World War 2: Empire or Freedom Creation Thread

[techumseh]

Palaiologos2:
You "don't see war as inherently evil". Too bad, because it is. You reject the concept of "justice" in international affairs. Very sad. Since you admit to believing in the concept of "might makes right", your support of fascist aggression is obvious.

Whether or not the the Sudetenland was, in Hitler's eyes, "legitimate German lands" is no justification to violate international law. The Sudetenland, as part of Bohemia and later Czechoslavakia, had never been part of Germany. The Nazis had no right under international law to occupy it.

The argument that the Nazi Party was really on the left shows a lack of understanding of the actual politics of the Nazi Party. Are you unaware of the "Night of the Long Knives" in which Hitler purged the left of the Party? Is the color of their flag supposed to be some sort of proof of their actual policies? The Nazi's posed as a socialist party in order to win support. That's very different from their actual policy.

"National collective memory"? There's a Nazi concept, if ever I heard one.

And the Greco-Turkish conflict isn't relevent to the political and historical background of the Second World War.

(edited for civility. Apologies to Palaiologos2 for losing my cool.)

 

[Alsbron]

Calm down all. Try to keep it civil. This has taken a downward turn I fear. Thoughts on the alternate WW3 scenario idea between India, China, Russia vs. US and Europe? I am working on aspects of the scenario general to any game at the moment so thematic changes are still possible.

 

[Palaiologos2]

I am not apologizing for anyone.
Seeing political affairs cynically is not "supporting fascist aggression".
"Left" is reffering exclusively to the economic policies of said party and their base of support in the social spectrum. Needless to say it is wrong to view the term as in modern context.

As for debating the notion of "justice" in international affairs, you'll have to excuse me but whoever believes in such a thing is pretty much ignoring reality.
Military, diplomatic and economic standing determines "justice" in the affairs of states you like it or not.
In our modern world f.e the diplomatic and military power of the USA is undisputed. Hence they are the international policeman, judge and lawmaker. They use tottaly abstract notions such as "peacekeeping", "human rights" and whatever to project their power. Its perfectly acceptable.

As for the Sudetenland, you as a proper humanist should acknowledge that the Sudeteland Germans were exhilarated when the German army entered their lands. Despite what you label as "aggression" the people ACTUALLY CONCERNED were happy with the change of things.

 

[civ2units]

@Techumseh:
I´m sometimes afraid that I use some words or sentences which could be understand in a wrong way. English isn´t my native language so it´s in some part sometimes difficult to find the correct words. Especially when talking about Hitler, the Third Empire and his plans.

@Palaiologos2:
In my opinion Hitler used the german claims on the polish corridor to Danzig and the territories of former Silesia to realize his plans. He had always in mind to colonize the Eastern territories. He never had any claims on Poland or the Sudetenland. Both where never part of Germany.

The annexion of Austria (also never part of Germany, even if they are speaking german) as too the annexion of the Czech Republik were both acts of war. Hitler´s luck was that the Western powers (mainly France and Britain) accepted these occupations. If they had declared war on Hitler in 1938, I´m sure the war would be over in 1939. Hitler army wasn´t really prepared for war at this time.

The Western powers accepted during the Munich Pact in 1938 Hitlers annexations of the Czech Republic and Austria to avoid a new war in Europe. Hitler himself now thought he can get everything because the Western Powers won´t have a war and will accept everything what he want.

With the occupation of Poland France and Britain declared Hitler war and stops his claims on other countries. Hitler used his military machine to get what he want. He himself and his military stuff were suprised about the fast victories in Europe.

I won´t imagine if Hitler also had occupied Great Britain and accordingly conquered the last free territory in Europe. I´m happy that this never happened. Also that he never had any chance to get the oil fields in Arabia.

Hitlers war and his crazy plans formed Europe and the rest of the world over 40 years. Over 60 million people died during this war.

@Alsbron:
This sounds also interesting as we don´t have many scenarios which plays during the Cold War or nowadays.

 

[Palaiologos2]

@Palaiologos2:
In my opinion Hitler used the german claims on the polish corridor to Danzig and the territories of former Silesia to realize his plans. He had always in mind to colonize the Eastern territories. He never had any claims on Poland or the Sudetenland. Both where never part of Germany.

The annexion of Austria (also never part of Germany, even if they are speaking german) as too the annexion of the Czech Republik were both acts of war. Hitler´s luck was that the Western powers (mainly France and Britain) accepted these occupations. If they had declared war on Hitler in 1938, I´m sure the war would be over in 1939. Hitler army wasn´t really prepared for war at this time.

The Western powers accepted during the Munich Pact in 1938 Hitlers annexations of the Czech Republic and Austria to avoid a new war in Europe. Hitler himself now thought he can get everything because the Western Powers won´t have a war and will accept everything what he want.

With the occupation of Poland France and Britain declared Hitler war and stops his claims on other countries. Hitler used his military machine to get what he want. He himself and his military stuff were suprised about the fast victories in Europe.

