End of Turn (2/2).
- 99-East-Med.png (1.43 MiB) Viewed 350 times
A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. MTO.
End of Turn (2/2).
End of Turn (2/2).
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. BOA.
Narrative.
The Atlantic saw German U-boat patrols for the first time this war. These occurred in the Faeroes Gap but German U-boats were unable to find allied convoys.
The RN's main effort, with some help from the French navy, focused on reconstituting CW and French convoy lines, and production was left shattered at the end of last turn. Also, the RN sent patrols and escorts to stay at sea and provide some protection for the beginning of the next turn and before the RN's naval moves.
At the end of the turn, FDR convinced US lawmakers that using US warships to escort CW convoys off the US East Coast made sense. So, the US passed entry option 11, “US East Coast Escorts”.
Combat Logs.
CP Losses.
Historical Comparison.
GMT By Year.
GMT Cumulative.
Narrative.
The Atlantic saw German U-boat patrols for the first time this war. These occurred in the Faeroes Gap but German U-boats were unable to find allied convoys.
The RN's main effort, with some help from the French navy, focused on reconstituting CW and French convoy lines, and production was left shattered at the end of last turn. Also, the RN sent patrols and escorts to stay at sea and provide some protection for the beginning of the next turn and before the RN's naval moves.
At the end of the turn, FDR convinced US lawmakers that using US warships to escort CW convoys off the US East Coast made sense. So, the US passed entry option 11, “US East Coast Escorts”.
Combat Logs.
- 99-BOA-CL.png (154.01 KiB) Viewed 317 times
- 99-BOA-CP-Losses.png (36.7 KiB) Viewed 349 times
GMT By Year.
- 99-BOA-GMT-by-Year.png (21.55 KiB) Viewed 349 times
- 99-BOA-GMT-Cumulative.png (19.2 KiB) Viewed 349 times
Last edited by rkr1958 on Sun Jan 19, 2025 8:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. The Eastern Front.
Narrative.
The Eastern Front this turn was characterized by inaction by the Soviets, which made (i.e., used) any land or air (rebase) moves there this turn. Germany, on the other hand, saw a significant transfer of forces from a conquered Poland, west to the Western Front with France and the CW.
An uneasy peace settles over the Soviet and German forces guarding their respective frontiers.
Nazi-Soviet Pact.
Narrative.
The Eastern Front this turn was characterized by inaction by the Soviets, which made (i.e., used) any land or air (rebase) moves there this turn. Germany, on the other hand, saw a significant transfer of forces from a conquered Poland, west to the Western Front with France and the CW.
An uneasy peace settles over the Soviet and German forces guarding their respective frontiers.
Nazi-Soviet Pact.
- 99-Nazi-Soviet-Pact-CL.png (32.89 KiB) Viewed 343 times
- 99-Nazi-Soviet-Pact.png (24.58 KiB) Viewed 343 times
Last edited by rkr1958 on Sun Jan 19, 2025 8:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. East Africa.
Narrative.
This front remained static this turn due to action limits and actions (i.e., land moves) going to other fronts/theaters. The reinforcement of a second ISO Terr forced the CW to scrap their plan of moving the KEN Terr from Mombasa to India. Instead, that Terr will remain in Mombasa for the foreseeable future as a guard against an Italian incursion into Kenya.
The RTB of the AUS Terr to Djibouti at the end of last turn foiled, at least for now, any Italian plan for the conquest of French or British Somaliland.
An interesting cat-and-mouse game is starting to play on the western border of Ethiopia with British-controlled AES. The AES Terr is 2 impulse moves away from being able to capture the Italian supply unit, which intended to move west and then north to Italian-controlled Libya. However; those plans may have to be scrapped. Also, the ETH Terr will have to be on guard for any back door move of the AES Terr towards Addis Ababa.
End of Turn.
Narrative.
This front remained static this turn due to action limits and actions (i.e., land moves) going to other fronts/theaters. The reinforcement of a second ISO Terr forced the CW to scrap their plan of moving the KEN Terr from Mombasa to India. Instead, that Terr will remain in Mombasa for the foreseeable future as a guard against an Italian incursion into Kenya.
The RTB of the AUS Terr to Djibouti at the end of last turn foiled, at least for now, any Italian plan for the conquest of French or British Somaliland.
An interesting cat-and-mouse game is starting to play on the western border of Ethiopia with British-controlled AES. The AES Terr is 2 impulse moves away from being able to capture the Italian supply unit, which intended to move west and then north to Italian-controlled Libya. However; those plans may have to be scrapped. Also, the ETH Terr will have to be on guard for any back door move of the AES Terr towards Addis Ababa.
End of Turn.
- 99-East-Africa.png (2.31 MiB) Viewed 342 times
Last edited by rkr1958 on Tue Jan 21, 2025 8:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. CBI.
Narrative.
The immediate concern for the CBI is CW garrison level and the threat of partisans. In India, the CW has garrisoned the 3 most important centers of Bombay, Calcutta, and (not shown) Delhi. This leaves India 3 corps under garrison and a 6% chance that 1 partisan, which didn’t happen this turn, will appear. This puts three unprotected RPs, Coal (Yellandu), Iron (95,110), and Iron (90,113) at risk. However; the severity of this risk is mitigated a bit for now by the fact that Iron (90,113) was idle due to scrambled allied convoy lines through the Med. Still, White Hall in London would like to avoid any risk at all by increasing CW garrison to 6 corps (or 5 corps & 1 div) to remove any risk of partisans. This goal was complicated by the fact that the Ken Terr had to remain in Kenya for defensive purposes and is no longer available for India.
Also, of concern for White Hall in the CBI is the partisan risk in Burma, which now stands at 2% with no garrison versus a need for 2 corps. The reality of filling these two garrison requirements will likely take some time as the CW has other competing garrison requirements in the Pacific and, more significantly, troop requirements for their two active fronts (Western & Med).
Combat Logs.
India. End of Turn.
Narrative.
The immediate concern for the CBI is CW garrison level and the threat of partisans. In India, the CW has garrisoned the 3 most important centers of Bombay, Calcutta, and (not shown) Delhi. This leaves India 3 corps under garrison and a 6% chance that 1 partisan, which didn’t happen this turn, will appear. This puts three unprotected RPs, Coal (Yellandu), Iron (95,110), and Iron (90,113) at risk. However; the severity of this risk is mitigated a bit for now by the fact that Iron (90,113) was idle due to scrambled allied convoy lines through the Med. Still, White Hall in London would like to avoid any risk at all by increasing CW garrison to 6 corps (or 5 corps & 1 div) to remove any risk of partisans. This goal was complicated by the fact that the Ken Terr had to remain in Kenya for defensive purposes and is no longer available for India.
Also, of concern for White Hall in the CBI is the partisan risk in Burma, which now stands at 2% with no garrison versus a need for 2 corps. The reality of filling these two garrison requirements will likely take some time as the CW has other competing garrison requirements in the Pacific and, more significantly, troop requirements for their two active fronts (Western & Med).
Combat Logs.
- 99-CBI-CL.png (11.64 KiB) Viewed 338 times
- 99-CBI-India.png (2.61 MiB) Viewed 338 times
Last edited by rkr1958 on Tue Jan 21, 2025 8:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. PTO.
Narrative.
