Download A Historical Analysis Of A3R`s/ERS`s Optionals

But What If?
A Historical Analysis Of A3R’s/ERS’s Optionals
by Charles E. Duke
The Boardgamer Volume 5, Issue 4 October 2000
THIRD REICH was wonderful. I played it until the German counters were so worn
out that they were more white than black. But still, it had some unrealistic quirks,
nooks, crannies and dark places which prevented it from being truly great.
I witnessed the evolution from second to third to fourth edition rules, with
improvements that were mostly cosmetic; many of the basic flaws remained. So
when ADVANCEDTHIRD REICH was announced, I was a bit skeptic; in fact, I
delayed quite awhile before buying it. Once I did, however, I found a
masterpiece. Everything in this game and its sister EMPIRE OF THE RISING
SUN seems to fit perfectly, and they work as well oiled machines.
For all their abstractness (how much detail can you expect at this level) the
A3R/ERS system is very realistic and historically sound; so much, that if players
follow more or less the same strategies as their historical counterparts, it is
almost a narrative of World War II.
All that I have said up to this point applies to the "clean" game, played without
variants, Research or Diplomacy. It would appear that most people prefer to play
with these, but personally the "clean" version is my favorite; play balance is
almost perfect and you can concentrate on the strategic and economic aspects.
When other elements are used, a "wild" factor is introduced. This may well be
what many players like about the options; that’s O.K., but from a historical point
of view how authentic are they? Also, what impact do they have on the beautifully
balanced "clean" game?
Some time ago, a friend talked me into playing ERS with five! variants per side.
This was unusual, as I rarely accept more than two (and, as I just said, I actually
prefer none). My opponent got the Japanese and, among other items, he picked
"Serious Unrest in India" (variant 2) and "Japan Varies Occupation Policies in
China" (variant1). Both give the Japanese player additional troops. I spent most
of that game whining about how I had been forced to face these unrealistic
armies, how they had unbalanced my whole position in Asia, and so on. Also, the
fact that I received some unimpressive Allied variants added insult to injury. The
bitter taste of that game lingered. Recently, however, leafing through a WWII
Encyclopedia, I came across some sections that described in detail Wang’s
collaborationist forces and the Indian National Army (see elsewhere in this
article). So they had really existed! They are part of a rather obscure area of
WWII which is not covered in most popular history books, or is mentioned only in
passing. It dawned upon me that not only were these particular variants based on
reality, but also that the normal game was depriving the Japanese player from
assets that he should have! This prompted me to investigate how other options
fared in the test of history, and that is the purpose of this article.
In the discussion below, I sometimes appear to suggest some changes to the
normal rules. These are only for argumentative purposes; i.e., to present an idea
of what the rules should be to better reflect historical fact. I'm not proposing a
game Variant. Of course, you are free to try these variations, but be warned that
they could have a dramatic impact on play balance.
VARIANTS
Just as with alcohol, I'd rather not take any, but I must admit that one makes the
party more interesting, and two is my limit. The problem with variants is that while
some are very powerful, others are insignificant. If one side gets a strong variant
(or combination thereof) and his opponent's pick is weak, play balance suffers. In
my very personal view, which the patient reader is entirely free to digress with,
too many variants ruin the near-perfect essence of the game.
Most variants are covered by Research projects, so I will analyze them under
that heading. Others deal with purely hypothetical "what if" situations, which can
be very interesting in themselves but it would be pointless to discuss them.
They're the kind of stuff that you can spend hours arguing about with fellow
amateur historians and get nowhere. If only Hitler hadn't stopped the panzers at
Dunkirk; if only Stalin had been purged, etc. There is one variant that merits
separate comments, however.
Axis Variant 8: The German invasion of France catches Allies by surprise. All
Allied and Minor Country infantry and replacements, in all types of hexes, are
subject to a -1 DM. This variant is closer to historical fact than the normal game.
Although the German offensive was expected to occur sooner or later, the
prolonged Phony War had lulled the Allies into what may be described as "All
Calm on the Western Front". Many people hoped that perhaps a treaty or truce
could be arranged, or that the war could go on indefinitely without changes in the
status quo. The Allied High Command was counting on a repetition of World War
I with a massive struggle in Belgium and a stabilization of the front. The Germans
completely shocked the Allies with paratroopers, armored formations, air
superiority, the vonManstein plan, etc. The Minors were taken in a few days, and
France fell in less than two months. This variant neatly simulates that shock
effect. It could even lead to the fall of France in a single season; good history, but
play balance...