I don't understand why you feel the need to clarify.
I never disputed any of this. The French and British were guarranteeing Czechia as well. Once they made clear it to the Czechs that they were not going to uphold their guarantee the Czechs gave up Sudentenland and later the rest of the country.

 

[civ2units]

These are just my opinions to this topic, compared with the knowledge from some history books.

I find this discussion interesting because it contains different views of a very dark part of Germany´s history. Finally we all have the same view of what happens 70 years ago.

However I read the beginning of the thread and the idea of the scenario which Albron have in mind. It sounds very interesting and would be a great story for a Civ2 scenario. I like "what if" scenarios. I don´t know how realistic a war with Nazi-Germany allied with the Western Powers against the Japanese Empire would be but we are playing Civ2, a game where everything could be possible. So why not create a scenario where the Nazis won the war (which horrify imagination) and the world would look in the 50´s and 60´s.

I saw a movie years ago which contains a story in a alternate history, where Hitler won WWII. It was a interesting movie and showed, how the holocaust against the jews and other ethnics would happened without the people notice anything. The movie ended with Kennedy arriving in Berlin and a American journalist shows him pictures and protocolls of the holocaust. Hitler needed at this time a new ally for his war against the Soviet Union. Unfortunatelly I don´t remember the name of the movie.

Alsbron, if you would like to create a alternate history scenario, please do so. I find this idea interesting. And there is one advantage, historical accuracy isn´t really needed. You can use your fantasy to create a alternate world.

 

[Ingvar VII]

@Alsbron: Why have India as part of the Eastern power and Pakistan as part of the West? Although I guess the Eastern powers would be very much strengthened by India.

How will you split up the Middle-East?

 

[McMonkey]

I really think the discussion about Hitler's intentions is an interesting one, but if we are to continue it might I suggest starting up a separate thread as this one is for Alsbron's scenario and we are really going off on a tangent! Thanks

(I posted a huge reply yesterday evening but it never showed up so I'm as guilty of thread-jacking as anyone else! )

 

[clightning]

@ techumseh:
Thanks for these discussion and information.
But when talking about numbers, there are storys behind them.
On paper US produced less aircrafts them all other major combatants together(not a big less anyway), but please be awared that in terms of productivity: 1 P-38/P-47 almost=2 regular fighters, 1 P-51=1.5, B-17/B-24(which is a large part of US production)=6-8, and B-29= even more. But most German/Soviet aircrafts are single engine light fighter/tactical bomber. Only UK has a similar portfolio. If this is counted, US score would be much higher.
For the tanks, yes Soviet is the king of tank, in quantity, practicability, and overall cpmbat ability. But IIRC in 1945 the operational Soviet tanks in Europe theater are at a similar scale compare to US tanks there. Soviet supply line comes directly from home, and US line from across ocean.
Anyway tank is not on top of US'shopping list as for Soviet(yet it's 2nd largest only next to Soviet). It would be more fair to also count ships tonnage builded in the war.
US is still not in a full power state in 1945 as all other major combatants. It still has potential.
And US has another unbalanced power: A-bomb. No other country is close to complete it in 1945. Nazi scientists (Heisenberg? is that name?) has some theory fault, was on a wrong way.
Sorry that can't post detailed stat numbers as yours for now, just remember these above.

On the other hand, i agree that the efforts of non-US countrys to defeat Nazi should not be under valued or under respected (especially the often blamed Soviet).

Regard to
"Given that it took all three powers, whose combined production far outstripped Germany's, until 1945 to defeat Hitler's regime, it's unlikely that one alone could have done so, especially if the industrial capacity of the other two had fallen into German hands.":

1, Germany military hardware seemd to be more powerful than others, but that's not because of a ability bonus, that's because the well trained soldiers. But Germany can not expand supply of well trained soldier as easily as to expand hardware production. So when its production get doubled, its overall combat ablity can not.
2, Even if Germany can occupy UK and USSR, it can not make full use of their productivity. Why? Because Nazi even didn't fully use its own productivity, befor 1942/43(?). Besides, the lost of original resources and organisation will cripple those UK/USSR productivity from being use by Nazi for some long time.
And BTW, my point of US can still save the world is based on UK hold British island, not US against rest of the world led by Nazi.

And about Isolationism, that is a problem. But US started Lend-Lease Program half a year before Japanese attack. It shall at least try to do something to save UK if UK is in real trouble. This may not be that persuasive to you, hehe

Please be free to point out my mistakes.

@civ2units:
The book/movie you metioned is Fatherland.

And sorry for hijack this thread as well......

 

[McMonkey]

I have started a new thread called "What-Fi scenarios - WW2" for the continuation of this and any other alternative history debate about the WW2 era. A small amount of thread jacking is fine, but this discussion is taking over!

 

[Alsbron]

@Ingvar:
Thanks for your feedback. I think you are correct in your concern regarding the Indian alliance with China and Russia and I did consider placing them on the western side. However, I think in terms of playability and balance of power, it's better if they are an ally of the east.