From a painful lesson learned in my last “rage quit”, on Germany’s DOW of the Netherlands, the CW placed the NEI Terr in Palembang to cover the 2 oil RPs instead of Batavia. This lesson learned paid off as a 0-strength Italian-controlled NEI partisan did spawn and was placed in the jungle two hexes away from Palembang. Why Mussolini is funding/supporting NEI separatists is surprising as Germany was the nation that declared war on the Netherlands. However, MI-6 contends that this is partial payback by Italy to Germany for the latter’s support of Italian operations in the Med.
The chance of the NEI partisan was only 2% but now that it’s appeared it currently stands at 5% for another one. However; the NEI Batavian MIL will appear at the start of the next turn reducing that chance. Over time that MIL could be moved and attack with the NEI Terr to attempt to eliminate the partisan. However; against the 0-strength partisan in the juggle, which has a strength of 1, the two NEI units in fine weather could only muster +6A, which is not even 50/50 and carries a 35% chance that both attackers would be lost; but only 3% of both attackers are lost with the partisan surviving. However; that risk is still deemed too high, so the CW will have to wait for a third unit to arrive if they decide to mount a campaign to eliminate that partisan. For now, containment to the juggle is the CW strategy.
Malaya and Singapore were also at a 2% risk of a partisan, which didn’t happen. In the subsequent RTB phase, the RN returned a TRS Gp loaded with NZL Auckland MIL to Singapore protecting that vital port and reducing partisan chance in subsequent turns to 1%.
Also, an empty Queens returned to Sydney, Australia to pick up the Sydney MIL for deployment to points undecided next turn.
Combat Logs.
End of Turn.
Malaya.
Hawaiian Islands.
Narrative.
From a painful lesson learned in my last “rage quit”, on Germany’s DOW of the Netherlands, the CW placed the NEI Terr in Palembang to cover the 2 oil RPs instead of Batavia. This lesson learned paid off as a 0-strength Italian-controlled NEI partisan did spawn and was placed in the jungle two hexes away from Palembang. Why Mussolini is funding/supporting NEI separatists is surprising as Germany was the nation that declared war on the Netherlands. However, MI-6 contends that this is partial payback by Italy to Germany for the latter’s support of Italian operations in the Med.
The chance of the NEI partisan was only 2% but now that it’s appeared it currently stands at 5% for another one. However; the NEI Batavian MIL will appear at the start of the next turn reducing that chance. Over time that MIL could be moved and attack with the NEI Terr to attempt to eliminate the partisan. However; against the 0-strength partisan in the juggle, which has a strength of 1, the two NEI units in fine weather could only muster +6A, which is not even 50/50 and carries a 35% chance that both attackers would be lost; but only 3% of both attackers are lost with the partisan surviving. However; that risk is still deemed too high, so the CW will have to wait for a third unit to arrive if they decide to mount a campaign to eliminate that partisan. For now, containment to the juggle is the CW strategy.
Malaya and Singapore were also at a 2% risk of a partisan, which didn’t happen. In the subsequent RTB phase, the RN returned a TRS Gp loaded with NZL Auckland MIL to Singapore protecting that vital port and reducing partisan chance in subsequent turns to 1%.
Also, an empty Queens returned to Sydney, Australia to pick up the Sydney MIL for deployment to points undecided next turn.
Combat Logs.
- 99-PTO-CL.png (47.68 KiB) Viewed 336 times
Malaya.
- 99-PTO-Malaya-NEI.png (1.87 MiB) Viewed 336 times
- 99-Hawaiian-Islands.png (626.03 KiB) Viewed 336 times
Last edited by rkr1958 on Tue Jan 21, 2025 9:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. Asian Theater.
Historical (ChatGPT)
Well, unlike the historically, Japan managed on their first attempt to capture Changsha from the Nationalists this turn. Japan’s assault was assured (100% PWIN) with a slight chance (5.5%) of losing a unit, which didn’t happen. US reaction to all this was none as was their reaction to Japan’s takeover of the open city (i.e., undefended city) of Hengyang.
In the north, the IJA managed to “liberate” the coal RP 73,143 from CCP partisans and close on Mao and his CCP armies in the mountains north of the Yellow River and northeast of Tungkwan.
Mao did manage to break the isolation and reorg his 1st CCP infantry army. A pull back by Mao to defend Tungkwan and Sian is expected (likely), which will leave Chengchow defended only by the Nationalists. The Nationalists have 2 garrison armies assigned to Chengchow with currently only 1 in the city proper itself and the second to the west protecting that flank.
Historical (ChatGPT)
The Nationalists (currently) also control Nanning and Ichang. However; Nanning will likely be abandoned when/if Chengchow comes under siege by the IJA. The Nationalists wish to hold on to Ichang for all long as reasonable to deny Japan fighter bases in range to escort strategic bomber raids against Chungking Chengtu.
Historical (ChatGPT)
Historical (ChatGPT)
Narrative.During World War II, Changsha, the capital of Hunan Province in central China, played a significant role in the Chinese resistance against the Japanese invasion. The city was targeted by the Japanese military several times due to its strategic importance as a transportation hub and center of military and industrial activity.
• First Battle of Changsha (1939): The first major confrontation occurred in 1939, when Japanese forces attempted to capture the city. However, the Chinese defenders, supported by a defensive strategy, managed to repel the Japanese forces, marking a significant early victory for China.
• Second Battle of Changsha (1941): In 1941, the Japanese launched a second assault on the city. This battle was characterized by brutal fighting, but once again, Chinese forces successfully defended Changsha, inflicting considerable losses on the Japanese troops. This was another morale boost for China.
• Third Battle of Changsha (1942): This battle saw the Japanese attempt to capture Changsha yet again. Despite initial advances, Chinese forces, aided by terrain advantages and a determined defense, repelled the Japanese once more, inflicting significant casualties.
The repeated failure to capture Changsha was a key setback for Japan in the war, especially as the city served as a vital base for Chinese military operations. Throughout these battles, Changsha's resilience helped rally Chinese resistance efforts and contributed to the eventual weakening of Japanese advances in central China. The city endured significant destruction during these battles, but its strategic importance kept it at the center of China’s wartime resistance.
Well, unlike the historically, Japan managed on their first attempt to capture Changsha from the Nationalists this turn. Japan’s assault was assured (100% PWIN) with a slight chance (5.5%) of losing a unit, which didn’t happen. US reaction to all this was none as was their reaction to Japan’s takeover of the open city (i.e., undefended city) of Hengyang.
In the north, the IJA managed to “liberate” the coal RP 73,143 from CCP partisans and close on Mao and his CCP armies in the mountains north of the Yellow River and northeast of Tungkwan.
Mao did manage to break the isolation and reorg his 1st CCP infantry army. A pull back by Mao to defend Tungkwan and Sian is expected (likely), which will leave Chengchow defended only by the Nationalists. The Nationalists have 2 garrison armies assigned to Chengchow with currently only 1 in the city proper itself and the second to the west protecting that flank.
Historical (ChatGPT)
Narrative.Chengchow (now Zhengzhou), a city in central China, played a significant role during World War II as part of the broader Chinese resistance against Japanese occupation. During the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–1945), the city became an important military and logistical center.
In 1939, the Japanese forces began advancing into central China, and Chengchow's strategic location made it a target. The city housed crucial railway lines that connected northern and southern China, which were vital for transporting troops and supplies. The Japanese aimed to capture it to disrupt Chinese supply lines and communications.
During the war, Chengchow faced multiple bombings and attacks. In 1941, the Japanese military launched a major air raid on the city, causing significant damage to infrastructure and civilian casualties. Despite this, Chengchow continued to be a center for Chinese resistance and part of the broader effort to delay Japanese advances into interior China.
