ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
Seems to be a theme with someone who loses a city... (i.e. CSA with Richmond, and maybe Columbia SC (claims vary on the last).)
I would be careful saying that in Columbia SC. They are still fighting that war.
Attack on the USSR
Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
RE: Attack on the USSR
I would be careful saying that in Columbia SC. They are still fighting that war.
RE: Attack on the USSR
I have been reading, with more than a passing interest, the posts on a Japanese attack on the USSR. I did take deep interest in Feinder's take on the armor issue.[&o] While I agree that historically the Japanese did take a terrible beating at the hands of the Russians [Zuhkov], but WiTP is not necessarily a truly historical game - things can go very differently.
The bulk of Russian forces are concentrated in the East along the coastal area of that command area, while there is a limited combat presence in the west along the TransSiberian RR. Additionally, the Russian during the course of the game only receives engineers [i.e., for airbases] as reinforcements. The entire bulk of the Russian "combat army" is confined in the eastern section of the Far East Command. Is it possible to attack in such a manner as to isolate these forces by strong and determined point attacks in the north and south? I believe it is possible and without the outside infusion of massive forces as some have suggested.
The use of Mongolian Cavalry Divisions from the China Expeditionary Army in the west could clearly isolate Russian bases as far west as Irtkusk without running into more that second line engineers with experience and morale in the upper 30s or low 40s. A strong concentration at Hailar with 3 or 4 Japanese Infantry Divisions, and support forces, could take the main Russian base [Borzya] just opposite of Hailar along the Trans-Siberian RR. Most of Russian combat forces are concentrated in Bozya.
In the East, Russian combat forces are concentrated, in the north, in the Blagoveshchenske-Kuysyshevka area. Japanese forces [3 to 4 Infantry Divisions with supporting troops] would concentrate in the Sunwu-Heiho area and attempt to cut the Trans Siberian RR at this point and drive the Russian units toward the south [trying to keep these forces from joining those Russian combat formations in the west].
It would appear that the Japanese should conduct a holding action in the center [Mishan-Chiamusu] while using their bombers to suppress the concentration of Russian bombers in this area. Russian combat forces would have a numerical advantage in this sector but may have to move some of these forces to the north and south to assist in the defense of these areas - hopefully leaving some parity along this sector of the front.
The Japanese forces [5 to 6 Infantry Divisions and 1 to 2 Infantry Brigades plus supporting troops] would concentrate in the area of Mutanchiang. This force would encounter most of the Russian combat forces in the Far East Command. These forces would conduct an offensive along the Mutanchiang-Vladivostok-Uglahamenski line with the primary goal of the capture of Vladivostok.
The overall goals here would be two-fold:
1. To destroy as much of the Russian Far East Command's combat efficiency [i.e., infantry, armor and artillery] since those Russian troops there are all the Russian gets during the game. The Japanese, during the course of the game, get several large combat infantry units in this area throughout the game; and
2. To capture Vladivostok and other cities in the eastern end of the Far East Command [resources and oil are to be found here].
In preparation for this assault I would do the following:
1. Strip all of Korea of any combat formation and move reccon airforces further north near Vladivostok.
2. Use all Mongolian Cavalry Divisions for deep penetration thrusts into the Russian western rear areas [i.e., Ulan Bator].
3. Move all Japanese combat units in Manchuria into western, northern and eastern Manchuria - along with appropriate support forces [i.e., combat engineers, artilllery, combat and supply transport aircraft and the proper headquarters{land and air}].
4. Move 3 fighter squadrons from other theaters into Mishan and Mutanchiang to support [2-Zero squadrons from the Southern Command and 1-Tojo Squadron from the China Expeditionary Army]. It appears that both types can match the fire power of the I-16 Type 24, MiG3 and Yak-1s [most Russian airpower is concentrated in the eastern part of the command.
Moses may ultimately be right concerning the need for 10 outside divisions to suppresss the Russian Far East Command, but the need to keep momentum in the Southern Command Area may be too important to divert these forces. Additionally, with China's cities needing to be carefully garrisoned to prevent "hostile" activies, withdrawal of division size units may be difficult [the best solution may the several Mongolian Cavalry Divisions].
