• And second question, what is your strategy??

  • '10

    @Warplayer12:

    And second question, what is your strategy??

    I do not understand your question. Can you elaborate a little? Do you mean if I could control the military of any one of those countries? In WW II or modern times?


  • @Fishmoto37:

    @Warplayer12:

    And second question, what is your strategy??

    I do not understand your question. Can you elaborate a little? Do you mean if I could control the military of any one of those countries? In WW II or modern times?

    Choose 1 of the ww2 Major Powers And your Strategy.

  • '10

    The first thing I would do is can adolf! Then if I was determined to expand German borders I would wait until my Military was fully prepared for total war. That would be the Montgomery side of me. I would never do anything to bring the U.K. or the U.S. into conflict. Even if it took until 1950 I would never move against the Soviets until I was fully prepared. No need to attack France or any other nation allied with U.K. And I sure would not ally myself with Japan. Italy is another issue. I would probably invite the duce to Berlin and then throw him in the cooler. I would attempt to gain control of the Italian navy and then have the German navy take control. of all facilities and vessels. When I was ready I would go for the Suez canal through diplomacy. If I could intimidate the U.K. enough they might negotiate to stay out of war. Chamberlin instead of Winston. If there was no conflict with U.K. then Winston might never be a player. Once I got the Suez then I would go for the oil fields. Once I had the oil then I would go for living space in Russia. Of course I would already have the Balkans because of being the major power in Europe. Who knows there might be very little fighting to do if Germany negotiated through strength. Yes Germany sounds like more fun because I get to throw adolf in the cooler. BTW Warplayer is this what you were looking for?


  • I would have to go with The British Empire! My first major concern would be the matiance of the Fleet, upgrading the older, but still usable, WW1 vintage ships, while preparing for the new age of war with an improved carrier fleet, no more bi-planes sword fish diver bombers for us! I would also do everything to make sure that the RAF had all the newest models of aircraft and the best radar, AAA, and operational command centers to direct them. With both of these in place Britiania would be a fortress that any invading power would break itself upon!

    Then I would focus on the most important part of Britian, the Empire! I would do everything to improve the condition and readiness of the armed forces of the Empire and the Common wealth. I would try to make the Empires non-UK forces ready, and able, to deploy in force anywhere in the world when they are needed. By investing these nations war induatries and providing ships and other necessary vessels for logisitical aid, I would hope to be able to have up 50,000 common-wealth and imperial forces ready to deploy in only the amount of time it takes their convoys to get there.

    With Britian secure and impregnable, and the lion share of her global man power on call, no enemy would last long against us!

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    I would take over Command of ALL German forces, on the condition that military decisions were up to ME and my generals, and that Adolf’s concerns were the people.

    I would do as Fishmoto says, and making the demonizing and remove of “The Reds” the primary goal and focus, and I would obliterate them with zealous committment from the world FOREVER.


  • As commander of the U.S.S.R, I would wait on war with the West, until China’s Civil War is finished. Meanwhile I would use the vast Russian spy network to build up massive numbers of Socialist supporter in every country of the world. These supporters would wait for the right moment.

    I would then attack the west with between 50,000- 75,000 tanks. Poland would be crushed. Finland falls. Norway would give the U.S.S.R great warm water ports. Germany and France would fall from within from millions workers uniting under the banner of a ‘new world order.’

    I would hang Francisco Franco for his actions againist Spainish Communist.

    Turkey would be forced out of Europe giving Russia openings into the Mediterranean Sea.

    I would go into a treaty with Japan, conditions are Japan leaves China. Japan makes war on the West with the raw materials of the U.S.S.R behind the war efforts. Japan keeps all it captures. I now have a Navy to fight the U.S and G.B.

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    French Madagascar, would be the primary target of every available German soldier in the world.

    We would tell the French to meet us there, and to settle things.


  • I voted Germany, and here is my strategy:i would not cancel plan Z, the build of the german navy. Then i say to mussolini: if you invade greece, i take over italy and all italy has. I am not sure what i am gonna do with him, if he invades greece. Then instead of barbarossa, i attack egypt, and go for the middle east oil. then i unleash battle of britain. When the RAF is taken down, i go for britain, this helps italy in africa. I am only going for barbarossa if the soviets attacks me. And if i go for barbarossa, i will ask the help of Japan. Then i prepare for the USA invasion, and move some troops to the eastren border to scare off the soviets. When or the soviets or the USA are taken down, the other power will have NO CHANCE  to survive.