By the end of the war in 1945, the city had suffered from both Japanese bombing campaigns and the broader devastation of the war, but it remained an important symbol of Chinese resilience.
The Nationalists (currently) also control Nanning and Ichang. However; Nanning will likely be abandoned when/if Chengchow comes under siege by the IJA. The Nationalists wish to hold on to Ichang for all long as reasonable to deny Japan fighter bases in range to escort strategic bomber raids against Chungking Chengtu.
Historical (ChatGPT)
Combat Logs.Nanning, a city in southern China and the capital of Guangxi Province, played a key role during World War II as part of the broader Chinese resistance against Japanese occupation. During the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–1945), Nanning was strategically important due to its location near the border with French Indochina (modern-day Vietnam), making it a vital supply and transportation hub for both Chinese forces and their allies.
In 1939, the Japanese began advancing southward, and by 1940, Nanning came under threat. The city was bombed by Japanese forces, and in 1944, after a series of hard-fought battles, it was briefly occupied by the Japanese. The occupation was part of Japan's efforts to control the southern provinces of China and cut off Chinese supply routes from French Indochina.
During the occupation, Nanning suffered from heavy bombing and economic disruption, and local resistance continued through guerilla warfare. However, the Japanese occupation was relatively short-lived, as Chinese and Allied forces pushed back in the latter stages of the war. Nanning was eventually liberated by Chinese forces in 1945, but the city had endured significant damage from the war.
Overall, Nanning's role in World War II was marked by its strategic significance, its occupation by Japanese forces, and the resilience of its people in the face of heavy bombardment and military occupation.
Ichang (now Yichang), located in central China along the Yangtze River, played a notable role during World War II as part of the Chinese resistance against Japanese forces. During the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–1945), Ichang was strategically important because it served as a transportation and supply hub for the Chinese military and provided a key route for the movement of goods and troops along the Yangtze River.
In 1938, the Japanese military launched a major offensive in central China, aiming to capture key cities. Ichang's location on the Yangtze River made it a valuable target for the Japanese as they sought to disrupt Chinese logistics and gain control of the river. In 1939, Ichang was bombed by Japanese forces, causing significant destruction.
Despite its strategic importance, Ichang's defenders put up strong resistance, and the city became a symbol of Chinese resilience. Over time, Ichang also saw a substantial amount of logistical support from the Allies, particularly the United States, which provided military supplies to China, some of which passed through the region.
Although Ichang eventually fell under Japanese control for a period during the war, its significance as a transportation hub and the efforts to defend it marked it as a critical location in the broader struggle for control of China. The city was later liberated by Chinese forces in the final stages of World War II, though it had endured considerable damage from the conflict.
- 99-Asian-CL.png (94.92 KiB) Viewed 335 times
Last edited by rkr1958 on Tue Jan 21, 2025 10:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. Asian Theater.
End of Turn. China.
End of Turn. China.
- 99-Asian-China.png (3.37 MiB) Viewed 334 times
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939.
Combat Log Summary.
KIA Summary.
Destroyed.
Dry Dock.
Combat Log Summary.
- 99-CL-Summary.png (73.67 KiB) Viewed 333 times
- 99-KIA-Report-CL.png (16.37 KiB) Viewed 333 times
- 99-Destroyed.png (104.8 KiB) Viewed 333 times
- 99-Dry-Dock.png (108.07 KiB) Viewed 333 times
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. Partisans.
- 99-Patisan-CL.png (27.56 KiB) Viewed 332 times
- 99-Partisan.png (59.95 KiB) Viewed 332 times
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. US Entry.
- 99-USE-CL.png (25.5 KiB) Viewed 330 times
- 99-USE-Pools.png (87.82 KiB) Viewed 330 times
- 99-USE-Options.png (64.51 KiB) Viewed 330 times
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939.
Use Oil.
Isolated and/or Unoiled Units.
Use Oil.
- 99-Use-Oil.png (23.53 KiB) Viewed 324 times
- 99-Isolated-Unoiled-Unit-List.png (50.98 KiB) Viewed 324 times
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939.
Econ.
Production.
Construction & Air Reserve Pools.
Econ.
- 99-ECON.png (96.64 KiB) Viewed 323 times
- 99-Production-1.png (150.11 KiB) Viewed 323 times
- 99-Production-2.png (229.86 KiB) Viewed 323 times
- 99-Construction-Reserve-Pools.png (289.22 KiB) Viewed 323 times
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939.
Victory Totals.
Victory Totals.
- 99-VT.png (139.01 KiB) Viewed 321 times
- 99-VT-2.png (29.85 KiB) Viewed 321 times
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. Narratives.
Introduction.
I've been wanting to use AI tools including speech to write to help me produce narratives, including historical references, for each of my fronts/theaters that I report on during this AAR. The following narratives and historical references have (also) be included in their respective front/theater section. I want to warn you that this is a work in progress and I would appreciate any feedback that you guys might have on this objective.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. The Western Front.
Narrative.
Germany’s intended strategy on this front was sitzkrieg until the arrival of their FJR (paratrooper) corps on turn 4, Mar/Apr 1940. As such, Germany voted for the Axis powers to move second if winning the initiative. However; Italy and Japan had different visions and voted to move first in such a case. The Axis did indeed win the initiative and with majority rule elected to move first.
Germany's OKH viewed the concession of moving first as a political concession to an unofficial ally, Japan, which wished to maintain the initiative against the Nationalists in southern and central China and possibly the CCP in northern China. Italy and its ongoing operations in the Mediterranean were a different story.
OKH also viewed this concession as a favor to Italy, allowing them to maintain their initiative against the French in Tunisia and possibly Algeria; especially given the French TRS Gp was put out of action last turn by Italian Subs. However; pressure was applied by El Duce via an appeal directly to Adolf Hitler for German military action on the Western Front in support of Italy in the Med. Specifically, action that would discourage or minimize the chance that the CW would or could move reinforcement in a timely fashion to French North Africa. With only 2 RN TRS Gps in the UK and in a position to move UK reinforcements to French North Africa, this boiled down to the reversal of Germany’s Sitzkrieg West Front plans.
Specifically, a German invasion of Holland and the capture of Amsterdam (the capital) on the first axis impulse. However; with their FJR corps still in production and snow in the north temperate (i.e., amph invasion for the North Sea not allowed) this meant that there was no chance to seize Rotterdam on the surprise invasion impulse. This meant that Rotterdam would be open to UK reinforcement and the dreaded (from Germany’s perspective) Rotterdam redoubt. But that was exactly the tension that Italy wanted to put the CW under in the hopes that the CW would choose to send the 2 UK white print corps to Rotterdam vs reinforcing French North Africa. Additionally, if the CW reaction went as Italy desired, the CW would be forced to take a combine, limiting their naval moves to two and giving Italy (at least initially) more freedom in the West Med. Recall that allied supply through both the West & East Med were broken last turn and was still broken at the start of this turn. Also broken, and still broken, was allied supply through Cape St. Vincent, meaning that supply to Gibraltar and French North Africa was and is still broken.
Part of El Duce’s sell to Hitler was that the CW may not establish the Rotterdam redoubt but instead send those two UK white print corps to French North Africa via Cape St. Vincent, debark Morocco, and rail to Tunisia and/or Algeria. El Duce argued that the CW may even take a naval. Regardless of a naval or combine, if the UK sent the two corps to French North Africa, then no Rotterdam redoubt and Germany would capture Rotterdam next axis impulse simply by walking in and getting Germany’s Case Yellow off to a head start. While Hitler and OKH listened politely but skeptically to El Duce, they weren’t buying his argument that the CW would not elect for the Rotterdam Redoubt.