RESEARCH
The research rules are most intriguing, and to play with them is tons of fun, if you
don't care too much about realism. It's like a magical fair: What rabbit will the
other magician pull out of his hat this turn? Well, wait until he sees the tiger that
I'm going to pull out of mine!
Some research projects are too easy to achieve; they are virtually guaranteed
with a minimum of effort. The question is, was it really that easy to augment the
Italian Army; to cause unrest among the Muslims; or to expand the activities of
Russian partisans? Shouldn't there be a trade-off; if you gain this you lose that?
An average game played with research will end with both sides having achieved
ten or more projects, assets that historically the powers never had. This is the
equivalent of playing with ten variants per side. If you like plenty of these, you will
like playing with research rules; if like me, you prefer clean games, then you
might have a problem with Research. The "clean" game is a fine simulation of
WWII; with Research or variants, it is anything but.
More important for competitive gamers is the issue of lost assets. When you play
with Research, a number of items that you take for granted in the normal game
are taken away and you must recover them through Research. So far, so good,
but are these losses equitative? The number of items that both sides lose in A3R
seems balanced, but if we go to ERS, we find that the Japanese loses only two
assets: a favorable ASW DRM in 1944 and Fortifications. The Allies lose
favorable DRM’s for SAC in 43, 44, 45 and 46; favorable DRM’s for torpedoes in
44 and 45; favorable DRM’s for ASW in 40, 41,42, 43, 44, 45 and 46; an increase
in shipbuilding; three artificial ports; a Magic counter; and of course, the A-bomb,
which represents at least four different and costly projects and the construction of
five bombs by 1946. 20+ items! If we assume that a player will try to recover his
lost assets before anything else, and average dice rolls, the Allies must spend
the entire war just to achieve this, and will even probably fall short by some
items. On the other side, the Japanese can easily recover his two lost assets and
then go on to achieve at least half a dozen other projects. This isn't fair! I never
accept to play ERS as the Allied player using Research. Back to the purpose of
this article, I will now discuss some research projects in the light of history.
Air Nationality DRM: During the war no power developed a superiority in
training and aircraft quality which would amount to a +1 DRM in the game. What
happened was that every power (even Italy) more or less kept up with the
technological progress of the others. To get an idea, they began with the P-39
(U.S.), Hurricane I (Britain), Me-109 (Germany), I-16 Rata (Russia) and Cr-42
Biplane (Italy), as their main fighters. They ended with the P-51, Tempest, FW190D, Yak 9 and Macchi 202, respectively. Although they had their crises, as the
British during the Battle of Britain, the Germans in 1944-45 and the U.S. after
Pearl Harbor, they managed to keep a minimum of pilot quality.
Perhaps you have noticed that I haven’t mentioned Japan. This is because it is a
notable exception to the statements I made in the preceding paragraph. This
country began the war with extraordinary Navy pilots and the superb Zero;
certainly the +1 for Japanese elite units of the early war is well justified. However,
they stuck to the same aircraft types for virtually the entire war, and the quality of
Japanese pilots decreased dramatically over the years. This is not represented in
the game, but I think that it would demand that the Japanese Air Nationality DRM
be reduced to -1 in1943 (not affecting any surviving elite units). Of course, the -1
could be offset by Research.
Force Pool Additions (in general):
The Force Pools in A3R/ERS are, of course, abstract representations which the
game designers defined to reflect the average forces which the different powers
fielded during the war. They do so quite effectively. Expanding a Force Pool is a
hypothetical situation which falls into the realm of "what if", and if you add to this
the fact that they don't represent historical orders of battle, an analysis seems to
be pointless. However, something comes to my mind regarding these additions in
the game. Augmenting a Force Pool is not so much a matter of technical
research (as the powers already know how to make rifles, trucks, airplanes,
ships, etc.) but of expanding the armies at the expense of the Home Front (the
laborers, farmers, clerks and defense forces taken away from their normal
occupations). Even the decision of making more ships, planes, or tanks than the
system is actually producing (including replacements for depleted units) would
simply the sacrifice of something else, as the industry would be stretched beyond
its natural limits. An idea that I have had for a while about what would be more
realistic in this aspect of the game is to use the normal (not Global War) Force
Pools as the basis for what the country's infrastructure can handle. Beyond that,
you can expand the Force Pool when and as you wish (except that you can’t
receive special units before their normal date of availability). No research, but
you must decrease your country's Base by the cost of the units added. Further,
as usual they are just added to the Pool and must be built.
