Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Well, the game allows you to adjust the players attitude towards the emeny, mild to harsh. So historically I can see where the odds of surrender were low, but if I can puppet England, why not Russia before I get to the Urals? Also, I chose a Mild policy towards the Russians so their will to fight to the bitter end should be much reduced imho. So I think some combination of policy and military success should have some kind of impact on when Russia would give up.

After all in my game I created the Ukrane as a seperate country, why not allow others to be formed as well? The Ukraians were not the only seperatist group in the USSR that would have loved to break away.

ORIGINAL: aspqrz

You are making a whole slew of assumptions that do not actually apply.

See, the reason the Russians keep on fighting, and would have, is because the Germans really gave them no option.

Remember all those welcoming Ukrainians and Byelorussians? Hated Stalin so much they welcomed the Nazis as liberators?

Well, did you know the German commanders didn't know how to handle this?

Probably not. Most people don't.

Do you know *why* they didn't know how to handle this?

Almost certainly not, as it is rarely, if ever, raised in general histories of the war, except in the most general, and therefore misleading, terms.

The reason the German commanders didn't know how to handle this was simply because the German operational and strategic planning requirements were based on the assumption that the population of the western USSR would be decreased, *in place* (i.e. not by deportation outside of the region), by 60% ... yes sixty percent ... within ten to twenty years.

What did this mean, in practise?

Deliberate starvation of the local population. Especially the local urban population. Initial plans were simply to cordon off major cities rather than capture and occupy them and shoot anyone who tried to leave, allowing little or no food in, and letting "nature" do the work for the Germans.

Yes, the German generals over-rode some of this planning, because, for example, the cities were transportation or industrial r communications hubs and simply surrounding and besieging them was actually militarily stupid.

And, of course, you'll argue, "I'm not Hitler. They didn't have to behave that way! The Russian people will welcome me and love me!"

Well, not so much, as it turns out.

Recent (say the last 20 years) research has shown that the Nazi state was a huge economic basket case, especially as regards food production.

The attack on Poland in 1939 was predicated on the understanding that the German farming sector would be so badly effected by the mobilisation of all those farmers sons (it was almost completely unmechanised, and so required much more manpower inputs than, say, British or American agriculture) that, unless they stripped food from conquered Poland there would be such a shortfall in domestic production that there would be famine.

So, the plan for Poland, in 1939, was to starve the population ... and they did just that ... to feed the victorious German burghers and their families.

When they attacked in the West in 1940, their occupation policies were to strip the occupied countries there to the bone, instituting severe rationing, and sending the food back home to Germany to support the populace at pretty much pre-war levels.

The planning for Barbarossa was predicated on the same assumptions.

So, if you *don't* murder/starve/exterminate those welcoming Ukrainians, Byelorussians etc. then it should, in reality, be at the expense of a *huge* hit to domestic unrest and production bottlenecks.

It didn't take long for the Russian people to do some pretty basic survival calculations and, basically, as a number of interesting (mainly British) Historians have shown, the results were that, as hated as Stalin was, his regime was predictably bad and, with a little care, you and your family had a better chance of surviving under it than under the Nazis.

This really doesn't change even if the Germans get to the Urals.

I doubt its modelled, but it should be.

Phil

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Your Theory of why buy the cow when you get the milk for free is an assumption all in itself. The Ukrainians and Byelorussians would have gladly joined the Germans if the Germans wanted them to. It was the German (and yes the German commanders knew how to handle this) policy however that made this simply not on option as it would have went against German propaganda and ideology to do so.

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Yes but as the Leader of the State (which is the thrust of the game), you can chose in a limited way how you will treat people you invade. So as Germany you could chose to be a liberater versus how they were historically. So if I am given the option of creating the Ukraine (which I was in my game), then why not other parts of the USSR as well?

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft

hmmm ... this is getting interesting (grabs popcorn and settles down to watch the flame war)

ORIGINAL: aspqrz

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Yes but as the Leader of the State (which is the thrust of the game), you can chose in a limited way how you will treat people you invade. So as Germany you could chose to be a liberater versus how they were historically. So if I am given the option of creating the Ukraine (which I was in my game), then why not other parts of the USSR as well?

Yes, indeed. But the Germans behaved the way they did because of things that were often partly or even entirely out of control.

Sort of like the Japanese efforts at wargaming WW2 in the Pacific.

You know the story?

After the Diplomats and Military Attaches to UK and USA were exchanged for their allied counterparts, they were gathered together and told to act as the Allies in a kriegspiel meant to help the IJA/IJN game out strategic alternatives.

Of course, they were loaded down with all sorts of limitations that simply didn't apply to the real world allied economies ... and gave the IJA/IJN fantasy alternatives (not enough oilers to let the Kido Butai carry out that operation? No probs! Pretend they exist! Out of fuel? No probs! Pretend it appears like manna from heaven! Can't get enough soldiers there in time because of transport bottlenecks, and can't supply 'em when they do get there? No probs! Magic everything so that the fantasyland express delivers it all)yet, within two game years the Allied forces were running wild all across the Pacific.

At which the IJN High Command terminated the game. Their reason? The Spirit of Banzai would overcome all.

Do you want to play a fantasy scenario that handwaves away economic and logistical reality?

Fine. I have no problem with that.

However, I want the option of a game scenario that adheres reasonably closely to such reality.

YMMV.

Phil
Need I point out that the Allied players in that game were correct?

ORIGINAL: aspqrz

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Your Theory of why buy the cow when you get the milk for free is an assumption all in itself. The Ukrainians and Byelorussians would have gladly joined the Germans if the Germans wanted them to. It was the German (and yes the German commanders knew how to handle this) policy however that made this simply not on option as it would have went against German propaganda and ideology to do so.

It's not my anything. Its the work of a lot of very smart Historians and Economists who have actually studied the guts of the German (and Allied, and Soviet) records for the last 60 odd years (some of them very odd, until 1989 or so).
(source ?????????)
It's also more than a theory. It's pretty widely accepted in the non-coffee table WW2 book scene.
{Source??????????}
Do you, personally, have to play it that way.

Of course not.

However, since you, personally, believe you have a perfectly reasonably expectation to have the game based around fantasies that simply weren't possible, or were only possible with severe disadvantages that you wish to handwave away, and I don't disagree with this, how about accepting that people who want to have something close(ish) to reality have the same right?
(Can't figure out what he is going off on)
Have a fantasy scenario or scenarios, by all means!

Just at least have the option of a historical one for those of us who want that ... or at least allow it to be modded for.

YMMV

Phil

ORIGINAL: doomtrader

The issue is that there was not really anything else than X.
Ukrainians where the only major nation in the Western part (the one represented in the game) of the SU.

ORIGINAL: rogo727
You give no sources, and you seem to be ranting about some sort of fantasy that I have? Try reading these books (note not coffee table books)

ORIGINAL: rogo727
Absolute War by Chris Bellamy- Soviet Russia in the second word war.
The Russo-German War 1941-1945 by Albert Seaton
The Rise and Fall of the Thrid Reich by William Shirer

ORIGINAL: rogo727
Also you state that Hitlers greatest blunder was the the attack on Russia ........even the smartest economist will tell you that it was Germany's declaration on the united states that lead to Germany's defeat.

ORIGINAL: doomtrader

The issue is that there was not really anything else than X.
Ukrainians where the only major nation in the Western part (the one represented in the game) of the SU.