Why no 1939?

[SoulBlazer]

I'm just curious.....

How come there's no 'Poland, 1939' secnario for World at War like almost EVERY OTHER WWII game that has been made?

I don't mind starting with France in 1940 too much, but I would prefer the extra year myself, personaly.

[Paul Vebber]

Technically it would only add two turns, and after you attack poland and redeploy to France you end up pretty much where you are. THere are also a bunch of issues with dividing Poland and what teh AI does in FRance (or a Human player). From what I've looked at you either "freeze" everything and you end up where you start, or Germany gets screed becasue BRitain sends a grunch of troops to France and if you don;t attack Poland, then Russia attacks you for breaking the treaty. Germany is in pretty dicey straights in Fa 39 historically.

Its already pretty tough on the Axis. make it a free for all and they get screwed. No Allied player in their right mind falls for the SItzkrieg. Lock in in and you end up where Sp40 starts you. With only 3 or 4 armor - Germay isn't strong enought to take France in one turn.

[PDiFolco]

Yes, I understand the '39 problem : historically Germany did not expect a DoW from WA when it ate Poland, as Hitler didn't feel ready and counted on Western pusillanimity ... And the West, that felt compelled to declare war, was not really wanting to do it !
So we had the "Phoney War". But in the game, we have some "total war" right from the start. So in a 39 scen we have Germany and WA rushing to fight, in a totally ahistorical manner... Many games had this issue, IIRC 3rd Reich get over it because they were so few units that Germans did have to spend 2 turns changing front.
Maybe adding a '39 scenario with a tweak - makes it start in Win'39 and not Fall - would make sense. Just my 0.02

[Becket]

The problem is, I believe, that there's no way to re-freeze the Soviets. You either unfreeze them and allow them to take some territory (assuming you find a way to keep the Germans from taking it), then let them go to war immediately, or leave them frozen and give those territories to the Germans.

Neither answer is particularly satisfactory.

I may have this wrong, but I believe that's what was discussed when this idea came up early in testing. Joel will know for sure. You might try a search for 1939. You'll probably find a post from me about a year ago asking for it. [:)]

[DBeves]

Yes well... and in almost every game I've seen poland gets creamed... nothing they can do about that...of course - unless France and great Britain invade western germany ... that they didn't historically was one of the greatest 'missed chances' of history. Personally - would be interesting to see if germany can fight a two front war off the bat but would require a large redeployment westward. Not sure what the historical view is of germanys capability to defeat poland and actually fight a more agressive France and GB is ? Anyone

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: Paul Vebber

Technically it would only add two turns, and after you attack poland and redeploy to France you end up pretty much where you are. THere are also a bunch of issues with dividing Poland and what teh AI does in FRance (or a Human player). From what I've looked at you either "freeze" everything and you end up where you start, or Germany gets screed becasue BRitain sends a grunch of troops to France and if you don;t attack Poland, then Russia attacks you for breaking the treaty. Germany is in pretty dicey straights in Fa 39 historically.

What would have happened if you as Germany attack Russia from the off in `39, but through the Baltic states and Kiev alone - on the assumption that the WE would have remained neutral, that is? You would have a totally different situation, then. Presumably the Allies would move troops into France pronto, but if you do well enough in Russia you would have the resources to attack successfully later (after capturing Poland) regardless.

[Dalwin]

ORIGINAL: Paul Vebber

What would have happened if you as Germany attack Russia from the off in `39, but through the Baltic states and Kiev alone - on the assumption that the WE would have remained neutral, that is? You would have a totally different situation, then. Presumably the Allies would move troops into France pronto, but if you do well enough in Russia you would have the resources to attack successfully later (after capturing Poland) regardless.

Personally, What I think would happen in that situation is that Berlin would fall in late '42. That is unless there was a coup in which Hitler was killed in 1940 and an armistice signed earlier. In spite of how some games make it appear, the Germans were definitely not ready for a two front war. Also, considering how badly their last two front war went, I'm not sure that Hitler could have remained in power if he had started another one.

[Bossy573]

ORIGINAL: DBeves
Not sure what the historical view is of germanys capability to defeat poland and actually fight a more agressive France and GB is ? Anyone

Hitler intended to attack Germany in the fall/ winter of 1939 using a revision of the Schleiffen plan. The Allies battle plan was to meet that head on in Belgium and historians generally agree that had that attack taken place, a stalemate would have developed and Germany would have been more rapidly defeated.

I think a more interesting period to probe would be the year following the fall of France when Britain stood alone. GGWAW does not, IMHO, give you a real chance to take out Britain at a time when she very possibly could have been defeated, or at least horribly mauled. Had the Germans played their cards right, they could have driven the British completely out of the Med. and the middle east at very low cost and then turned on Russia in a much more favorable position. Had Russia attacked Germany during this time (which was extremely unlikely), I find it difficult to believe they would have been as powerful on the attack in 1941/ 1942 as they were later in the war. This is my major beef with GGWAW at this time.

[Dalwin]

ORIGINAL: Bossy573

ORIGINAL: DBeves
Not sure what the historical view is of germanys capability to defeat poland and actually fight a more agressive France and GB is ? Anyone

Hitler intended to attack Germany in the fall/ winter of 1939 using a revision of the Schleiffen plan. The Allies battle plan was to meet that head on in Belgium and historians generally agree that had that attack taken place, a stalemate would have developed and Germany would have been more rapidly defeated.

I think a more interesting period to probe would be the year following the fall of France when Britain stood alone. GGWAW does not, IMHO, give you a real chance to take out Britain at a time when she very possibly could have been defeated, or at least horribly mauled. Had the Germans played their cards right, they could have driven the British completely out of the Med. and the middle east at very low cost and then turned on Russia in a much more favorable position. Had Russia attacked Germany during this time (which was extremely unlikely), I find it difficult to believe they would have been as powerful on the attack in 1941/ 1942 as they were later in the war. This is my major beef with GGWAW at this time.

Poland fell so quickly that the British and French didn't really have much opportunity to launch a major offensive. It takes a few weeks to mobilize the armies. France did make one attempt to push east while Germany was still in Poland. This bogged down in the Siegfried line. The French fell back to build up further before launching another assault.

The Germans had enough forces in their western fortifications to stall long enough to complete the conquest of Poland.

There is an interesting incident concerning the original German plans for invading France. As you pointed out, they had originally planned to go with a plan similar to that from WWI. A staff major carrying a copy of this plan crashed over I believe Luxembourg (though it might have been Belgium). With a copy of this plan in Allied hands, the Germans went back to the drawing board and came up with the plan that actually worked.

I agree with the historical assessment that the original plan would probably have bogged down and failed.