Ideas for sceanrios

[Honda]

Interesting. Although I don't see Hitler and Stalin getting killed in Poland - interesting. In such a scenario, I would consider playing Allies as underdogs.
As far as alternate history, the stuff is possible. German involment in '43 and later would be intersting. I wonder what they would be able to do against US stamrunner when it gets going. Of course, some meddling with VPs would be necessary to reflect the new circumstances.
All in all, good idea.

[LTCMTS]

Tankerace and I have had this discussion before. By 1930, the RN would have had Argus, Eagle, Hermes, Furious, Glorious and Courageous, if not Vindictive as carriers. During the early thirties, the RN operated the Furious, Courageous and Glorious as a carrier task force in the Med. 2) The USN wanted carriers so bad, they were already planning in 1920 on cancelling the Ranger (CC4) and using the material for a fleet CV. The General Board wanted four carriers authorized and funds appropriated for FY20, and when that didn't happen, they turned to converting the "Lexingtons" even before the Washington Treaty. If the USN got it way, and the international scene had forced Congress to appropriate greater sums for completing the 1916 Program, they would have wanted at least 4 fleet carriers (not Langley types but Lexington size) in service by 1926. None of the 1916 program, the IJN 8-8-8 or the RN's G3 and N3 would have been completed before 1922, so to get the "South Dakotas", the "Lexingtons", the "Tosas" and the "Amagis" into the picture, the scenario couldn't start before 1929.

[Tankerace]

ORIGINAL: LTCMTS

Tankerace and I have had this discussion before. By 1930, the RN would have had Argus, Eagle, Hermes, Furious, Glorious and Courageous, if not Vindictive as carriers. During the early thirties, the RN operated the Furious, Courageous and Glorious as a carrier task force in the Med. 2) The USN wanted carriers so bad, they were already planning in 1920 on cancelling the Ranger (CC4) and using the material for a fleet CV. The General Board wanted four carriers authorized and funds appropriated for FY20, and when that didn't happen, they turned to converting the "Lexingtons" even before the Washington Treaty. If the USN got it way, and the international scene had forced Congress to appropriate greater sums for completing the 1916 Program, they would have wanted at least 4 fleet carriers (not Langley types but Lexington size) in service by 1926. None of the 1916 program, the IJN 8-8-8 or the RN's G3 and N3 would have been completed before 1922, so to get the "South Dakotas", the "Lexingtons", the "Tosas" and the "Amagis" into the picture, the scenario couldn't start before 1929.

There was a good sized movement for carriers by the end of World War I. British success with the Furious at raiding the Dutch coastline, and the effectiveness of using scout planes to find the battle line (such as at Jutland from the seaplane carrier Engadine) proved that. However, In the US the carrier was regarded as an expensive experiement, thanks mainly to a general anti-war sentiment and the love of the battleship. To quote one pilot after the results of the 1922 treaty was something on the lines of: "Most of our battleships are gone. More capital ships sunk with a pen and paper than have ever been sunk in wartime. But, we still have the Langley. They didn't think the Langley was worth sinking."

While it is fascinating to think of what happened, the fact is that by the signing of the treaty in 1922, carriers were seen as scouts. The British had Argus and Furious, with Eagle and Hermes building. The Japanese had the Hosho with Shokaku building, and the US had the Langley.

While the US wanted to convert some Lexingtons, given the pattern of building and funding in the '20s, it is quite probably that none would have been converted. THe same can be said of the Japanese. Building of carriers was seen as a way to supplement the use of the battleship, and to make use of the battleship and battlecruiser hulls that would now otherwise be scrapped.

The War Plan Orange mod only changes one main historical detail, the Washington treaty. None of the "never weres" will be seen in the 1922-1926 scenario. In the '26-30 scenario, that is when they come to play. By 1928, all 6 Lexingtons would have been in service. In the Japanese side, they weren't constructing any carriers until the 1930's. The British, as they can keep their capital ships, will keep Courageous and Glorios in their large light cruiser roles.

As to the never-were design service dates in the mod, Tosa appears in 1923-1924 for the Japanese. Having already been launched in 1922, her completion would have only required no more than another year. Being 70 some percent complete, the US gets the Colorado class Washington in 1923. In 1926, the first of the never were designs come in, with the Kaga joining her sister, plus Amagi, and the US receives the South Dakota and the Lexington. The rest will arrive at about 1 or 2 per year.

No British never were designs, with the exception of the 3 follow on Admiral class BCs, are included. I made this decision because given Britain's financial situation, it would be extremely doubtful if they would have been completed in the first place. 3 additional Hoods, for 6 designs never laid down is a better design decision.

This gives each side a nice balance of carriers, 2 for Japan, with the option to convert 2 pre dreadnoughts to CVLs, 1 for the US with the option to convert 3 ACRs into CVLs, and the British with 2 carriers (Eagle and Hermes won't be included in the database). As to right now, only 1 British carrier will definately make an appearance, so if no conversions are done it will be a 2-2 tie.

The truth is that the naval mentality of the 1920's was still a battleship one. The Washington Treaty began the forced transition to carriers, but it is quite probable that if it had never been signed, then the battleship Admirals would have still been firmly in power, especially with their new playtoys.

In addition, as mentioned in my Plan Orange updates, early carrier aircraft are extremely short ranged. While they are good for work in the North Sea and in Europe, their relative short range (300-350 miles) makes them all but ineffective in the Pacific anyway. The greater use of aircraft and carriers will be as scouts, much as how the Langley (And indeed the Furious and Argus) were intended. No carrier based plane in the WPO mod will exceed the 500 mile range, so for operational use you get maybe 3 hexes. 4 at the most.