After much discussion between Hitler and OKH, Hitler made the dictate to OKH’s frustration that Germany would indeed support his ally Mussolini by “immediately” invading the Netherlands. Hitler told his Generals that they were soft and that the Wehrmacht support by the Luftwaffe and the Kriegsmarine could easily dig out any UK forces foolish enough to move into Rotterdam. Especially given their performance and quick dispatch of Poland last turn. So, the Fuhrer order was given, “Invade Netherlands, immediately”.
With only a 30% chance that the US would react to this aggression, they did; but modestly with only a 1-value chit added to their Ge/It entry pool. The Netherlands aligned to and immediately sought help from the British, adding 32 BPs to their (CW) armed forces. Though Amsterdam, and eventually Holland, was lost; the CW did indeed take a combine and sent two white print corps and a fighter group to Rotterdam. Assuming that the UK Rotterdam redoubt can hold out this turn, which isn’t a bad assumption, the UK plans to even add a third unit, an artillery div, to the Rotterdam defense.
The CW even had plans with the assistance of the Dutch TRS Gp setup in Paramaribo, Dutch Guyana, to use their second naval move to reestablish supply to Gibraltar and French North Africa via NED TRS Gp in the CSV and get the UK III inf corps in Gibraltar to French North Africa. However; this plan was thwarted by excellent RM intercepts of French supply CPs in the West Med; requiring the CW to use their second naval move to bring a supply CP into the East Med to get Malta back in supply. The French navy accomplished supply to Gibraltar and French North Africa via Cape St. Vincent.
The Rotterdam redoubt was unmolested by Germany for the remainder of the turn. Germany did bring in significant land and air reinforcements from Poland to the Western Front. Also, during the surprise invasion impulse, the Luftwaffe did have a modestly successful port strike sinking the Dutch CA De Ruyter and flipping the CA Java.
The Western allies had three ineffective strategic bombing raids against Germany and an ineffective port strike as the 3 KM CAs in Kiel.
Near the end of the turn, Germany did attempt to establish a presence in the North Sea with two obsolete BBs; only to see both BBs heavily damaged and avoiding being sunk through excellent damage control.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. MTO.
Narrative.
Italy, though active, only took combined actions this turn to continue its offensive against France in its colonies of Tunisia and Algeria. Itay’s continued offensive includes combat at sea, in the air, and maneuvering on land but no combat. Balbo and his army (HQ-I, mech corps, inf div) that took Corsica from the French were transferred to Tunisia to put force behind Mussolini’s goal of taking Tunisia, Algeria, and possibly even Morocco from the French. An Italian infantry corps and artillery div in Tripoli were placed under Balbo’s command, formally designated the Italian Desert Army Group Balbo.
With the French TRS Gp damaged last turn and out of action this turn, the RN 3 TRS Gps and the Queens were the only hope for getting reinforcements to French North Africa. Well, that was until the NED TRS Gp set up in Dutch Guyana became aligned to the RN after Germany’s DOW on the Netherlands on impulse 1. There was a plan by the British during the first Allied impulse to use the 2nd naval and 3rd land move of the CW’s combined (1st naval and 1st & 2nd land moves were to get two white print corps to Rotterdam) to move the UK inf corps in Gibraltar to Morocco and then rail it Tunisia or Algeria depending on need. However; that plan was blown up when the Italian RM successfully intercepted 2 separate French CP supply attempts to run past the RM in the West Med and establish a critical supply line to Malta through the East Med. These two successful intercepts were a 9% event that forced the CW to use their 2nd naval move to move an RN supply CP from Aden into the East Med.
The two successfully intercepted French CPs remained unescorted and alone except for the RM in the West Med. The French did move a CP to Cape St. Vincent which established a “second” but very fragile supply line to Malta through the West Med.
Later in the turn, the RM did manage to sink both French CPs in the West Med, breaking that supply line. And, the RM moved a cruiser force into the East Med that also managed to sink the RN supply CP operating there. Then, the turn ended before the CW could get another chance to replace and reestablish supply to Malta, which meant that the RN fleet based there once again could not be oiled. This RN fleet is composed of 1 CV, 2 CVLs, 3 CAGs, 4 BBs, 3 CAs & 2 CPs and puts the CW at a major disadvantage versus the Italian RM in the Med.
Mussolini’s thrust west into French North Africa comes at the cost of a “lightly” defended Cyrenaica vs Wavell’s 8th army operating out of Egypt. The UK Royal Mot eng div captured Bardia, Tobruk and Benghazi. Mussolini is counting on his fleet to blunt Wavell’s push into Cyrenaica.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. BOA.
Narrative.
The Atlantic saw German U-boat patrols for the first time this war. These occurred in the Faeroes Gap but German U-boats were unable to find allied convoys.
The RN's main effort, with some help from the French navy, focused on reconstituting CW and French convoy lines, and production was left shattered at the end of last turn. Also, the RN sent patrols and escorts to stay at sea and provide some protection for the beginning of the next turn and before the RN's naval moves.
At the end of the turn, FDR convinced US lawmakers that using US warships to escort CW convoys off the US East Coast made sense. So, the US passed entry option 11, “US East Coast Escorts”.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. The Eastern Front.
Narrative.
The Eastern Front this turn was characterized by inaction by the Soviets, which made (i.e., used) any land or air (rebase) moves there this turn. Germany, on the other hand, saw a significant transfer of forces from a conquered Poland, west to the Western Front with France and the CW.
An uneasy peace settles over the Soviet and German forces guarding their respective frontiers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. East Africa.
Narrative.
This front remained static this turn due to action limits and actions (i.e., land moves) going to other fronts/theaters. The reinforcement of a second ISO Terr forced the CW to scrap their plan of moving the KEN Terr from Mombasa to India. Instead, that Terr will remain in Mombasa for the foreseeable future as a guard against an Italian incursion into Kenya.
The RTB of the AUS Terr to Djibouti at the end of last turn foiled, at least for now, any Italian plan for the conquest of French or British Somaliland.
An interesting cat-and-mouse game is starting to play on the western border of Ethiopia with British-controlled AES. The AES Terr is 2 impulse moves away from being able to capture the Italian supply unit, which intended to move west and then north to Italian-controlled Libya. However; those plans may have to be scrapped. Also, the ETH Terr will have to be on guard for any back door move of the AES Terr towards Addis Ababa.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. CBI.
Narrative.
The immediate concern for the CBI is CW garrison level and the threat of partisans. In India, the CW has garrisoned the 3 most important centers of Bombay, Calcutta, and (not shown) Delhi. This leaves India 3 corps under garrison and a 6% chance that 1 partisan, which didn’t happen this turn, will appear. This puts three unprotected RPs, Coal (Yellandu), Iron (95,110), and Iron (90,113) at risk. However; the severity of this risk is mitigated a bit for now by the fact that Iron (90,113) was idle due to scrambled allied convoy lines through the Med. Still, White Hall in London would like to avoid any risk at all by increasing CW garrison to 6 corps (or 5 corps & 1 div) to remove any risk of partisans. This goal was complicated by the fact that the Ken Terr had to remain in Kenya for defensive purposes and is no longer available for India.
Also, of concern for White Hall in the CBI is the partisan risk in Burma, which now stands at 2% with no garrison versus a need for 2 corps. The reality of filling these two garrison requirements will likely take some time as the CW has other competing garrison requirements in the Pacific and, more significantly, troop requirements for their two active fronts (Western & Med).
