Jump to content

The Plunder Option


Recommended Posts

JerseyJohn,

I like the more detailed plunder option you came up with. For the sake of more discussion of this idea for the game and those who did not see your idea, I have reposted it below:

"Snowstorm Sorry I took so long to reply to your earlier point about plunder options in Russia. I think the USSR would need to be laid out as numerous nations under the same system. As Germany conquers different areas it should have the plunder option in each of them individually: Belorussia; Ukraine; Crimea; Caucasus etc, and liberated countries such as Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. The better they're treated the more they'll give in return in the form of troops and resources along with the absense of partisan activity. Going for the brutal plunder option would yield a full year's total production from that territory, but would result in total partisan participation and reduced production and troop reinforcement later on. I'd go for three settings: Harsh, Partial, Friendly (no plunder other than military salvage) and Semi-Autonomy, which would give the region its own government and make it an Axis minor ally.

-- An option would be to choose an historical setting to simulate the degree of oppression carried out historically, ranging from light in places like Denmark and the Channel Islands, to draconian in places like Poland and the Ukraine with countries like France falling somewhere in the middle."

I think this idea could be expanded to other victorious armies in the Axis as well as perhaps the Allies (who were more likely to pick the more Partial, or Friendly option) in other places. Some places may not work as well as others, but that it certainly open for discussion, like right here. ;):D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hitler and the Nazi believed that they were a superior master race while the slavic people should serve them as slaves.

One or more military commander (HQs) could be pulled permanent out of the game if the player treated the conquered countries fair.

And with every "good" behaviour there could be chance of a german civil war (Nazis against german military resistance). Result could be morale loss of the german units and / or strength point losses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think another way to balance things out would be to have a fellow Axis, or even Allied player (if I understand how the more separate behavior of each Axis or Allied player might be in the new game) run the chance of breaking their alliance with the country in question.

For an example, let's suppose Germany decides not to plunder the Ukraine. In addition to the results that JerseyJohn proposed, Italy's (or more likely Japan's) diplomatic level changes back to 80 or 90 in favor of Germany, and/or decides to go it alone against other Allies instead of cooperating with Germany, or Japan takes longer to officially join Germany against other Allies later in the game. In this case, there could be serious diplomatic consequences to consider. Of course, this could also cause a more favorable attitude from an Allied country, but the game could be weighted more heavily toward negative diplomatic consequences rather than positive ones for Germany if it took this plunder option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snowstorm that is a great idea that JerseyJohn has but by doing so you are altering the game in favor of the Axis.What would you think would be a fair trade for that option?

Thank you, Arado, thank you, Snowstorm, and thank you, BrotherX.

I don't think there's any need to take away from this idea to balance it for play purposes with something negative to swing back to the Allies.

The point is to see how things might have been different if the Axis, specifically Nazi Germany, had a more sensible policy toward the populations it in territories it came to occupy. It has to be a positive step for the Axis, but none of these options should be used by people who want to keep the game historical -- in other words, in that context Hitler, Goering and Himmler should be allowed to go on causing their own downfall behind the front lines with inane treatment of people who at first viewed them as saviors and heroes. Nothing wrong with that; the options would be chosen to see what might have been if Hitler and his inner circle had been a little wiser.

I see various plunders within occupied Soviet territories as:

1) Military Salvage with the capture of Soviet armies, or their decimation and quick withdrawal. The same would hold when Axis forces are either captured or driven out of a province; there would always be a great deal of equipment and supplies falling into the victors hands. Rommel, for example, ran much of his desert campaign on windfalls that came into his hands by surprising overly cautious British commanders.

The amount of MPPs in the form of salvage would be proportionate with the size of the force destroyed in taking the province.

The following pure plunder options would be in addition to military salvage:

2) Harsh Plunder grabbing everything in sight and leaving the populace to eat roots and rodents while their produce and foodstores are robbed by the victorious army.

-- Bonus I'd recommend giving the victor a full year's production from that area up front.

-- Consequence In all subsequent years the province produces at half its previous level till liberated by its original owner, at which point it can be rebuilt to its full original production level. The province also becomes a heavily hostile partisan zone requiring a large garrison and maximum escort for supply convoys moving through.

3) Controlled Plunder The province yields 6 month's normal production. In following years its production level remains as it was before the invasion and partison activity, while high, does not require more than a standard garrison and only a light escort for supplies moving through.

4) No Plunder No immediate MPP gains for the conqueror. The locals are pleased. There is no partisan activity, no need for a garrison and supplies going through do not need escort (it would be assumed there would be attached security, of course, but no need to guard against large partisan activity).