Alternatively, a limit of how much Base you can convert to Force Pool can be
imposed. Also, you can remove units from the game (even those from the
original Force Pool) and increase your Base by their value.
Jets: Although Germany is generally hailed as the country that invented the jet
fighter (the Me-262, operational in 1944), few casual students of WWII realize
that other powers also developed it. Britain had the Gloster Meteor, which was
used primarily to defend against the V-1 Flying Bomb; it also appeared in1944.
The USA built the P-80 Shooting Star, but it was a bit late as the first units
equipped with it began arriving in Italy a few weeks after the war in Europe had
ended. An encounter between enemy jet fighters would have been most
interesting, but unfortunately for military history students it never happened.
Germany also built other jets, like the Arado 234 bomber and He-162 fighter, and
the rocket fighter Me-163. In a historically-minded game, I would give Germany a
jet counter in Fall 1944 and Summer 1945; Britain would get one in Winter 1944,
and the U.S. one in Fall 1945.
Rockets: The V-1 Flying Bomb was a small pilotless aircraft powered by a pulse
engine. It was test-launched in December 1942 by Werner von Braun, of NASA
fame, and ordered into mass production in 1943. The first bombs were launched
against London on June13, 1944. Only about a third of these weapons reached
their targets; the rest crashed or were shot down. From October 1944, Belgian
cities came under attack, especially Antwerp, the chief supply port for the Allies
in Europe. London was resumed with an extended range version fired from
launchers in the Netherlands. They were also used tactically, such as in the
Battle of the Bulge. Altogether, over 10,000 V-1s were launched against England.
The V-2 Rocket Bomb was a parallel development. It was first fired in October
1942, but due to it being complex and expensive, production was delayed until
1944. The first V-2 was launched against London on September 8, 1944. Until
March 1945 a total of 1,054 rockets fell on England; of these, 517 reached
London. They were also used against Antwerp. In the game, allow the German a
12-13 Rockets result in Summer 1944, 14-15 in Winter 1944, and 16 in Spring
1945, reflecting Flying Bomb improvements.
Paradoxically, a 17 result would come into effect in Fall 1944 (before the 14-15
and 16 results!). Remember that the development of these weapons was parallel.
An 18 result would be applicable in Spring 1945.
Strategic Bombers: As is well known, only the U.S. and Britain developed and
used important strategic bombing forces. I won't go into a lengthy discussion of
these. The only other power to come anywhere near was Germany. Early in the
war, prototypes of two four-engine bombers, the Ju-89 and the Do-19, were
presented to Göring, but he turned them down in favor of smaller two-engine
types which were already in production. He has been much criticized for the
decision, but it was probably correct at the time. Building the large planes would
mean much less medium types, and would Germany have achieved what it did
without them?
Another project was the He-177 Ural bomber, that would have been operational
in 1941 except for a silly requisite of the Luftwaffe: It had to be able to dive-bomb!
Again, Göring has been blamed for the stupidity, but it seems that he's not guilty
of this one. The designers had to couple each pair of engines, a technical
nightmare which caused all sorts of trouble like spontaneous fires. Maintenance
was very difficult. The final result became operational in late 1942 and looked to
the casual observer as a bimotor. 1,146 were built and they were used in many
roles (including as transports in the siege of Stalingrad). They could carry 6,000
kg of bombs (the B-17 carried 2,722 kg and the Lancaster 6,350). Incidentally, it
was able to dive-bomb. However, Germany never engaged in a serious Strategic
Bombing campaign, so I consider that allowing the U.S. and Britain to build
strategic bombers and nobody else, as in the normal game, is the more
historically accurate option.
