1939 Alliance Of Evil Scenario

[JerseyJohn]

AZGungHo, sounds good to me.

I think American entry into WWI was a combination of factors with the Lusitania and publication of the idiotic Zimmermann Telegram finally pushing it all over the edge.*

I got a chuckle from the line in the movie Reds where the American journalist John Reed boils it all down American having too much capitalist interest in Great Britain to allow that country to lose. The reason I got a chuckle is my father (who was born in 1914) used to say that whenever we got into a discussion involvning WWI. -- Reed appears to have said that at least two years before the United States became involved.

Anyway, I'd say some formula for adding up different provocations would be great. Perhaps a 3/4 DOW event attached to Germany occupying, or annexing, Iceland. And a 100% DOW attached to Germany annexing, or occupying, any part of the Western Hemisphere proper.

It would be fun to add a Zimmermann Telegram type wildcard. :cool:

*A copy of the telegram, already sent to the Mexican government, was found in an attache case accidentally left on an NYC subway car by a member of the German embassy. Afterwards the official was jokingly referred to as an Ambassador Without Portfolio.

[crispy131313]

I'm curious where Italy will fit into all of this. With Russia as an Ally will Germany really need Italy, or would they be better off taking over the Boot and not exposing the underbelly of Europe.

If the the War kicks off full tilt after Russia and Germany split Poland then Germany may have to make the decision to attack France or attack Italy first. It could really change the game, because depending on how fast the USA enters the war the surviving country could be where the Americans trench in.

[AZGungHo]

If the Germans take France, and then Spain either joins them or they take it and Gibraltar, the US and Brits (if still around) can't get anywhere near Italy until and unless they recapture it.

I would think Italy would join the Germans out of fear if for no other reason, and then the Germans could use them as occupation forces as their own forces do most of the fighting.

[Snowstorm]

I am curious as to what victory objectives Hubert and Co. have put in order for the Axis to win for "Decisive Victory" in Global Conflict. It might answer this question as far as how the game approaches it.

[JerseyJohn]

In a global game Italy's East African colonies might become a factor.

Also, Arabian oil has been mentioned a few times in various threads. I'm not sure but I don't think Arabia was a major oil producer in 1940. Also, there's oil in Libya, but no one knew about it at the time. Wonder if there's something in the game for discovering and developing resources?

OW!! :eek: Hubert, I don't mind you throwing a book, but a brick?!! :eek::eek:

[arado234]

Imho if in reality this did happen(games can be modified to make it winnable for both sides)Italy would still join the Axis and try and grab what she could in Africa.I cant see Spain joining the Allies with the Germans sitting right there,especially if Hitler has no Russia to worry about.If he promised Gibralter then imho Spain would go for it just to avoid being occupied.

As far as building planes goes ,dont you think the Axis are going to build ALOT.Remember the Allies still have to get their planes to the battlefield.The Axis already have a land route(unless th Allies can still just zoom planes around the world).The Allies would need MORE carriers or a land staging route.It would be possible against Russia but I dont see any quick route against Germany.

Goodluck in keeping up with the Axis as far as land forces go.You cant just teleport tanks.The Axis would have a HUGE atvantage in this regard.Plus they probably will have more and better ones.

With neither side able to attack the others infrastructure then it would be one HUGE armed force against another.

[Snowstorm]

Arado, I agree with you on that.

JJ, I think your suggestion almost sounds like Civ 5, except with an SC game engine, design, and map. Come to think of it, I don't have a problem with that idea at all. Hmmm.......IDEA! :eek: :cool:

Hubert, hint, new game idea, hint,....:cool:

[SeaMonkey]

Arado, I agree with you on that.

JJ, I think your suggestion almost sounds like Civ 5, except with an SC game engine, design, and map. Come to think of it, I don't have a problem with that idea at all. Hmmm.......IDEA! :eek: :cool:

Hubert, hint, new game idea, hint,....:cool:

Amen to SC Civ!

arado, you are exactly right, two ginormous armed camps with neither able to make inroads upon the others core holdings, so all the fighting will be on the perimeters. Think of the geographical locations that allow either one side or the other the ability to isolate the battlefield and gain that bridgehead into the opponents domain.

