Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 82

Author Topic: Armchair General General - /AGG  (Read 137547 times)

MonkeyHead

  • Bay Watcher
  • Yma o hyd...
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #180 on: August 10, 2014, 03:25:02 am »

Cant comment on other forces, but I am under the impression that the BEF was horribly ill-equipped to fight against armour. Not much in the way of anti-tank weaponry that would stop the German tanks, and no real plan of how to deal with massed armour formations.
Logged
This is a blank sig.

celem

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #181 on: August 10, 2014, 04:37:53 am »

Yarrr.

Playing for Europe and assuming non-nuclear through MAD. 

Feign secession by the United Kingdom to the USA.  My call is that provided this crazy moment of war has erupted somewhat spontaneously both the USA and British civilians (who you don't tell) buy that.
USA's logical move is to turn the UK into a FOB.  Its pretty much tailor-made to harass the snot out of Europe, worked fine vs the 3rd Reich.
But since you are playing double-agents with countries you sucker-punch them when they go to setup.

Have Americans read 1984?

Truthfully, I thought on this about an hour and can see no way to invade the mainland US without WMDs.  An armed civilian population with the particular cultural streaks of patriotism the Americans have makes that a really really hideous concept.

Seriously though, in a straight up dustup its pretty American.  Even without nukes.  Air superiority is king, high-ground has been since war was war.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2014, 04:42:57 am by celem »
Logged
Marksdwarf Pillboxes
I wish I had something cool to say about this.  Because it's really cool.

Daonitre

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #182 on: August 10, 2014, 10:54:47 am »

OK, so it totally trailed off by page 7 but I read more than intended in the first place. This will be my longest post ever.... so I hope you enjoy sarcastic spoilers. :)

Spoiler: From Page 2 (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: From Page 3 (click to show/hide)

I love Page 4. Nothing funny here... I just love it.

Page 6 made me want to play World of Tanks, by the end of page 7 I was ready to go reinstall...
Spoiler: Speaking of which (click to show/hide)

Aaaand not quite as long as I'd thought it'd be. I may be back for pages 8-12 later on. Or not.. I have DF2014 and lots of TV to keep up on. :)

Oh right, don't just respond but reply... hmm... 'Murka wins.
Logged
Me:"Say, you don't know where the Titan is, do?"
"In the early spring of 125, he died after colliding with an obstacle."

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #183 on: August 10, 2014, 11:41:40 am »

Cant comment on other forces, but I am under the impression that the BEF was horribly ill-equipped to fight against armour. Not much in the way of anti-tank weaponry that would stop the German tanks, and no real plan of how to deal with massed armour formations.

People seem to have drawn the conclusion from Blitzkrieg that tanks win wars on their own.  They dont.  Tanks capture high value targets very quickly.  But in this case the high value target is like half the country.

While the British Expeditionary Force had lost most of its antitank equipment in France, that didn't mean they were completely helpless against tanks, just that they had a smaller number of anti-tank guns then they normally had.  And the German order of battle only called for about 500 tanks (4th and 7th panzer divisions).  Even that is optimistic given the... tenuous logistical situation.  In fact the Germans are gonna be just as SOL on the anti-tank equipment front as the Brits and the Brits would have a pretty heavy advantage in tank numbers.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

Sergarr

  • Bay Watcher
  • (9) airheaded baka (9)
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #184 on: August 10, 2014, 12:42:51 pm »

The main thing what makes blitzkrieg possible is motorized and mechanized infantry. Tanks are more of an addition for busting open high-defense targets.
Logged
._.

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #185 on: August 10, 2014, 12:47:17 pm »

Not really, look at the OOB for Poland, the classic Blitzkrieg: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_order_of_battle_for_Operation_Fall_Weiss

Not a whole lot of motorized infantry and no mechanized infantry to speak of.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

Elfeater

  • Bay Watcher
  • Max Yeskly the dwarf
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #186 on: August 11, 2014, 03:19:25 pm »

I think we should move away from modern wars, and move back towards ancient, or medieval warfare.
Logged
I for one support our child snatching overlords.
there is a difference between droping red numbers representing magma on Es representing elves, and finding it hot when a girl moans like a retarded seal

Glloyd

  • Bay Watcher
  • Against the Tide
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #187 on: August 11, 2014, 04:07:35 pm »

We were just talking about the battle of Hastings a few pages back. And the Mongol hordes. Uh, okay. What would have happened if the Romans had won the Battle of Teutoberg forest? That or they had a competent enough governor so that the battle never happened.

MonkeyHead

  • Bay Watcher
  • Yma o hyd...
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #188 on: August 11, 2014, 06:02:17 pm »

Roman expansion eastwards, probably as far as the Elbe as it forms such a nice defensible frontier along with the Danube, but I give them a slim chance of getting as far as the Vistula, and no chance of getting to the Dneiper. I doubt the ability of the Romans to push further - overland supply would be a horror to pull off, and I don't think their seamanship would be up to supply over water the long way around via the Baltic
« Last Edit: August 11, 2014, 06:03:54 pm by MonkeyHead »
Logged
This is a blank sig.

