WesWorld

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson

Quoted

Has anybody considered Japan versus China? Nothing the SAE would be involved in but at least a possible scenario, methinks.

China and Japan are currently allies, so it would take a fair amount of backstory to explain a shooting war. Not to mention that we can see what the result of that is: the Japanese sweep the seas of Chinese ships, can probably control the coasts, but haven't the manpower to defeat China.

Didn't stop them in OTL in 1937...

IMO this should be moved to another thread. We have hijacked the 1939 Brazil thread.

I agree that SAE is one of the best candidates for a new war because a war with them have the chance of not turning into WW2. Even if India offers their help South Africa have the option of refusing the help.

PRJ vs. Bulgaria-Turkey probebly wouldn't explode, but you never know in Europe.

Quoted

Originally posted by perdedor99
IMO this should be moved to another thread. We have hijacked the 1939 Brazil thread.

There is a 1939 Brazil thread???

Quoted

I agree that SAE is one of the best candidates for a new war because a war with them have the chance of not turning into WW2. Even if India offers their help South Africa have the option of refusing the help.

SAE is a large enough power to be well rounded,
with assets and interests overseas,
but not involved in one of these 4-5 party treaties.

Copied this thread to Meeting place, resume your armageddon discussions here, and I'll clean out Jason's news thread...

However, you should all be aware that Canada is the key to the Ragnarok (No spoiling, Jason and Brock)

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc

However, you should all be aware that Canada is the key to the Ragnarok (No spoiling, Jason and Brock)

So you're the keymaster ?

...only if I can get a better looking gatekeeper than Signourney Weaver.

Don't you have the identical sextuplets?

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson

Quoted

Has anybody considered Japan versus China? Nothing the SAE would be involved in but at least a possible scenario, methinks.

China and Japan are currently allies, so it would take a fair amount of backstory to explain a shooting war. Not to mention that we can see what the result of that is: the Japanese sweep the seas of Chinese ships, can probably control the coasts, but haven't the manpower to defeat China.

Didn't stop them in OTL in 1937...

I certainly wouldn't call Japan an ally of China's at any time from about 1895 up until now. Before 1945, they were looking to conquer and/or colonize China (see Manchuria), after 1945 they were either not in a position to be an ally or opposed due to China becoming first Communist and later a competitor.

I think overall that is a flaw which is now apparent. It would be nice if neighbors weren't all unnaturally friendly and united against folks on the otherside of the world....but that is oddly how it's worked out.

I'm not saying there haven't been some (evil Indians) but not to the same level as say the 1800s. It's much more a post-WWII political gestalt.

China, with it's land army and weak naval infrastructure and long history in Mongolia/Korea, would make a good foe for the Japanese paired with..say the Dutch.

Quoted

PRJ vs. Bulgaria-Turkey probebly wouldn't explode, but you never know in Europe.

Guess he isn't in on the secret, Mwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Quoted

However, you should all be aware that Canada is the key to the Ragnarok (No spoiling, Jason and Brock)

Aye sir! No secrets to anyone, especially Tex and Foxy!

Notes those of you who want to know what Shin is talking about should come on the IRC more often (shameless promotion).

Quoted

I think overall that is a flaw which is now apparent. It would be nice if neighbors weren't all unnaturally friendly and united against folks on the otherside of the world....but that is oddly how it's worked out.

When Count Witte took over as Nicky II's Chairman of the Committee of Ministers in 1905, when asked what he wanted, he replied "Twenty years of peace." He was assassinated the next year, and Russia got into another war in less than ten. Present Russian government has learned much from subsequent dreadful experience.

Our land is great and rich, and we have finally gotten some order in it.* We have plenty of land, though none to spare, and are far more interested in developing what we have than in acquiring more.

*obscure historical reference.

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
I don't see FAR having any reason for fight AEGIS at present. Peru's behaving, Siam's quiet, etc etc etc.

Well maybe instead of SAE-NL vs UK we should be talking FAR against... ? AEGIS ? That would be messy, and also would likely spiral out as Brock observes.. so who could FAR fight? AWAY?

Actually, a Nordmark-UK-Germ vs FAR might be interesting to watch, if I ran a nation not in Europe...

Not likely but agreed, would be very messy, France has a very large land force and so does Russia. If the Russians find a way to re-enforce the French, the French delema of having AEGIS enemy's on three fronts might be alieviated.

Iberia is in a similar situation to France, having a large army to the east and territorys to defend to the west. Problem is those territorys are also west of Atlantis. Iberia would have to deal with two navy's, one close to home (France) in both the Med and Atlantic and the other (Atlantis) in a perfect possition to cut of any Caribbean re-enforcements and cause additional havoc in the Atlantic.

