[WarInEur] strategic surprise rule - more lipstick for the piggy!;)

Tue Nov 13 09:10:27 EST 2007

From: baseballnut570 at hotmail.comTo: peterturkaly at comcast.netSubject: RE: [WarInEur] strategic surprise rule - more lipstick for the piggy!;)Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 09:08:35 -0500

TWO QUESTIONS FOR ALL OF US TO PONDER? 1) to what extent was the outcome of WWII inevitable? 2) To what extent was the way that WWII unfolded the result of the decisions made by the combatants rather than the balance of forces?  From a purely economic standpoint the Axis had no chance to win after December 11, 1941 becausethe resources available to Germany, Italy, and Japan were not sufficient to prevail over a British US, Soviet alliance that was buttressed by contributions from dozens of colonies and minor allies around the world.  And yet, the balance of forces in the field far favored the Axis from May 1940 to august 1942 to an extent that the defeat of one of the three major allies was entirely possible and if that happened the chance that both Germany and Japan could be defeated by September 1945 would have dropped to near zero.For what it's worth, IMO it is impossible for a war game to both simulate a conflict of the scale of WIE or WitP and provide the players with a free hand to avoid clear historical mistakes. The best any game can do is provides risks and benefits commensurate with those perceived by the historical decision-makers. And even this fails because sometimes the RW decision-makers harbored fears/insecurities that a mere war gamer will not have. For this reason, the France 1940 campaign is not fixable as a part of a 1939 campaign game. We can simulate what happened only if the Allies are required by some game mechanism to contest more of Belgium than can be safely defended or via one or more ad hoc rules prohibiting the Allies from creating a defense in depth deployment.   Why is this? Because the allied moves were (a) dictated at least as much by political considerations as by military wisdom, and (b) were made in ignorance of the full capabilities if the Axis forces.  Remove either one of thesefactors and the German's lightning victory disappears. Instead of Paris falling in 10 weeks or less, the 3rd Republic isa 50-50 bet to last 20 weeks. Remove both and the campaign might not end until winter, depending on which options are in play. The impact of this on Sea Lion is easy to see.  Under the real world version of FOW, the Brits did not know that the Germans had made NO advance plans for an invasion across the Channell. In WIE this means that they were in ignorance of German shipping and Airmobile builds to date. Furthermore, the RW believed that even though such an invasion could andprobably would eventually be repelled, it seemed a natural next step if the Nazi's were interested in winning the War.   A WIE player, on the other hand, knows that the counter limits for ATPs and Naval units make a substantial invasion forces literally impossible even in 1942 and in the late summer and Fall of 1940 there simply hasn't been time or resources available to the Germans to create both a historical U-Boat Fleet and the SURF, AMPH and TRANS fleets needed for anything like a Full Scale Sea Lion. Ergo it is relativelysafe to strip England of its garrison in favor of operations in the Med'.  In this respect the game is literally too historical. If a Dunkirk style disaster does occur in WIE, the Germans will generally not be in anyposition to do anything about it, (precisely as they were in WWII.)  That they were not in position to take advantage was the result of decisions made well prior to May 1940 (Naval building aimed for 1942 start date, Allies decided to go to war over Poland to the Germans's counter the Germans expectations.) That there was a Dunkirk at all was the result of Hitler's decision to go with the Von Manstein plan, the Allied political decision to send a large force into Belgium, and a misunderstanding about the suitability of the Ardennes road net for armored warfare. Some of these factors are hardwired into WIE, but others remain up to the players. Thus WIE PLAYERS HAVE TO STOP EXPECTING THIS PHASE OF WIE TO PLAY OUT ANYTHING LIKE IT DID HISTORICALLY. It just is not going to happen unless the special 1940 Scenario Rules are in force.  To a lesser extent, the 1941 and 1942 Russian campaigns were as much the result of the decision made as they are of the resources available to the opposing general staffs. Stalin's troops were in the midst of setting up permanent fortifications in Esastern Poland, probably because they had wrongly concluded that there wasn't going to be a summer offensive that year, what with the invasion of the Balkans and so many weeks of good weather already having passed. The fortifications on the old soviet border had been painstakingly torn down and to be relocated further westward. WIE really doesn't have anything that simulates these events, except to start War in the East with no Fortified units on the map.  In May 1942 the Soviets tried a fair weather counter-offensive and got clobbered. This is the sort of mistake a WIE player is unlikely to make. As a result, even if 1941 plays out pretty much historically, 1942 seldom will.  Thus one last time I say to one and all, If you want to play through historical events, stick to scenarios, the decision trees for Campaign games are too dense with opportunities for major departures from historical events.  With regards to the Russian OOB.  A large number of the Soviet infantry units turned out to be right next to worthless when used independently. They came under fire and disintegrated. In WIE terms this would mean that they are removed from the map the instant an Axis unit moves next to them, which would mean that they have no more ZOC than an Airbase or Arms center or unoccupied fort.  The Axis destroyed dozens, perhaps even hundreds of such units over the course of the war.   In BWIE there really isn't any way to introduce such untried units, which made up a rather larger percentage of the Soviets OOB in 1941. They simply have to be omitted. Given that they in no way contributed to the Soviet War effort, this may be just as well. It does lead, however to a false impression of Soviet infantry casualties.  In CWIE with FOG of WAR the Axis would generally be unable to distinguish the zero valued rifle divisions from the 1-4s. Thus would give thema certain decoy value. UNfortunately for the Soviet player, he would not know which will disintegrate and hence might put too many in the same sector, leading to a completely unexpected breakdown of his defense in depth.   I would argue that what Chuck calls Attack on the March was really the just the process of scattering these inexperienced, low morale would-be divisions without any substantial combat effort on the partof the advancing forces, which is approximately what happened during Desert Storm. (An overrun, but with less units involved) BOB