The solution I propose may take more time in mission completion, but Japanese goals and manpower resource suggest a solution within the forces in and about Manchuria.
Any thoughts?
The bulk of Russian forces are concentrated in the East along the coastal area of that command area, while there is a limited combat presence in the west along the TransSiberian RR. Additionally, the Russian during the course of the game only receives engineers [i.e., for airbases] as reinforcements. The entire bulk of the Russian "combat army" is confined in the eastern section of the Far East Command. Is it possible to attack in such a manner as to isolate these forces by strong and determined point attacks in the north and south? I believe it is possible and without the outside infusion of massive forces as some have suggested.
The use of Mongolian Cavalry Divisions from the China Expeditionary Army in the west could clearly isolate Russian bases as far west as Irtkusk without running into more that second line engineers with experience and morale in the upper 30s or low 40s. A strong concentration at Hailar with 3 or 4 Japanese Infantry Divisions, and support forces, could take the main Russian base [Borzya] just opposite of Hailar along the Trans-Siberian RR. Most of Russian combat forces are concentrated in Bozya.
In the East, Russian combat forces are concentrated, in the north, in the Blagoveshchenske-Kuysyshevka area. Japanese forces [3 to 4 Infantry Divisions with supporting troops] would concentrate in the Sunwu-Heiho area and attempt to cut the Trans Siberian RR at this point and drive the Russian units toward the south [trying to keep these forces from joining those Russian combat formations in the west].
It would appear that the Japanese should conduct a holding action in the center [Mishan-Chiamusu] while using their bombers to suppress the concentration of Russian bombers in this area. Russian combat forces would have a numerical advantage in this sector but may have to move some of these forces to the north and south to assist in the defense of these areas - hopefully leaving some parity along this sector of the front.
The Japanese forces [5 to 6 Infantry Divisions and 1 to 2 Infantry Brigades plus supporting troops] would concentrate in the area of Mutanchiang. This force would encounter most of the Russian combat forces in the Far East Command. These forces would conduct an offensive along the Mutanchiang-Vladivostok-Uglahamenski line with the primary goal of the capture of Vladivostok.
The overall goals here would be two-fold:
1. To destroy as much of the Russian Far East Command's combat efficiency [i.e., infantry, armor and artillery] since those Russian troops there are all the Russian gets during the game. The Japanese, during the course of the game, get several large combat infantry units in this area throughout the game; and
2. To capture Vladivostok and other cities in the eastern end of the Far East Command [resources and oil are to be found here].
In preparation for this assault I would do the following:
1. Strip all of Korea of any combat formation and move reccon airforces further north near Vladivostok.
2. Use all Mongolian Cavalry Divisions for deep penetration thrusts into the Russian western rear areas [i.e., Ulan Bator].
3. Move all Japanese combat units in Manchuria into western, northern and eastern Manchuria - along with appropriate support forces [i.e., combat engineers, artilllery, combat and supply transport aircraft and the proper headquarters{land and air}].
4. Move 3 fighter squadrons from other theaters into Mishan and Mutanchiang to support [2-Zero squadrons from the Southern Command and 1-Tojo Squadron from the China Expeditionary Army]. It appears that both types can match the fire power of the I-16 Type 24, MiG3 and Yak-1s [most Russian airpower is concentrated in the eastern part of the command.
Moses may ultimately be right concerning the need for 10 outside divisions to suppresss the Russian Far East Command, but the need to keep momentum in the Southern Command Area may be too important to divert these forces. Additionally, with China's cities needing to be carefully garrisoned to prevent "hostile" activies, withdrawal of division size units may be difficult [the best solution may the several Mongolian Cavalry Divisions].
The solution I propose may take more time in mission completion, but Japanese goals and manpower resource suggest a solution within the forces in and about Manchuria.
Any thoughts?
"Over?! It's not over until we say it's over. Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?!" John Blutarsky from the Movie "Animal House"
-
BlackSunshine
- Posts: 363
- Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2002 12:16 pm
RE: Attack on the USSR
To be honest, I was surprised to see that Russia was even included in WITP. Too many "what-ifs" to deal with.