Who doesn't recall the game of "RISK". Remember how easy it was to start out with your first continent for those bonus armies? Where were those locations? Maybe Australia? Perhaps.....S.America? Easy defense, minimal avenues of approach, with inside logistical security, those are the keys for SC Global as well. Think about where the greatest bonus was with the most defensive liabilities......hint....it wasn't the West.

[JerseyJohn]

Snowstorm, When I suggested it I was joking, but who's to say, perhaps with your powers of persuassion Hubert might be inclined to put something like that in the game. The problem, of course, is any of us can look at a world atlas and know where to go drilling for oil, or speculating for mineral resources. So, perhaps some sort of randomizer too? :cool:

Arado, SeaMonkey In a game where it's

Germany-Russia vs US-UK-Japan, it would be like Thadeus Mahan duking it out with Liddel Hart; sea war vs land war.

Both are pretty perfectly laid out. The Axis has a huge connected interior front, but with the overwhelming majority of good lines of transportation west of the Urals. East of the Urals there would be the single line of the Trans-Siberian Railroad. Next stop Manchuria.

Presumably the USSR fighting a protracted land war in Manchuria and Outer Mongolia would, sooner or later, run into the same logistics problems that the Czar's army ran into in 1905. Could this be offset by the USSR troops better armor and heavy artillery? The Soviets defeated the Japanese twice during the undeclared war in Outer Mongolia, but are they logistically able to advance?

Meanwhile, Japan would be receiving US reinforcement and heavier equipment from across the northern Pacific. US air power supporting Japanese ground troops. I think Manchuria would be a stalemate with lines moving back and forth occaisionally, but without anything decisive happening. What else does Russia attempt? A drive through the Himalayas? One through Persia and/or Iraq?

Where does China stand in this, Japan have been its invader and the United States its friend?

In the Atlantic, as you said, SeaMonkey there's the old risk route from Brazil to West Africa. I think the Congo and Brazil would become very important and would see huge battles; the question is, on which side of that route would they be fought?

And, of course, if the UK is in the war, and Italy in the Axis, it's the historical WWII in Europe except Germany hasn't got a Russian front to drain its troops and resources. That ought to make things interesting. I can't see the Allies every successfully staging the invasion of Italy, or getting back into France. North Africa? The Middle East?

As was discussed earlier, if the UK falls before US entry, or if it is just defeated so the United States doesn't use the British Isles as a staging area, then the whole thing takes on a totally different look. Victory would have to be determined, as SeaMonkey said, along the periphery.

Deciding on victory conditions would really be a challenge. :eek:

[SeaMonkey]

Excellent JJ, I hadn't used that line of reasoning, exactly, the Mongolian/Manchurian scenario should unfold as you have suggested, as you've stated with the American support.

I'm going to try it!

And those victory conditions??? Yeah...I'm hip...a tough resolution...but I'm sure they've been set by now...Bill....Hubert????:confused:

Anyway, after we try a few games I'll bet these forum heads will come up with a number of tweaks.

[PowerGmbH]

Actually, such an alliance is not so unlikely.

Germany and the USSR were in effect allies from September 1939 until Barbarossa in June 1941. They carved up Poland between them and supported each other's aggression elsewhere.

Well there is an interisting story about this friendship. The Trade between Germany and Russia beeing quite intensive, it is no Joke that the last Train from Russia with Some thousands of Tons of Grain deliveries ( International Trade ) arrived in Berlin just not even 1/2 hour before the German Army marched into Russia. quite astonishing facts in the afterview..

[AZGungHo]

Quite a nightmare huh? I'm thinking about using the entire US Marine Corps as a massive raiding force, hitting and destroying towns, ports, resources, holding them for as long as possible, letting the Japanese or US Army troops hold and build up there if possible, pulling back out to sea if not.

For those who don't know, my Dad was a US Marine Raider in WW2, and the Raiders weren't very well appreciated by the rest of the Corps. In a scenario like this, they might be just what the doctor ordered, only on a vastly larger scale!

OH - and a true nightmare scenario looms in my mind - Germany, Russia AND Japan! Would that alignment be unstoppable? Imagine them ending up hold all (or almost all) of Europe, Asia, the Pacific and much of Africa. What could you do against that? And how long would it be before it all fell apart and you had a vast "civil war" between them?

