My conclusions on game balance

[pyrhic]

i think england's comfort was in their belief of the supremacy of the royal navy. That legacy is a long and powerful one and i think would have bolstered their confidence regardless what happened on land. HOWEVER, if the navy was badly damaged, say by naval bombers/subs/heavy fleets....without a navy to protect them, a english government would be a lot more willing to bargain...

it's one of the great, and unanswerable, questions of ww2. What if germany just halted after france, taking up devensive positions vis-a-vis the uk isles and at the same time putting up a strong diplomatic effort? "Why should good british citizens die for poland?", "Why should commonwealth citizens die for poland?" "All germany wanted was the danzig corridor, something rightfully hers.", "this is all a by-product of the unfair mersailles treaty..." In this kind of situation, and given the kind of losses the uk would have had attacking germany in a reversed battle of britain, it's easier to see the attitude of the uk softening somewhat. Now, if it's fleet was also to have been hit hard.....hmmmm...

[hakon]

ORIGINAL: pyrhic
I think it's proper that the game doesnt allow for a condition which spain would willingly join the axis(like it does for romania/hungary) because i don't think they would have. Leaving germany's only option to put them under the gun...a case i think they would have resisted most aggressively...

Actually, I am not so sure. I think it is quite possible that Spain would joint the axis if they were bribed with for example algeria, morocco and gibraltar.

[Drax Kramer]

Actually, I am not so sure. I think it is quite possible that Spain would joint the axis if they were bribed with for example algeria, morocco and gibraltar.

They would. The problem is that the moment French find out about the deal, French fleet joins the Allies as well as entire French Empire. If French fought Americans on the Morrocan beaches, be sure they'd fight Spaniards too.

That's the fundamental problem with hypothetical Axis Mediterranean "rainbow coalitions" that were a favourite of Third Reich players. In reality, there was no way for Italians, French and Spaniards to fight together on the Axis side because they had overlapping interests in the region.

If you cuddle Franco, you must get rid of Petain. If you want Petain, you must get rid of Mussolini etc, etc. I'd say, Hitler's policy in the Mediterranean was the optimal one, until late 1942 when he started to reinforce defeat by pouring troops into Tunisian bridgehead.


Drax

[SeaMonkey]

Good points Drax, it was a tangled web. Pyrhic makes a good point about the demise of the Royal Navy's invincibility as it was a focal point of British resolution to continue.

Now for this Spanish thing, let's be very clear. Franco was a hair's breath away from joining the Axis...read your history.

1. Spain joined the Anti-Comintern Pact, Apr. 1939 and signed a Treaty of Friendship with Germany.

2. At the beginning of the war, although officially neutral, Franco changed Spain's status to that of non-belligerency after Italy entered.

3. See Spain's occupation of the international zone of Tangier, exploiting European war chaos, and Franco informed Hitler he would join the Axis after a brief period to convince public opinion.

4. Numerous episodes of Spanish cooperation, allowing overflights and staging areas for Axis attacks on Gibraltar, repatriation of Axis combat personel vs POW status for Allies.

I could go on and on and on ....

It is a well known fact that Franco intended to forge a Spanish Empire and the fascist faction was very active in his government. If Hitler had agreed to ceding Gibraltar, Fr.W.Africa, and Morroco to Spain, they would have joined the Axis ...period.

As far as Drax's post, it is my opinion that Petain and Vichy France were not in a great bargaining position, perhaps even they could have been swayed to the Axis side. Never the less it was Hitler's decision to allow Vichy to be formed. Does anyone truly believe that the Germans and Italians were not capable of carving up the rest of France in June of 1940?

[Pocus]

Hitler choose to let Vichy exists so that the French colonies, along with the French fleet, would remains neutral, as they were no way the Axis could get an hand on them. It was a very good move from Hitler.

[willgamer]

it's one of the great, and unanswerable, questions of ww2. What if germany just halted after france, taking up devensive positions vis-a-vis the uk isles and at the same time putting up a strong diplomatic effort?

Well we do know the answer to one question. It wouldn't have been called WWII.

Back to the core, imo, issue: The USSR must be invaded by Germany with the objective of putting at least western USSR (Lennigrad, Moscow, Stalingrad) out of action to be a WWII game.

The game as it now stands almost, but not quite, lives up to that.

Does anyone seriously believe Germany should be able to avoid that invasion?

[Uncle_Joe]

Personally, I see no reason to make Germany HAVE to fight Russia to declare victory. The conquest of Russia was goal of Hitlers. In the game, the player replaces Hitler, so why saddle them withhis exact goals? We dont force players to 'stand fast' during the Russian winter, and we dont have a chance the player can be assassinated in 44 and end the game.

