Capto Iugulum Background Thread

[Jehoshua]

probably , I'm only going so far as to say that the rejection is not purely due to nihilisms sociological deleteriousness on the thread at present though. I'm putting aside for now the assertion that morality and Truth are irrelevant to each other (Il Papa would say that truth is a spiritual teleological end in itself, and that something which is closer in accord to the truth is inherently superior morally to that which is erroneous, or which is actually opposed to objective truth) as another topic for the future (presumably via essay) in order to avoid clogging the thread with a long ooc debate between myself and Karikon over our philosophical disagreements.

 

[Luckymoose]

Nihilists are dumb anyway.

 

[Azale]

Don't want to clutter the thread so I'll place this here.

OOC: I would point to the fall of the Maginot Line in France in World War 2 and resulting chaos and confusion for the French military, which was one of the best in Europe at the time. Like the French, you placed your primary defense in a single series of fortifications. This allowed me to custom design weapons (land cruisers and adapting RMH Artillery) for the specific purpose of destroying said "impregnable" line. This meant that once the Mannerheim line fell, not only did you lose your main defense against me, but psychologically it scarred your soldiers since their invincible defense was simply swept aside. Also, being outnumbered 10-1 is not conducive to high moral. 30 years in NES time equating to 2 years in RL time worth of planning also helps...

OOC: I can't believe you would try to make an exact parallel between the Maginot and Mannerheim line I don't even think the psychological element has all the credibility pop historians and History Channel specials have given it in REAL LIFE much less this completely and utterly different situation.

This could be seen as an attempt to paint LOE's strategy as something it was not in order to gain an upper hand with the mod.

 

[Jehoshua]

I think that although equating Scandinavia's plans with the Maginot line failure of RL history is probably not accurate, the end result might still be the same. Consider, Russia sent almost as many forces into Scandinavia as it did into Germany, and that Scandinavia has less than a tenth the infantry and artillery the Russian Empire has. That is also not mentioning that Scandinavia doesn't actually have armoured divisions at all, let alone to match the huge armoured force Russia has.

This one would expect, would lead to Russia simply overwhelming the Finnish defence beyond the line, no matter what plans Scandinavia put in place for an ordered retreat/defence. Its defensive strategy likely couldn't cope with the mechanised Russia war machine.

 

[Shadowbound]

The Russian advantage in men and material is simply absurd at this point, so them winning by simple virtue of the Scandinavians running out of bullets would not be out of the question.

But with that noted...

OOC: I would point to the fall of the Maginot Line in France in World War 2 and resulting chaos and confusion for the French military, which was one of the best in Europe at the time. Like the French, you placed your primary defense in a single series of fortifications. This allowed me to custom design weapons (land cruisers and adapting RMH Artillery) for the specific purpose of destroying said "impregnable" line. This meant that once the Mannerheim line fell, not only did you lose your main defense against me, but psychologically it scarred your soldiers since their invincible defense was simply swept aside. Also, being outnumbered 10-1 is not conducive to high moral. 30 years in NES time equating to 2 years in RL time worth of planning also helps...

1) The Maginot Line never fell. While individual forts were breached by German combat engineers over a year of fighting, it lasted long past the fall of Paris and only yielded when a general surrender was sent out. Many French commanders actually hoped to keep fighting individually, before Weygand issued a general surrender. They were by no means broken.

2) The French army was merde. They were not the best army in Europe, by any means. Basically every branch was chronically underfunded due to the expense of building the Maginot Line, and their population had never really recovered from the First War, meaning they were reliant on middle-aged reservists to provide the bulk of their fighting strength.

3) The Germans were able to defeat the French so quickly was because they were incredibly lucky and sent armored divisions through the Ardennes Forest, which everyone believed was impassable, so much so that the French didn't bother to defend it. Meanwhile, France sent half their army into Belgium, including their best mobile forces, which were promptly cut off when a bunch of very unexpected German tanks came out of the woods behind them. The rapid fall of France is also attributable to the Germans pushing themselves to the very limit of their supply lines, see Heinz Guderian and Rommel during the fighting in France.