[JerseyJohn]

Thank you, SeaMonkey. I agree with you, we have to wait for either Hubert, or one of the inner-inners to reveal a little more before we can speculate much further. And those victory conditions, that ought to be one for the ages!

PowerGmbH I've always wondered about that, about why Hitler didn't just keep taking the lopsided trade agreement with the USSR for another year while tidying things up in the Mediteranean/Middle East, and launching a truly nightmare submarine campaign against Britain. No doubt he honestly felt the Soviet Union couldn't hold out longer than the first two months. That being the case, and with him feeling the main enemy was the UK, it seems strange that he didn't plan policies for the east that would have gotten the population to see the Axis as saviors, rather than persecutors and enslavers.

AZGungHo Ah, so there's more to the screen name than I thought. As a young kid in the early fifties that Randolph Scott Gung Ho movie used to play all the time on TV and was one of my favorites. There were so many WWII movies, made during the 1940s, playing so often on fifties television that it was probably 1956 before I realized we weren't still at war with Germany and Japan. I had no idea what was going on with China and Russia since in some movies they were our friends, and in others they were our villains. :confused: -- A lot of those movies I still remember in fragments and they're never played anymore. I found out decades later in a pair of obituaries that one actor who always played fanatical Nazis, usually SS, was actually Jewish! While two other actors who played the most hated kind of Japanese were in fact Chinese.

First time I've heard that the marine raiders and the rest of the corps didn't get on very well. Hope you'll elaborate on that, sounds very interesting.

Interesting thoughts on that mega-Axis. The late historian Stephan Ambrose discussed that possibility and said it would have been the start of the modern dark ages.

-- I like the Civil War idea. I'd give them about 5 years, tops, before they began infighting. It seems most likely that it would have been Germany and Japan vs the USSR, nibbling at it from both sides like a pair of predators taking down a much larger prey.

[arado234]

JerseyJohn I dont see England having much chance.I guess they could get lucky.If Hitler and Stalin made this pact then Hitler may plan for an attack on England and be much better prepared and if he got the chance to trap the B.E.F.he would do it.

As far as Russia fighing in Mongolia etc I think the Russians with German help would be able lay a beating on anyone foolish enough to try and attack them.They could re-enforce much faster than the Allies(especially ground forces).

I could see the whole Allied alliance unravel if the Chinese decided(which they may do)to tell the Japs to either give back all they took or the Chinese join the Axis.Then its REAL trouble for the Allies.

If the Axis did''win'' then forsure as soon as either Hitler or Stalin got the chance they would just backstab eachother and the whole thing would start again.This time who knows what would happen.I guess it depends on who started what would have the big effect on who joined what side.Total chaos.It would also be REAL interesting if one side had the upper hand on the other in Nuclear research.It would be a total mess..

[JerseyJohn]

Arado I think the USSR by itself could bulldoze its way through Manchuria, provided the support line was adequate. But if Hubert's supply representation is as good as I think it is, we'll see that the Soviet Siberian Army should have a good starting stockpile, but everything else will need to come in very slowly, squeezed through the Trans-Siberian Railroad. I remember reading somewhere that many of the troops sent from Siberia to fight at Moscow actually walked the whole way because the railroad system couldn't handle the load!

So, in that situation, 1,000,000 troops would be worse than having 100,000 because those other 900,000 would break the supply system!

Conversely, if the Japanese and Americans gain the offensive they'd also need to wait for a built up supply network after the initial gains.

-- Here's a question for Hubert: Is there any way to build up supply networks? I'm sure that would be needed almost anywhere in Asia before sizeable forces would be able to operate any distance from their main depots.

Interesting view of the Chinese in all of this. It's like what I was asking earlier, where would they fit in when the United States (their friend) and Japan (their enemy) form an alliance?

Not being locked into the historical alliances creates a lot of really great possibilities. I think the key, on a global scale, will be to handle diplomacy as well as the military and other major aspects of the game. Getting a key minor ally in strategically important areas where neither side has any great access will turn out to be very important.

[Snowstorm]

JJ,

I agree with you on the diplomatic issue in the game.

With so many different possibilities with countries not so locked into any alliance as much as before, it's probably near impossible to completely ignore the diplomatic end of this game without getting burned unexpectedly.