The Russians would already be fighting a war on their Western Front against the Germans. Depending on how that went, reinforcements would more than likely be made available.
I find it hard to believe that Japan could actually pull it off with the unlimited amount of manpower available to the Russians. And then, in 1942 you have the Germans entering the Caucuses. I would think this would have to be included too, to be realistic at all.
I think the only reason this theatre is included is because the map would look strange to have Russia carved out of it. $.02
The Russians would already be fighting a war on their Western Front against the Germans. Depending on how that went, reinforcements would more than likely be made available.
I find it hard to believe that Japan could actually pull it off with the unlimited amount of manpower available to the Russians. And then, in 1942 you have the Germans entering the Caucuses. I would think this would have to be included too, to be realistic at all.
I think the only reason this theatre is included is because the map would look strange to have Russia carved out of it. $.02
RE: Attack on the USSR
You can look at the Russian theater a lot of ways. In Dec of 41 pretty much the whole world believed that Russia would collapse. They survived due to herculean efforts to revive their industry, dogged and desperate fighting, a very harsh winter, and some significant German erors.
History only happens once so who really knows what would happen if you could rerun it a hundred times. I suspect that Russia's margin of survival in late 41 was very thin. with a collapse being a very real possibility.
My real point is that most players take Russia's industrial revival for granted, (as they also take the incredible US expansion for granted) But these industries could have been derailed in a number of ways making Japan's chances look much better in all respects.
History only happens once so who really knows what would happen if you could rerun it a hundred times. I suspect that Russia's margin of survival in late 41 was very thin. with a collapse being a very real possibility.
My real point is that most players take Russia's industrial revival for granted, (as they also take the incredible US expansion for granted) But these industries could have been derailed in a number of ways making Japan's chances look much better in all respects.
RE: Attack on the USSR
Russia collapsed in WW1, they got their ass handed to them by the Kaiser and fell into revolution.
No real reason why it couldn't have happened in WW2 as well.
No real reason why it couldn't have happened in WW2 as well.
RE: Attack on the USSR
ORIGINAL: EUBanana
Russia collapsed in WW1, they got their ass handed to them by the Kaiser and fell into revolution.
No real reason why it couldn't have happened in WW2 as well.
Except that it didn't.
[:D]
x-Nuc twidget
CVN-71
USN 87-93
"Going slow in the fast direction"
CVN-71
USN 87-93
"Going slow in the fast direction"
RE: Attack on the USSR
A lot of "what if" , but i agree that russia was on the brink of collaps end 1941 , and they moved lot
of forces from siberia to the west to save the front.
IF [:D]the japanese would have attacked then , it just might have been the thing to bring the russians
on there knees.
IF IF IF [:D][:D][:D]
of forces from siberia to the west to save the front.
IF [:D]the japanese would have attacked then , it just might have been the thing to bring the russians
on there knees.
IF IF IF [:D][:D][:D]
in to deep and out of time
-
Mike Scholl
- Posts: 6187
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 1:17 am
- Location: Kansas City, MO
RE: Attack on the USSR
ORIGINAL: moses
You can look at the Russian theater a lot of ways. In Dec of 41 pretty much the whole world believed that Russia would collapse. They survived due to herculean efforts to revive their industry, dogged and desperate fighting, a very harsh winter, and some significant German erors.
Everyone except the Russians. One of the things that convinced Roosevelt that things weren't as bleak as they seemed on the surface was the fact that when the Soviets submitted their "requests" for Lend Lease Aid, they weren't asking for piles of "finished goods", but for lots of raw materials. They certainly seemed to believe they would have the time and industry to produce their own weapons.
History only happens once so who really knows what would happen if you could rerun it a hundred times. I suspect that Russia's margin of survival in late 42 was very thin. with a collapse being a very real possibility.
Right. It was so "thin" that in November they would surround a German Army at Stalingrad and threaten to do the same to an entire Army Group in the Caucasus. What YOU suspect is not a basis of Historical reference.
My real point is that most players take Russia's industrial revival for granted, (as they also take the incredible US expansion for granted) But these industries could have been derailed in a number of ways making Japan's chances look much better in all respects.
