are like 1500 fights in a game. Bad luck in a few of them cancels out with the good luck in others.

But this is not the case with weather, that only matters in 25 turns or so (the 5 turns just before winter) : if you have bad luck at those, you're set back half a year.

Same with Malta : only the 10 turns that you are attacking Egypt count, if you have bad luck there, you loose like 2-3 units.

Same with research : if he gets Advanced Infantry to level 3 while you are at level 1 for 15 turns or so, the game is over.

Those numbers are too small, so luck plays an important factor.

[Liam]

Seems the Russians had a vast amount of units and equipment an attack during France would've been a great opportunity.

I think Stalin was curious to see how that was going, if it would've gone on 6 months and gone badly, I would not underestimate the entry of Stalin against Germany if he knew for certian he would be fighting a few german units is all.

[SeaMonkey]

Now you are getting it, thanks Liam. In actuality during the French campaign and the subsequent Battle of Britain the Germans only had 28 divisions deployed in western Poland.

Do you think Sealion would be so easy with the possibility of the Russian entry? How about North Africa? The implications spread far and wide, kind of like it may really have been.

Talked to anyone that knows, either yeh or ney, from that period? Isn't that what the players actually felt, no hindsight, just the unknown, weighted estimates, guesses, reasonable deductions, all with the limited intelligence of that era.

So .....anyone here that can foresee the outcome in the Middle East.......well????

I thought so!

[Retributar]

Middle East:

SeaMonkey ...Yes, i think i can see it!, SO i'll offer my opinion even though im sure that you will not like it. This could very well be the next MAJOR-HEAVY-DANGER conflict area on the earth!.

The president of IRAN is on a mission to convert the Middle East into a Muslim Islamist Empire, for now,...the world later!. Thus!, there will be no tolerating any Democracy-Style government's in this Islamist realm!.

Since IRAQ [1/3rd Shiite< they also control the present government in Iraq.] who was controlled by Saddam Hussein- a Sunni, Saddam is no longer around to roadblock IRAN [shiite], Iran is now free of Saddam's obstructive effort's and now has the opportunity to do as they see fit!, including having/demanding the right to construct Nuclear Missle weapon's to further their ambition's which also include the destruction of Israel.[They will snub the U.S, the European Union, and the U.N. as regards the development of weapon's grade uranium for nuclear weapons]. With this war with Hezbollah...in Lebanon, his follower's are mostly Shiite, they take orders from IRAN,...Iran also supplies money and weapon's to Hezbollah!, the Weapon's are procured from China as well as Russia.[Probably traded for Oil]

By the way, Turkey [Muslim] also has a beef with the Kurd's in Iraq, and i think will make an incursion toward's them. Turkey has also enlisted Iran to co-assist in this endeavor.[Not too much new's yet on this recent development.]

In their religion, they do not tolerate any other religion's. So therefore, you are an infidel!, not worthy of walking/breathing on this earth.

Already we see on the new's that IRANIAN President has the following of most Muslim's through-out the earth, which is what he need's to try to fullfil his holy-vision-mission!. His backer's also include Russia & China, as he already has huge/substantial oil contract's with them and that Russia is Actively involved in helping Iraq build their Nuclear Reactor's [CNN Broadcaster stated that Russia & China have Huge Oil Contract's with Iran and Russia,...Who know's if his/this statement is entirely correct??? & Yes, Russia is also an 'Exporter' of Oil!] [They desperately want access to his oil supplies...Maybey not only for internal consumption only, but in some circumstances for resale in other profitable market's] and so know's that he can rely on them to back him and block any effort's from the U.S. or Europe in preventing him from doing as he see's fit.

I could be completely wrong, but, i seriously doubt it!. Someone could create a MOD called 'THE RED CRESENT-ISLAMIST JIHAD'...depicting this present day upcoming dangerous new dictator!.

[ August 24, 2006, 04:22 AM: Message edited by: Retributar ]

[SeaMonkey]

Uhh, OK Retri. Hmmmm, I guess I did ask for it!

Well,... copy this for posterities sake and we shall see.

Retri, perhaps you have the vision of great leader and I do agree with some of your conclusions, but this was not exactly my point, but thanks for the post.

[Rolend]

Retributsr you are spot on with some of your thinking. Why do you think Bush Sr. let Iraq stay in power after the first Gulf war? Yep he knew they kept Iran in check and that Iran was the real threat to peace in the Middle East.

However the Russians don't need any oil, they are cleaning up with the huge oil reserves they have, their involvement in the Middle East is strictly over money, arms sells etc. Funny how the Anti-capitalist Soviet Union is now driven by money

As for Turkey getting on board with Iran, I doubt it, yea they are both Muslim but Turkey sees itself at the head of a greater Muslim world.

Yea China needs the oil but at the risk of losing the US market place? I don't think so but they do LOVE the political game and love to keep the US on the ropes.

With all that said, it wouldn’t matter who is on Iran’s side if they get Nukes, they won't care they WILL use them if they get them PERIOD. Why more nations are not alarmed about this possibility is beyond me.

Back on subject, I am sorry but after the Russian’s TOTAL screw up in Finland there was NO way Stalin was going to allow an invasion into Germany in 40, now you may want to play Stalin and trust your military more then he did but I think that in a real life setting you would be making a mistake to even think about invading Germany in 40, the Russian army at that time would of self destructed.

[SeaMonkey]

Good point Rolend, about the Finnish fiasco.

That would have to fly in the face of a decision to enter another conflict, especially against a so seemingly formidable foe as Germany.

[Liam]

Iran and Iraq are sort of boring topics. Going nowhere, doubtful Americans will be able to afford to finish their job there, Doubtful that Iran will be stopped in building a Holy Weapon. LOL

Even Christians do not have the audacity to call it a Holy Weapon LOL

In the end the only thing that'll come from all this is Arabs spending their cash on weapons and junk, and their infrastructure going to crap

meanwhile we'll get richer, we should have 5,000 commandos over there instead of 100,000 American targets

[SeaMonkey]

Look you guys are stealing my thread, this MidEast thing is really nothing. Their irrational actions will continue until they finally do it. (I do hope not)...but

Then we'll get irrational....and you know what that result will be.

Well... it'll look pretty from outerspace, Middle Eastern colored glass.