4) Armored vehicles attacking fixed fortifications head-on, even if they're giant landcruisers or whatever, won't work. Like ships, fixed fortifications can always mount heavier guns and tougher protection at less cost, making going gun-to-gun a bad idea.

Some of this is historical detail, but god damn it someone needs to rein people in.

 

[Jehoshua]

On four

I just see Land-cruisers as rail-mounted heavy artillery on wheels. Ergo the "cruiser" part moves the huge gun to some fixed location, whereupon the crew proceed to set up shop and fire away. As was noted on the thread, its not like they are feasible otherwise. Still, your point remains. Although again, and as you noted, the sheer overwhelming manpower of Mother Russia (which I am amazed is so much larger than say Germania) would do the Mannerheim line in regardless.

 

[Lord of Elves]

As azale pointed out, my entire strategy has been mis-characterized or intentionally misunderstood. The point of the Mannerheim Line was not, as has been apparently alleged, to be some kind of guarantor against a Russian invasion force. No one had any illusions, OOCly or ICly, that an invading army would be incapacitated by the line. The line was meant to delay the Russian army and do as much damage possible to Russian forces prior to their entrance to Scandinavia, giving our soldiers time to evacuate Finland and take up defensive positions throughout the country.

My objection is not that the line fell but that Scandinavian troops retreated for no reason when everything was going according to plan.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

I'm going to point out that unlike the updates, the EXTRAs are NOT exactly what happened in precise detail. They are simply the perception of events at the given point in time.

 

[Lord of Elves]

I'm going to point out that unlike the updates, the EXTRAs are NOT exactly what happened in precise detail. They are simply the perception of events at the given point in time.

Nonetheless I am not even remotely convinced that there is a good reason why my soldiers should have been unable to react in a timely and coordinated manner to what happened, considering absolutely nothing happened that was not expected and was not planned for.

I am also perplexed as to how my soldiers were unable to utilize the numerous, military-exclusive railway and roadway networks to man interstitial defenses throughout Finland and harass Russian troops as they entered the country.

It is as if everything I have done the past 30 turns save for building the Mannerheim Line itself never occurred.

EDIT: And what happened to the 100-some EP worth of anti-personnel and anti-tank minefields laid down throughout Finland?

 

[Jehoshua]

MUMBAI, INDIA - Even as His Majesty the High Prince concludes his suppression of the perfidious princes' bloody rebellion, a far bloodier conflict has engulfed the world. The world's two premier powers, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the United Russian Empire, are now engaged in a life-or-death struggle, and the victor will likely emerge as the world's most powerful nation. The two mighty nations each have brought to bear a myriad of allied powers great and small, with fighting at least tangentially related to this war occurring on four continents; South America has managed as a whole so far to remain on the outside of this conflict. The aftermath of this war will doubtless touch every nation on the face of the planet however, and there will surely be more nations joining the fighting before the dust has cleared. A generation ago there was the Great War, which had a multitude of powers, many of relatively equal strength, engaged in a vicious melee around the globe. This war is very different however; while the Great War was multipolar, this war is decidedly bipolar. It is a War of Hegemony where there are two distinct sides standing behind one nation, each with two clear goals: the annihilation of its opponents and the establishment of a new order in the world. The aftermath of this war will likely see a new world, with borders in some areas being unrecognizable, if not erased, and, perhaps most importantly, the predominance of the victors' ideology over the world.

I dispute the notion that this war is (or rather was) bipolar. Firstly lets look at the state of the world as it was at the beginning of the war. If we consider the state of things economically we have four great powers which in order of wealth are (Russia, Germany, Great Britain and Japan). Militarily, thanks to its manpower and thirty year long militarisation campaign, Russia had/has a much larger military than the three other powers. We thus see a world in which there are three great powers, but in which one great power is more great than the others so to speak, namely Russia. (solely thanks to its huge manpower advantage [which I think is somewhat off, when compared with the manpower of say Japan which owns swathes of China], and consequentially more massive military)

Moving into the war, we can see therefore that its not so much a bipolar war, but a war between three of the four great powers (Germany, Britain and Russia) in which the greater great power has pushed both Germany and Britain into one camp due to whatever reason (whether its the stated one, or not) is lurking in the back of the Tsars mind. Ergo, its begun as a multipolar (tripolar) war.