[Hubert Cater]

-- Here's a question for Hubert: Is there any way to build up supply networks? I'm sure that would be needed almost anywhere in Asia before sizeable forces would be able to operate any distance from their main depots.

I can't give away all the surprises now can I?

To be honest we are actually quite pleased with the response this campaign has received in the forums and personally I'm actually enjoying the comments on how it might play out.

Some of you are spot on

Hubert

[Snowstorm]

Spot on? HOW were we spot on? WHERE were we spot on? WHO was spot on?:eek:

(Ohhhh I know, Hubert, you can't tell us that, how about just a teensy, weensy clue? )

[AZGungHo]

Hey JJ,

Well it's a long story about the Corps and the Raiders as you might imagine. It boils down to the basic philosophy of the Marines, which even today isn't completely comfortable with having "special forces" in the Corps, since ALL Marines are special! That's why now you are rotated into and out of their Special Forces units if you are a Marine.

Back then they disbanded the Raiders in early 1944, saying the character of the war had changed and raiding units weren't needed anymore. Shortly there after they instituted Recon Companies, who did roughly the same work the Raiders were designed to do. All that attention from Hollywood didn't help either!

You can read my late Father's restrained comments about all this here - the page title says a lot. http://www.usmcraiders.com/guillo.htm

BTW - I'm still involved with the Raider Association, as a Chaplin and board member. Got to go to China last summer on a two week trip tracing Edson's travels there. It was AWESOME!

Hope no one minds this little side trip - now back to the subject at hand!!

[JerseyJohn]

Thank you, Hubert, for the Definite Maybe!

Snowstorm, you are definitely spoiled. What Hubert said back there was a veritable treasure trove of information. You should have been around in the old days when a definitive answer was a single wink, and nothing more. Many a poor soul desperately waiting to be enlightened used to, well, sort of flip out. :eek:

AZGungHo. Thanks for the explanation, and the link. I went there and it's a great place to read up on these things. Seems to me that rotating troops in and out of elite forces is a very good idea, helps elevate the overall level and also prevents internal animosities. Also explains why one of my grandnephews who was in a combat unit in Iraq -- no idea if it was considered elite or not -- is being switched to a flightline unit for his tour in Afghanistan. Seems weird to hear that he's getting two tours in his first (probably only) hitch. That used to be unheard of (when I was in the AF), unless the trooper requested it.

-- He's stationed in California now and has just had his third car accident in as many months. I told him they ought to get him to Afghanistan right away, for his own safety.

[Snowstorm]

JJ,

He did? Drat, I MISSED something! I better go back! :eek:

Now, where did I leave my magnifying glass, I knew I might need it.

[JerseyJohn]

Magnifying glass?

"Let's see, I know he answered it somewhere, it's got to be in that post, somewhere. If not between the lines, perhaps if I focus between those two letters? -- Or maybe those two?"

[SeaMonkey]

Ha! Good one JJ. Hubert...you didn't? Come on...you did? :confused:Did you really get the communication net layer in? I can't believe it! I'm dumbfounded.......speechless...

Just today I was wondering....what....what did Hubert hold back as a surprise for Global, but I didn't think about this long lost suggestion.

I'm listening to what JJ reminds us of. Hubert's MO of never say anything, he has gotten so talkative lately.......maybe its not Hubert.....its really Bill...or perhaps....where is Blashy? Hubert is really Blashy.:eek: There's a fishy smell here!

[SeaMonkey]

And arado, don't be so sure that the British Isles will be a pushover. If the UK player invests heavily into the Island 's defense from the beginning and plays France as a delaying mechanism, the Allies could essentially create "The Rock of Britain".

By inserting a number of these peripheral fortresses on the eastern hemisphere and with the firepower mobility of the West's naval forces, the East will constantly have to be aware of impending aggression from many points on the compass.:cool:

I mean if the West properly cloaks their intentions, whos to say if the threat is real or imagined, the main effort or a diversion?:confused:

[Snowstorm]

Sea Monkey,

You're absolutely right. With that strategy, and at least maintenance of the navy and air force, the Axis can have a whale of a time (hey, I think I found that fishy smell you talked about ) trying to cross the English Channel, as well as second guessing if a return trip is coming back on them.

JJ,

Thanks for doing the looking for me with your obviously superior magnifying glass, I was having trouble finding mine.

Did you come up with anything yet?