Please be so good as to name some of these "number of ways". I'd be facinated to hear how the Axis was going to stop these production efforts..., especially as they already exceeded Axis production and were just really "warming up"? If you want to make silly "claims", please be so good as to back them up with some real research, quotes, and sources. "I Think" is not much of an arguement unless you can string a lot of degrees in Military History behind your name.
RE: Attack on the USSR
Where I said late 42 in my second paragraph I meant late 41.
Apart from that, excuse me for making "silly" claims. I would back things up with research and maybe a full bibliograpy if perhaps you paid me for the work, and I thought anyone really cared. As is I gave an opinion.
Niether the Russian or allied Industrial miracles were forordaned. Thats my opinion. If you want a good reference read "Why the allies won" by Richard Overy for a start. Other then that just use good sence and logic.
Nothing is easier in the world than screwing up. Germany with supposedly the most advanced and technically proficient industry in the world managed to be totally outclassed by a Russian industry which was crude by any standard. Russia and/or the US could easily have made errors, screwing up their production efforts. For example.
1.) US decides that high quality as opposed to mass produced is needed to match Germany.--This was Germany's call and it cost them.
2.) US planners are "rational" and consider the initial production targets as ridiculous. As would the rest of the world if they had been told. Production is reduced to more "achievable" levels.
3.) US make a catastrophicaly wrong design decision. Something like manueverability is the prime goal in fighter design. Production is set back a year or two as everything must be redesigned and restarted.
4.) Some critical bottleneck developes or someone just flat screws things up. etc. etc.
5.) As for Russia we can just allow for the possibility that the workers simply collapse under the inhuman strain placed upon them. Its hard even now to believe what they went through.
Now we know what happened historically. Its hard to do research on something that might have happened. But I hardly see that the idea that US or Russian production need not have been so amazing is hard to fathom.
Apart from that, excuse me for making "silly" claims. I would back things up with research and maybe a full bibliograpy if perhaps you paid me for the work, and I thought anyone really cared. As is I gave an opinion.
Niether the Russian or allied Industrial miracles were forordaned. Thats my opinion. If you want a good reference read "Why the allies won" by Richard Overy for a start. Other then that just use good sence and logic.
Nothing is easier in the world than screwing up. Germany with supposedly the most advanced and technically proficient industry in the world managed to be totally outclassed by a Russian industry which was crude by any standard. Russia and/or the US could easily have made errors, screwing up their production efforts. For example.
1.) US decides that high quality as opposed to mass produced is needed to match Germany.--This was Germany's call and it cost them.
2.) US planners are "rational" and consider the initial production targets as ridiculous. As would the rest of the world if they had been told. Production is reduced to more "achievable" levels.
3.) US make a catastrophicaly wrong design decision. Something like manueverability is the prime goal in fighter design. Production is set back a year or two as everything must be redesigned and restarted.
4.) Some critical bottleneck developes or someone just flat screws things up. etc. etc.
5.) As for Russia we can just allow for the possibility that the workers simply collapse under the inhuman strain placed upon them. Its hard even now to believe what they went through.
Now we know what happened historically. Its hard to do research on something that might have happened. But I hardly see that the idea that US or Russian production need not have been so amazing is hard to fathom.
RE: Attack on the USSR
An attack into Siberia in the winter (the posters seem to indicate a Dec/Jan jumpoff) hardly seems to be the most auspicious moment from the standpoint of logistics. The horse drawn (for the most part) Japanese Army would be hard pressed to advance when the horses expired from lack of proper feed and exposure to the extremes of the Siberian weather. The European Russian climate decimated Germany's horse drawn supply train and according to all I've ever read or heard the Siberian winter is substantially more extreme in so far as both temperature and snowfall. The snowfall would make movement off major transportation lines extremely difficult and would force the Japanese to rely on frontal attack as their principal tactical option. Operating as it did with a doctrine of obtaining "local supply" the IJA was not the best force to lead into a frozen and essentially uninhabited wasteland.
