Make Norway more attractive to DOW?

[Orm]

From time to time there is a discussion on how to make Norway be invaded more often in MWIF. Many ask for a rule change so that Germany will suffer if they do not conquer Norway.

I do not agree with this at all. I think that attacking Norway was a mistake. And I see no reason why MWIF should force you to repeat the mistakes of WWII.

One reason that Norway see so little action is that Allies do not want to DOW Norway and Germany knows this. Germany, historically, believed that the Allies would occupy Narvik and hence decided that they could not allow this. If it became common Allied practice to occupy Narvik then I am sure that some German players would prefer to occupy Norway themselves. Some may wait for the Allied DOW before aiding Norway. But Norway would see more action. My point is this; why punish Germany when they do not want to dance when it takes two to tango.

So I wonder why there is a discussion about punishing Germany for being to passive in Norway. Why not discuss punishing the Allies for the same. If CW and France do not DOW Norway then bad thing should happen to them.

I think that the special rule about Narvik has to strong effect compared to what the likely historical outcome from it would have been.



I seldom see CW declare war on Vichy France as soon as it is installed. Yet during WWII UK did attack Vichy Forces almost at once. But I do not see the same discussion about Vichy France and CW.

[Empire101]

ORIGINAL: Orm

From time to time there is a discussion on how to make Norway be invaded more often in MWIF. Many ask for a rule change so that Germany will suffer if they do not conquer Norway.

I do not agree with this at all. I think that attacking Norway was a mistake. And I see no reason why MWIF should force you to repeat the mistakes of WWII.

One reason that Norway see so little action is that Allies do not want to DOW Norway and Germany knows this. Germany, historically, believed that the Allies would occupy Narvik and hence decided that they could not allow this. If it became common Allied practice to occupy Narvik then I am sure that some German players would prefer to occupy Norway themselves. Some may wait for the Allied DOW before aiding Norway. But Norway would see more action. My point is this; why punish Germany when they do not want to dance when it takes two to tango.

So I wonder why there is a discussion about punishing Germany for being to passive in Norway. Why not discuss punishing the Allies for the same. If CW and France do not DOW Norway then bad thing should happen to them.

I think that the special rule about Narvik has to strong effect compared to what the likely historical outcome from it would have been.



I seldom see CW declare war on Vichy France as soon as it is installed. Yet during WWII UK did attack Vichy Forces almost at once. But I do not see the same discussion about Vichy France and CW.

+1

[Klydon]

ORIGINAL: Orm

From time to time there is a discussion on how to make Norway be invaded more often in MWIF. Many ask for a rule change so that Germany will suffer if they do not conquer Norway.

I do not agree with this at all. I think that attacking Norway was a mistake. And I see no reason why MWIF should force you to repeat the mistakes of WWII.

One reason that Norway see so little action is that Allies do not want to DOW Norway and Germany knows this. Germany, historically, believed that the Allies would occupy Narvik and hence decided that they could not allow this. If it became common Allied practice to occupy Narvik then I am sure that some German players would prefer to occupy Norway themselves. Some may wait for the Allied DOW before aiding Norway. But Norway would see more action. My point is this; why punish Germany when they do not want to dance when it takes two to tango.

So I wonder why there is a discussion about punishing Germany for being to passive in Norway. Why not discuss punishing the Allies for the same. If CW and France do not DOW Norway then bad thing should happen to them.

I think that the special rule about Narvik has to strong effect compared to what the likely historical outcome from it would have been.



I seldom see CW declare war on Vichy France as soon as it is installed. Yet during WWII UK did attack Vichy Forces almost at once. But I do not see the same discussion about Vichy France and CW.

+1

One of the strong points of WiF is the multiple "what if" scenarios. It doesn't really "channel" action in the game to match what happen in history. In hindsight, Norway was a mistake and the Germans got little benefit while paying a pretty hefty price.

[AxelNL]

was Norway used much to inctercept the Murmans convoys? That could be a reason in an all-out Barbarossa scenario?

[Ur_Vile_WEdge]

I seldom see CW declare war on Vichy France as soon as it is installed. Yet during WWII UK did attack Vichy Forces almost at once. But I do not see the same discussion about Vichy France and CW.

But...but...... muh Dakar overrunning, muh invasion of either indo-china or Madagascar! Muh early torch! How can I do these wonderful things without attacking Vichy right off the bat?

Besides, what are you afraid of? Some obsolete battleships that the Germans have to call a Naval to move?

[Ingtar]

The Allies had three considerations for Norway, from my recollection. The first, there was an attempted German coup and a counter coup leading to the Allies wanting to insure that Norway did not end up as a German ally. This was similar to what happened later in Yugoslavia. The second was that much of the Swedish ore that was being sent to Germany had to travel through Narvik for at least a portion of the year. This led to Narvik being a target. Third, the French insisted that the Allies help Finland. The plans were drawn up and ready to go for a British/French intervention in Finland through Narvik. The Germans declared war days before the British. The Allies reacted by landing their invasion force in Narvik.

[gravyhair]

The invasion of Norway had everything to do with the iron ore convoys that come out of Narvik during bad weather and sail down the Norwegian Coast. Recognizing the significance of these convoys, Churchill was agitating to act unilaterally against Norway to close the route, and his efforts got into the papers, and the Germans recognized what an economic impact that would have on their war industries, so they invaded. From Germany's perspective, Norway's neutrality was at best uncertain, and at worst threatened by British action. One could argue that it wasn't a mistake at all, for that reason alone, but the debate would center around economics and politics rather than strategy.

One of the largest problems with wargames is that they do not always reproduce the economic and political realities which spurred historical decision-making, so they sometimes leave you with the impression that stuff that was done back then was a "mistake". I agree that there should be greater incentive in WiF to invade Norway, but leave you the option of declining if you wish.

[CrusssDaddy]

WiF's scale ensures there are numerous campaigns that do not live up to the real-life hype: Norway, Crete, East Africa, Finland border war, Papua, to name a few. This is hard-wired into the game by the supply rules, map layout, 2-month turns, etc. Does anyone know if WiF Master Edition alters any of these to accommodate the boutique theaters?

[wodin]

They could also Bomb the UK further North from Norway airfields I believe.

[Numdydar]

Correct. But that was soon stopped due to no fighter cover and limited impact. So I would not consider that as a major reason to invade.

Personally, no matter what WWII game I play as Germany, War in Europe, Hearts of Iron, etc. I ALWAYS avoid Norway as like others have said here the cost for Germany is too high for too little gain no matter what game you play.

[markb50k]

add a red factory in oslo.  the 1 resource is probably not worth it but a factory as well?  with prod multiples, a factory is worth quite a bit.

[Ur_Vile_WEdge]

Except if you're playing with oil, it's a rare day that you have enough resources and oil to run all of Germany's factories, and all of Italy's factories, and reorganize everyone. An extra factory doesn't mean much without an extra resource to put in it, and resources are usually the limiting factor for the axis.

[gravyhair]

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge

Except if you're playing with oil, it's a rare day that you have enough resources and oil to run all of Germany's factories, and all of Italy's factories, and reorganize everyone. An extra factory doesn't mean much without an extra resource to put in it, and resources are usually the limiting factor for the axis.

True.

P.S. Love your screen name.

[Ingtar]

A (whale) oil resource in Narvik?

[Centuur]

The problem with Norway in the game is that both sides don't have a realy incentive to take the country, because the effects for the other side are too positive. Historically speaking, the attack on Norway by the Axis was a very costly affair. Personally I think they would never have been able to retake Narvik if the Allies didn't evacuate the place themselves...

This attack was only done because the Germans expected the CW to take the country if they didn't. They were right on that account.

How to reflect this in WiF, without reducing the Norwegian force pool is important. I would suggest the following:

First, to increase the pressure on the CW, WiF should allocate the Norwegian resource from the start of the game to Germany in a trade agreement.
Second, put in a US entry action which says: CW lays mines in Norwegian territorial waters. The CW can in any DoW phase take this action, but every time it does so, a US entry (lets say a 3) is rolled for which might take a chit out of the US entry pools. If the CW takes this action, Germany doesn't get the Norwegian resource end of turn. If the weather during the last impulse is Snow or Blizzard in the Arctic, Germany doesn't get the resources out of Sweden either (Narvik blocked by mines...).
As soon as the US is in the war, the CW can still choose this option, but doing so means that the Germans will get the possibility to align Norway at the start of the next impulse (thus reflecting the Norwegian population getting more and more angry at the British intervening with the local shipping, which is very important to the Norwegian economy). However, the mines are laid, so this turn no Norwegian resource or Swedish ore if the weather is bad enough.

Now, things are getting interesting. A political game is happening around Norway, which can annoy any side in the game and may or may not force them into action, which may or may not upset the US. The gains for both sides are greater now, since apart from the Norwegian army and fleet, there is now also the resource situation for Germany to take into account...

Now, if someone says: didn't I read this before somewhere? Yes, you did...

[peskpesk]

ORIGINAL: Orm

From time to time there is a discussion on how to make Norway be invaded more often in MWIF. Many ask for a rule change so that Germany will suffer if they do not conquer Norway.

I do not agree with this at all. I think that attacking Norway was a mistake. And I see no reason why MWIF should force you to repeat the mistakes of WWII.

One reason that Norway see so little action is that Allies do not want to DOW Norway and Germany knows this. Germany, historically, believed that the Allies would occupy Narvik and hence decided that they could not allow this. If it became common Allied practice to occupy Narvik then I am sure that some German players would prefer to occupy Norway themselves. Some may wait for the Allied DOW before aiding Norway. But Norway would see more action. My point is this; why punish Germany when they do not want to dance when it takes two to tango.

So I wonder why there is a discussion about punishing Germany for being to passive in Norway. Why not discuss punishing the Allies for the same. If CW and France do not DOW Norway then bad thing should happen to them.

I think that the special rule about Narvik has to strong effect compared to what the likely historical outcome from it would have been.



I seldom see CW declare war on Vichy France as soon as it is installed. Yet during WWII UK did attack Vichy Forces almost at once. But I do not see the same discussion about Vichy France and CW.

+1 MWIF is no place for "house rule about Norway" (If RAW 8 or some future edition changes Norway then...)

[gravyhair]

Did a bit of research. Note that Sweden has a trade agreement requiring her to send 3 resources to Germany. Normally this is done through the Baltic, but see 8.2.10 which states that these resources can't be transported through the iced-in ports of the northern Baltic during snow or blizzard. If Germany wants to get her 3 resources from Sweden, she can only do so in bad weather IF Narvik is NOT controlled by an Allied player. So if you go back to history; you see why the Brits were considering invading Norway, and why the Germans pre-empted them. It's already in the game. Three resources is a decent motivator in my mind.

[Ur_Vile_WEdge]

Stockholm is a major port that doesn't ice in. In fact, I think most of the ports in Sweden don't ice up, and I'm sure Oslo doesn't either.

You'd need to ice up every port in Scandinavia that borders the Baltic to make this work, and if you did THAT, you'd mess up the Germans a real big deal, since you'd need convoys in the Arctic and the North Sea to get those resources in (at least until and if the Germans take Leningrad and get the overland route secure). Good luck keeping them alive for more than 2 impulses.

[Extraneous]

.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: Ur_Vile_WEdge

Stockholm is a major port that doesn't ice in. In fact, I think most of the ports in Sweden don't ice up, and I'm sure Oslo doesn't either.

You'd need to ice up every port in Scandinavia that borders the Baltic to make this work, and if you did THAT, you'd mess up the Germans a real big deal, since you'd need convoys in the Arctic and the North Sea to get those resources in (at least until and if the Germans take Leningrad and get the overland route secure). Good luck keeping them alive for more than 2 impulses.

Unfortunatly, the Swedish railroad system couldn't cope with the Iron trains from the north. The only railroad usable for them was the Lulea - Narvik one... There were some serious issues regarding capacity of railroad cars to transport ore, I believe. And that's why the rule exist that Germany don't get ore out of Sweden if Narvik is Allied controlled...