More practically, Germany resorted to a “poor man's" solution, using medium and
light bombers in the Battle of Britain which is appropriately represented in the
game by the German Bombing of Britain rules (43). The Western Allies also
made extensive and effective use of tactical air forces against strategic targets in
Germany towards the end of the war, and carrier-borne aircraft did the same
against Japan. This is not simulated in the game. Perhaps a general rule would
be more realistic, where any major power can use air factors to bomb an enemy
major power’s objective cities (ICs in the case of Russia) in range, while the
enemy may defend as per rule 43. Allied bombings would reduce U.S.-Axis
tension, just as Axis bombings increase it. The Japanese Bombing rules (ERS
43) would still apply, and carriers on patrol could send their aircraft on these
missions.
Air Supply: Both sides were able to supply by air small bodies of friendly troops.
The Germans had kept several pockets supplied in the infamous Russian winter
of 1941-42, which was one of the reasons which made them so confident that
they could repeat the trick at Stalingrad. In Burma, the Allies found that aircraft
were often the only effective means of keeping the front-line troops supplied,
especially during the Chindit expeditions and the battle around Imphal in 1944.
But air supply had its limitations. Göring's boast that the Luftwaffe could keep
Stalingrad supplied proved to be empty, and the U.S. and Britain failed to keep
their high-speed advance across France in late Summer1944 supplied by air. In
both cases, transport aircraft proved insufficient to meet the demand. In game
terms, I would assign the Germans the ability to supply one unit by air, and the
Western Allies two.
Airborne: In 1922 Soviet soldiers were dropped successfully by parachute, an
event that didn't go unnoticed by German observers attached to the Red Army.
However, it wasn't until 1938 that Major-General Student was ordered to create
an airborne arm. The world's first airborne combat operation was mounted on
April 9, 1940 during the Norwegian campaign; a month later German
paratroopers were used in the assault against the Low Countries. On May
20,1941, Student successfully took the island of Crete solely by air assault, a feat
demonstrating the strategic potential of these operations. However, dismayed by
the heavy losses (a quarter of the forces involved were killed), Hitler decreed that
the surprise element of airborne assaults was lost and that large-scale operations
would no longer be undertaken. Except for isolated pinprick operations, Student
's fallschirmjägers were used as elite infantry for the rest of the war. The Battle of
Crete had an opposite effect on the Western Allies, prompting the U.S. and
Britain to develop and expand their airborne forces. British and American
parachute detachments were used in the invasion of French North Africa and
Sicily. Allied techniques were perfected by D-Day, when the British 6th and the
American 82nd and 101st divisions were dropped. In August 1944 all Allied
airborne formations were integrated into Lt. General Brereton's Allied Airborne
Army, comprising the British 1st Airborne and the U.S. 18th Airborne Corps; these
units were not nationality-exclusive, as both included formations from each
country. Likewise, the Western Allied airborne units in the game could be
considered to be of mixed nationality and usable by either power without need of
being lent.
In September 1944 the veteran U.S.82nd and 101st and the 1st British airborne
divisions, along with the Polish parabrigade, were dropped during operation
Market-Garden. It failed to establish a bridgehead across the Rhine, but in March
1945 during operation Varsity the 6th British and 17th U.S. achieved just that.
The historical orders of battle and operational effects of both Germany and the
U.S. would seem to justify only one airborne unit for each in the game, as it is.
The second unit that both can get by Research falls into the category of
hypothetical force pool expansions.
Although the Soviets had been the pioneers of airborne warfare, it had been
neglected after Marshal Tukhachevsky was purged in the thirties. Soviet
parachute operations were confined to minor deployments, usually in conjunction
with defensive amphibious operations in the Black Sea. I would say that they
should have only one airborne unit in their normal force pool.
The Japanese were quick to grasp the potential of parachute forces, and 1,800
marines were trained to drop from low altitudes. They captured the airfield of
Menado, Celebes in January 1942. Also remarkable was an assault by a small
team that captured the oilfields of Palembang, Sumatra. On February 20,1942,
the 3rd Yokosuka battalion took part in the first vertical envelopment of an enemy
force in history when they dropped behind Allied lines in Timor. The Allies also
employed airborne forces in the Pacific, notably the 11 th U.S. division at Luzon in
January 1945.