Likewise France has two navy's to deal with in the med. The largest obviously being the Italian fleet but again if the Russians can access the med it might negate the slight advantage Italy has.

The real wild card is what allies could either alliance convince to join them. Mexico is one nation iching to get at either Iberia or Italy, the only thing stoping them currently is deplomacy and a serious descrepancy in fleet strength.

The U.S. might also want to take advantage of Iberia being distracted and demand Cuba or Liberia as incentive to refrain from sneaking off with territory's in the Caribbean. Yugoslavia I'm sure also wouldn't mind some of its lost territory back from the Italians.

All this being said currently there is no tention between FAR and AEGIS as both recognise SATSUMA (even in its current fractured state) as a larger threat. Should either FAR or AEGIS territory in the Pacific fall first the other is likely to become more enticing and therefore a more likely target.

Pre-NATO an AEGIS vs. FAR war could have been possible but since NATO and the subsequent Caribbean talks between the U.S., Atlantis and the U.S., tentions have eased to the point that conflict is unlikely.

would be able to get troop, materiel, and supply convoys to France in a FAR-AEGIS war.

Quoted

France has a very large land force and so does Russia. If the Russians find a way to re-enforce the French, the French delema of having AEGIS enemy's on three fronts might be alieviated.

A Nordmark-UK-Germany vs FAR war would be a really tough slog. The forests of Finland are made for nullifying Russian mech forces, so there would be no quick result there. The mine/torpedo bomber infested Baltic will quickly become a "no-ship zone".

A big wild card here would be the PRJ, especially the Poles. Do they join a side, or try to maintain neutrality? If they succeed in staying out of it, the real action will be at the North Cape and in the mid-Atlantic as static land warfare smolders on in Finland and at Verdun.

And ANT-35b's can bomb Scapa Flow by flying over the North Cape, then landing in France.

A GBN vs. FAR scenario IMO will end with the defeat of France. France IMO has done nothing so far that can account for a different result than IOTL plus they have to worry about a possible British amphibious operation. The only way this could be different is by the actions of the PRJ. If they join the Russians, France is saved because I don't see a decent defensive line for Germany in the Eastern Front till the Oder River. On the other hand a neutral Poland got a lot to win from just sitting the conflict. Possible border adjustments in their favor could be nice incentive for doing nothing.

Russia's numbers will not help in this case and I doubt Atlantis have the numbers in land troops to really till the balance in favor of the French.

The ANT-35 raid would be more of a Doolittle raid. I doubt it would work a second time.

In a FAR vs. AEGIS my money goes to FAR. Their enemies are too spread out and could be dealt one at time. Russia would have direct access to the Med and to sent troops to France. Italy would be my first target if I was running this scenario. Conquer Northern Italy and you take their industrial capabilities away.

Quoted

Originally posted by AdmKuznetsov
would be able to get troop, materiel, and supply convoys to France in a FAR-AEGIS war.

Agreed.

Quoted

Quoted

France has a very large land force and so does Russia. If the Russians find a way to re-enforce the French, the French delema of having AEGIS enemy's on three fronts might be alieviated.

A Nordmark-UK-Germany vs FAR war would be a really tough slog. The forests of Finland are made for nullifying Russian mech forces, so there would be no quick result there. The mine/torpedo bomber infested Baltic will quickly become a "no-ship zone".

A big wild card here would be the PRJ, especially the Poles. Do they join a side, or try to maintain neutrality? If they succeed in staying out of it, the real action will be at the North Cape and in the mid-Atlantic as static land warfare smolders on in Finland and at Verdun.

Agreed on the Poles, they're in the pivotal position. But joining either side makes them the first target of the other and the primary battlefield, so neutrality is the best option. I don't think the Western Front would be nearly so static, though, especially not with the threat of invasion from the Channel (and while the British Army is smallish, in a FAR-GBN war German troops could be moved to the UK before landing on the coast of France).

Quoted

And ANT-35b's can bomb Scapa Flow by flying over the North Cape, then landing in France.

It's much easier for GBN bombers to flatten Murmansk from Nordish bases, though: a lot shorter flight, allowing for heavier bomb loads, and Murmansk is in range of long-range fighters from Nordish bases, so the bombers could be escorted..... Not to mention that there's some question about those ANT-35b range numbers that RA and I raised back in the Aircraft threads....


Certainly, though, GBN strategy would be fairly clear: go on the defensive vs Russia while knocking France out of the war, then if the war continues focus on either Russia or Atlantis while defending against the other. Atlantis might be the better target, in this case, because it's somewhat more accessible (no neutrals in the way).

