Yugoslovia

[demyansk]

How is that long ww2 Yugoslavia campaign?

[Oberst_Klink]

The Todd Klemme one or which one are you referring to?

There are the 1991 and the 1941 campaigns, too.

http://www.the-strategist.net/RD/scenar ... php?Id=685
http://www.the-strategist.net/RD/scenar ... php?Id=688


Klink, Oberst

[demyansk]

Thanks, the WW2 campaign game thats in the directory, I believe? It looks like a massive campaign game but interesting.


would someone like to play this campaign?

[demyansk]

Anyone interested?

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: demjansk

How is that long ww2 Yugoslavia campaign?

Gotta wonder how THAT would actually work. For starters, I see at least six players with totally distinct agendas. The Italians and Germans were certainly working at cross purposes, and then of course so were the Chetniks and the Partisans. The Croats were definitely at odds with the Italians, Chetniks, and Partisans, and weren't always doing things that pleased the Germans. Then there are the British and the Americans, and who they are going to help. Finally, the Russians are going to wander in, and even the Partisans swiftly came to realize they weren't an unmixed blessing...

...and that's just the first problem. The second problem -- and one that led me to hastily retreat from any detailed study of the subject is that no one agrees about what happened. I mean, there are differing perspectives on all things -- but I have never seen so many people so categorically denouncing each other as complete liars as what one encounters if one ventures into matters World War Two and Yugoslav.

I mean, if one had something similar as a history of D-Day, one would have one source that insisted heroic Polish conscripts rose up against their German officers and took the beaches for the Allies, a second that asserted they actually dutifully fought, and a third that denied they were there at all. What can you do with that?

[desert]

Hmmm...

Well, here's the scenario creator's take on the issue:

More difficult then color-codes where loyalties of certain units. Certain units operated their own private war
– either against everyone or for everyone. To illustrate the problem: a Serb Chetnik ("Dinarska") Division
was formed in Croatia in 1941 and fought against Partisans and Ustashe (at the same time), supported by
Italians (sponsors of the Ustashe). So: is a unit that fights Allies and some Axis with help of other Axis – an
Allied or an Axis unit? Most accurate representation would probably be half-Allied, half-Axis unit – which
would lead to that unit fighting against it's own members... After much thought, I avoided the problem by
avoiding the unit, but the problem will remain until TOAW supports a "third-side" or a variant of something
like that. No game ever will probably be able to illustrate the full complexity of such warfare.

After much pondering and slicing through orders-of-battle, I was able to (reasonably well) represent the
historic units. The problem is that only Germany, Italy, Hungary, Bulgaria and Royal Yugoslavia had
professional pre-war armies; most others were either volunteers or ad-hoc units. Data on these is impossible
to find, so you can be sure that a Partisan detachment is not really accurate in its composition (in reality,
there was no generic composition you can copy to all units). Where this is the case, most logical or game-
fitting composition was used (example: even if it's nowhere noted, almost all local units have horses; rare
few have transport trucks).

Unsatisfying?