Chindits: This was the name given to General Wingate's Long Range
Penetration Groups, which fought behind enemy lines in Burma while being
supplied by air. The first important, although relatively small, operation was
Longcloth, which took part in February 1943 with mixed results. A more
ambitious operation, Thursday, occurred in February-March1944 with larger
forces. Part of these infiltrated while others airlifted. A road/rail block and two
strongholds around airstrips were established, which were successful in drawing
Japanese forces from the Imphal offensive. However, after Wingate's death in a
plane crash on March 24, the Chindits came under Stilwell’s command and were
thereafter used in a conventional role, for which they were ill suited. After
suffering great losses the force was withdrawn and eventually dissolved. In the
game, to simulate history the Chindit unit should be available as an addition in
Winter1942. By the way, although it is not mentioned specifically in the rules, the
Chindit should be able to overstack.
Human torpedoes: These were used primarily by the Italians, but also by the
British, Japanese and Germans. In what was probably their only unqualified
success in the war, the Italians crippled the battleships Valiant and Queen
Elizabeth in Alexandria harbor using Maiale torpedoes on December 19,1941,
and also attacked shipping in Malta, Algiers and Gibraltar. The British used their
version of the Maiale, the Chariot, to mount an attack on the Battleship Tirpitz in
October 1942, which failed. However, attacks on Italian ships in Palermo and
other ports were more successful.
The Germans used the Mohr torpedo against shipping in the Anzio landings and
later in Normandy, with negligible results. They were also used against Channel
shipping (incidentally, the German torpedomen were usually from penal units).
Likewise, the Japanese Kaiten (a suicidal weapon) had few successes, except
on their first use at Ulithi in November 1944 where they managed to sink an
American fleet tanker. In game terms, we would probably have to limit ourselves
to the spectacular; I would give the Italians a two-dice-roll attack in 1941 or later,
and the Japanese a one-die-roll attack in 1944 or later.
Commandos: The first British Special Forces were formed in 1940 for the
Norwegian campaign. From them evolved the Commandos when in Summer
1940 Churchill ordered that hit-and-run raids be conducted against occupied
Europe. They mounted numerous operations, the most important being those at
Lofoten, Dieppe and St. Nazaire. Hitler was so outraged by these tactics that he
decreed that captured commandos be treated as spies (i.e., summarily executed)
even if fully uniformed. Different but related units were the Royal Marine
Commandos, dedicated to supporting major Allied landing operations, and which
the game’s Commando units most likely represent. On the other side, the ability
of these units to invade ports is historically questionable. More realistic would be
to allow them to overstack in invasions. To represent Raiding Forces, allow a
non-moving Commando unit in an Allied controlled, fully supplied port in the
Atlantic to cause a one-BRP loss to Germany. A similar unit in the Med could
cause the loss to either Germany or Italy, while one in the Pacific could
inconvenience Japan in the same way. One commando unit should be available
in Summer 1940 (so it can begin to annoy Hitler) and the other in Spring1944
representing the Royal Marines prepared for D-Day.
Flexible deployment: Did it really take six months to move from the U.S. to the
South Pacific? In Magellan's time perhaps. Why is it so slow, and why do you
have to research the ability to get there? (Maybe Astronomy needs to be
discovered. . . Er, no, that 's in CIVILIZATION). It was a long trip, but the
difficulties could better be portrayed by doubling the SR cost. All the above apply
to Flexible Deployment in A3R as well.
Synthetic oil: The oil output for Germany during WWII was as follows:
1939 2.2 million tons
1940 3.3 million tons
1941 4.1 million tons
1942 4.9 million tons
1943 5.7 million tons
1944 3.8 million tons
This production was insufficient to cover all of the Wehrmacht's demands, so
Germany continued depending on the Romanian oilfields. When these were
gone, oil shortages began (as the game portrays by implementing oil effects). As
can be seen, Germany had synthetic oil production even before the war, and it
remained relatively constant, so the game's Research results represent an
expansion beyond the basic capability and therefore a "what if" situation. The
normal game effects are closer to history.
Fortifications: Construction of the Siegfried Line began in 1936 and accelerated
in 1938, when the Todt
Organization employed 500,000 workers and a third of Germany’s annual output
of cement to complete it. The Line deterred a French invasion during the phony
war and was used again in 1944-45. Therefore, the West wall should be in
existence at game start! The fortification abilities of Germany, Russia and Japan
are nearly legendary, as seen in Cassino, Stalingrad, the Atlantic Wall, Okinawa,
etc. However, I wonder if this ability was really a trait of these nationalities or it
stemmed from the fact that all were faced with a protracted defensive war.