To me, the game is about 'what ifs'. If that means that Germany can 'win' within the victory conditions without seriously attacking Russia, than I'm OK with that. Where I think the game should go is to make it a good fight to get the AV. That could mean taking out England, making a play for Neutrals and NA, or a full out attack on Russia.

Where the problem has developed in the current AV, is that its a little too easy to get to 70 without involving either the US or the USSR and that makes it a lot less fun of a game. Also, the totally 'gamey' desperation grab of resources greatly reduces the fun factor as well.

So, IMO, all that really needs to be done is to make sure that in order to gain the AV, you have to be able to hold it for at least the whole turn. I think that, coupled with the new cost of attacking neutrals (and the general bug fixes) would be enough.

YMMV.

[Joel Billings]

I'm sure most of you have figured this out already, but if you want to create a house rule that Auto-Victory is only checked at the very beginning of the German turn, simply agree to play without AV in the game options but that if at the end of the WA turn, the Axis still have 70 production, declare the game an Axis AV.

[SeaMonkey]

Damn, there goes the neighborhood[;)]...I mean the discussion. Seriously though, if you guys never made another change, this would still be a great game.

I mean,.. I've gotten my moneys worth out of it long ago...and it continues to satisfy...and I haven't even played one PBEM yet.....Thanks 2by3[:)] This is one for the ages.

[Wayllander]

SeaMonkey,

You definitely want to play a pbem. The game is very good against the AI - but truly fantastic against other humans. If you don't, your missing out [:'(]
--way

[SeaMonkey]

I know Wayllander, I'm an avid SC PBEMer, just been waiting for the next patch, keeping up with the forum, digesting the opinions and advice...experimenting with the game mechanics. Soon PBEM....Soon!!

[TOCarroll]

[:-] OK. This will probably stir up a real s*** storm, but someone mentioned that Churchill & the English Ministries considered accepting a negotiated peace with Germany during the French campaign. Somehoe the historian David Irving even got drug in to the "dispute". Here are a coupla facts....

GGWaW is an awesome game, partly due to the carefully considered of play.

The sequence of events in the summer of 1940 have not been completely declassified, but some have. Here is what I understand these to be.

1. The Germans break through WA lines and isolate the BEF and French Forces.

2. While the panzers are still advancing on the trapped troops, Churchill & crew discuss the rather bleak option of continuing the war after losing ALL the BEF. This is when the "...maybe we can get some kind of terms..." discussion. Possibally Italy could be approached to mediate.

3. Germany issues a stop order to it's armour troops. The BEF & French are sealed up in the Dunkirk perimeter, but, due to the stop order, and to the fact that BEF Commander (Lord Gort) had planned a possible retreat, the Allies are given time to save the bulk of their troops with the Dunkirk evacuation.

4. Once it is clear that many British troops are going to be evacuated, Churchill & crew confirm their determination to fight to the bitter end, even if invaded (after all, now the have guys to fight WITH, even if short of equiplent).

5. Following the Dunkirk evacuation, the German's overrun the rest of France.

6. France surrenders. About a month after the English decide NOT to consider negotiating with Germany, Hitler offers vague terms.

Not really a willings to deal w/Germany. Very worried about defending Britan w/ no troops.

Feedback?

Prussian Tom

[TOCarroll]

[;)] Well, I left the word "sequence" out of the first line about GGWaW.

It is a good game partly due to the sequence of play.

The sequence of events in 1940 do not support the idea that negotiating with the Axis was seriously considered. A desperite idea during a brainstroming session, yes. Acceptance of terms, NO!

[TOCarroll]

By the way. A LOT of you guys have done a lot of reasearch on WW2. This generates a lot of opinions, all respected. WaW lets us explore the heck out of them.[:)]

[MarcelJV]

Not sure why you are worried about people complaining, this more or less covers the events. It was discussed between Churchill and Lord Halifax of a possible attempt at peace terms, but this was not long lived.

David Irving was involved because of his statements that the winning of the War caused the loss of the British Empire, not to suggest that this was not going to happend anyway, but it is suggested then that if he (Churchill) had concluded a peace then the Empire may have lasted a lot longer. That is the jist of the introduction in Vol II of his books on Churchill.

ORIGINAL: TOCarroll

[:-] OK. This will probably stir up a real s*** storm, but someone mentioned that Churchill & the English Ministries considered accepting a negotiated peace with Germany during the French campaign. Somehoe the historian David Irving even got drug in to the "dispute". Here are a coupla facts....

GGWaW is an awesome game, partly due to the carefully considered of play.

The sequence of events in the summer of 1940 have not been completely declassified, but some have. Here is what I understand these to be.

1. The Germans break through WA lines and isolate the BEF and French Forces.

2. While the panzers are still advancing on the trapped troops, Churchill & crew discuss the rather bleak option of continuing the war after losing ALL the BEF. This is when the "...maybe we can get some kind of terms..." discussion. Possibally Italy could be approached to mediate.

