Vichy France & Bordeaux Enclave

[rkr1958]

(1) Are Vichy France and the Bordeaux Enclave exploits?

(2) After considerable play and consideration my personal answer to the above is yes ... and no ... how's that for decisiveness!?

(3) Let me lay out the background, as I see it, for both and my rationale for my yes & no answer.

(4) Also, I post this to get analysis, feedback, thoughts, recommendations or anything else you might like to contribute on the two subjects.

Background
(5) The optional rules I'm playing in my current AAR, A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers, are the following RAC (Rules as Coded) & RAI (Rules as Intended).

09-Optional-Rules-as-Intended.png (152.01 KiB) Viewed 151 times

(6) Germany was having a hard time in France; but managed a successful 71.3% assault to take Paris and; thus be able to install Vichy at the end of the turn.

(7) While "good" odds; this assault was far from certain.

(8) And my first, well actually second, question of this post is; if Germany didn't know with certainty that they could install Vichy, make the French army & defenses "disappear" would they have made such an assault or waited to clear more hexes adjacent to Paris and for more certain (i.e., better) odds to assault Paris?

05-AX-Western-LC-1-Paris.png (263.4 KiB) Viewed 151 times

(9) Even after the loss of Paris the French & CW still had a formable & organized defensive line extending from the North Sea to Lyons.

(10) But; with certainty German knew they could install Vichy, dissolve the French forces and isolate the CW forces.

09-AX-Western-France.png (1.93 MiB) Viewed 151 times

(11) With the knowledge that Germany was having a hard time several turns prior, the CW and French began setting up their Bordeaux-Bayonne enclave; including railing 2 Vichy factories to Bordeaux.

(12) This enclave was also reinforced by CW forces displaced from both Vichy & Morocco on Vichy being installed. Would Germany have allowed a British army in Morocco to "move into Bordeaux"?

99-Western-France-Post-Vichy.png (1.8 MiB) Viewed 151 times

Are these Exploits?
(13) Again, I answer yes and no.

(14) I really would like to explore both from an historical and gaming perspective.

(15) I really don't see France agreeing to an armistice just because they lost Paris but still held a defensive line with the Brits extending from the North Sea to Lyons.

(16) But maybe they would, what do you think?

(17) Should installing Vichy require more than just the capture or Paris? Be probabilistic if France is still strong and not certain?

(18) Now comes the Bordeaux enclave ... is this an historical counterfactual? Especially given that the CW and France started preparing for it several turns ago and well before Paris was threaten; must less taken.

(19) From a gaming perspective I can see that the Bordeaux enclave is a potential impediment to an axis close the Med strategy and a German/Italian invasion of Spain.

(20) So just to outright not allow the Bordeaux enclave would make such a gambit easier for the axis.

(21) Maybe not allow it for Germany/Italy agree not to attack Spain from France for a year or so?

(22) What do you think?

[Joseignacio]

Not answering all of them, just...

... this is a game of simulation, not all the possible reluctances or possible reactions are into it. Considering this and considering the size of the rules, from which Vichy is a sizeable chunk and a serious source of doubts and complexity, I wouldnt touch it. Unless maybe to delete that part, but it gives chrome to the game.

As for (18), I have done it several times with very good results, and have had it done against me successfully too, and it is a real PITA for the GE.

(18) Now comes the Bordeaux enclave ... is this an historical counterfactual? Especially given that the CW and France started preparing for it several turns ago and well before Paris was threaten; must less taken.

(19) From a gaming perspective I can see that the Bordeaux enclave is a potential impediment to an axis close the Med strategy and a German/Italian invasion of Spain.

(20) So just to outright not allow the Bordeaux enclave would make such a gambit easier for the axis.

(21) Maybe not allow it for Germany/Italy agree not to attack Spain from France for a year or so?

(22) What do you think?

[Centuur]

Interesting questions. First, you need to take into account the political situation in France in 1939-1940. The country was politically a total mess. There was no strong leader (like Churchill in the UK) who unified the country. And this became especially visible the moment Paris was conquered by Germany. From that moment on there were factions who wanted to continue the fight (even if France would totally get conquered) and there were factions who wanted the fighting to end.

So I would say that even with a strong French army present, Vichy would have been declared (I compare it with the end of WW I. Germany did defeat the Russians and their eastern armies were moving west however the political situation escalated, which resulted in the collapse of the Kaiser).

And one thing you also asked. If you can get a +10 (or more) on Paris: don't hesitate to attack.

Now, the Bordeaux situation. Is it an exploit? No. Why? German troops entered Bordeaux in june (a whole month before Vichy got created...). And: the British did consider to send troops to Brest and Bordeaux. Why they didn't do so? Lack of resources and the incredible speed of the German Blitzkrieg. In your game, that Blitzkrieg is a slow one. And if they were forced to evacuate out of Morocco, why not send those troops to assist lord Gort if he has his HQ in a nice castle there.

[Centuur]

Sorry, double.

[paulderynck]

For this version of rules I would say the designer must have agreed the Bordeaux Redoubt is an exploit because in the CE edition (RAW8 vs RAW7 in MWiF), he added the rule permitting the axis to move into Vichy France to counteract allied units adjacent to the Vichy border.

[rkr1958]

For this version of rules I would say the designer must have agreed the Bordeaux Redoubt is an exploit because in the CE edition (RAW8 vs RAW7 in MWiF), he added the rule permitting the axis to move into Vichy France to counteract allied units adjacent to the Vichy border.

Not only that, check out the MAP change from FE (MWIF) to CW! In CE there are 6 adjacent land hexes (with axis likely being able to get 4 or 5 of them) vs MWIF with only 2!

MWIF

99-MWIF-Bordeaux.png (1.71 MiB) Viewed 74 times

CW

99-CE-Bordeaux.png (4.66 MiB) Viewed 74 times

[paulderynck]

I don't see a difference in the maps, but certainly in CE the axis can get to all the hexes adjacent to the 4 the CW will try to hang onto. Without marine units, Bordeaux cannot be attacked from the hex directly east of it. In RAW7 that leaves one hex to attack from (since neither CW or Germany would normally want to enter Vichy after it's declared) and it is protected by a river hexside. So in CE the axis can get a 4 hex attack on that hex. It may take awhile though, since they have to "ooze around" due to CW ZoCs.

Once Vichy is declared the hexes east of the redoubt should not be CW controlled BTW.

[rkr1958]

I don't see a difference in the maps,

In CE Bordeaux is moved 1 hex southeast. The hex where it used to be is now just a woods hex. In CE, Bordeaux is now adjacent over land and attackable from all 6 surrounding hexes.

[rkr1958]

Once Vichy is declared the hexes east of the redoubt should not be CW controlled BTW.

The MWIF map I'm showing is after Germany collapsed Vichy and excludes units. CW units have moved into and control those two hexes in former Vichy. In fact, CW units occupy 1 of the two hexes