Posts made by Field Marshal

Rommel wanted to be where the action was. He felt he could have made a difference at that front. At that time, he was unaware that the Nazi’s were running the show in Russia. There would be no “Gentlemen’s War” like in Africa. Hitler would have eliminated him sooner.

I think it came down to days when Rommel was going to go to the Allies with his proposals and his being wounded. After that, he openly talked bad about Hitler, even in the company of Nazi and Gestapo agents. Shortly before his death, he was asked the status of the war. His iritated answer, " The Americans are here, the British there, and the Russians there. What do you think? Hitler is a fool!" This helped fuel the conspiracy ties to him. Rommel was lying in a French hospital being treated for his head injuries days before the attack on Hitler’s life. He obviously could have no direct involvement, and it will always be argued how much knowledge he did have.

Personally I believe he had limited information, being a professional soldier, that occupied the majority of his time. He expressed his desires for alternative measures rather than murder. He had his own plans, which meant acting against Hitler outside the conspiracy, but it was a good enough excuse to kill him.

Rommel was aware of the plot to some extent, but favored Hitler’s arrest and trial over a cowardly assassination. Rommel knew the war was over after Alamein and became increasingly unhappy (putting it lightly) with Hitler until his death. Rommel’s popularity with the German people made him a good candidate for president had the assassination attempt not failed. If Hitler was dead the conspirators would have thrown the presidency in Rommel’s lap. Rommel was labeled by the Allied propaganda as an evil Nazi like most of Hitler’s generals. The Nazi’s also used Rommel’s popularity to marry him to the Nazis so they looked good. He complained about this several times. Only after the war Rommel’s true beliefs were known where he was then labeled “the hero of the German Resistance” which was post-war propaganda to save his name and give the German people some dignity.

A little known fact about Rommel is what would have happened if he would have lived. Rommel, before his wounding by the UK fighter, was going to Eisenhower to surrender the Western Front! He was suing for peace without Hitler and his regime (legal treason). He cared about what Hitler did not: the suffering of German troops on both fronts against overwhelming odds, the suffering of the German AND French people during Allied air raids, the suffering of ALL in the death and work camps, etc, etc. His plan was to make Peace with the UK/USA and send all available units to the Eastern Front to delay the Russians until a peace agreement with them could be reached. It is unclear that this would work due to the Allied demand for unconditional surrender and Nazi attrocities. It was a German’s worst fear to be ruled by the Soviets. We all know what happened after the war.

Officially, Rommel died in the Fall of 1944 due to complications from the wounds received in that air attack. In reality, he was given the choice of cyanide or trial as a conspirator. Conspirators who chose trial never made it to Berlin alive. He chose cyanide with the understanding his wife and son would be left alone. A tragic and unfitting death to a man who gave his entire life to his country. But just another number to the millions slaughtered by the Nazis.

Sorry for all the seriousness guys. Rommel was one of the greatest men of the 20th century (my opinion). I have a few books on him which I don’t have access to right now. Most good ones are written by British officers after the war. Check them out…

[ This Message was edited by: Field Marshal on 2002-03-16 07:49 ]

[ This Message was edited by: Field Marshal on 2002-03-16 07:50 ]

Sounds like the plan is to keep Germany guessing and keeping German troops in Western Europe tied down with defense instead of attacking the Russians in the East. Whatever the US objective may be can remain hidden until enough troops are massed in a given territory and then relocated. Only then are the US’ real intentions revealed at Germany’s expense.
Is this close to the mark Dzertfish?

I’ve been doing just that these past few games. Dropping off troops every turn in Africa, Spain, Western Europe, or Finland really puts pressure on Germany…

Zero, I think we posted at the same time.

Remember, the game starts in the Spring of 1942, not Dec. 1941. Historically, the Spring of 1942 is the time of Axis maximum power and expansion…

Alamein,
Your strategy IS sound. Mainly my comment was directed towards your enemy, who seemed to be falling for your trap. You know how it is, if it works - do it.

