Here is an interesting bit of historical trivia. The US 8th Air Force actually had bases in the Ukraine for a short time. From June to September 1944, the 8th Air Force started a shuttle run of bombers that would take off from England and Italy, bomb targets in Germany then fly on to 3 bases in the Ukraine, Piryatin, Mirgorod and Poltava. The reasoning was mainly to show solidarity with the Russians and to hit Germany from an unexpected quarter.
The mission was called “Operation Frantic”. I don’t think it was much of a success. One reason is that the Luftwaffe bomber arm was still fairly strong in the East. Some Luftwaffe planes saw the American bombers heading into Russia. Then when a shot up P-51 crashed in Poland, it had documents on the Russian bases. Luftwaffe command was notified and they send Fliegerkorps IV, nearly 350 He 111s, to pound those bases while the B-17s were lined up in neat rows due to lack of space. It was the 8th Air Force’s costliest single operation of the war.
I didn’t even know about this until I read it in World War II magazine.
Idea for rule change regarding strict neutrals
-
It’s simple, yet a bit more sensical than what we have now: In any turn you wish to attack strict neutrals, you have the option of “buying off” any remaining ones so that they stay neutral.
Case in point: Germany wishes to attack Sweden, but obviously doesn’t want to turn Spain or Turkey against them. To keep them as strict neutrals, Germany must pay 2 + 2 (the IPC values of each territory).
If it wants to include Afg. and Saudi Arabia, then 2 + 2 + 2 + (say a min of 1 IPC, for those territories with no IPC values).
These territories would also stay strictly neutral in the event of an Allied attack (although perhaps that can be debatable). Also, the IPC costs themselves: perhaps double the tt value would be better, but those are, of course, details.
Thoughts?
Suggested Topics