Anyway, I admit that the Fortification rules applicable to each of these three add
a lot of flavor and should be included in any historically-oriented scenario. The
Berchtesgaden fortress and the Bavarian Redoubt, of course, were only myths.
Atomic research: Serious research into atomic fission began in England in the
early forties, conducted mainly by Jewish refugee scientists that had fled Austria
and Germany. However, Britain had more urgent technical needs in 1940, so the
project was dropped.
In Japan, K. Hagiwara foresaw the possibility of an U235 bomb, but no serious
effort ensued. Igor Kurchatov in the USSR alerted his government to this, but the
idea fell on deaf ears until May 1942, when Georgi Flerov stated that “his country
must build a bomb without delay” and an intense espionage effort against the US
program began, which bore its fruits in Russia’s post-war developments.
In Germany the possibility of a bomb was largely overlooked; it was considered
not feasible until the end of the war. However, a “boiler” (a controlled reaction)
might be achieved. Heisenberg (famous for his “Uncertainty Principle”) led this
effort, but it was seriously handicapped when the heavy water plant in Vemork,
Norway, was sabotaged in February 1943. After this, atomic research was
dropped entirely.
During 1941 American scientists visited the United Kingdom and were very
impressed. Until that time not a single member of the American team thought that
fission was attainable before the end of WWII. The result was the Manhattan
project, where the workers of the existing British effort were transferred. At an
estimated cost of two billion dollars and a workforce of 600,000, the first atomic
bomb was tested at Alamogordo, July 16, 1945.The Hiroshima bomb of August
6, 1945 was made of uranium, while the August 9 bomb at Nagasaki was made
of plutonium.
Most historians agree that Germany never had a real chance of developing an
atomic bomb. In the game, especially when played with several variants and the
Atomic Research Table, it is quite possible.
Ethiopia: Italy’s East African operation did occur. Soon after Italy entered the
war on June 10, 1940, forces under the Duke of Aosta invaded British border
outposts in Sudan and Kenya, and conquered British Somaliland. However,
despite overwhelming numerical superiority, the Italians failed to exploit the
initiative and fell into a defensive state of mind. The British counteroffensive
began in earnest on January 19, 1941 and after a somewhat difficult campaign
Aosta surrendered on May 16, 1941. An important aftermath was that Roosevelt
declared that the area was no longer a war zone, therefore allowing the still
neutral US to send merchant ships to Suez.
Chinese occupation policies: Japan’s occupation of China wasn’t nice.
However, they did establish puppet governments in the different Army
commands; these worked separately and often in rivalry. The Central China
Expeditionary Army’s version was “The Reformed Government of the Republic of
China”, seated in Nanking under Wang Ching-wei, a well-known politician who
had defected to the Japanese out of rivalry with Chiang Kai-shek. Although
discredited from the start, it did command certain resources. After 1939, the line
between Nationalist and collaborationist forces became blurred. Some local
commanders did the bidding of either side depending on their current
calculations of survival and self-interest. Nationalist units were extra officially
authorized to defect if the alternative was certain destruction, under the notion
that they would change sides again in the future. This makes estimating puppet
forces difficult, but one estimate places Wang’s forces at 900,000 in 1940; forces
in Northern China may have been equally large. They were considered unreliable
and viewed with contempt by their Japanese masters.
In the game, it would seem that a 9+ effect is appropriate from the start.
However, to reflect the lack of effectiveness of Wang’s units, they can’t attack.
Also, I would make an exception regarding the Nationalist partisans and allow the
existence of at least one.
Indian subversion: The Indian Nationalist Army (INA) was formed by Mahan
Singh and Major Fujiwara Iwaichi from Indian POWs in February 1942. It was
poorly organized and had low morale. Out of 60,000 prisoners 20,000
volunteered. However, in December1942 Singh came under suspicion and was
arrested; the INA virtually disbanded. In June 1943 it was reconstituted under the
Indian revolutionary Subhas Chandra Bose. INA units were fragmented and
attached to Japanese formations, and they had some success in sabotage,
propaganda, translation, and as guides. 7,000 INA troops took part in the Imphal
offensive, and later the INA participated in the defense of Burma. They continued
to be poorly armed, and their morale was suspect. Vast numbers surrendered or
deserted. Chandra Bose and the INA are considered patriotic figures in India
even today.