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Agreed on the Poles, they're in the pivotal position. But joining either side makes them the first target of the other and the primary battlefield, so neutrality is the best option.

That would assume Poland enters the conflict with advanced notice, otherwise Russia could simply re-enforce Poland prior to the outbreak of war and it would be a tough slog for Germany. They won't be facing a Russian army purged of most of its generals.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
I don't think the Western Front would be nearly so static, though, especially not with the threat of invasion from the Channel (and while the British Army is smallish, in a FAR-GBN war German troops could be moved to the UK before landing on the coast of France).

Can Germany spare the troops vs. Russia's massive land force? Can they spare enough to land a large enough force that won't get smashed on the beaches?

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Certainly, though, GBN strategy would be fairly clear: go on the defensive vs Russia while knocking France out of the war, then if the war continues focus on either Russia or Atlantis while defending against the other. Atlantis might be the better target, in this case, because it's somewhat more accessible (no neutrals in the way).

That sounds like it rely's on Atlantis sitting on its arse while france gets stomped.....
Unless Iberia closes the Gibraltar straights Atlantis can simply send troops to the South of France.

IMO too much wait is being put in France staying power and Poland taking the Russian side. IMO Poland have a lot to win from just sitting the war out and a lot of Polish soldiers were killed by Russians in 1935 so helping the Russians will not be popular. is possible but IMO Poland will sit this one out until a clear winner is on sight.

How France is in better shape without a Maginot and Atlantic Wall? War will not be static IMO. Russian and Atlantean ground forces will not reach France IMO in enough numbers to stop the fall of France. France has to initially cover their borders with the AEGIS powers and the whole Channel Coast to cover a British-Canadian landing. The historical manpower issue is still in the favor of the Germans. IMO France falls except if Poland is more afraid of the Russian bear than anything else.

And I still don't understand why GNUK would feel the need to attack FAR. Both of our treaties are defensive - who's to say that if, for instance, Germany declares war on France, that Britain and Nordmark won't say "Fugitaboutit!" and stay neutral? Suddenly it's Germany versus FAR. Still a tough slog (especially for France), but not impossible.

[SIZE=1]I kinda feel this discussion is kinda pointless. None of us want to sign up to lose a major war: we all want to win on our own terms. So we just fall back on kicking around minor powers and NPCs. There's nothing serious being discussed here, just the usual "Well my alliance can beat your alliance so nyah nyah nyah."[/SIZE]

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Agreed on the Poles, they're in the pivotal position. But joining either side makes them the first target of the other and the primary battlefield, so neutrality is the best option.

That would assume Poland enters the conflict with advanced notice, otherwise Russia could simply re-enforce Poland prior to the outbreak of war and it would be a tough slog for Germany. They won't be facing a Russian army purged of most of its generals.

And just how could Russia reinforce Poland without that warning Germany? Poland has no agreement that allows Russia into it's territory, just like it doesn't have an agreement with Germany that allows German troops into it's territory.

Quoted

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
I don't think the Western Front would be nearly so static, though, especially not with the threat of invasion from the Channel (and while the British Army is smallish, in a FAR-GBN war German troops could be moved to the UK before landing on the coast of France).

Can Germany spare the troops vs. Russia's massive land force? Can they spare enough to land a large enough force that won't get smashed on the beaches?

Depends on what is happening on the Eastern Front. If the PRJ is neutral, absolutely. If the PRJ is not, then things would be a bit more dicey.

Quoted

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Certainly, though, GBN strategy would be fairly clear: go on the defensive vs Russia while knocking France out of the war, then if the war continues focus on either Russia or Atlantis while defending against the other. Atlantis might be the better target, in this case, because it's somewhat more accessible (no neutrals in the way).

That sounds like it rely's on Atlantis sitting on its arse while france gets stomped.....
Unless Iberia closes the Gibraltar straights Atlantis can simply send troops to the South of France.

The UK still controls GIbraltar, so the UK has some say in this as well, and that's assuming the RN is all deployed north of Iberia. I'd expect some, but not a lot, Atlantean reinforcements to reach France.

None of this is saying that the strategy would WORK, mind you, but the basic military strategy at the start of a GBN-FAR war looks straightforward for GBN.

From the other side, it's also relatively clear: Keep France alive, attack Nordmark to tie up enemy forces (even though the terrain's horrible), and decide how to proceed with the neutrals in eastern Europe. If a neutral country can be persuaded (by whatever means) to join the FAR, do what it takes and start moving Russian troops west, they'll lighten the load on France. Try to get Iberia to take or allow you to take Gibraltar ASAP, to open the way for Atlantean reinforcements to France.