  • I chose Germany. Determining the correct strategy for this nation is a very tough challenge. I like challenges! :)

    However . . . Hitler, Stalin, and the other leaders involved with WWII were smart enough to figure out how to gain control over entire nations. I am not as smart as that, as shown by the fact that I haven’t seized control over any particular nation. For my plan to be better than the plans formulated by Hitler, Stalin, etc., I will make heavy use of hindsight and of information which had been unavailable at the time.

    The stated goal of Hitler’s foreign policy was to make Germany too strong for the Western democracies to ever again impose a Versailles Treaty on it, and too strong to be invaded by the Soviet Union. Hitler felt the successful conquest of the Soviet Union would achieve both purposes. For the sake of this scenario, I will make this my long-range goal as well.

    My chief challenge would be the defensive alliance between France and the Soviet Union, which was signed in 1935. This alliance would mean that if I invade the Soviet Union, France would most likely declare war against me. An invasion of France would likely mean war with Britain, and that in turn would pull the United States into things. Even if FDR didn’t manage to get the declaration of war he clearly wanted, he would at least use U.S. factories to produce large numbers of military aircraft and other weapons to provide to the British. More bluntly, it’s perfectly possible for the U.S. government to decide to wage an undeclared war–a war in which the might of American industry is used to destroy the German military. Invading the Soviet Union would likely mean a war against the major Western democracies as well.

    Given all these factors, Germany’s best option may have been to take the military and diplomatic actions it took, at least through 1940. I’m not saying this was necessarily a particularly good option–but it was probably less bad than any of its other options.

    In the late spring of 1941, the German Army consisted of 150 divisions. 80% of German men between the ages of 20 - 30 were members of the German military. The remaining 20% were considered too vital to industry for the military to have them. German military leaders had believed the Red Army consisted of 200 divisions. They were wrong. By the fall of '41, the Red Army consisted of 600 divisions. To make matters worse from the German perspective, the Soviets were able to add 500,000 new men to their army each month for most of the rest of the war. In 1942, the Soviets outproduced the Germans by a nearly 2:1 margin in terms of military aircraft, and by a factor of 3 or 4 in most major land categories. German military planners had not anticipated any of this. The Soviet Union of WWII had much more in common with the Soviet superpower of the Cold War era than with the backward Russia Germany had defeated in WWI.

    Therefore, I would not invade the Soviet Union in 1941. My military conquests for 1941 would be more modest: Spain, Greece, Turkey, and possibly other small nations in Eastern Europe. I would then approach the leaders of Vichy France, and offer them some Spanish territory in exchange for going to war against Britain. I would offer Mussolini part or all of Greece in exchange for stepping up his efforts in the Eastern Mediterranean and putting pressure on the British there as well. Having conquered Spain, I would seize Gibraltar directly, to close the western Mediterranean to the British. With Gibraltar under Axis control, and with the power of the Vichy French and Italian navies standing behind me, the Mediterranean would fall increasingly under Axis control.

    I would send two large land forces to attack the British Empire. One would arrive in Africa via Libya. The other would arrive via Turkey. (As an aside, I would be willing to forego the conquest of Turkey if that nation agreed to join the Axis outright.) The objective would be for the force from Turkey and the force from Libya to push towards each other and eventually meet. The long-range goal would be to push the British out of all of Africa and the Middle East. Success here would deprive Britain of much of its manpower and raw materials, while also giving Germany access to the valuable Persian oil fields.

    In addition, it is possible that a portion of the Middle Eastern population might be persuaded to fight either against the British or (later) against the Soviets. The Middle Eastern population could be told several things. 1) That the official state religion of the Soviet Union is atheism, and that many who believed in God had been persecuted and killed. 2) That a significant portion of the Soviet population was Muslim, but the Soviet government was trying to convert it to atheism. 3) That the Soviet Muslim population was being persecuted as part of the Soviets’ larger reign of terror.

    India would be a tougher nut to crack, unless the force based in Turkey moved very quickly. Ideally Japan would go to war against Britain, but not against the U.S. If the British force in India had to face a two front threat, India would fall more easily. An independent and neutral India would also be acceptable from the Axis standpoint. The main objective is to prevent the British from having a stronghold in south central Asia.

    It would probably take two years, or perhaps three, for these measures to be completed. By this time there will have been significant increases in both American and German military aircraft production. In the historical war, 1944 was the first year in which the Allied bombing effort was truly effective at destroying German cities and the German population. Even if the United States was technically not at war against Germany, it would still have provided large numbers of aircraft to the British to use to accomplish this bombing effort. In 1944 the U.S. produced 96,000 military aircraft to 41,000 for Germany and 26,000 for Britain.

