An Attempt to use MWiF to Simulated WW2 Reasonably Historically

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Northern USSR.

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Strategic Summary.

[Grotius]

Ronnie, this is a wildly entertaining AAR. Kudos to you for taking it so far, in a relatively short amount of time! For what it's worth, I approach my solitaire wargaming in roughly the same way. I want to simulate a plausible WW2, but I don't insist on an exact replica of the event.

I have one thought on Norway that will probably be cold comfort to you, but I can't resist mentioning it. I think in MWIF there's tremendous disincentive, and not much gain, for Germany to take Norway. So I don't blame you for not doing so. By contrast, in RAW8/Collector's Edition, there are new options that may give Germany more incentive to invade Norway. They stem from whether the CW chooses to mine the Norwegian Coast (one of the new US Entry actions), which disrupts the German resource flow from Sweden. There's a chance that this mining will immediately allow Germany to align Norway, though, or at least to gain some lesser benefits. Also, in the board game without the Scandinavian map, it seems like it might be less daunting for Germany to take Norway, though I'm not sure about that -- experts here can comment. I haven't gotten that far in the CE yet.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Grotius

Ronnie, this is a wildly entertaining AAR. Kudos to you for taking it so far, in a relatively short amount of time! For what it's worth, I approach my solitaire wargaming in roughly the same way. I want to simulate a plausible WW2, but I don't insist on an exact replica of the event.

Thanks! I must say that this is the most entertaining game of MWiF I've ever played. [:)]

ORIGINAL: Grotius

Ronnie, this is a wildly entertaining AAR. Kudos to you for taking it so far, in a relatively short amount of time! For what it's worth, I approach my solitaire wargaming in roughly the same way. I want to simulate a plausible WW2, but I don't insist on an exact replica of the event.

I have one thought on Norway that will probably be cold comfort to you, but I can't resist mentioning it. I think in MWIF there's tremendous disincentive, and not much gain, for Germany to take Norway. So I don't blame you for not doing so. By contrast, in RAW8/Collector's Edition, there are new options that may give Germany more incentive to invade Norway. They stem from whether the CW chooses to mine the Norwegian Coast (one of the new US Entry actions), which disrupts the German resource flow from Sweden. There's a chance that this mining will immediately allow Germany to align Norway, though, or at least to gain some lesser benefits. Also, in the board game without the Scandinavian map, it seems like it might be less daunting for Germany to take Norway, though I'm not sure about that -- experts here can comment. I haven't gotten that far in the CE yet.

I was trying to come up with some set of "house" rules that made attacking Norway make sense. In the end I think next time that I'll just "require" Germany to attack it.

By the way, how's your game going? Didn't you at one time think about doing an AAR on your game? I'd be interested, even if it was infrequent, to follow the status on your game.

[Courtenay]

If I were to use a house rule to give the Germans an incentive to attack Norway, it would be this:

If Norway is neutral and the Baltic is frozen (so that the iron ore has to go through Narvik), if there is a CW SCS in the Norwegian Sea, the Allies may use Search and Seizure on the Swedish iron ore resources.

Early in the war, this is not much of a threat, because the US entry effects are not worth the gain of depriving the Axis of a few resources, but once the US is in the war, there is no reason not to do it, so the Germans will have to decide whether invading Norway is worth it.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

If I were to use a house rule to give the Germans an incentive to attack Norway, it would be this:

If Norway is neutral and the Baltic is frozen (so that the iron ore has to go through Narvik), if there is a CW SCS in the Norwegian Sea, the Allies may use Search and Seizure on the Swedish iron ore resources.

Early in the war, this is not much of a threat, because the US entry effects are not worth the gain of depriving the Axis of a few resources, but once the US is in the war, there is no reason not to do it, so the Germans will have to decide whether invading Norway is worth it.

That's a nice one. I never thought about it...[&o]

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

If I were to use a house rule to give the Germans an incentive to attack Norway, it would be this:

If Norway is neutral and the Baltic is frozen (so that the iron ore has to go through Narvik), if there is a CW SCS in the Norwegian Sea, the Allies may use Search and Seizure on the Swedish iron ore resources.

Early in the war, this is not much of a threat, because the US entry effects are not worth the gain of depriving the Axis of a few resources, but once the US is in the war, there is no reason not to do it, so the Germans will have to decide whether invading Norway is worth it.

Interesting.

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Summary (1/3).

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Summary (2/3).

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Summary (3/3).

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Allied #1. Pacific Action Summary.

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Allied #1. USN. Sea of Japan.

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Allied #1. USAAF. Strategic Bombing Raids, Japan.

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Allied #1. US/CW. Ground Strikes, Japan.

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Allied #1. communist Chinese. PTO.

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Allied #1. Nationalist Chinese. PTO.

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Allied #1. US/CW. Seoul, Korea.

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Allied #1. US/CW. PTO, Japan (1/2).

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Allied #1. US/CW. PTO, Japan (2/2).

[rkr1958]

Turn 29. May/June 1944. Allied #1. RN/USN. Atlantic, Med Action Summary.