The German experience fighting Russian infantry in Europe showed that Russian units would hold to a position with "oriental fatalism" in the face of overwhelming firepower and odds, UNLESS the attack could be developed from an unexpected direction. As mentioned earlier the winter weather in Siberia would for the IJA to rely on the frontal attack (pretty hard to wade through 5-6ft of snow for even a few hundred feet let alone a major flanking march). With its relatively light arms the IJA was not well equipped to force the issue by virtue of its firepower against an enemy (likely entrenched) with a similar if not quite identical disregard for human life.
Only because of rules which ahistorically restrict Russian movement prior to the Japanese initial attack and totally ignore the physical realities of the theater is any possibility of a successful Japanese winter campaign a possibility IN THE GAME. IRL the chances of success were nil for the reasons mentioned above.
The German experience fighting Russian infantry in Europe showed that Russian units would hold to a position with "oriental fatalism" in the face of overwhelming firepower and odds, UNLESS the attack could be developed from an unexpected direction. As mentioned earlier the winter weather in Siberia would for the IJA to rely on the frontal attack (pretty hard to wade through 5-6ft of snow for even a few hundred feet let alone a major flanking march). With its relatively light arms the IJA was not well equipped to force the issue by virtue of its firepower against an enemy (likely entrenched) with a similar if not quite identical disregard for human life.
Only because of rules which ahistorically restrict Russian movement prior to the Japanese initial attack and totally ignore the physical realities of the theater is any possibility of a successful Japanese winter campaign a possibility IN THE GAME. IRL the chances of success were nil for the reasons mentioned above.
RE: Attack on the USSR
I'm sorry Moses, but what sort of research do you have that says the German economy was, "the most advanced and technically proficient industry in the world".
I see no evidence that German ability to produce was "more technically advanced" in any way. Were specific industries more advanced (like rocket development)? Sure. But you're not talking about specific industries. You're talking about the ECONOMY, and the ability of those specific industries to mass produce.
Having advanced "rocked technology" is great. But if you can't PRODUCE it in quantity, who cares? Kudos to Mr. Speer for producing 1500 Me-262s in 2 years. Oops. Only 400 of them will ever leave the ground, because your economy has been wrecked, and you have neither the gas nor the parts to maintain them. Hm. The US just produced the same number of P-51s LAST MONTH. Ooops, there's another 400.. And another 400... For a total of 19,800 P-51s...
A problem with German industry throught the enitre war, was it's specialization. The German economic model was certainly not more "advanced" than the US economic model. And comparing the industrial output of basically the Ruhr to even only the northeast, well, there is no comparison.
Russian produstion - In 1941 and 1942, they litterally disasempled entire factories, and rebuilt the things on teh other side of the Urals. By 1943, they were certainly producing their own high quality tanks, guns, and aircraft. By January 1944, the Soviets were already crossing the border to "liberate" Poland (altho you could hardly call it that)., months before we were even in France. Those guys weren't just out for blood. They were going to erradicate the Germans, with our without our help.
US production - By 1944, the US economic output was greater than all the rest of the of the combatents combined. Granted, it's helped by the fact that nobody could touch (bomb) us. But either way, even with gross mis-management, the US could have outproduced both of the Axis powers (Italy didn't produce sqat anyway, if you want to use a screwed up economy as an example, they're the flag-bearers). There was never any doubt about US production capabilities. We simply buried everyone.
-F-
I see no evidence that German ability to produce was "more technically advanced" in any way. Were specific industries more advanced (like rocket development)? Sure. But you're not talking about specific industries. You're talking about the ECONOMY, and the ability of those specific industries to mass produce.
Having advanced "rocked technology" is great. But if you can't PRODUCE it in quantity, who cares? Kudos to Mr. Speer for producing 1500 Me-262s in 2 years. Oops. Only 400 of them will ever leave the ground, because your economy has been wrecked, and you have neither the gas nor the parts to maintain them. Hm. The US just produced the same number of P-51s LAST MONTH. Ooops, there's another 400.. And another 400... For a total of 19,800 P-51s...
A problem with German industry throught the enitre war, was it's specialization. The German economic model was certainly not more "advanced" than the US economic model. And comparing the industrial output of basically the Ruhr to even only the northeast, well, there is no comparison.