    In this scenario, Britain’s ability to pay for American aircraft would have been significantly reduced due to the loss of so much of its empire. That loss may have created at least some financial constraints on America’s willingness to provide aircraft. Nevertheless, it would be necessary to focus the majority of Germany’s military aircraft production on the production of fighters, to defend against Allied strategic bombing raids. While this would not be enough to stop the raids, at least it would be enough to blunt their effectiveness. However, some fighter-bombers and medium bombers would also be necessary in Africa, the Middle East, and India.

    By 1944 or 1945 at the very latest, all British possessions in Africa or Asia should be under Axis control. All nations in Eastern Europe should either be under German control or at very least friendly toward Germany. There should be a massive effort underway to recruit soldiers from among anyone living under German occupation. It would also be necessary for Germany to undergo a massive rearmament and a retooling of its factories. In the historical war, Germany began fielding Me 262s in 1944. I would envision that by 1946, its aircraft production should consist of nothing but jets. In the historical war, Germany produced about 500 jets, roughly 100 of which saw combat. If (for example) it had produced 50,000 jets in 1945 or 1946, the impact would have been far greater.

    In addition to jets, I would also focus on Type XXI U-boats. Towards the end of WWII, Germany began producing large numbers of these highly sophisticated submarines. However, none saw action before the war ended. Between the jets and the u-boats, it would be possible not just to thwart the Allied bombing effort directed against German cities, but to gain superiority in the airspace above Britain, and to inflict massive damage on its navy. This could create a window of opportunity in which it would have been possible to invade Britain itself.

    By 1945 or 1946 I would hope to have E-Series tanks in production. E-Series tanks were intended to be much more easily manufactured than Germany’s existing tanks. In addition, the E-Series tanks would have been qualitatively superior to the tanks they replaced. The E-25 Standardpanzer would have been better than the Mark III and Mark IV, the E-50 would have been better than the Panther and Tiger I, and the E-75 would have been superior to the King Tiger/Tiger II.

    My army would be equipped with large numbers of E-Series tanks, assault rifles, and long-range Panzerfaust anti-tank weapons. My air force would consist largely of jet fighters and jet fighter bombers. I would have large numbers of soldiers from Europe, the Middle East, and possibly Africa. With a force like this I would invade the Soviet Union, regardless of whether it had or had not been possible to take Britain. This invasion would occur along as broad a front as possible. Ideally Finland, everywhere between the Baltic and Black Seas, Turkey, and Persia. I would also attempt to persuade Japanese leaders to initiate their own invasion from the east. (Though this would not be necessary for the plan to succeed.)

    The German Army would be far more motorized in this invasion than in the historical war. The Persian oil fields under Germany’s control would supply the fuel for this motorized army. Waiting until 1947 to invade would supply the extra time needed to build the required military trucks. While the Soviet Union would also be better prepared for invasion in 1947 than it had been in 1941, I strongly believe Germany would have benefited far more from those six extra years than the Soviets had. (Especially if Germany had taken the steps described above during that time.) German tanks, tactics, handheld weapons, and soldiers would be significantly superior to their Soviet counterparts; and the total size of the German force would be comparable to the Soviets’. Germany would have had a decisive technological advantage in 1946; which clearly had not been the case in '41.

    The initial invasion would deal the Soviets a hammer blow, and German strength would mean that there would not be the opportunity for them to recover. The German war machine would push eastward like a steamroller, destroying all resistance in its path.


  • USA - who wouldn’t want to have that industrial backing such that you had at your disposal more military equipment and supplies than the entire axis combined?  (for that matter, more than the USSR and GB combined also).

    The strategy would be simple.  Stay the course the war took, then after Germany is defeated in May 1945, turn Patton loose on the USSR (after the titanic struggle with Germany, Russia would/did have a shortage of manpower).  This would be the hardest part as the USSR at the end of the war was the largest potential enemy.

    With the USA on a war economy, don’t make the same mistakes Germany made: provide winter clothes for your soldiers and plan a defensive line winter 45-46 somewhere in East Europe.  Possibly start a second front in the Caucasus via Turkey/Iran but avoid Vladivostok as there is nothing significant there and is too close to the Japanese armies tied down in China.  Take the USSR out of the war over the course of 1946-47 or longer if necessary.  Preach (and deliver) liberation to the Ukranians, Baltic nations, Georgians, Armenians, etc. so that they turn against Stalin.  Some freedom for these nations would be acceptable to the USA provided they remain allies, and would probably be acceptable to them provided they had some level of self governance (and no purges).  Strat bomb the Russian oilfields in the Caucasus, the industrial production centers in the Urals and cut the transportation facilities via airpower.  With both a very significant production advantage and technology advantage, Russia should be beatable (despite the USSR advantage in espionage and manpower) with patience and persistence.