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. PTO.
Narrative.
From a painful lesson learned in my last “rage quit”, on Germany’s DOW of the Netherlands, the CW placed the NEI Terr in Palembang to cover the 2 oil RPs instead of Batavia. This lesson learned paid off as a 0-strength Italian-controlled NEI partisan did spawn and was placed in the jungle two hexes away from Palembang. Why Mussolini is funding/supporting NEI separatists is surprising as Germany was the nation that declared war on the Netherlands. However, MI-6 contends that this is partial payback by Italy to Germany for the latter’s support of Italian operations in the Med.
The chance of the NEI partisan was only 2% but now that it’s appeared it currently stands at 5% for another one. However; the NEI Batavian MIL will appear at the start of the next turn reducing that chance. Over time that MIL could be moved and attack with the NEI Terr to attempt to eliminate the partisan. However; against the 0-strength partisan in the juggle, which has a strength of 1, the two NEI units in fine weather could only muster +6A, which is not even 50/50 and carries a 35% chance that both attackers would be lost; but only 3% of both attackers are lost with the partisan surviving. However; that risk is still deemed too high, so the CW will have to wait for a third unit to arrive if they decide to mount a campaign to eliminate that partisan. For now, containment to the juggle is the CW strategy.
Malaya and Singapore were also at a 2% risk of a partisan, which didn’t happen. In the subsequent RTB phase, the RN returned a TRS Gp loaded with NZL Auckland MIL to Singapore protecting that vital port and reducing partisan chance in subsequent turns to 1%.
Also, an empty Queens returned to Sydney, Australia to pick up the Sydney MIL for deployment to points undecided next turn.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. Asian Theater.
Historical (ChatGPT)
Well, unlike the historically, Japan managed on their first attempt to capture Changsha from the Nationalists this turn. Japan’s assault was assured (100% PWIN) with a slight chance (5.5%) of losing a unit, which didn’t happen. US reaction to all this was none as was their reaction to Japan’s takeover of the open city (i.e., undefended city) of Hengyang.
In the north, the IJA managed to “liberate” the coal RP 73,143 from CCP partisans and close on Mao and his CCP armies in the mountains north of the Yellow River and northeast of Tungkwan.
Mao did manage to break the isolation and reorg his 1st CCP infantry army. A pull back by Mao to defend Tungkwan and Sian is expected (likely), which will leave Chengchow defended only by the Nationalists. The Nationalists have 2 garrison armies assigned to Chengchow with currently only 1 in the city proper itself and the second to the west protecting that flank.
Historical (ChatGPT)
The Nationalists (currently) also control Nanning and Ichang. However; Nanning will likely be abandoned when/if Chengchow comes under siege by the IJA. The Nationalists wish to hold on to Ichang for all long as reasonable to deny Japan fighter bases in range to escort strategic bomber raids against Chungking Chengtu.
Historical (ChatGPT)
Introduction.
I've been wanting to use AI tools including speech to write to help me produce narratives, including historical references, for each of my fronts/theaters that I report on during this AAR. The following narratives and historical references have (also) be included in their respective front/theater section. I want to warn you that this is a work in progress and I would appreciate any feedback that you guys might have on this objective.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. The Western Front.
- 99-Weather-Actions-Summary.png (35.59 KiB) Viewed 244 times
Germany’s intended strategy on this front was sitzkrieg until the arrival of their FJR (paratrooper) corps on turn 4, Mar/Apr 1940. As such, Germany voted for the Axis powers to move second if winning the initiative. However; Italy and Japan had different visions and voted to move first in such a case. The Axis did indeed win the initiative and with majority rule elected to move first.
Germany's OKH viewed the concession of moving first as a political concession to an unofficial ally, Japan, which wished to maintain the initiative against the Nationalists in southern and central China and possibly the CCP in northern China. Italy and its ongoing operations in the Mediterranean were a different story.
OKH also viewed this concession as a favor to Italy, allowing them to maintain their initiative against the French in Tunisia and possibly Algeria; especially given the French TRS Gp was put out of action last turn by Italian Subs. However; pressure was applied by El Duce via an appeal directly to Adolf Hitler for German military action on the Western Front in support of Italy in the Med. Specifically, action that would discourage or minimize the chance that the CW would or could move reinforcement in a timely fashion to French North Africa. With only 2 RN TRS Gps in the UK and in a position to move UK reinforcements to French North Africa, this boiled down to the reversal of Germany’s Sitzkrieg West Front plans.
Specifically, a German invasion of Holland and the capture of Amsterdam (the capital) on the first axis impulse. However; with their FJR corps still in production and snow in the north temperate (i.e., amph invasion for the North Sea not allowed) this meant that there was no chance to seize Rotterdam on the surprise invasion impulse. This meant that Rotterdam would be open to UK reinforcement and the dreaded (from Germany’s perspective) Rotterdam redoubt. But that was exactly the tension that Italy wanted to put the CW under in the hopes that the CW would choose to send the 2 UK white print corps to Rotterdam vs reinforcing French North Africa. Additionally, if the CW reaction went as Italy desired, the CW would be forced to take a combine, limiting their naval moves to two and giving Italy (at least initially) more freedom in the West Med. Recall that allied supply through both the West & East Med were broken last turn and was still broken at the start of this turn. Also broken, and still broken, was allied supply through Cape St. Vincent, meaning that supply to Gibraltar and French North Africa was and is still broken.
Part of El Duce’s sell to Hitler was that the CW may not establish the Rotterdam redoubt but instead send those two UK white print corps to French North Africa via Cape St. Vincent, debark Morocco, and rail to Tunisia and/or Algeria. El Duce argued that the CW may even take a naval. Regardless of a naval or combine, if the UK sent the two corps to French North Africa, then no Rotterdam redoubt and Germany would capture Rotterdam next axis impulse simply by walking in and getting Germany’s Case Yellow off to a head start. While Hitler and OKH listened politely but skeptically to El Duce, they weren’t buying his argument that the CW would not elect for the Rotterdam Redoubt.
After much discussion between Hitler and OKH, Hitler made the dictate to OKH’s frustration that Germany would indeed support his ally Mussolini by “immediately” invading the Netherlands. Hitler told his Generals that they were soft and that the Wehrmacht support by the Luftwaffe and the Kriegsmarine could easily dig out any UK forces foolish enough to move into Rotterdam. Especially given their performance and quick dispatch of Poland last turn. So, the Fuhrer order was given, “Invade Netherlands, immediately”.
With only a 30% chance that the US would react to this aggression, they did; but modestly with only a 1-value chit added to their Ge/It entry pool. The Netherlands aligned to and immediately sought help from the British, adding 32 BPs to their (CW) armed forces. Though Amsterdam, and eventually Holland, was lost; the CW did indeed take a combine and sent two white print corps and a fighter group to Rotterdam. Assuming that the UK Rotterdam redoubt can hold out this turn, which isn’t a bad assumption, the UK plans to even add a third unit, an artillery div, to the Rotterdam defense.
The CW even had plans with the assistance of the Dutch TRS Gp setup in Paramaribo, Dutch Guyana, to use their second naval move to reestablish supply to Gibraltar and French North Africa via NED TRS Gp in the CSV and get the UK III inf corps in Gibraltar to French North Africa. However; this plan was thwarted by excellent RM intercepts of French supply CPs in the West Med; requiring the CW to use their second naval move to bring a supply CP into the East Med to get Malta back in supply. The French navy accomplished supply to Gibraltar and French North Africa via Cape St. Vincent.