Where things get interesting is that its very rapidly becoming a bipolar war, in that Russia is on the way to successfully striking Germany off its pedestal as a great power, presumably due to Drexlerian overconfidence and a lack of a reciprocal military build up from the German side to correspond to the Russian one. Should Russia be successful in this (which it looks like it will be at this stage, short of a miracle or act of military genius on the part of the German High Command) than we will see the war transition into a bipolar phase, in which the key sides are the Russian and British ones.

 

[Grandkhan]

On four

I just see Land-cruisers as rail-mounted heavy artillery on wheels. Ergo the "cruiser" part moves the huge gun to some fixed location, whereupon the crew proceed to set up shop and fire away. As was noted on the thread, its not like they are feasible otherwise. Still, your point remains. Although again, and as you noted, the sheer overwhelming manpower of Mother Russia (which I am amazed is so much larger than say Germania) would do the Mannerheim line in regardless.

They're not. They're explicitly massively oversized armoured vehicles. And, as I said in the other thread, they simply aren't feasible. They'd sink into the ground if you tried to use them in a place like southern Finland, an area which is at least partially boggy as hell.

Honestly when these came out I thought they were literally a dummy option - somebody sinks money into them for years and then when they use them they'd be destroyed in day 1. They're literally screaming "Please bomb me while I am unable to exit from the depression I've made by being so heavy".

 

[Symphony D.]

They're not. They're explicitly massively oversized armoured vehicles. And, as I said in the other thread, they simply aren't feasible. They'd sink into the ground if you tried to use them in a place like southern Finland, an area which is at least partially boggy as hell.

'Sup.

Weighs: 6.2 million pounds
Carries: < 18 million pounds

Notably, the Kennedy Space Center was built on marshy beaches and you can see on several shots that the ground isn't more reinforced than some gravel.

They're literally screaming "Please bomb me while I am unable to exit from the depression I've made by being so heavy".

This is closer to the mark. The problem is that you can make something sufficiently large and armored that still has sufficiently low ground pressure to move around, but it will be so ridiculously slow and such a large target that it will inevitably be killed by sheer weight of firepower. The only way something so large could be maneuverable enough to survive and cost-effective to operate would be a dedicated on-board nuclear reactor. Theoretically this could be ameliorated with sufficient protective forces (e.g., anti-air) and would be beneficial over rail artillery in poorly developed areas, but would still be economically inefficient versus the benefits. Ground pressure alone is not a compelling argument.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

Grandkhan is right in the description of the landcruiser. This is the real life design they are modeled upon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1000_Ratte

I fully agree with Grandkhan, in most/all circumstances such a vehicle is thoroughly impractical, especially if your enemy has any sort of bombers that they could use against it. Scandinavia did not have any sort of bombers they could use against it. As for the earth, yeah, such a beast would tear up even paved roads and in boggy terrain would likely sink and have severe difficulty, if incorrectly maneuvered. The Russian landcruiser was designed for a single purpose: creating a vehicle that could breach the Mannerheim Line, and perhaps wage defensive fights against German armor on open steppes. A mobile battle against superior firepower? Very much no. For either of these purposes, the landcruiser is ideal. So far, these vehicles have not proceeded beyond the original use of breaching the front line.

EDIT: Symphony made the point quite well. I lived in the KSC area for a while, and yeah, it's pretty darn marshy and wet.