    Use atomic weapons in Moscow instead of Hiroshima if necessary as by 1945 Japan was like a bull in the barn.  You had Japan where you wanted it but couldn’t do anything to them (at least not without a huge fight in an invasion).  So let Japan wither by a blockade from your Navy while the bulk of your forces (including atomic) take over Russia.  If Russia and Japan produce and alliance, simply sever the trans-Siberian railroad via strategic bombing from China so that they are incapable of helping each other( which would primarily be via oil and Russian raw materials to Japanese held factories in Manchuria).

    After Russia is out, finish off Japan.  That only leaves a depleted and exhausted Great Britain, dependent on the USA for everything, which should then be easy pickings.  The promise of internal self-governing to the Middle East, India, and other parts of the British empire might play out much like in Russia.  Canada and Australia would be more difficult than the depleted GB…but at a small fraction of the size of the USA, these nations would not be a problem either.


  • @KurtGodel7:

    The initial invasion would deal the Soviets a hammer blow, and German strength would mean that there would not be the opportunity for them to recover. The German war machine would push eastward like a steamroller, destroying all resistance in its path.

    You still have the problem in Russia of attacking with a Mechanized force across extreme conditions- little to no road systems, rivers, swamps, forest and fighting an enemy that will leave stronghold behind to be dealt with.

    You will be asking your men to fight a battle with no chance chance of a quick victory. There are no vital targets, no death blows targets the first 400 miles inside Russia. Your army will have to fight an epic battle, near Moscow, with a 800 mile supply line; facing an enemy that is getting supplied a few miles away. That’s risking a lot.

  • 2024 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17

    @221B:

    after the titanic struggle with Germany, Russia would/did have a shortage of manpower

    Errrrh…. I suppose you haven’t seen this map:

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    Clearly by Mechanized… he means HELICOPTERS! and NUKES! :P :P :P

    And without anyone else at your back…  you’re sending 100% of everything.


  • @ABWorsham:

    @KurtGodel7:

    The initial invasion would deal the Soviets a hammer blow, and German strength would mean that there would not be the opportunity for them to recover. The German war machine would push eastward like a steamroller, destroying all resistance in its path.

    You still have the problem in Russia of attacking with a Mechanized force across extreme conditions- little to no road systems, rivers, swamps, forest and fighting an enemy that will leave stronghold behind to be dealt with.

    You will be asking your men to fight a battle with no chance chance of a quick victory. There are no vital targets, no death blows targets the first 400 miles inside Russia. Your army will have to fight an epic battle, near Moscow, with a 800 mile supply line; facing an enemy that is getting supplied a few miles away. That’s risking a lot.

    Your post is absolutely correct. There can be no argument that conquering the Soviet Union would have been a gargantuan task. You’re right about the terrain, the length of the supply lines, and the implication that the required battles would be of epic proportions. In addition, the Soviets an overwhelming numerical advantage in available infantry. My impression is that the Soviet numerical advantage was 3:1 over the Germans, but declined to 2:1 after taking into account the Romanians, Hungarians, Finns, Italians, and anti-communist Soviet citizens who fought alongside German soldiers on Germany’s Eastern Front during WWII.

    In the historical war, Germany lacked oil. As a consequence, its supply lines had to be largely oil-free. Coal-powered trains would deliver supplies most of the way to the front, and horses would take them the rest of the way to where they were needed. This transportation method can work well during a relatively static war, but is inadequate for the kind of mobile war necessary to conquer the Soviet Union. During the invasion of the Soviet Union some gasoline-powered transportation was available to supplement the horse and coal method. But this supply delivery mechanism was wholly inadequate because of Germany’s lack of oil. Germany’s inability to adequately supply its troops was why its soldiers often lacked winter uniforms during the winter of '41 - '42.

    In the scenario I outlined, Germany would have control of the Persian oilfields for several years leading up to the invasion. That oil would allow military trucks to play a much greater role in supplying Germany’s soldiers than had been the case in the actual war. I realize this supply effort would become less effective in fall (muddy roads) and winter (freezing engines). Even so, this would still represent a dramatic improvement over the supply situation Germany faced in the historical war.

    I envision the Soviets’ quantitative advantage being offset in three ways.

    1. By outproducing them. Germany experienced a nearly threefold increase in its aircraft production between 1942 and 1944. My scenario envisions putting this kind of efficient production into effect several years before the invasion of the Soviet Union.