The Rotterdam redoubt was unmolested by Germany for the remainder of the turn. Germany did bring in significant land and air reinforcements from Poland to the Western Front. Also, during the surprise invasion impulse, the Luftwaffe did have a modestly successful port strike sinking the Dutch CA De Ruyter and flipping the CA Java.
The Western allies had three ineffective strategic bombing raids against Germany and an ineffective port strike as the 3 KM CAs in Kiel.
Near the end of the turn, Germany did attempt to establish a presence in the North Sea with two obsolete BBs; only to see both BBs heavily damaged and avoiding being sunk through excellent damage control.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. MTO.
Narrative.
Italy, though active, only took combined actions this turn to continue its offensive against France in its colonies of Tunisia and Algeria. Itay’s continued offensive includes combat at sea, in the air, and maneuvering on land but no combat. Balbo and his army (HQ-I, mech corps, inf div) that took Corsica from the French were transferred to Tunisia to put force behind Mussolini’s goal of taking Tunisia, Algeria, and possibly even Morocco from the French. An Italian infantry corps and artillery div in Tripoli were placed under Balbo’s command, formally designated the Italian Desert Army Group Balbo.
With the French TRS Gp damaged last turn and out of action this turn, the RN 3 TRS Gps and the Queens were the only hope for getting reinforcements to French North Africa. Well, that was until the NED TRS Gp set up in Dutch Guyana became aligned to the RN after Germany’s DOW on the Netherlands on impulse 1. There was a plan by the British during the first Allied impulse to use the 2nd naval and 3rd land move of the CW’s combined (1st naval and 1st & 2nd land moves were to get two white print corps to Rotterdam) to move the UK inf corps in Gibraltar to Morocco and then rail it Tunisia or Algeria depending on need. However; that plan was blown up when the Italian RM successfully intercepted 2 separate French CP supply attempts to run past the RM in the West Med and establish a critical supply line to Malta through the East Med. These two successful intercepts were a 9% event that forced the CW to use their 2nd naval move to move an RN supply CP from Aden into the East Med.
The two successfully intercepted French CPs remained unescorted and alone except for the RM in the West Med. The French did move a CP to Cape St. Vincent which established a “second” but very fragile supply line to Malta through the West Med.
Later in the turn, the RM did manage to sink both French CPs in the West Med, breaking that supply line. And, the RM moved a cruiser force into the East Med that also managed to sink the RN supply CP operating there. Then, the turn ended before the CW could get another chance to replace and reestablish supply to Malta, which meant that the RN fleet based there once again could not be oiled. This RN fleet is composed of 1 CV, 2 CVLs, 3 CAGs, 4 BBs, 3 CAs & 2 CPs and puts the CW at a major disadvantage versus the Italian RM in the Med.
Mussolini’s thrust west into French North Africa comes at the cost of a “lightly” defended Cyrenaica vs Wavell’s 8th army operating out of Egypt. The UK Royal Mot eng div captured Bardia, Tobruk and Benghazi. Mussolini is counting on his fleet to blunt Wavell’s push into Cyrenaica.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. BOA.
Narrative.
The Atlantic saw German U-boat patrols for the first time this war. These occurred in the Faeroes Gap but German U-boats were unable to find allied convoys.
The RN's main effort, with some help from the French navy, focused on reconstituting CW and French convoy lines, and production was left shattered at the end of last turn. Also, the RN sent patrols and escorts to stay at sea and provide some protection for the beginning of the next turn and before the RN's naval moves.
At the end of the turn, FDR convinced US lawmakers that using US warships to escort CW convoys off the US East Coast made sense. So, the US passed entry option 11, “US East Coast Escorts”.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. The Eastern Front.
Narrative.
The Eastern Front this turn was characterized by inaction by the Soviets, which made (i.e., used) any land or air (rebase) moves there this turn. Germany, on the other hand, saw a significant transfer of forces from a conquered Poland, west to the Western Front with France and the CW.
An uneasy peace settles over the Soviet and German forces guarding their respective frontiers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. East Africa.
Narrative.
This front remained static this turn due to action limits and actions (i.e., land moves) going to other fronts/theaters. The reinforcement of a second ISO Terr forced the CW to scrap their plan of moving the KEN Terr from Mombasa to India. Instead, that Terr will remain in Mombasa for the foreseeable future as a guard against an Italian incursion into Kenya.
The RTB of the AUS Terr to Djibouti at the end of last turn foiled, at least for now, any Italian plan for the conquest of French or British Somaliland.
An interesting cat-and-mouse game is starting to play on the western border of Ethiopia with British-controlled AES. The AES Terr is 2 impulse moves away from being able to capture the Italian supply unit, which intended to move west and then north to Italian-controlled Libya. However; those plans may have to be scrapped. Also, the ETH Terr will have to be on guard for any back door move of the AES Terr towards Addis Ababa.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. CBI.
Narrative.
The immediate concern for the CBI is CW garrison level and the threat of partisans. In India, the CW has garrisoned the 3 most important centers of Bombay, Calcutta, and (not shown) Delhi. This leaves India 3 corps under garrison and a 6% chance that 1 partisan, which didn’t happen this turn, will appear. This puts three unprotected RPs, Coal (Yellandu), Iron (95,110), and Iron (90,113) at risk. However; the severity of this risk is mitigated a bit for now by the fact that Iron (90,113) was idle due to scrambled allied convoy lines through the Med. Still, White Hall in London would like to avoid any risk at all by increasing CW garrison to 6 corps (or 5 corps & 1 div) to remove any risk of partisans. This goal was complicated by the fact that the Ken Terr had to remain in Kenya for defensive purposes and is no longer available for India.
Also, of concern for White Hall in the CBI is the partisan risk in Burma, which now stands at 2% with no garrison versus a need for 2 corps. The reality of filling these two garrison requirements will likely take some time as the CW has other competing garrison requirements in the Pacific and, more significantly, troop requirements for their two active fronts (Western & Med).
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. PTO.
Narrative.
From a painful lesson learned in my last “rage quit”, on Germany’s DOW of the Netherlands, the CW placed the NEI Terr in Palembang to cover the 2 oil RPs instead of Batavia. This lesson learned paid off as a 0-strength Italian-controlled NEI partisan did spawn and was placed in the jungle two hexes away from Palembang. Why Mussolini is funding/supporting NEI separatists is surprising as Germany was the nation that declared war on the Netherlands. However, MI-6 contends that this is partial payback by Italy to Germany for the latter’s support of Italian operations in the Med.
The chance of the NEI partisan was only 2% but now that it’s appeared it currently stands at 5% for another one. However; the NEI Batavian MIL will appear at the start of the next turn reducing that chance. Over time that MIL could be moved and attack with the NEI Terr to attempt to eliminate the partisan. However; against the 0-strength partisan in the juggle, which has a strength of 1, the two NEI units in fine weather could only muster +6A, which is not even 50/50 and carries a 35% chance that both attackers would be lost; but only 3% of both attackers are lost with the partisan surviving. However; that risk is still deemed too high, so the CW will have to wait for a third unit to arrive if they decide to mount a campaign to eliminate that partisan. For now, containment to the juggle is the CW strategy.
Malaya and Singapore were also at a 2% risk of a partisan, which didn’t happen. In the subsequent RTB phase, the RN returned a TRS Gp loaded with NZL Auckland MIL to Singapore protecting that vital port and reducing partisan chance in subsequent turns to 1%.