5) Semi-Autonomy No immediate MPP gains for the victor but locals flock to his cause, reinforcing depleted infantry units and, in subsequent years raising units of their own to fight for the Axis cause. Production becomes higher than its original level and beginning the second year of occupation half the yield goes to Germany.

I think that would pretty well simulate what we're discussing in game terms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad you like them, BrothersX and Rambo and Snowstorm. :cool:

I agree with JJR's idea about fitting diplomacy into this. Eager to hear others ideas on it while letting it rattle around the old noggin. :)

These ideas would also need to be considered in the whole game context. Germany had, by its eastern standards, a very reasonable occupation of France, Norway, Denmark, Holland and Belgium, yet there was considerable anti-German sentiment and underground activity in all of those countries.

So I think mild occupation policies would mainly be appreciated in eastern countries. Also, I believe it should be an option for Poland; there's no reason Germany couldn't have accepted the conquered Poles into the Reich treating them as real people instead of subhuman scum. And if they had, how much benefit would they have gained from it, and in what ways? For one thing, I believe a lot of captured Polish soldiers would have been useful serving the Reich as security divisions along the their border with the USSR, beefing up the Reich's defences. And, of course, a better treated Poland would have produced more and not had as much of a partisan movement.

-- As for the issue no one likes to discuss, but I think it has to come into consideration: If we're allowing for a kinder, gentler Germany, what about the Holocaust? I don't think there should be any pretense that the Nazis wouldn't have been rabid anti-semites under any circumstances; unless we're talking about created scenarios that have a kind of Third Reich but without any of the racisms. Getting back to the Holocaust, what sort of realistic game alternatives should be considered?

-- -- Germany remains murderous, but does not opt for the "Final Solution." ??

-- How does this affect the Reich's production and the world's view of it?

-- -- Germany has a real deportation option, selects a conquered region with an already large Jewish population and resettles all other Jewish populations to that region. ??

-- Same question as in above scenario.

-- -- Germany chooses neither, the default being its historical course.

-- What are the game consequences of Germany's historical course? I don't think this should be decided by the player but rather a kind of unlucky default option. I can see it yeilding MPPs in the form of outright robbery done by the state to mass millions, and also the slave labor factor, but overall I don't think it's something sane people would choose. Or anyone with any kind of conscience, even if only a virtual one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sir Jersey --- Plunder is one thing, but now aren't you saying,"Lets take evil out of the Germans & make them good"? Meaning, if Hitler & his friends didn't start the Final Solution against Jews & many others, more military resources would have been available to the 3rd Reich. In addition, the Germans would have been seen as the good guys trying to stop Communism or some similar ideology.

Problem is, without that anti-semite spark (spirit of hate), they may have not gotten into power in 1933.

Another question about the Holocaust & murdering of civilians in terms of political status abroad, who really knew it was going on? Was the US aware, didnt care, or didnt' know the magnitude? Yet the British killed that Heydrich dude with a bazakoo or piat? Also, once the war got going, knowlege of the German activities didn't really matter, you're already at war.

To make the game fair & fun in this political mode, do we need a "Russia does purge their own"? If the Axis can be smarter pre-1939, can the Allies have a pre-war smarter strategy too?

We also have to take in account the way information was passed back then. Newspapers & radio. Nobody had T.V.s. Did people really believe their information in European nations? That's why the Holocaust was able to be sort of hidden. There wasn't cell phone pictures, youtube, twitter, etc.....how did you know what to believe, or could you even imagine such evil.

"Hey guys, the Germans are bad" --- Band of Brothers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly, Snowstorm. The Nazis had a large but minority vote in the Weimar parliament. The goverment of Paul von Hindenburg invited Hitler to become chancellor so his followers would vote with the center against the communists. That soon included the government favoring Nazi goons over communist goons in street fights. A short time after that Hitler finished appointing his cronies into key government positions and from there on the country was controlled by Hitler even before the death of Hindenburg. Upon the fieldmarshal's death Hitler had the parliament rubber stamp the combining of president with chancellor, in effect making Hitler the dictator of Germany. The elections that followed, though theoretically free had a lot of activity from Nazi goons, and was only a Yes - No vote. The Nazis won it overwhelmingly. I believe that was last vote held by the Nazi regime. As soon as that was done the first concentration camps were set up, though at first they were for political opponents, mainly communists, not the Jews, who weren't specifically targetted yet. A year or so later anti-Semitism became the state policy with the Nuremburg Laws.

It seemed that at first the idea was to make life in Germany, and then Austria, so miserable for the Jews that they'd voluntarily leave the Reich, even if that meant signing virtually all they owned over to the Nazis.