India in this scenario would join the eastern bloc because of the oil deals it has with the Russians. The Indian government is convinced it can help shatter America's status as the sole global superpower and defeat Pakistan.

Pakistan is not truly an American "ally" in the purest form but the US backed regime there would make them a member of the western allies. India will invade Pakistan in hopes of claiming land and by doing so will hold down Pakistani and American troops in the Middle East while the Russians and Iranians launch an offensive through Iraq aimed at capturing Jerusalem and pushing into Saudi Arabia.

At this point I think Egypt, Libya, and Syria will side with the east while Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey side with the west - Turkey as a member of the EU.

The way I see it playing out the Russians and Indians will overwhelm the Allies in the Middle East by way of their crushing numerical advantage.

In the east, China invades the Indochinese nations with the exception of Thailand, a Chinese ally and quickly overruns them. The Chinese and North Koreans invade South Korea where they should win based on their numbers. A Chinese invasion of Japan is likely the next step. From there the Chinese need to challenge the Allies elsewhere in the Pacific.

In the west the Russians couple their assault in the Middle East with an invasion of Belorussia and Ukraine in hopes of securing old Soviet lands. Obviously the next phase of this theatre would be the attempted Russian invasion of Europe. The Russians will have to defeat the Americans in the Middle East first though so they can move forces to the European theatre.

The Americans will start with a force capable of global reach and powerful striking capacity, but will lack the ground forces (at first) to muster any great counterattack. Their aerial and naval power will give the Axis trouble from the very first turns.

In Europe the three significant powers and members of the EU will be Britain, France, and Germany. Turkey will be a member of the EU as well and her large army will likely be useful in a defense of Europe. The EU like America will lack numbers as war begins but will have great industrial potential as the war rages on.

Any thoughts?

 

[Alsbron]

Most cities are placed but then I'll have to break for a week or so to really focus on LSAT homework.

I'm not sure what to do with the American aircraft. Particularly the B-2. I don't know how big the range should be or if it should have range. A B-2 has never been detected or engaged in combat so I don't even know if I should give the MIGS a chance to shoot it down. I know the A-10 will be a range 1. Still up in the air on the other aircraft.

 

[CurtSibling]

I think it should have a long range, naturally...

But I find a good way to represent "stealth" type bombers is to take away the "bomber" rule of CIV2.

Make the B2 like a fighter, in that they must return to base in one turn. And make their defence quite low,
but attack high. A bomber is not meant to dogfight, and it means if the city it is sitting in gets attacked,
then the B2 will be most likely easily defeated, forcing the player to be careful where they base this bird!

 

[Alsbron]

Guys,

I've ran into two VERY strange problems since I started working on my scenario on a new computer. I am currently using Civ 2 on Windows Vista 64-bit using a patch. Let me preface my problems by saying I don't think this has anything to do with them, but I thought it wise to provide this information anyway.

OK, so I'm at the point where I'm starting to give civs techs. It's crazy because when I try to advance the tech tree through the cheat menu by giving a technology advance, the cpu seems to randomly choose a tech to give the civ. I can't bring up the tech menu, can't choose a tech, can't even see when a tech is discovered, but when I then click on "edit techs" I learn techs have been given to the civ. ??? Nothing like this has ever taken place before.

Secondly, I moved my scenario folder with all the files into the default SCENARIOS folder included with the Civ 2 multiplayer gold game. I did this to make transitioning easier. Now, for some reason when I try to access the folder through My Computer, MPS, ect....the conventional way, the folder IS NOT THERE. It appears in Recent Places because I CAN ACCESS it through the directory within the Civ2 game. Everything appears just fine. However, when I try to access the folder in a conventional manner through My Recent Places, I am told windows cannot find the folder - nor does it appear in the directory when I try to find it through My Computer.

Why is all this goofiness happening at once? I can only assume it has something to do with the more advanced Windows operating system and fishy mechanics. Thanks in advance for the help. I don't want to lose all my work!

 

[Palaiologos2]

No, no, no don't use the tech advance-that just completes the current research focus of the player.
Use the "edit Technologies" (CTrl+SHIFT+F6) menu.
Double click on the tech you want, (* means the tech is given, - means the tech is removed) and then click "exit", NOT "OK".

 

[Alsbron]

Palaiologoss2, while I appreciate your attempt to help, I AM WELL AWARE in terms of design, I should use edit tech, however, I wanted to run a test to ensure the tree progresses as I intended without any errors. The point is that NO graphic appears when I advance the tech – no display windows – no science selection box – nothing, and techs seem to be randomly assigned or advanced without the graphics showing up. I know this because I check the tech allocations in edit techs or the science window when I do this, which leads me to believe something is terribly wrong.

 

[Palaiologos2]

Ahh ok got it.
Well i think i know whats going on.
Your civ's research rate is higher than the cost of a single advance-hence the research rate is a couple of techs per turn and these are not showing up. Try raising the research paradeigm.

 

[CurtSibling]

Indeed! An don't forget the tech paradigm in rules as well as the in-game menu -