> From: peterturkaly at comcast.net> To: csutherland at gamewoodinc.com> CC: sgminfo at aol.com; baseballnut570 at hotmail.com; warineur at mailman.halisp.net> Subject: RE: [WarInEur] strategic surprise rule - more lipstick for the piggy!;)> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:59:06 -0500> > It doesn't matter if the soviets get 300+ 1-4s or the equivalent in 4-4 and> 5-5s. In 1941 were they capable of putting up the same kind of defense that> all those extra units would allow? It would be rather ahistorical versus> the kind of numbers the germans could put up against it. On the other hand,> if you could concentrate the french forces to give fewer, but stronger> units, it might thin the line and allow for more breakthru opportunities.> > > -----Original Message-----> From: Chuck Sutherland [mailto:csutherland at gamewoodinc.com] > Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 7:30 PM> To: Peter Turkaly> Cc: 'sgminfo'; 'Wardall Clark'; warineur at mailman.halisp.net> Subject: Re: [WarInEur] strategic surprise rule - more lipstick for the> piggy!;)> > I'm not talking about changing the numbers on the units, just the amount of> them allowed in the OOB and for the russians how many they can build.> > Part of the 1-4 mix is taken up by the 4-4/5-5 corps, you could say> 4x1-4 = 1x4-4, 5x1-4 = 5-5. Late in 41 I read where the Russians had > 250+ divisions.> > I just know that if you really want to FIX the combat issues the > Russians are going to need their historical abilities to mass produce > alot of cannon fodder to slow the offense and have enough afterwards to > kick those sorry NAZIs back west!> > I recall reading an old thread about using the 6-5s to attrition down > the russians to weaken them so that you could break the line in 42. An > attrition war should easily be won by the russians no questions asked, > but because of the low amount infantry production in the current system > its a viable tactic to lower the number of 5-5 available for 42.> 

Climb to the top of the charts!  Play Star Shuffle:  the word scramble challenge with star power. Play Now! 
_________________________________________________________________
News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now!
http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.halisp.net/pipermail/warineur/attachments/20071113/cb2ddd82/attachment.html