For those who feel righteous about their own governments in all of this it should be remembered that many nations, including the United States, soon put up barriers agains Jewish immigrants. As the situation in Germany grew worse the U. S. made it more difficult for Jews to enter its borders. FDR didn't openly create this policy, nor did the State Department. Oddly enough it was decided upon by comparatively minor beurocrats who kept changing regulations and creating new restrictions, quotas and paperwork. This went on till something like 1943, when it was finally publicized and FDR was forced to step in. By then, of course, official channels for moving those people out of Europe, the few who hadn't already been killed, were totally meaningless.

BrotherRambo, Nothing was ever going to make either Stalin or Hitler anything but a pair of sociopathic, racist, meglomaniacal, paranoid butchers. At the end of his life Staling was planning to not only purge his leadership (again) but also to start a Holocaust-type persecution of the Jews in the USSR. He'd confided to Beria and others that he admired what Hitler and the SS had done. Strange, since his daughter Svestlana had married a Jew and, consequently, Stalin's grandchildren were half-Jewish.

So, in game terms I'd have this kind of thing entirely as a player option. Something like:

1) Totally Historical -- the Axis player is, in a virtual sense, Adolf Hitler and that's it.

2) Mild Hitstorical -- Perhaps Hitler's luck didn't hold out before the war and one of the wouldbe assassins got lucky. he's replaced by someone who, though not particularly humane, decides the whole Final Solution idea is completely nuts and bends things to utilize the Jews and other targetted minorities toward being part of the production structure. This would become more accute as the war developed. Historically there actually were many officers and other fighting men in the Germany army, navy and air force, who were at least partly Jewish. Field Marshal Milch, Goering's second command in the Luftwaffe, was half Jewish. When confronted by this Goering said, "I am the one who decides who is, and is not, a Jew!"

3) Ahistorical -- Germany is not ruled by a racist regime, but one that is, in other ways, totally fascist.

4) Random, The cumputer decides which of the above three would be used.

There could be a similar set of options for the USSR

What if Stalin had been dumped by his underlings? And the year -- July 1941, when he was hiding in his dacha after the disaster he'd caused, and then worsened when he ordered all fronts to ounter attack instead of reorganizing? -- A few years earlier: the generals band together instead of allowing themselves to be decimated by a vengeful madman; six of the eight generals who courtmartialed commander of the Soviet Armies Marshal Tiemoschenko were themselves executed later on in the purge! -- Stalin never runs the country, Trotsky succeeds Lenin -- Etc & etc, to the effect that there's no purge and also no persecuting of the farmers (80% of the population at the start of the forced commune program), with the effect of the change worked out to the start of the game. And, of course, the final choice would be random.

Similar things could be done for the other major powers, USA, Japan, Britain, France and Italy. Things like FDR losing his attempt at a third term; the president becomes antiwar Wendell Wilkie. -- France does not have its prewar government upheavals -- Britain becomes isolationist, does not become involved when Hitler begins making claims in Central Europe and Poland -- Japan decides on a different sort of policy, or can proceed without worry because FDR isn't US president. -- Italy doesn't throw in with Germany, either remains neutral or is wooed back to the Anglo-French fold.

If all of the choices go to random there could be something like:

Germany -- Ahistorical setting, no Hitler but a nonracist facist regime equally determined to break Versailles and just as expanionist as the Nazis, but without Hitler's determination to slaughter and subjugate concuered populations.

USSR -- Stalin ousted during the 1930s. No purge, no slaughter of Russians, no gulags etc. ... tons of speculation here.

Britain -- Non-continental government, only interest in its Empire and the independence of nations within flying range of the British Isles. No churchill, no Polish guarantee etc & etc; also, no Munich Conference.

USA -- FDR is not elected to a third term; Wendell Wilkie is president. No Pearl Harbor, no Lend Lease, and no rearmament till the foreign wars become directly threatening to the U. S. and its territories.

Italy -- Does not ally with Germany, becomes an British/French ally instead.

Or, there could be any variation on those situations, a lot of different combinations. Or, the player/players can choose specifically what they'd like to test out, or just the basic historical options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yes, these are beautiful "what if" scenarios, i would love to see them in the game.

The "random" trigger would be the most important of them all, at least in a game against the AI, where i would love to get tons of random events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, BrotherX. Glad you like them.

I see it as something like:

............(Each having)-- Historical, Ahistorical & 1,2,3 or more options plus randomizer.

Germany

USSR

Britain

USA

France

Japan

Italy

The game, even without dedicated scenarios, could have hundreds of different situations each time it was started. Or, just a basic few chosen by the players. Or, the historical default settings, also chosen by the players.