Crezth made a comment about how he was disappointed that the Scandinavians could not build a defensive line that could stand up to artillery, and Shadowbound (correctly) pointed out that the Maginot Line actually did quite well against direct German assaults. To address the first, a landcruiser is not an indirect artillery piece, like the infamous rail gun the Germans used OTL. It is meant for direct fire capacity, with the option of indirect if no other option is available. Having actually spoken to people who spent time under fire of both in the Second World War, I can assure you that direct fire is a completely different beast than indirect, and far more devastating to the target. Because no RL installation ever faced direct fire from twin 240mm cannons, we can only hypothesize as to the resulting destructive effect. The armor of the said vehicle is more than sufficient to responding to the guns that would be present for direct fire on the front. The biggest threat to the landcruiser, close air support and heavy bombers, doesn't exist. The Scandinavians have had no such aircraft. Combined with actual rail-mounted heavy artillery like Dora present (three of them in fact), we are talking about a devastating attack and firepower that the Scandinavians could not effectively respond to. Of course this is incidental, the Russians also attacked with nearly 10x as many soldiers as the Scandinavians could effectively field on the battlefield. The outcome was unlikely to change, the presence of the landcruiser and heavy cannon only helped reduce Russian casualties, and perhaps shortened the battle. As LoE pointed out, holding the Mannerheim Line was never the plan, but I hesitated to mention that before he did because, I figured that I should not be the one to actually reveal what players have planned, even in the update.

In terms of Russian numbers, I must disagree with Shadowbound that they are at a ridiculous level, and based on my research of primary sources from the OTL time frame, as well as modern agricultural production and statistics, which I looked over last time that was brought up, I believe the current situation IS plausible. At the same time I will acknowledge that as the best sources available directly from the time frame are written by the Soviets, it's highly unlikely they are accurate. I can only work with what information actually exists and is not written in Russian. All evidence points to the Russian army size and mobilization being theoretically possible, under the correct circumstances.

In strictly numerical terms, Russian victory is not inevitable, even if the situations in Germany and Scandinavia are as dire as they may appear. Heh, just wait until you see the casualty lists.

 

[Crezth]

I do love how, according to the emergency orders everyone is sending, every single country in CI is apparently a command economy.

Anyway, all this talk about landcruisers makes me think of fatboys and OGREs.

 

[Circuit]

In strictly numerical terms, Russian victory is not inevitable, even if the situations in Germany and Scandinavia are as dire as they may appear. Heh, just wait until you see the casualty lists.

I agree. The Italian civil war has not erupted yet for some reason, nor has the opportunistic Russian nationalistic insurgencies that will distract them and threaten supply lines (I didn't leave Britain because I thought there was no hope). Plus I don't think the sides have been decided quite yet.

 

[Immaculate]

Gotta say this has made for some great stories. I like TLJ's in particular!

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

I'd still say my personal favorite story is still crezth's from the fighting in Charleston. I just like the imagery of it. It was the picture that I asked Ahigin for, but never got.

 

[Shadowbound]

In terms of Russian numbers, I must disagree with Shadowbound that they are at a ridiculous level, and based on my research of primary sources from the OTL time frame, as well as modern agricultural production and statistics, which I looked over last time that was brought up, I believe the current situation IS plausible. At the same time I will acknowledge that as the best sources available directly from the time frame are written by the Soviets, it's highly unlikely they are accurate. I can only work with what information actually exists and is not written in Russian. All evidence points to the Russian army size and mobilization being theoretically possible, under the correct circumstances.

The Russian advantage, not the absolute numbers. Unless Nintz and co. have literally been phoning it in for the past twenty years, there's no way they should have allowed them to build such a massive military force without some reciprocal armament. I'm bashing the Allies for being dumb with that statement.

 

[TheLastJacobite]

The Russian advantage, not the absolute numbers. Unless Nintz and co. have literally been phoning it in for the past twenty years, there's no way they should have allowed them to build such a massive military force without some reciprocal armament. I'm bashing the Allies for being dumb with that statement.

Well, their main issue is is that they've been continually distracted by events abroad that have demanded their attention more than constraining Russia, such as the numerous rebellions in Africa, the Firework's War (which at times lead to the near total destruction of both the British and German air forces at various times) , the Burgundian crisis, the Reclamation War in the Americas, etc. This, coupled with the simultaneous attacks on their intelligence agencies, have crippled and distracted the Allies to the point where they've been unable to quickly and effectively respond to Russia's actions. It also makes it seem like someone planned those events for just that purpose...

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

@Shadowbound: My misunderstanding then, no worries.