[RUPD3658]

ORIGINAL: mikemike

One idea for a scenario I´m playing around with is a bit involved:

Hitler and Stalin and all of their closest advisors/associates except Berija and Speer have a secret meeting in Poland in July 1940. They are all killed by a bomb laid by the Polish underground.
Berija, as the surviving strongman, runs amok with purges. In contrast, in Germany, those in power are rather more rational and pragmatic than Hitler´s boys. Maybe adopt Goering as a figurehead. They do nothing much about Britain (no Battle of Britain!) or the Mediterranean - Mussolini has been talked out of entering the war -, but attack the Soviet Union in March 1941 (they want to pre-empt Berija attacking them). The Soviet Union collapses with rather less resistance than historically, because for most Russians the Germans are a lesser threat than Berija and his secret police. The Russian Campaign ends in an armistice that splits off the Baltic states, Belorussia, and the Ukraine as independent states under German influence. The Germans get to occupy the Caucasus region with its oil and have unlimited right of transfer through the territory of the Soviet Union. The Soviet armed forces are limited in size (this is monitored) and the Soviet Union has to deliver raw materials, foodstuffs, machinery, and weapons to Germany and its Allies.
Now for the Pacific relevance:
Japan has, concurrently with the German attack in the west, started a limited offensive against Mongolia and Siberia that prevented the Soviets from transferring any Siberian troops to the west. As their part of the spoils, they get much of the Soviet Far East from Komsomolsk down to Vladivostok, all the Soviet Far East Fleet, and the same kind of reparation deliveries as the Germans. Thus, more oil, steel, coal, and food for Japan, so Japan could get by without the resources of the British and Dutch colonies. Japan´s LCU´s also are upgraded with Soviet Artillery, AA guns and tanks. The air force may get stuff like the IL-2m3 and the La-7, but they will certainly get a number of German types like the FW190, the Ju88 or the He219. Some German army units may be transferred to the Pacific (the "Pazifkkorps"), also some Luftwaffe Geschwader. The Kriegsmarine should make an appearance only with a number of U-Boats (transferred via the Indian Ocean) and small ships (S-Boats and MFP barges, transferred via the Transsib Railway and reassembled in the Komsomolsk shipyard).

The war this time starts on December 6, 1942. Germany has attacked the British position in the Mediterranean in May, 1942, so we still get the influence of the Med situation.

This one should be harder for the Allies.

Find and read a book called "The Moscow Option". I don't recall the author but he plays out the scenario you just described except Hitler is killed in a plan crash in Mid 41. Good reading.

[Tanaka]

I would like to see someone do a short Midway battle scenario sort of like the Coral Sea one in the game. Would be fun to try to change the historical outcome of this battle.

[Hoplosternum]

There are lots of good ideas here. But some are better than others [;)]

Apart from the themed scenario's such as Tankerace's Plan Orange a good question to ask is what you want to get out of the scenario balance wise.

As I see it the historical scenario has a few months of the Japanese running amok. There is little the allies can do strategically. Japan can always get the numbers and combat power. Lets call this phase 1. But this phase does not last for ever and then you have a period of balance when both sides can hurt the other and gain local superiority if they concentrate at a point their opponent does not or cannot. Lets call that period phase 2. Then comes a final phase which is much longer (Phase 3 - see the pattern [;)] ) Here the Japanese are being ground down by a larger and better equipped opponent. In UV it was all but impossible for the Japanese to hold out for a points win in '43. I suspect, but don't know, that this is the case in WitP.

Personally I like the phase 2 part best. Especially against a human opponent. It's here that you can both attack but also have to defend. You cannot to everything you want nor take every perceived opportunity. There is a degree of bluff and out guessing going on that is far less evident in Phase 1 or 3, which is merely the case of the proper allocation of overwhelming force. Not an easy thing to pull off in the time available but a rather one sided affair whether you're doing it well or badly.

So the suggestions that boost Japan at the beginning but still have them having to do the fighting (like the attack CW and Dutch first) to me just extends Phase 1 or makes it even more one sided. Interesting to discuss but not necessarily to play. Where as the suggestion in RUPD's Nightmare in the Pacific helps the Japanese yet shortens the Phase 1. Pretty much throwing you straight into Phase 2 with the allies being in a very precarious position but having the tools to hit back.

Scenarios that boost Japan's long term staying power such as getting some German help from 1943 onwards will extend Phase 2. I also like the idea of having a few German planes scattered about (even though they will fly as Japanese). If Russia is neutral it's plausible to have the machine tools and experts come across Siberia to help build them in Japan to.

By the way does anybody know how I can get my hands on some extra plane art? Is anyone working towards the Stukas, Bearcats, Shooting Stars, Lancasters, Bf 109s and Fw 190s? Which I could borrow [:D]

[steveh11Matrix]

One that I'm thinking of is a case where Mussolini does a Franco and keeps Italy out of the war. I'm guessing that France falls anyway, and Vichy is still created, but the Mediterranean theatre never goes "hot".

The result is fewer distractions for the Germans, but much less chance foe the British & Commonwealth to get bogged down in a land war in 1941/42.

In Game terms I'm thinking of increasing both logistical and unit commitments to the Pacific/Indian theatres. Once war opens a more substantial commitment of the fleet, more aircraft - though not much more, as the RAF is having to carry the fight in Europe - and considerably more ground troops, Engineers and Support troops.

Probably the Japanese will still be able to conquer Malaya and capture Singapore. Hong Kong is likely lost very early still. But the aim as the Allies would be to reconquer it in less than a year, or to force MUCH higher commitment to this theatre by the Japanese at the expense of some expansion and defence capability. I feel this should lead to a shorter but interesting game. I love "What-If" anyway!

BTW "The Moscow Option" was by David Downing. Good read.
Steve.

[mutterfudder]

Howbout reversing the roles and making the Allies the aggressor?