    2. Largely offset the Soviets’ quantitative advantage in available infantry. Even if some group of foreign recruits proved one fifth or one tenth as effective as Germans on a man-for-man basis, it would still be better than nothing. And if, due to poor motivation or lack of discipline, foreign soldiers proved relatively ineffective, that problem could be solved through sheer numbers. A large non-German force invading northward from Persia could tie down a significant amount of the Red Army’s strength; and indeed could kill or capture a large number of Soviet soldiers. While the main hammer blow would be the German Army attacking from the west, it would be logical to create as many problems for the Soviet Army as possible.

    3. By building a qualitative advantage over them. On a man-for-man basis, Germany’s infantry were about three times as combat effective as their Soviet counterparts (see http://www.dupuyinstitute.org/pdf/e-4epw1and2final.pdf ). But for most of the war, Soviet soldiers were, on average, as well or better armed than their German counterparts. That problem could be solved by the assault rifle. It was introduced late in the war, and in very small numbers. It proved exceptionally effective at allowing German soldiers to mow down their Soviet counterparts. The improved supply situation (Persian oil) and manufacturing situation means that German infantry and artillery would have plenty of ammunition.

    By far the best handheld anti-tank weapon of WWII was the Panzerfaust. The first version of the Panzerfaust could penetrate the frontal armor of any widely deployed Allied tank, but only had a range of 30 meters. That range was soon doubled to 60 meters. By 1945, Germany had deployed a few Panzerfausts with a range of 150 meters, and with a better sighting mechanism and even better armor penetration than their predecessors. Germany was in the process of developing a Panzerfaust with a 250 meter range when the war ended. Had the invasion of the Soviet Union taken place in 1947 or '48, the Panzerfaust 250 could have been put into widespread deployment, making German infantry devastating against Soviet tanks.

    Another important aspect of the qualitative situation involves tanks. The T-34 was an exceptional tank by the standards of 1941. But by 1944, even the upgraded version (T-34-85) was getting long in the tooth. In the Korean War, it had become clear that the T-34-85 was obsolete in competitions against the tanks Britain and the U.S. had begun deploying in 1945 and '46. In subsequent Arab-Israeli conflicts, T-44/54 model tanks would also prove highly ineffective/obsolete against very early postwar British and American tanks.

    This is where the Entwicklung Series (E-Series) tanks could have been immensely valuable to Germany. Just as Panthers were qualitatively superior to T-34-85s, the E-50 would have been qualitatively superior to the T-44/54. The E-Series was designed to be much more easily manufactured and more mechanically reliable than its predecessors. Instead of a handful of Panthers against a horde of T-34-85s, it would have been a very large number of E-50s against those T-34-85s! Additionally, the E-50 would have been a better tank than the Panther or Tiger I, and the E-75 would have been superior to the Tiger II. Panthers and Tigers were often lost to mechanical problems or lack of fuel rather than enemy action. But with the increased mechanical reliability of the E-Series, and with the Persian Oil, German tanks would become much less likely to be lost to such causes.

    The Soviet Union did not develop jet engines during WWII. In 1946, Stalin was able to license jet technology from a pro-Soviet British Labour government. That technology was then put to use in the Korean War; where the MiG proved an effective aircraft.

    During the Korean War, the democracies’ most effective jet fighter was the F-86 Sabre. It would not be too much of an exaggeration to call the Sabre a knockoff of the Me 262, except with better engines. The Germans had begun using Me 262s in combat in 1944; and had already begun work on designing their next generation of jet aircraft. Had that next generation been deployed in the Korean War, both the Soviets’ and democracies’ aircraft would have been obsolete in comparison.

    Had the German invasion of the Soviet Union occurred around 1947 or '48, German aircraft would have had a commanding qualitative edge over their Soviet counterparts, even if the Soviets had been able to license jet technology.

    Not only were German air designs more advanced than their Allied counterparts. Late in WWII, Germany began developing advanced air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles. Waiting until 1947 or '48 to invade would have given Germany the chance to refine these designs and to put them into widespread deployment. Germany would have controlled the skies above the battlefield. It would have used that control to destroy Soviet tanks and artillery, to strafe retreating columns of Soviet soldiers, to take out bridges and trains, and generally to wreak havoc.

    While the Soviet military’s strength was immense, not even they could have withstood an onslaught such as this.

Suggested Topics

  • 10
  • 23
  • 42
  • 2
  • 22
  • 4
  • 9
  • 7
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

44

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts