End of Sino-Japanese War

[Colin I]

I am wondering if there should be a decision event to end the Sino-Japanese war.

The Chinese had their successes but also big failures. Perhaps after x casualties or lost territory there is a chance of peace as a decision event.

The cost for Japan is no longer being able to take all of China with MPP gain. The gain is being able to immediately redeploy against other targets.

I bring this up because if there is a cookie cutter plan for Japan its concentration on cChina. this would give an option to go other targets before US swings into the mess in great force.

Not sure about historical basis but given factionalized China it might not be impossible - this is more of a thought towards more diverse/interesting game play.

[scottsmm]

It's definitely a good idea Colin, and I wish there was something like this in SC 1, SC 2 (Blitz, WAW and PDE). That way Germany could make peace with England, and maybe even America.

[SeaMonkey]

Colin has got it, doesn't seem to be much variation for Z, not to take anything away from Bill, he did a good job.

But its China first, and then roll up and defend against the Hell that follows, OK for an AI game a few times, but not much fun for H to H.

We need Global SC, work hard you Betas!

[scottsmm]

Ya, you definitely have to think that's what everyone is working on right now. I can't wait though to be pleasantly surprised with whatever they come up with.

As for not much variation in Z for the most part SeaMonkey got it right, except for it's by far the easiest campaign to make MODS for, and in that respect it gains a ton of variation for the obvious reasons.

[Blashy]

Was peace EVERY possible? We can forget UK and Germany agreeing to peace, UK knew full well that not getting it done now only meant loss of influence and more trouble later on.

USA and UK were just as a greedy in keeping their world influence as Germany was in making their own.

[scottsmm]

The US never wanted to be in the war until we were savagely attacked by the Empire of Japan, and then subsequently Germany & Italy declared war on us 4 days later. I do agree that as long as Winston Churchill was PM, peace with Germany would never happen, but saying something happened to him a coup for example, or he suffered a heart attack, or whatever then there definitely would have been a chance for GB and Germany to make peace. Just as long as this happened before Pearl, because it gets a lot more complicated when were thrown into the mix.

Just so people don't go crazy here, I do agree that it would be a mistake to have made peace with Germany, but I think in terms of playing a game it would definitely make it more dynamic if this was a possibility.

[SeaMonkey]

Blashy, don't so blatantly show your misinformed side, the USA was not at all comfortable with the existance of the British Empire. Greed.....??? American greed? I think your getting a bit mixed up with current events.

Churchill could have been easily replaced with a "No Confidence" vote from Parliament, especially after a number of UK failings on the battlefield ...ala North Africa....Greece....the Balkans.

There is plenty of basis for decision events, don't forget the inhumanity going on in China. The world campaign is where its at.....PTO is just a diversion...a test of new mechanics.:cool:

We need more trials, more tests, more modding....Nupremal's mod looks like a good starting point......all aboard???

[scottsmm]

I hope that what someone said above me wasn't trying to imply that either Great Britain or America= Nazi Germany. I understand that some people out there don't like the US, and that's fine with me, but saying that we were/are equal to Nazi Germany in any way is simply wrong. We have never had death camps, we never created a world war, we give aid to other countries before we give it to ourselves, etc. Same goes for Great Britain, and other civilized countries.

[scottsmm]

SeaMonkey, by the way I'm aboard

[Ludi1867]

The problem with a diplomatic peace in the ETO was not so much Churchill and the UK as the distrust between the western Allies and Russia. Comments such as Blashy’s saying that “USA and UK were just as greedy in keeping their world influence as Germany was in making their own” is superficial at best, and morally reprehensible at worst.

Most great powers are very interested in preserving or asserting their own interests. The difference between the USA and UK in the Second World War and Nazi Germany was that the latter not only wanted to aggressively adjust the status quo in their favour – putatively to redress the ‘stab in the back’ Versailles treaty, a red herring that has done far better over the years than the facts would suggest should be the case – but more ominously to introduce a new form of governance in all their occupied areas (as well as in their own native country) that promoted the active extermination of groups that did not conform to their ideals – the Jews, of course, but also homosexuals and mentally deficient or handicapped individuals. This active policy of extermination of non-desirables is a barbaric approach that should never be equated with western governments, as morally ambiguous as some policies, such as area bombing, might be argued to have been.

That said, the western powers were quite concerned through most of the war about the attitude of the Soviet Union. Indeed, Churchill’s influence waned significantly in the last year of the war, as Roosevelt sought (unsuccessfully) to achieve an “understanding” with Stalin. Trying to determine how a conditional peace could have been achieved when the “allies” were so mistrustful of each other that unconditional surrender was the only workable compromise is hard to see in the ETO.

All that aside, the possibility of a negotiated settlement in China in SC2PT does have merit. The one addition I would suggest is that Japan would also be required to maintain a significant garrison in China – the reason negotiated peace was a possibility was the chaotic state of Chinese politics, but that same chaos would have resulted in a resumption of hostilities if too many Japanese forces left the country.

[Colin I]

I think as others have noted diplomacy and peacemaking is partly personality driven so there can be a lot of variation and surprise in it.

In China it was such a mess of warlords and factions that I can see it as a possibility. Bear in mind Japan fought Russia too before WWII and made peace there. if anything, the total war of WWII is unusual - most of history war is a stop-start affair with countries being elevated or diminished but not always waging war to the point of complete victory or surrender.

[Blashy]

Blashy, don't so blatantly show your misinformed side, the USA was not at all comfortable with the existance of the British Empire. Greed.....??? American greed? I think your getting a bit mixed up with current events.

Read official government doctrine books pre WW2, even during WW1 and USA had goals on dominating the world in influence. This does not mean comparing them to Nazy Germany in any way.

But yes it does put them in the greedy category just as much as ALL great powers in history have done, USA was already trying to do so in the early 1900s, the wars, especially WW2 gave them the ultimate push in doing so.

UK saw their loss of power throughout the world and they were not about to give Europe to Germany. There was WAY too much at stake for any of them to want peace, the long term consequences of giving in were just to clear... another war and Germany continuing to act like barbarians for certain types of citizens.

The Allies were the good guys in that they liberated countries and let them be. But they used their influence post war in MANY intolerable ways.

I am all for concrete historical possibilities... what if type possibilities, no.

[SeaMonkey]

" I am all for concrete historical possibilities... what if type possibilities, no."

I guess you are the decider of reality, tangibles and intangibles, please Blashy, I would like a copy of your crystal ball.

And of course everyone has an opinion of what is intolerable or not, we all have our thresholds. So you prefer the alternatives.......be careful what you wish for! Sorry there is no perfect World only choices (sometimes that's the lesser of the evils).:cool:

Anyway Ludi and Colin have a decent handle on the the possibilities existing in the Asian sphere, IMO. As for the ETO, I believe you need to start earlier, before the political alignments were established by Germany's aggression. In this context there is a greater degree of variability and then of course things will play out quite differently.....sorry again Blashy.

If you approach the diplomatic arena of WW2 with hindsight you'll be hopelessly entrenched into its tunnel vision of unfolding, you've got to allow for Murphy's Law...unless...you're in denial.

No one here like that....I know! ;-)

[scottsmm]

Blashy, I'm very interested in listening to what you call intolerable? Was this giving aid to countries like Greece, and Turkey to resist communism, Giving western Germany the stability to be a prosperous society? Or something else that you know about that we don't? Either way I have a true interest in hearing what you consider to be "intolerable".

[arado234]

scottsmm let us not forget that it was America who showed the Germans how to convert coal to oil after Hitler came to power.It was America who was selling oil to Spain when they knew full well that Spain would send it to Germany while Germany and England were at war.They also showed Germany how to modernise her industry.They also showed Germany how to raise octane levels in gasoline.Im not saying the Allies werent the ''good''guys but they also did some pretty bad things.Oh one more,Britain and Russia ''suggested''to Iran that they allow supplys to flow into Russia if they new what was good for them.Iran wanted NO part of WW2 but were forced into it.

[scottsmm]

Yes, Arado234 that really equals going around and killing innocent people for no reason other than race, and gender. Anyone who thinks were the "bad guys" in this war is simply insane, and needs an MRI done on them immediately along with a full mental evaluation. By the way Spain in the later part of the war was an ally of the Americans so suggesting us giving them oil to give to Germany doesn't make much sense. Do some research on Franco, and you'll see he just wanted to be on the side that wins, he wasn't in any way devoted to Nazi Germany. By the way did we show Germany the new industrial way before or after then invaded Poland? Truth is we were allies with Germany (same as most of the world) until they invaded Poland. So if you’re an ally of a country why wouldn’t you want to help them out? Have you ever heard of the lend lease? Have you ever heard of the Red Cross? American Navy helping countries out around the world? Have you ever heard of the freedom we’ve given to countless countries in the face of tyranny at a cost in blood to us which is so dare? Please if you really hate the United States so much chances are your just jealous, and have no serious reasons of why you hate us.

Back to SC I think it would be nice if diplomacy could change a major countries alignment just as it can do with minor ones. When you think of it, it really is realistic that a country could flip flop. Case and point would be the USSR in WWII, and Italy in WWI.

[dhucul]

1. There was and should be NO chance of peace between Germany and UK or Japan and UK, none. Even a successful sealion and UK fights from its colonies.

2. Once US is in the war there is no chance of US peace with Germany or Japan, however, if sealion is successful BEFORE US enters then maybe US should move AWAY from war instead of towards war? If Sealion is followed up by Axis attack on Ireland, Canada or Iceland then US would move towards war again.

3. There WAS and should be a chance of USSR peace with Germany. If Germany takes Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad there should be a decision event to offer peace to Germany. Germany gets all territory from Archangel to Astrakhan. USSR moves capital to Urals and goes Neutral again. (Although possibly still pro-Allied and moving closer to war again after awhile) Currently the remaining territories of the USSR would need to be transferred to a minor, something like the SSSR, Siberian Soviet Socialist republic. Its workable but not perfect.

4. There should be a decision event for Japan and China to have peace if Chungking falls. Again, China goes Neutral albeit very pro-Allied and re-activates if and when certain territories fall to the other Allies.

What is needed is a new activation system whereas each major can be in different states of activation towards the others as well as being able to force majors to non-activation etc.

A little bird tells me that Hubert is working on something along these lines.

Stay tuned.

[arado234]

Scottsmm I dont hate and im not jealous of America.

It maynot have mad sense to send oil to Spain for Germany but thats what happened.Ford and G.M.were hleping Germany with the production of trucks AFTER the attack on Poland and in Fords case up to mid 1941.Most Americans didnt know this so again im not blaming the average American im blaming the companies that did it and didnt care just as long as they were getting rich.America wasnt the only country either.A very good book on this subject is called:Alliance of Ememies.

As far as being Germanys ally,by the mid late 1930s it was obvious what you were dealing with.

Franco was very much thinking of joining the German cause,except when Hitler sent Canaris(who was a huge anti-nazi) to talk with Franco on that very subject Canaris told Franco that if Spain joined Germany America would probably attack Spain.Franco believed it and never joined Hitler.Hitler went to talk with Franco and was major pissed and asked his generals if an attack on Spain was possible.He was told nobecause of the Battle of Britain and the attack on Russia.

As far as us being the good guys,ill bet there were alot of Natives of the Americas that would have disagreed with you.I know thats going back along time but peolpe have been fighting and killing eachother as long as we have been on this earth.Just the weapons have improved

Just ask Iran how they felt about lend-lease.They wanted no part of it but had no choice.

[scottsmm]

Okay personally every time I hear Ford and GM it makes me sick, so I'm definitely not going to question you on that. Those CEO's demand more tax money for their private jets and 5 star hotels than anybody else in history, even in this so called recession, and they know there being watched.

Take a look at what Neville Chamberlin was trying to do in the late 30's. America never wanted to be involved in the European war if it involved any sort of death, but of course we weren't allowed that option. Then again those countries that forced us into war paid a hell of a price. Bombing of Europe (in particular Germany), in Asia there was a little something called the A-Bomb, and fire bombing.

A famous quote that Hitler said after his meeting was when he was asked if he ever wanted to go back to Spain to negotiate with Franco. He then replied by saying "I'd rather pull my teeth out then negotiate with him"

If you look around today in America what you will find is often Native Americans are some of the proudest Americans here. Although I'm sure if you go back 400-500 years your right, but it was Europeans then not Americans. We shouldn't be blamed for what are greatgreatgreatgreatgreatgreatgreatgreatgreatgreatgreatgreatgreatgreatgreatgrandfathers did.

As for Iran, I have my own personally feelings about them. It's been proven that hey finance and give Islamic terrorists a safe haven. Quite frankly if we went into their country as liberators I wouldn't complain. In Iran remember people aren't equal. Case and point would be, do you remember the woman who was about to get raped but instead decided to kill her assailant, and she then received the death penalty? This goes to show this country isn't right, and should be dealt with sternly. They also harbor terrorists and hurl them against the civilized nations of the world. Therefore I have a real dislike of their country, as long as they want to kill the innocent I don't think I will ever have any sorrow for a country like Iran.

Remember we wanted no part in this war, but we were forced into at Pearl, and then the Germans declare war on us. Iran on the other hand at least had an option and so chose to join the Allied cause, we on the other hand weren't given that option, and yet it doesn't seem to me you have any feelings for us, just the Iranians, and Natives of 500 years ago.

[scottsmm]

dhucul,

Whether it is a new activation system or a new diplomacy system it all sounds the same to me, and I'm glad to hear that it has been brought to Hubert’s attention.

[DEVILS ADJUTANT]

I have to disagree that America didnt want any part of this war,it was just a matter of time.America did not want to come into the war and be seen as an aggressor (like Germany).Pearl harbour gave them the legal right to defend themselves.Hitler declared war on America 4 days after Pearl just to beat the Americans to the punch(silly man)and in the hope that the Japs would help him fight the Russians(silly silly man).As for Iran,I dont agree with there system,but every country has a right to rule themsevles.Personally I think that the western countries should be cleaning up there own backyards before we start worrying about other peoples,but when it comes to terrorism,we should totally destroy it no matter whose toes get stood on.

TO SECURE PEACE IS TO PREPARE FOR WAR

[scottsmm]

Okay Jason, what you’re saying I can definitely agree with. It's just after 9/11 we didn't have a choice but to go over to Afghanistan, and absolutely destroy whatever terrorist networks we found. Which we did until Osama Bin Laden went over to the non-governed Pakistan, or Iran.

[SeaMonkey]

I like your drift dhucul, glad to hear that perhaps....a loosely used term.....Hubert is considering something akin to your post.

History is profuse with examples of belligerents becoming allied or neutral, agreeing to cease-fires/treaties at moments where their huevos need to extracted from the fire. The same can be said with allies that later have falling outs to the extreme of "ultimate diplomacy"...warfare.

Look at present day feuds with Hamas/Hezbollah vs Israel, recently the US and Sadam, OBL and the CIA, and on and on. Will it ever end?

So...SC needs the flexibility if we're to stray from the Blashy Syndrome of only historically defined transgressions. Its necessary to examine the full extent of "what ifs" and guarantees longevity for SC.

"We want the world and we want it ......NOWWWWW!",,,,J.Morrison, the Doors (ehh??/JJR)

[arado234]

Scottsmm I do care what happens to anyone or any country thats being mistreated including America.I have some good friends that are Americans and I like visiting America.Canada isnt exactly innocent either.We were one of the few countries who let prettywell no jews in the country(I believe it was 100) after the Nazis started their persecution.America did alot more than we ever did.

As far as Iran supporting terrorists that may be so but it was America who sold the chemical weapons to Saddam and then got upset when he used them.What did they think would happen when the guy your selling them to Idolised Hitler.Again im not blaming the average American im blaming greed at the top.

I like your idea about Russia being able to flip flop in SC2 but if that were to be an option what would you think the Allies should get in return?Im thinking Americas industrial might jumps to historical levels?

[arado234]

DEVILS ADJUTANT as far as not caring whos toes get stepped on when fighting terrorism,the Oklahoma city bombing was one of the bigger terrorist attacks in America.Are you suggesting America attack themselfs since the guys that did it are American,I believe from the state of Utah.One more thing since most if not all the sept 11 attackers were either Saudis or from Egypt why werent those countries attacked instead of Iraq.Maybe because of oil.Like I said before,its not the average American its GREED, at the top.