Culise

  • Bay Watcher
  • General Nuisance
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #189 on: August 11, 2014, 06:35:47 pm »

Indeed, which is why I don't think they'd even make it that far.  Even after Teutoburg, Tiberius launched a series of decisive military actions just five years after under the general who would gain the agomen "Germanicus" for his victories.  By 16, the Germanic alliance under Arminius had been devastated, and only the decision of the Emperor not to annex Germanicus' gains prevented a third campaign from coming to pass.  The Elbe is not a very good frontier from a Roman perspective; the Rhine, with its origin in Helvetica and breadth of span, was ideal for the purpose of supplying Legion bases along the Limes Germanicus.  The Elbe, by contrast, would have required a massive overland trek through woodlands filled with hostile tribes to reach, for extremely questionable gains - the Germanic hinterland was just that, a hinterland with little economic worth.  Limited Roman colonization in the area was apparently lackluster and incomplete, as far as I can tell.  Raid it, put pliant chiefs in place over the tribes, and maybe nibble a bit around the edges, but a full-scale integration of the entirety of the province into Rome feels a bit difficult.  Perhaps, at the largest, I think we might see something that reaches the Weser (with an overland portage being from the Rhine via the Main), but even that might be a bit unstable. 

Perhaps the most significant consequence of a victory at Teutoburg would have an extension of that overstretch to eventually be cut off in some Varian defeat, as well as a lack of action to strength the Limes Germanicus into a cohesive fortification chain (since there would be no apparent need to do so) until such a crisis occurs.  If they do reach the Weser, they'll almost certainly eventually be forced to regroup on the Rhine-Iller-Danube line again by the third century, due to much the same reason as they did historically - barbarian pressures under a decaying military/state apparatus. 
Logged

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #190 on: August 11, 2014, 07:15:27 pm »

We were just talking about the battle of Hastings a few pages back. And the Mongol hordes. Uh, okay. What would have happened if the Romans had won the Battle of Teutoberg forest? That or they had a competent enough governor so that the battle never happened.

Rome having a slightly more defensible border wouldn't really help them at all.

The Romans weren't militarily incapable of holding things together:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Catalaunian_Plains
Even 15 years before the fall of the western empire they had tons of power under competent leadership properly:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majorian
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The problems with the empire were within.  The plagues caused a population decline and the civic life collapsed in the face of a powerful aristocracy controlling the serfs (thanks Constantine!).  The western empire just kept dividing itself, even at the very end the remnants were divided between two rival emperors and several autonomous governors.

Unless the population decline and serfdom never happened the barbarian migrations into the empire were inevitable.  This wasn't necessarily the doom of the empire, they assimilated many people successful and many of the barbarian tribes were happy to be loyal subjects of a strong Rome, as Majorian showed.  What's really important is if Rome can keep things together politically, keeping a competent bureaucracy to check the inevitable stupid emperors and keeping proper control of the provinces so that the empire doesn't suffer civil wars every couple decades.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

Helgoland

  • Bay Watcher
  • No man is an island.
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #191 on: August 18, 2014, 12:27:10 pm »

New what if: What if Friedrick III didn't contract throat cancer and a liberal, pro-British Kaiser was in charge from 1888 onward?
This. Is an Anglo-German alliance plausible? What would German navy policy have looked like? How does the web of alliances change? (Do we get a war of a French-Russian alliance vs. Britain and the German-speaking monarchies?)
Logged
The Bay12 postcard club
Arguably he's already a progressive, just one in the style of an enlightened Kaiser.
I'm going to do the smart thing here and disengage. This isn't a hill I paticularly care to die on.

Glloyd

  • Bay Watcher
  • Against the Tide
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #192 on: August 18, 2014, 12:54:31 pm »

Re: The Teutoberg Forest, those were my thoughts as well. Rome was screwed up enough internally that winning a battle there wouldn't have prevented an eventual collapse. All the same structural problems would still exist. If anything, they'd last a bit longer against barbarian incursions with the new frontier, but eventual collapse was inevitable.

Sergarr

  • Bay Watcher
  • (9) airheaded baka (9)
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #193 on: August 18, 2014, 01:38:09 pm »

Anglo-German alliance would screw the France hard. Being surrounded from sea and from land... ouch.

Russian Empire vs. Anglo-German alliance would probably look like some combination of WW1 and WW2, but most likely Germans would go with their Lenin plan, destroying RE from within.

I guess after that the alliance would break apart and the massive war for colonies would start.
Logged
._.

Culise

  • Bay Watcher
  • General Nuisance
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #194 on: August 18, 2014, 01:45:40 pm »

If an Anglo-German alliance actually happened, it would be devastating to France and Russia, as you say.  That said, Britain still wouldn't sit idly by while Germany launched a preemptive attack on France via Belgium, if the run-up to World War 1 remained unaltered; even in 1875, while Bismark was at his peak ascendancy and before Anglo-German relations took a serious downturn under Wilhelm, Britain sternly warned Germany against any such preemptive attacks to prevent France's rapid recovery after the Franco-Prussian War (the War in Sight crisis).  Bismark would probably get along even more poorly with Frederick III than with Wilhelm II due to the former's much-presumed liberal tendencies, and the former probably wouldn't be much more assertive in bringing the General Staff to heel.  I think the best Germany can hope for is British armed neutrality, with British domestic opinion gradually turning against Germany due to concerns about Germany's successes in France combined with French propaganda. 

That said, I suspect that Frederick III would not grant Austria-Hungary the blank cheque to begin with, so whether the war begins on schedule is highly questionable to start with. 
« Last Edit: August 18, 2014, 01:48:04 pm by Culise »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 82