Russian produstion - In 1941 and 1942, they litterally disasempled entire factories, and rebuilt the things on teh other side of the Urals. By 1943, they were certainly producing their own high quality tanks, guns, and aircraft. By January 1944, the Soviets were already crossing the border to "liberate" Poland (altho you could hardly call it that)., months before we were even in France. Those guys weren't just out for blood. They were going to erradicate the Germans, with our without our help.
US production - By 1944, the US economic output was greater than all the rest of the of the combatents combined. Granted, it's helped by the fact that nobody could touch (bomb) us. But either way, even with gross mis-management, the US could have outproduced both of the Axis powers (Italy didn't produce sqat anyway, if you want to use a screwed up economy as an example, they're the flag-bearers). There was never any doubt about US production capabilities. We simply buried everyone.
-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me
RE: Attack on the USSR
A problem with German industry throught the enitre war, was it's specialization.
I read him to mean that this was a German failure that kept them from mass producing good if not great munitions in quantity. For example, what if the Germans had simply concentrated on mass producting Panthers instead of the myriad of heavy tank configurations?
Would they have matched US production? No. Would they have produced a startling quantity of very good tanks? Yes.
It may not have changed the outcome, but they were certainly capable of concentrating their industry if they had chosen to do so.
"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown
RE: Attack on the USSR
First off I said "supposedly most advanced. And my point, specifically stated, was that they failed to deliver on their potential. Which is what you seem to be arguing. My only point which seems to be strangly controversial is that the allies might have screwed it up just as well.
RE: Attack on the USSR
ORIGINAL: moses
Where I said late 42 in my second paragraph I meant late 41.
Apart from that, excuse me for making "silly" claims. I would back things up with research and maybe a full bibliograpy if perhaps you paid me for the work, and I thought anyone really cared. As is I gave an opinion.
Niether the Russian or allied Industrial miracles were forordaned. Thats my opinion. If you want a good reference read "Why the allies won" by Richard Overy for a start. Other then that just use good sence and logic.
Nothing is easier in the world than screwing up. Germany with supposedly the most advanced and technically proficient industry in the world managed to be totally outclassed by a Russian industry which was crude by any standard. Russia and/or the US could easily have made errors, screwing up their production efforts. For example.
1.) US decides that high quality as opposed to mass produced is needed to match Germany.--This was Germany's call and it cost them.
2.) US planners are "rational" and consider the initial production targets as ridiculous. As would the rest of the world if they had been told. Production is reduced to more "achievable" levels.
3.) US make a catastrophicaly wrong design decision. Something like manueverability is the prime goal in fighter design. Production is set back a year or two as everything must be redesigned and restarted.
4.) Some critical bottleneck developes or someone just flat screws things up. etc. etc.
5.) As for Russia we can just allow for the possibility that the workers simply collapse under the inhuman strain placed upon them. Its hard even now to believe what they went through.
Now we know what happened historically. Its hard to do research on something that might have happened. But I hardly see that the idea that US or Russian production need not have been so amazing is hard to fathom.
1) Would have reduced US production totals, but would still have outproduced all of the Axis combined.
2) The actual production levels were way over what the goals were.
3) What makes you think the US didn't make some wrong design decisions? The original P-51 design was woefully underpowered for example.
This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.
"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy
Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.
"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy
Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.
RE: Attack on the USSR
ARRRGGG. This thread is about a Japan attack on Russia. I simply said that Russia's margin of survival in late 41 and 42 was very thin. Things could have happened differently.
I don't think anyone has argued harder that in the game it is way too easy for Japan to defeat Russia. Let me say it again. THAT JAPAN CAN DEFEAT RUSSIA IN ONE OR TWO MONTHS WITHOUT EVEN THE INCONVINIANCE OF HEAVY CASUALTIES IS CLEARLY NOT HISTORICAL.
Still it is not inconsistant to believe that a Japanese attack on Russia may have had a chance of success and may even possibly have helped to cause a Russian collapse under some conditions.
IN AN IDEAL WORLD. (and I'm absolutly certain such changes will not be made so I'm just dreaming and wishing). Russian starting forces would be reduced but given some flexability to respond to Japanese starting move. Then if Japan attacks Russia, Russian reinforcements will begin arriving on based on a random calculation based on how well Russia is presumably doing with Germany.
