Matrix Games Forums

Can we get back on topic please.

Short answer No. Detailed answer: yes, but only in vanilla/historic scenario having however some cleverly thought out variant scenarios (or variants in core scenario) like V4V had. That was great to experiment and see which one (or a combination of which) tipped the scales of balance to the other side. 3-5 per side per scenario should be enough. Among these could be winter equipment, preparing for the long run, bringing all possible divisions from the west, no lend-lease help, Japanese attack etc.

ORIGINAL: Seminole

Unemployment in the US is around 7.8%. That's pretty good compared to much of Europe.

The number of people employed today is 3 million fewer than the same time in 2008, while the population has grown by over 12 million people.
Five years of monetary pumping have created the worst U.S. recovery since the Great Depression.
The ONLY reason the touted unemployment number is 7.8% is because they have reduced the labor participation numbers to a 30 year low.

Austerity sucks. It just leads to the paradox of thrift, as per Keynes.

Keynes is wrong. Living within ones means is not 'austerity', it is the prerequisite reality to sustainable wealth creation. There must be savings before there can be investment. There must be investment before there can be increases in production. Demand is a market economy is always and only the other side of the production coin. You cannot consume (demand) that which has not been produced.
What kind of work is being done is critical (and where Keynes and Krugman go off the rails suggesting we dig up money in bottles, or build up defenses against a non-existent alien threat). You need real market prices to figure out what work needs to be done, and our monetary authorities around the globe are working overtime to mask that reality.

The Great Depression was really a bunch of recessions, we are making all the same mistakes again. The unemployment rate and inflation rate is much higher if you simply use per 1985 formules.

Printing money always helps the rich and crushes the poor, saves the banks and lowers the standard of living of the working class. Keynes was a coward and champion of the rich.

Germany has won WW III as they did things the right way and the rest of Europe was to lazy and printed money to save the banks and not the poeple.

Its amazing the turn of events, Europe is on their knees begging Germany for hand outs, but still to lazy to live withen their means.

Whats going on in Japan and Korea and soon Europe has nothing to do with money at its core.

The birth rate is 1.1 way to low to keep the population above water. Japan can print all the money they want or save and pay off the bills. It will fall apart because there will be more poeple over 60 then under soon.

You can't have economic growth with a shrinking population.

Again simple math that can not be ignored.

Whats going on now has more to do with growing or shrinking populations, the shrinking ones have the wealth and the growing ones want it.

What should WITE2 do with runaway German aircraft pools?

Yes sir! I'll re-ask my most recent question.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Pffft. "Intractable economic inferiority" my foot. The impressive thing about Germany is how strong that economy has been for the last century and then some. They have been punching well above their weight the entire time.

They didn't have to go to war in 1914 for economic reasons, either. All Germany has to do to win is...what they are doing now, as a matter of fact. Sit tight and allow their productivity to zoom ahead and dominate the European market and assume inevitable political leadership of Europe. Ironically, they don't want it anymore.

War is for chumps.

I fully agree. And Germany was certainly not forced to go to war in 1939, or to attack the SU in 1941. The decision to fight was primarily down to an expansionist and racist ideology, combined with a fear of the Soviets and Hitler's megalomania.

ORIGINAL: The Guru

1. The very existence of such a brutal entreprise as WWII stems from a number of "psychological" conditions in the German leadership. Players that want a WWII but with a very reasonable German leader in charge are asking for an historical aberration.

2. Victory in wargames should measure performance relatively to the goals of the military entreprise portrayed, not the contribution to the delaying of defeat.

I 100% agree with those points... I have long argued that victory should be judged relative to historical achievements within the same timescale.

I would add, as another poster has commented, that the restrictions within the game should be tightened to prevent a German retreat to Poland in '41 winter OR a Soviet pull back in summer '41. For example, if there are less than 10 Sov Divs within 10 hexes of Smolensk by X date = automatic defeat, etc. Such conditions reflect the historically (insanely?) tight limits imposed by both Hitler and Stalin on their generals. WitE players are the generals, they are not the supreme command.