India suffered extensive but poorly organized subversion in the war’s early years,
but it had been suppressed by1943. In game terms, a result of 9+ should come
into effect in Summer 1943. Optionally, allow the Japanese to build one Indian
partisan from game start.
Varied occupation policies
(Germany): One of the greatest blunders attributed to Hitler (he seems to have
been an expert on such things) is the harsh treatment given to Soviet civilians in
accordance to Ostpolitik. Many peoples, especially in the non-Russian Soviet
republics, were ready to acclaim the Germans as liberators. Ucrania could well
have become an important Axis Minor Ally. Even many ethnic Russians would
have welcome the Nazis, considering them preferable to the Communists.
Russian General Andrey Vlassov was captured in July 1942 and agreed to form
an anti-Stalinist Russian Liberation Movement. Apparently he knew that he could
not rejoin the Soviets as he faced severe punishment for losing his army.
At first Vlassov was used only for propaganda purposes. Hitler didn’t take his
appeals for a Russian Liberation Army seriously because he considered Slavs
inferior, and he disapproved of this display of Russian nationalism. In June 1943
he forbade all further attempts.
In November 1944 Himmler formed a Committee for the Liberation of the
Peoples of Russia (KONR). The committee was allowed to form two divisions in
January 1945 under Vlassov. The 2nd KONR never saw action, but 1st KONR
did. Later, in May 1945, it fought in Prague against the Germans.
The Wehrmacht made extensive use of Soviet POWs and civilians as auxiliaries
(“hiwis”). Osttruppen were independent battalions or companies, officered by
Germans, which were attached to German formations. Ostlegionen were nonSlav units formed by Armenian, Azerbaijani, Georgian, Caucasian, Turkestani
and Tatar troops. Cossacks originated in communities on the frontiers of the
Russian Empire, especially the Don, Kuban, Terek and Zaporozhie, considered
non-Slav Aryans by the Nazis. A 15th Cossack Cavalry Corps was formed, and
used against Tito in Yugoslavia.
There were other units, such as the Kaminski brigade, which had 5,000 troops in
1942 and 10,000 in 1943. In1944 Kaminski himself became suspect and was
shot, and the brigade was subsequently used by the SS in the suppression of the
Warsaw ghetto uprising.
Clearly, the research results for “varied policies” are not close to historical
occurrence; they are an interesting “what if”. However, I would otherwise add two
“Vlasov” 1-3 units to the German Force Pool, rebuildable, to represent the
various Russian forces that served in the Wehrmacht. One would appear on the
turn after war is on Russia, and the other in Winter 1944 representing the KONR
divisions.
CONCLUSION
Many people approach wargames with a historic mind. They want to relive, or try
to change, the events that the game intends to portray. For this purpose, A3R
and ERS are very well suited, as long as the basic version is used. In my opinion,
Variants, Research and Diplomacy rules alter the authenticity of the system
without taking into account the impact those alterations would have had on the
course of the war. I’m not saying that these options shouldn’t exist, or that
players should confine themselves to the basic game. A German atomic bomb
can be a possibility, but if the German player decides to pursue it, he should face
some of the real difficulties and pay the penalties that such an effort would bring
to his economy and his other needs.
However, every work is perfectible, and I would like to see all the historical facts I
mentioned in this article integrated into the rules in some manner that would not
alter play balance. Also, I would like Research and Diplomacy to more
realistically interact and reflect the issues at stake in WWII. Research should be
limited to the investigation of technical breakthroughs; Intelligence could be an
independent subsystem, with each country receiving “Intel points” each year,
unrelated to Research or Diplomacy points. A pet idea that I have had for some
time is that the actions of Minors would be better handled by Resistance tables,
minimizing the luck factor which has such a heavy influence on Diplomacy as it
is. DPs could still be used, but they would apply as modifiers. 2nd Edition
Variant/Research/Diplomacy rules? Well, anybody interested?