Also, an empty Queens returned to Sydney, Australia to pick up the Sydney MIL for deployment to points undecided next turn.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. Asian Theater.
Historical (ChatGPT)
Narrative.During World War II, Changsha, the capital of Hunan Province in central China, played a significant role in the Chinese resistance against the Japanese invasion. The city was targeted by the Japanese military several times due to its strategic importance as a transportation hub and center of military and industrial activity.
• First Battle of Changsha (1939): The first major confrontation occurred in 1939, when Japanese forces attempted to capture the city. However, the Chinese defenders, supported by a defensive strategy, managed to repel the Japanese forces, marking a significant early victory for China.
• Second Battle of Changsha (1941): In 1941, the Japanese launched a second assault on the city. This battle was characterized by brutal fighting, but once again, Chinese forces successfully defended Changsha, inflicting considerable losses on the Japanese troops. This was another morale boost for China.
• Third Battle of Changsha (1942): This battle saw the Japanese attempt to capture Changsha yet again. Despite initial advances, Chinese forces, aided by terrain advantages and a determined defense, repelled the Japanese once more, inflicting significant casualties.
The repeated failure to capture Changsha was a key setback for Japan in the war, especially as the city served as a vital base for Chinese military operations. Throughout these battles, Changsha's resilience helped rally Chinese resistance efforts and contributed to the eventual weakening of Japanese advances in central China. The city endured significant destruction during these battles, but its strategic importance kept it at the center of China’s wartime resistance.
Well, unlike the historically, Japan managed on their first attempt to capture Changsha from the Nationalists this turn. Japan’s assault was assured (100% PWIN) with a slight chance (5.5%) of losing a unit, which didn’t happen. US reaction to all this was none as was their reaction to Japan’s takeover of the open city (i.e., undefended city) of Hengyang.
In the north, the IJA managed to “liberate” the coal RP 73,143 from CCP partisans and close on Mao and his CCP armies in the mountains north of the Yellow River and northeast of Tungkwan.
Mao did manage to break the isolation and reorg his 1st CCP infantry army. A pull back by Mao to defend Tungkwan and Sian is expected (likely), which will leave Chengchow defended only by the Nationalists. The Nationalists have 2 garrison armies assigned to Chengchow with currently only 1 in the city proper itself and the second to the west protecting that flank.
Historical (ChatGPT)
Narrative.Chengchow (now Zhengzhou), a city in central China, played a significant role during World War II as part of the broader Chinese resistance against Japanese occupation. During the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–1945), the city became an important military and logistical center.
In 1939, the Japanese forces began advancing into central China, and Chengchow's strategic location made it a target. The city housed crucial railway lines that connected northern and southern China, which were vital for transporting troops and supplies. The Japanese aimed to capture it to disrupt Chinese supply lines and communications.
During the war, Chengchow faced multiple bombings and attacks. In 1941, the Japanese military launched a major air raid on the city, causing significant damage to infrastructure and civilian casualties. Despite this, Chengchow continued to be a center for Chinese resistance and part of the broader effort to delay Japanese advances into interior China.
By the end of the war in 1945, the city had suffered from both Japanese bombing campaigns and the broader devastation of the war, but it remained an important symbol of Chinese resilience.
The Nationalists (currently) also control Nanning and Ichang. However; Nanning will likely be abandoned when/if Chengchow comes under siege by the IJA. The Nationalists wish to hold on to Ichang for all long as reasonable to deny Japan fighter bases in range to escort strategic bomber raids against Chungking Chengtu.
Historical (ChatGPT)
Nanning, a city in southern China and the capital of Guangxi Province, played a key role during World War II as part of the broader Chinese resistance against Japanese occupation. During the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–1945), Nanning was strategically important due to its location near the border with French Indochina (modern-day Vietnam), making it a vital supply and transportation hub for both Chinese forces and their allies.
In 1939, the Japanese began advancing southward, and by 1940, Nanning came under threat. The city was bombed by Japanese forces, and in 1944, after a series of hard-fought battles, it was briefly occupied by the Japanese. The occupation was part of Japan's efforts to control the southern provinces of China and cut off Chinese supply routes from French Indochina.
During the occupation, Nanning suffered from heavy bombing and economic disruption, and local resistance continued through guerilla warfare. However, the Japanese occupation was relatively short-lived, as Chinese and Allied forces pushed back in the latter stages of the war. Nanning was eventually liberated by Chinese forces in 1945, but the city had endured significant damage from the war.
Overall, Nanning's role in World War II was marked by its strategic significance, its occupation by Japanese forces, and the resilience of its people in the face of heavy bombardment and military occupation.
Ichang (now Yichang), located in central China along the Yangtze River, played a notable role during World War II as part of the Chinese resistance against Japanese forces. During the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–1945), Ichang was strategically important because it served as a transportation and supply hub for the Chinese military and provided a key route for the movement of goods and troops along the Yangtze River.
In 1938, the Japanese military launched a major offensive in central China, aiming to capture key cities. Ichang's location on the Yangtze River made it a valuable target for the Japanese as they sought to disrupt Chinese logistics and gain control of the river. In 1939, Ichang was bombed by Japanese forces, causing significant destruction.
Despite its strategic importance, Ichang's defenders put up strong resistance, and the city became a symbol of Chinese resilience. Over time, Ichang also saw a substantial amount of logistical support from the Allies, particularly the United States, which provided military supplies to China, some of which passed through the region.
Although Ichang eventually fell under Japanese control for a period during the war, its significance as a transportation hub and the efforts to defend it marked it as a critical location in the broader struggle for control of China. The city was later liberated by Chinese forces in the final stages of World War II, though it had endured considerable damage from the conflict.
Last edited by rkr1958 on Thu Jan 23, 2025 12:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Turn 2. Nov/Dec 1939. Call Center Headset & Talk to Text.
My cheap telephone call center headset arrived today and I thought I would give it a test drive by trying out Microsoft Windows speech-to-text functionality. I can see that, and it may be my accent, that not all words are being properly captured and that with the support of Grammarly, I will need to edit for both content and grammar. However; I hope I can develop this capability to produce faster and more descriptive narratives. And more grammatically correct with the help of Grammarly. Also, with the help of chatGPT, I hope to pull in more historical references in this AAR.
I must admit that I do feel like an executive dictating to a secretary with a team of editors behind me. Maybe this technology is not so new but I’m hoping to gain skill in it to relieve the burden of producing my play narrative to spend more time playing the game.
I’ve already summarized this November December 1939, turn two but I wanted to provide some reflections on how I felt Matrix World in Flames was playing out in respect to fun and history. As stated at the beginning of this AAR, I intend on using no house rules; but will use a couple of uncoded optional rules.
So my plan for this AAR is to summarize each front or theater at the end of each turn. With some beginning-of-turn and end-of-turn summaries as necessary or other summaries as necessary. I will continue to use and provide my AAR worksheet combat logs by theater. I will review those logs at the end of each turn develop a set of summary bullet points and from that produce my narrative using talk-to-text functionality.
As I’m dictating this, a thought occurred to me that I could provide those bullet points in PowerPoint format as part of this AAR. Those bullet points would be a bullet point executive summary from that front for the given turn that I’m describing.
I hear that my dog in the other room has gotten a plastic coke bottle and he is chewing on it so I’m going to stop this dictation for a while or long enough to get the bottle away from him. I’m back.
I’m not sure whether the summary bullet points would be helpful maybe they would be in addition to the combat log summaries.