3. Germany issues a stop order to it's armour troops. The BEF & French are sealed up in the Dunkirk perimeter, but, due to the stop order, and to the fact that BEF Commander (Lord Gort) had planned a possible retreat, the Allies are given time to save the bulk of their troops with the Dunkirk evacuation.

4. Once it is clear that many British troops are going to be evacuated, Churchill & crew confirm their determination to fight to the bitter end, even if invaded (after all, now the have guys to fight WITH, even if short of equiplent).

5. Following the Dunkirk evacuation, the German's overrun the rest of France.

6. France surrenders. About a month after the English decide NOT to consider negotiating with Germany, Hitler offers vague terms.

Not really a willings to deal w/Germany. Very worried about defending Britan w/ no troops.

Feedback?

Prussian Tom

[MarcelJV]

Here is an excerpt from Churchill Vol II by David Irving.

"We saw how after a 'wilderness period' of ten years Winston S. Churchill, described by Harold Balfour as this 'singularly unloved' man, came to power on May 10, 1940, to the alarm of his monarch and the dismay of at least three of his cabinet ministers (Lords Beaverbrook and Halifax, and Mr Neville Chamberlain); how, by playing on the non-existent threat of Nazi invasion he entrenched himself in office, and rebuffed the peace settlement which Adolf Hitler repeatedly and secretly offered, and which more than one of King Gerorge VI's ministers, his consort Queen Elizabeth, and (on certain dates in May and June 1940 even Churchill himself) seemed disposed to accept; how having thus sabotaged the prospects of peace, he contrived to prolong the war and, cynics would observe, his own premiership, by propelling Britain and Germany into a campaign of mutual air bombardment."

Allot there including reference to the royal family inclinded to want peace.

[MarcelJV]

Here is some more of what David Irving has to say about Churchill.

"At a time when Hitler embargoed all raids on London, Churchill ordered a 100-bomber raid on Berlin on August 25, 1940, deliberately unleashing a bombing campaign which would reach a climax of barbarism only after the present volume comes to a close. In his orgy of destructiveness, Churchill even issued orders - never carried out - a few days after the firestorm in Hamburg, for the ruthless saturation bombing of the Eternal City of Rome."

Looks like Churchill started the tit-for-tat of capital bombing.[:-]

[TOCarroll]

Glad to hear from you. I guess that a lot of people who had more first-hand-experience than I do (I have none) are real touchy about getting bombed.

I just didn't think that considering the possibility of losing made one a defeatist. If it did, I wouldn't get too far in WaW.

But if I had told my folks that Winston said what he said, or started w/Strat. bombing, I would have been shot. Or, at least, grounded.

Lots of interesting stuff about WW2 continues to be classified (or denied) after 40 - 60 years.

[Drax Kramer]

ORIGINAL: TOCarroll


The sequence of events in the summer of 1940 have not been completely declassified, but some have. Here is what I understand these to be.

1. The Germans break through WA lines and isolate the BEF and French Forces.

True.

2. While the panzers are still advancing on the trapped troops, Churchill & crew discuss the rather bleak option of continuing the war after losing ALL the BEF. This is when the "...maybe we can get some kind of terms..." discussion. Possibally Italy could be approached to mediate.

Not really. Entire BEF was not trapped in Belgium. Outside the pocket there were 51st Highland, 1st Armoured as 1st Canadian divisions. More divisions were been prepared in Britain. British government knew very well that security of the Home islands primarily depended on the Royal Navy and Air Force, not the army. Churchill did not assume premiership in order to surrender few weeks later.

3. Germany issues a stop order to it's armour troops. The BEF & French are sealed up in the Dunkirk perimeter, but, due to the stop order, and to the fact that BEF Commander (Lord Gort) had planned a possible retreat, the Allies are given time to save the bulk of their troops with the Dunkirk evacuation.

True.

4. Once it is clear that many British troops are going to be evacuated, Churchill & crew confirm their determination to fight to the bitter end, even if invaded (after all, now the have guys to fight WITH, even if short of equiplent).

See my comment under 2.

5. Following the Dunkirk evacuation, the German's overrun the rest of France.

True.

6. France surrenders. About a month after the English decide NOT to consider negotiating with Germany, Hitler offers vague terms.

Not really a willings to deal w/Germany. Very worried about defending Britan w/ no troops.

British were worried, but not to such extent to give up their war goals, i.e. restoration of independence of German occupied countries and removal of nazi regime in Germany.


Drax

[CharonJr]

Hmm, well, considering that the source quoted here is David Irving - who is said to be fairly sympathetic to the Nazis - I do have some doubts about the point of view presented here. We are talking about the same David Irving who claims that no Jews were killed in Auschwitz and other concentration camps...

CharonJr