Would historical Russia have survived Rhye's??

[Cossack Captain]

Something I've been thinking about lately. As we all know, historically Russia has had many invaders who were able to capture major cities like Kiev, Smolansk, Stevastopol, and even Moscow but was never able to decisively defeat Russia and eventually had to withdraw their armies. You might recall the two very famous examples of Napoleon and Hitler: both captured huge areas of Russia and important Russian cities but both eventually had to withdraw and were ultimately defeated.

So here is my question: would that same Russia in Rhye's world have been able to withstand all that loss and still survive and avoid a complete collapse? What do you think?

 

[Lone Wolf]

Well, at the time of Hitler Russia had Police State and Nationhood, which should help your stability at times of war. (Historically, you can say that Russia was in collapse from the first half of 12th century (all these fighting principalities), respawned as Mongolian vassal, and then Mongolia herself collapsed).

 

[Úmarth]

Does it have the UP?

 

[Good Sauce]

Does it have the UP?

Maybe not. I'm not sure about the Hitler campaign, but napoleon did most of his invasion in the summer. The cold weather only became an issue after he was already trying to retreat.

 

[Lone Wolf]

I'm not sure about the Hitler campaign

Hitler campaign lasted from 1941 to 1945! Of course, there were winters in these years, althrough sometimes Russian troops weren't equipped to fight cold weather much better then the Germans.

 

[Zdarg]

So here is my question: would that same Russia in Rhye's world have been able to withstand all that loss and still survive and avoid a complete collapse? What do you think?

I don't need to think, I know.
In my previous game, as Germany, Russia was largest I ever seen. About 15 cities, many in Siberia. It collapsed just after I had conquered two of their cities.

 

[wolfigor]

Well, at the time of Hitler Russia had Police State and Nationhood, which should help your stability at times of war. (Historically, you can say that Russia was in collapse from the first half of 12th century (all these fighting principalities), respawned as Mongolian vassal, and then Mongolia herself collapsed).

Very correct.
I would like to add that we should consider historical Russia collapsing in 1917... immediately after the revolution a ferocious civil war started.
Russia was "put together" only a few years later

 

[The Q-Meister]

Maybe not. I'm not sure about the Hitler campaign, but napoleon did most of his invasion in the summer. The cold weather only became an issue after he was already trying to retreat.

But that's the classic Russian strategy: retreat and lay waste to the territory to give the invaders nothing. At that time, no army in the world could match with Napoleon's Grand Armee so that's what the Russians did. By the time of the winter Napoleon had a choice: stay in Moscow or retreat to the west. Napoleon, foolishly I believed chose retreat, thought he could be in Poland before winter broke out and actually hesitated quite a bit in the silly hope that Tsar Alexander would offer him peace (he did not) and the Russian Winter came early and in large measure wiped out what remained of his army after Borodino. Also the Cossacks were very efficient in taking down any stragglers from his army as well.

 

[Riker]

Russian destroyed the food supplies and burned down a big percentage of the houses (all made of wood). Napoleon had no food nor shelter for his troops, he couldn't stay more time

 

[Lone Wolf]

I suspect that it was not the Russians who burned down most of wooden Moscow, it very well could be the French themselves. A large occupying army maraudering in a city mostly built of wood... Considering the fact that there were constant fires in Moscow even in peacetime, the result seems almost inevitable.

 

[Hitti-Litti]

^

Russians used "the tactic of burned land" in other wars too, for example in the Great Nordic War. Why wouldn't they use it in Napoleonic Wars?

 

[Lone Wolf]

AFAIK, the "scorched land" tactics was never used in major cities. I may be wrong, through...

 

[das]

Scorched earth is a bit of a misnomer in any case; it's not so much about burning anything as about denying supplies to the enemy through any means possible. Burning cities has little to do with it; rural areas are where it's at.

Anyway, as was pointed out previously, the Russians perhaps could have burned Moscow, but they would never have even needed to torch it.

As to Russia's survival, well, I remember invading it twice in RFC; the first time was relatively quick, but when it rebelled away and had to be put down it was very much a bitter fight. I think it could survive. Don't forget that neither the Swedes nor the French nor the Germans ever took our capital, wherever it was at the moment. And the Germans were the only ones to seriously threaten the capital, but even they got pushed out. That would seem to be survivable, at least from my experience of fighting with some other nations.

 

[Edungeon]

In my first try at the Germany UHV many versions ago i went all the way to the city of Lone Wolf ( IIRC ) Ekaterinburg in the Urals... ( Yekaterinburg is the same as Ekaterinburg? >P )

 

[Lone Wolf]

Yekaterinburg is the same as Ekaterinburg?

Sure.

OotP XCL

 

[Rhye]

Now that I see das's avatar, I think I'll add the Sverdlovsk renaming when Stalin comes to power (same as Leningrad and Stalingrad)

 

[Zdarg]

Now that I see das's avatar, I think I'll add the Sverdlovsk renaming when Stalin comes to power (same as Leningrad and Stalingrad)

Then, rename Tver to Kalinin also.

 

[Rod]

and Nishni Novgorod became Gorki

 

[onedreamer]

Now that I see das's avatar, I think I'll add the Sverdlovsk renaming when Stalin comes to power (same as Leningrad and Stalingrad)

You shouldn't do it. It should ONLY happen if Russia is communist.

 

[RedRalph]

Yeah I agree.... only if state property is adopted. Also dont forget for years St. Petersburg was called Petrograd