Also, please let me know what you think about this approach that I plan to use. I can see that I’ve typed or dictated nearly a full page of text in Microsoft Word. However; that does require a review and correction by me first to correct words that were or were mistyped and then by Grammarly to correct my spelling in grammar.
While this new approach does seem to make my documentation burden easier, I am curious for feedback as to what you the community think about all this.
The resort may be a little bit more nonlinear and freer flowing than if I rigorously typed instead of dictating, but I’m hopeful that this approach will give you a more raw insight into my thinking and playing.
Enough for now, I’m going to review and edit, and then post. I plan to start turn number three maybe tonight but possibly tomorrow and I hope to increase the pace of play in this game in AAR much faster than it took for these past two turns. Let me know what you think about all this.
My cheap telephone call center headset arrived today and I thought I would give it a test drive by trying out Microsoft Windows speech-to-text functionality. I can see that, and it may be my accent, that not all words are being properly captured and that with the support of Grammarly, I will need to edit for both content and grammar. However; I hope I can develop this capability to produce faster and more descriptive narratives. And more grammatically correct with the help of Grammarly. Also, with the help of chatGPT, I hope to pull in more historical references in this AAR.
I must admit that I do feel like an executive dictating to a secretary with a team of editors behind me. Maybe this technology is not so new but I’m hoping to gain skill in it to relieve the burden of producing my play narrative to spend more time playing the game.
I’ve already summarized this November December 1939, turn two but I wanted to provide some reflections on how I felt Matrix World in Flames was playing out in respect to fun and history. As stated at the beginning of this AAR, I intend on using no house rules; but will use a couple of uncoded optional rules.
So my plan for this AAR is to summarize each front or theater at the end of each turn. With some beginning-of-turn and end-of-turn summaries as necessary or other summaries as necessary. I will continue to use and provide my AAR worksheet combat logs by theater. I will review those logs at the end of each turn develop a set of summary bullet points and from that produce my narrative using talk-to-text functionality.
As I’m dictating this, a thought occurred to me that I could provide those bullet points in PowerPoint format as part of this AAR. Those bullet points would be a bullet point executive summary from that front for the given turn that I’m describing.
I hear that my dog in the other room has gotten a plastic coke bottle and he is chewing on it so I’m going to stop this dictation for a while or long enough to get the bottle away from him. I’m back.
I’m not sure whether the summary bullet points would be helpful maybe they would be in addition to the combat log summaries.
Also, please let me know what you think about this approach that I plan to use. I can see that I’ve typed or dictated nearly a full page of text in Microsoft Word. However; that does require a review and correction by me first to correct words that were or were mistyped and then by Grammarly to correct my spelling in grammar.
While this new approach does seem to make my documentation burden easier, I am curious for feedback as to what you the community think about all this.
The resort may be a little bit more nonlinear and freer flowing than if I rigorously typed instead of dictating, but I’m hopeful that this approach will give you a more raw insight into my thinking and playing.
Enough for now, I’m going to review and edit, and then post. I plan to start turn number three maybe tonight but possibly tomorrow and I hope to increase the pace of play in this game in AAR much faster than it took for these past two turns. Let me know what you think about all this.
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Hi Ronnie,
Thanks for another great AAR, although, have to admit, I still use the Historical one that you created a long time ago, as i'm still trying to match history for learning purposes
.
Thinking of getting back into this game.
If you have time, and don't mind, have 2 questions for you.
1) can you upload your latest excel version if possible (v. 12 i think). If not, no worries, i'll use the older one.
2) I have no idea anymore which version to use. I want it to be stable and have a good time, so is it better to stay with 3.2, or should I go to 5 as some have indicated in previous posts, or should I go to 7.
Oddly enough, i'm thinking of going with 3.2 as personally, at the time, it seemed to be the one that allowed production and supply to actually work, but again, i've seen same type of comments with 5.
Honestly don't know which version to install anymore, and right now, it's the 1 problem i have to actually even start this game.
Thanks.
Dave...
Thanks for another great AAR, although, have to admit, I still use the Historical one that you created a long time ago, as i'm still trying to match history for learning purposes
.Thinking of getting back into this game.
If you have time, and don't mind, have 2 questions for you.
1) can you upload your latest excel version if possible (v. 12 i think). If not, no worries, i'll use the older one.
2) I have no idea anymore which version to use. I want it to be stable and have a good time, so is it better to stay with 3.2, or should I go to 5 as some have indicated in previous posts, or should I go to 7.
Oddly enough, i'm thinking of going with 3.2 as personally, at the time, it seemed to be the one that allowed production and supply to actually work, but again, i've seen same type of comments with 5.
Honestly don't know which version to install anymore, and right now, it's the 1 problem i have to actually even start this game.
Thanks.
Dave...
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
(1) I've attached the latest, latest AAR spreadsheet. It's the one that I'm using now. You'll need to clear the entries for the first two turns; however, I left it filled out for you to check out because I've made some functional changes with this newest version. (2) I'm a beta tester so I'm using the latest version released to us testers. It's version 7.0.1.1. This version does have some regression bugs that I believe are also in the public beta 7.x version. So, I plan to stick with the latest and, as in my last complete AAR, will "toggle" back and forth to 3.2 when I run into two crippling bugs/features. These are (a) secondary supply from allied HQ not properly handled and (b) painful "slowdown" in the late game when moving some units, especially HQs. As another point of reference, the game I started with Scotty was with version 5.0.0.10.Falken wrote: Thu Jan 23, 2025 4:23 pm Hi Ronnie,
Thanks for another great AAR, although, have to admit, I still use the Historical one that you created a long time ago, as i'm still trying to match history for learning purposes
Thinking of getting back into this game.
If you have time, and don't mind, have 2 questions for you.
1) can you upload your latest excel version if possible (v. 12 i think). If not, no worries, i'll use the older one.
2) I have no idea anymore which version to use. I want it to be stable and have a good time, so is it better to stay with 3.2, or should I go to 5 as some have indicated in previous posts, or should I go to 7.
Oddly enough, i'm thinking of going with 3.2 as personally, at the time, it seemed to be the one that allowed production and supply to actually work, but again, i've seen same type of comments with 5.
Honestly don't know which version to install anymore, and right now, it's the 1 problem i have to actually even start this game.
Thanks.
Dave...
Ronnie
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
Thanks for the spreadsheet Ronnie. You've put a lot of work into it, and you didn't have to share, but did. Thank you so much. It's very appreciated. Honestly, can't play this game without your spreadsheet now. It's a good reminder of events since the game takes a while to play. Thanks again...
Re: A Competitive GW (Solo) Scenario by the Numbers.
You're welcome.Falken wrote: Fri Jan 24, 2025 12:05 am Thanks for the spreadsheet Ronnie. You've put a lot of work into it, and you didn't have to share, but did. Thank you so much. It's very appreciated. Honestly, can't play this game without your spreadsheet now. It's a good reminder of events since the game takes a while to play. Thanks again...
For anyone interested I've attack my attack planning spreadsheet. Again, populated for this game and the first two turns and without explanation.
In this and the AAR spreadsheet, yellow columns/cells are calculated. That is, they have equations to either (a) calculate their values from other cells on their given row or (b) lookup their value from other tabs in the spreadsheet.
Also, I will say more often than not my calculations are in error with respect to what MWIF actually and accurately calculates. I don't know if that's because I grew up on MWIF vs cardboard/paper or vassal version of WIF. I wonder though how accurate folks are who have to calculate and implement the odds themselves?
Screenshot of AP Spreadsheet.
- 00-Attack-Planning.png (220.86 KiB) Viewed 163 times
Ronnie