So maybe Russia is near collapse and so in one game recieves only a couple divisions. In another game they have things under control and send 20 divisions.
Just a dream. I'll leave any further production discussion to another thread.
I don't think anyone has argued harder that in the game it is way too easy for Japan to defeat Russia. Let me say it again. THAT JAPAN CAN DEFEAT RUSSIA IN ONE OR TWO MONTHS WITHOUT EVEN THE INCONVINIANCE OF HEAVY CASUALTIES IS CLEARLY NOT HISTORICAL.
Still it is not inconsistant to believe that a Japanese attack on Russia may have had a chance of success and may even possibly have helped to cause a Russian collapse under some conditions.
IN AN IDEAL WORLD. (and I'm absolutly certain such changes will not be made so I'm just dreaming and wishing). Russian starting forces would be reduced but given some flexability to respond to Japanese starting move. Then if Japan attacks Russia, Russian reinforcements will begin arriving on based on a random calculation based on how well Russia is presumably doing with Germany.
So maybe Russia is near collapse and so in one game recieves only a couple divisions. In another game they have things under control and send 20 divisions.
Just a dream. I'll leave any further production discussion to another thread.
RE: Attack on the USSR
Production aside, I'll still have to "agree to disagree".
IMHO Japan never stood a chance against Russia, even under the "optimal conditions" of late '41. Hitler repeatedly asked Japan to attack Russia, throughout 1941 (when agruably Russia was at it's weakest), and made even greater noise in throughout 1942. And still, the Japanese said, "No way." Again, it was Japan that approached Russia with the non-agression pact; and Japan abided by it, because it was certainly in their best interest.
-F-
IMHO Japan never stood a chance against Russia, even under the "optimal conditions" of late '41. Hitler repeatedly asked Japan to attack Russia, throughout 1941 (when agruably Russia was at it's weakest), and made even greater noise in throughout 1942. And still, the Japanese said, "No way." Again, it was Japan that approached Russia with the non-agression pact; and Japan abided by it, because it was certainly in their best interest.
-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me
RE: Attack on the USSR
I don't think attacking Russia was a good idea for Japan. I just don't believe that it was impossible.
IRL I suspect that had it been tried it would have required at a minimum a very hard battle lasting at least several months Even a Japanese victory would have essentially mangled all the participating divisions. And the possibility of Russia just flat stopping Japan is very significant.
In the game it is easy to defeat Russia with very few losses provided Japan commits the force which I recommend.
So there is a very wide disconnect between the game and even my very liberal view of Japan's possibilities.
Those who believe that Japan had no chance under any conditions should be even more concerned then I about this disconnect.
We could argue all year over whether Japan has no possibility of success(your position??) or whether it has some slight chance of very bloody success (my position). The fact is that in the game Russia can be conquered quite easily which is not quite historical by either of our standards.
NOTE: This is just a fun historical/game discussion and I for one am not lobbying for further changes in this area. I simply don't attack Russia.
IRL I suspect that had it been tried it would have required at a minimum a very hard battle lasting at least several months Even a Japanese victory would have essentially mangled all the participating divisions. And the possibility of Russia just flat stopping Japan is very significant.
In the game it is easy to defeat Russia with very few losses provided Japan commits the force which I recommend.
So there is a very wide disconnect between the game and even my very liberal view of Japan's possibilities.
Those who believe that Japan had no chance under any conditions should be even more concerned then I about this disconnect.
We could argue all year over whether Japan has no possibility of success(your position??) or whether it has some slight chance of very bloody success (my position). The fact is that in the game Russia can be conquered quite easily which is not quite historical by either of our standards.
NOTE: This is just a fun historical/game discussion and I for one am not lobbying for further changes in this area. I simply don't attack Russia.
RE: Attack on the USSR
I will most definately agree that Russis "mis-represented" in WitP. OB issues aside (and there are certainly many of them), the "wonkiness" of the land combat model also complicates the issue. A few weeks ago, I ran several controlled tests where I put 100 T-34s vs. 100 of the crappy Japanese light tanks (clear terrain, equal exp/morale/disruption/fatigue/commanders). The T-34s got clobbered (lost 16 - 20 tanks) every time (less than 5 light tanks destroyed for Japan).