Not sure how much programming it would entail or if its even possible. I hope it is, and I hope something like this will be done sooner or later if it doesn't find its way into Hubert's design. But, considering he's always taken care to leave room for alternative ideas, I'm sure he's got something in the new global game that will be similar. Looking forward to seeing what it is. :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JJ,

Your idea for player options as well as other options mentioned previously are very good. In fact, I would say they certainly build a good case for at least an expansion to the Global game. Hmmm....by George, I think he's got it! :eek: :cool: :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the non-racist regime did get into power in Germany then all those Atomic scientists may have stayed and worked for Germany.Who knows what would have happened.These possibilties bring up even possibilties.Its a computer programers nighmare but I LOVE IT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the non-racist regime did get into power in Germany then all those Atomic scientists may have stayed and worked for Germany.Who knows what would have happened.These possibilties bring up even possibilties.Its a computer programers nighmare but I LOVE IT.

Good point!

Think about the german jews working and fighting for their fatherland just like in WW1 might have given Germany the edge she needed.

At least this is something i always feel pretty sure when i think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love those plunder options JJ. The composite effects from the players' choice of taking MPPs scaled to the severity of suppressive occupation is awesome. Even Rambo comes up with a great feature that also correlates diplomatic leanings/belligerency to the choices the players make.

Hubert, this is a really great feature addition and I hope you'll consider it in a future patch as the AI could be set to a random choice at each conquest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Xwormwood I know from what ive read about the German nuclear program and other military scientific research is ALOT of the German scientists left EXACTLY because of Hitlers racist ideals and some of the scientists that did stay tried to sabotage alot of research that was done for the German war effort.It would have for sure been a much different attitude in Germany and possibly elsewhere if when Hitler conquered a country he let the occupied country run itself and be Allied to Germany.

People(in some cases) seem to just adapt to a given situation and learn to live with & if the occuping country doesnt get to ridiculus just accept it.

All these ideas are great but I have no idea how you would ever add them to the game.It sure would make things VERY interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All these ideas are great but I have no ideas as well how ytor add them into the game.

I'm very confident that they sure would make things VERY interesting.

arado234, i don't have no clue as well.

But, if somehow possible, i would love to have 50 options to trigger or to set at random, because it would make my single games against the AI much more colorful.

----

Sad but true:

in WW1 a german patriot suggested the use of poison gas against the Entente powers. In Nazi Germany this man would have been treated as bad as possible, because he had some ancestors which were jews.

I don't want to point on the poison gas invented by a person of jewish ancestors, but at the fact, that this patriotic man wasn't there to help Germany in WW2, simply because of the evil, murderous minds which were in power in these days.

This Nazi scum destroyed everything beautiful, wonderful and good in Germany, beginning with the Jews, the free minds, the science, the art.

Just like cancer.

Good thing, that Germany lost the war, and even better that the Allies demanded the unconditional surrender. Else we would have become sometwhat like the Japanese, sorry about losing the war, but not seeing what we did to our neighbors.

----

Link to comment
Share on other sites

xwood..get off it! You, nor anyone else here is responsible for what your ancestors, countrymen, leaders, etc. perpetrated as acts against humanity. The injustice is not yours to bare. Humans from every walk of life throughout the annals of time have been responsible for despicable acts against one another, the blame is not yours, only the responsibility of recognition is ours to remember and not to repeat.

Now, what I would like for SC Global to be is not a reinactment of those horrendous moments of history, but a game of conquest of the imperial nature set in the time and technology of WW2. OK, you can call it somewhat of a "Civ" game, but geared more to the armed conflict spectrum then to the details of nation building.

I want to leave Hitler, Stalin, FDR, Churchill, etc behind, they are not the characters in charge here, we are, and we are free within the set of game mechanics to conduct our own war. I'm not forgetting, I'm role playing and I'm a better human than these guys and my only agenda is to have fun, to entertain and share that with you guys.

So if I'm playing Germany, I'm not Hitler, he maybe my stooge in an AAR, but I'm going to conduct a smarter campaign than him or any of those other guys previously mentioned or implied. So Germany is just my vehicle for conquest, just like UK, USA, Japan, or USSR will be the next time, sort of like Spain, Portugal, France, Great Britain, Holland etc was in the Age of Discovery, its the same thing.

We can discuss and reflect but what's important in exploring the 'what ifs" is that we want to see how it may have been if we did it "better". You know what "better" means, it means smarter, smarter using the resources that we have and we get and people are one of those resources, but simulated so. The last thing I want to think about when I'm playing, entertaining myself and my opponent, is that I'm somehow responsible for one of those extremes from this era, war is enough already. If I want to be a little tougher on my simulated conquered populations for the benefit of my role playing, fine, the plunder options are appropriate, but I'm a bit repulsed by any connections to such things like the holocaust, purges, etc. and I don't want those things accessed in anyway by the game mechanics of SC.:cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...