Basically the issue is the Axis need to strike fast to win. The bid enhances this chance to win. If the Allies can hold out and build up forces, the Axis will probably lose against experienced Allied players. The Axis need to stay sharp to exploit any weakness or indecision the Allies will show once the game progresses past turn 10, with no clear winner. Allied players can get impatient with waiting for build-ups and take actions costly to the overall goal. This is actually the 2nd way the Axis can win - by taking advantage of a fragmenting alliance…

Japan needs to apply pressure quick, up and through the fall of Russia. Russia must be taken AND held before any significant US build up is achieved or the Axis cause is bleak…

Japanese ventures outside pressuring Russia must be done in moderation. Too much energy supplied to an American invasion before the fall of Russia can be easily contained while the Japanese push into Russia stalls. The American energy diverted to taking back Canada and Alaska can be temperarily offset by Russian troops re-directed from Asia to Europe. The Japanese then scramble to re-establish their fronts in Asia while all other gains stall or are lost. The Allies gain build up time in Europe.
If this scenario is working for you, your Allied opponents are falling into a panic unnecessarily. The UK player sounds mostly ineffective.
Diversionary tactics to gain quick and easy IPC’s are just that. Too much commitment to gain a few IPC’s without any strategic gain can cost you the war.

As the Allies, you will have to maintain a balance of power against your Axis enemies. You’ll have to shift your combined production power around the map to gain time. Once the Allies win the time game, they’ll win the war.
I try to break it down this way: The Russian’s put the majority of their initial production against the Germans until US/UK help can arrive. They then shift against the Japanese over time. Higher US production can win the war of attrition against the Germans. The majority of British attention should go to liberating Africa and using it to harrass Japan from concentrating on Moscow. Japan will make many gains in Asia until combined Russian/UK production can overtake them. Pacific islands and Australia are reasonable loses for the Allies. Once the Axis are contained, it’s just a matter of time for Allied victory…

If you want the carrier in the battle, move it now. If not, don’t move it now. If you want the carrier to end it’s non-combat movement in that space, your fighters will have to clear it of enemy units first…

Even if the US doesn’t get the tech rolls, you will still have to deal with Russian aggression. You’ll have to fight them one or two turns using the Ukraine as the turnover point so you can build up to keep the Russians out of Eastern Europe in Turn 3. Once you can stalemate the Russians, you can go ahead with your plans to hit the US…

If the war is tipping out of your favor, this is the time to take necessary risks such as chancier battles and weapons rolls. Hopefully, delaying tactics will lead to technology you can turn the war around with.
If your winning the war, there’s really little point in spending the IPC’s. Heavy bombers will speed up the war, but you may have won already by the time you get them…

It is worth putting effort into Africa.
For the Axis, Germany gains the IPC’s it will need to fight the combined Allied attacks. Germany’s effort in Africa should be limited however, not to threaten European security. Japan can also send troops after taking South-East Asia, linking up with the Germans in Persia. The longer the Axis can hold Africa, the better the odds they can win.
For the Allies, the same is true. Half of the UK’s NP is in Africa, it is necessary for the UK/US forces to take Africa back ASAP to regain UK NP strength and use Africa as a staging point to hit South-East Asia or back up the Russians.
One of the few parallels this game seem to has with WWII is the fact that the Allies seem to have to regain Africa and the Med before attacking Europe. The Axis are well aware of this. You usually don’t see an effective A&A D-day until Africa is liberated…

What the h___, give it a try. If you wound Russia bad enough in the first turn or two, go defensive, and keep the English from building ships, you might just pull it off. It will definitely throw your Allied players off…

It does. In fact, you will probably land your aircraft wherever you planned to if the attack succeeded…

Germany gets the chance to attack first in Africa in the first turn. They can take Egypt weakly in Turn 1 or better supported in Turn 2. The Allies need to take Africa back quick to then concentrate on Europe and Asia. Britain needs to preserve it’s existing African units as long as possible for a counter-strike. The US can help out with troops transported from America. In this situation the British can only place their first turn purchased IC in either India or South Africa. India is good to counter the Japanese in Asia but many times it will be lost to them. South Africa is the safer but weaker choice, giving you Africa and then troops into Asia (which takes longer). This however secures the African continent.
It is a judgement call between the 2 areas where to put the British first turn IC depending on German first turn performance and trying to guess Axis strategy. I suggest you try both against your opponents to see what will work for you…

Agreed. The attack had better be supported well enough to avoid that scenario…

Lately I’ve been trying to have Germany hold the Suez canal long enough to allow the Japanese fleet to enter the Med (earliest by turn 4, if Japan doesn’t attack Hawaii in turn 1 and the US withdrawals it’s fleet immediately to the Atlantic). This gives the Allies quite a jolt if it works. The down side is your unprotected transports in the Japanese SZ. This can protect Southern Europe from invasion (with German fighter support) and may allow attacks on the Allied fleets. What else do you do with the Japanese fleet after the Asian coast is in Japanese hands?