But yes, the "wide disconnect" does concern me, and it's only complicated by my mistrust of the ground combat model.
In my PBEM games, Russia is stood down; and China too for that matter (or in one case, a "war zone" is declared, where speficied cities are capturable). Simply because the OBs and ground model is borked.
-F-
But yes, the "wide disconnect" does concern me, and it's only complicated by my mistrust of the ground combat model.
In my PBEM games, Russia is stood down; and China too for that matter (or in one case, a "war zone" is declared, where speficied cities are capturable). Simply because the OBs and ground model is borked.
-F-
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me
-
testarossa
- Posts: 958
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 6:06 pm
RE: Attack on the USSR
ORIGINAL: Feinder
A few weeks ago, I ran several controlled tests where I put 100 T-34s vs. 100 of the crappy Japanese light tanks (clear terrain, equal exp/morale/disruption/fatigue/commanders). The T-34s got clobbered (lost 16 - 20 tanks) every time (less than 5 light tanks destroyed for Japan).
Just for info (on the side note). German army possessed vast number of outdated machines during attack on USSR. Pz I, Pz II, Pz III had 37-mm gun, Pz IV had short-barrelled 75-mm infantry gun, and so on. Still they clobbered Russians during 1941 who had only(!) 600 T-34, 200+ KV-1 and 12000+ light tanks (these numbers are not exact, but easily available in any book on Barbarossa). It's training and command that decided the outcome.
And Russians could always rise vast numbers of conscripts if things go sour, the way they did during battle of Moscow. They were poorly trained and armed but i think in the WitP terms they were roughly equivalent to Chinese militia divisions. So It could be done the way WitP handles invasion of Vietnam by Allies, I don't remember exactly but 2 or 3 VM division appear at Hanoi. If Japan attack USSR 10-15 "conscript" divisions should appear or something.
-
Mike Scholl
- Posts: 6187
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 1:17 am
- Location: Kansas City, MO
RE: Attack on the USSR
ORIGINAL: Mynok
A problem with German industry throught the enitre war, was it's specialization.
I read him to mean that this was a German failure that kept them from mass producing good if not great munitions in quantity. For example, what if the Germans had simply concentrated on mass producting Panthers instead of the myriad of heavy tank configurations?
One big problem would be that the Panther wasn't really designed to be "mass-produced". It wasn't until the germans were trying to design a "Panther II" that they began seriously trying to adapt it to be more easily produced. They got the design finished about the time the war finished. Easily observable difference---look at the turret construction on virtually all German tanks. They are constructed from multiple plates and parts. Look at the turrets on a Sherman or a T-34. They are one piece castings.
Simple and quick if you have the capacity to do it. German industry in general didn't think in mass-production terms. Worse, the Nazis and the Wehrmacht didn't trust it. Which explains why the largest automotive plant in Europe (the Adam Opel/Ford plant) did virtually NO war production work. The "professionals" didn't trust them to be able to meet the military's needs beyond a few thousand "camp stoves".
True Mass Production is a "ground up" process. When Ford set out to mass-produce B-24's, he started with designing the factory around the product it would produce. Took a while to get up and running, but in 1944 that ONE factory produced 51% (by weight) that all of Germany could manage in it's best year. Same thing with Henry Kaiser and his shipyards, Boeing's B-29 plant in Wichita, Higgins building landing craft in New Orleans, etc. Americans invented mass-production. American industrialists thought in those terms. The Russians had been forced into it in the 30's because thay had to maximize the use of their limited skilled labor force by fleshing it out with lots of unskilled labor---and the only way to do it was with massive single-purpose plants. Germany just didn't do things this way in general, and while they were starting to think about it in areas like the Volkswagen plant under construction when the war started, the firms that specialized in military production were much more old fashioned. And the Military wanted them that way. They liked firms that could answer their requests for upgrades and improvements quickly---rather than complaining that it would totally disrupt the production lines. So they constantly got new toys, but they didn't get very many of them.