The Battle of Pleven had the 202. Moto. Strelk division, which my limited Russian seems to indicate is a motor rifle division.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
The Battle of Pleven had the 202. Moto. Strelk division, which my limited Russian seems to indicate is a motor rifle division.
I'll do a fuller response tomorrow (just written the next post but need to chop and paste screenshots etc), but both in game and in the war, Soviet nomenclature was downright confusing. In this context there were two essentially different formations that had the (anglicised) title motor rifle division - one is a rifle division pure and simple that happened to have a decent amount of organic transport and some aptitude at using those transports on the battlefield. Now you'd think, esp given the pre-lend lease truck shortage, that these would be seen as precious forces to operate with the armour. In reality they were scattered around the normal infantry armies, giving them a bit of operational mobility (& thats how I'm using them in game). If anything, Soviet operational doctrine put more emphasis on the unique use of the Cavalry divisions than these motorised infantry formations.
The second formation paradox models as a light tank brigade with 2 mot rifle brigades (I've 3 of these in the Balkans) and the 202 is one of those. Now I think the Soviets didn't see them as a package and the T-60/T-70 (& lend lease) light tank brigades were cross-attached to all sorts of combinations (including with the T-34 formations, but mostly where they were operating as independent tank brigades). So you read about x brigades in Stavka reserve being allocated to y front. In effect the Soviets had a block of light, medium and heavy tank brigades that were added to non-tank armies as needed. So the paradox version is reasonable (& I for one am not going to start playing with the RKKA at the brigade level) but its a sort of proxy for this ad-hoc style formation.
Caught up again. I guess you were more than happy to trade those territorial losses in the Balkans for the gains you made in the Ukraine. In one of the screenshots, Lvov was enticingly close. Are you, at this point in time, already on pre-1939 Polish soil?
Manpower is looking pretty dire. What's the bigger constraint for you: the tight manpower and logistical situation, or the Axis resistance?
Manpower is looking pretty dire. What's the bigger constraint for you: the tight manpower and logistical situation, or the Axis resistance?
It should be called - motostrelkovaya divizia. BTW - this is how it is called in HPP mod.
I'll do a state of the world round up in a few posts, the events to come in Poland give adequate reason for yet another Soviet-British summit. But on the battlefield, Japan and the US are trying to invade each others islands in their private war (US not in the Allies and Japan hasn't, at this stage, attacked the allies directly). The British are having one of their better phases, they are doing well in S China and are actually over the Libyan border (mainly as my subs operating out of Beirut have sunk Italy's convoys)
I'll do a relatively detailed post on the manpower position when I reach the end of September (ie the start of the autumn-winter battles) as it had a huge impact on what I could and couldn't do.
Cross-checking my records I stay just over 100 till the end of 43 by cannabilising brigades, scrapping the older subs (I'd kept a number of short range ones in the Far East as they could have been useful in interdicting Japan-Korea convoys) & being really ruthless in terms of who was allowed to reinforce.
I also lowered my occupation policy in Iran (my argument is that 2 years after the occupation the new Tudeh govt is securely in control) & retake my main population centres - it all just about keeps me alive, but I have rifle divs around 4-5000, some below 4000 and even the armour starts to drop below 7000 ... but as with one of my cats after he's had a fight --- you should see the other guy
But to me, as Lord Tim says, its right. Post-Bagration the Soviets were out of manpower and replacing infantry firepower with artillery. One reason why Hitler deluded himself the Soviets couldn't attack along the Oder in 1945 was they couldn't understand how any army could actually supply the volume of guns the Soviets had by then, but then the Red Army by 1945 was very good at solving military problems.
Its an interesting situation. You can read this heavy reinforcement of the Balkans as astute - it keeps Greece, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Hungary in the war. Equally they come very close to winning and forcing me to abandon Bulgaria and S Rumania. If that had happened, combined with their strong defense on the Dniestr my long exposed flank on the Hungarian-Ukrainian border (I'll come to this soon) could have been a bigger problem than it was to me in game.
On the other hand (as we'll come to) at the time that they are battering my forces around Ploesti-Bucherest (next post), I'm gently walking to the Vistula hampered by no more than the shells of once powerful divisions.
So I sort of see it as this games version of Hitler's Hungarian offensive in 1945. Bad news for Tolbukhin's front, but given what the Soviets were planning on the Oder utterly irrelevant.
I need Copenhagen first, as my arctic fleet was sunk back in late 41/early 42. But its pretty clear the British won't be able to liberate themselves so its most likely something I need to do (& then decide whether or not to hand it back to them?) ... as a consequence of the manpower shortage I'm building a lot of naval (esp transports) and air (& infra) at the moment, so I have the sealift capacity by May 44, but not the combat fleet to take on the Kriegsmarine (which in the Baltic remains very strong).
welcome aboard, glad that it was interesting enough to hold your attention across all those page ... as I've said a few times, I never imagined this thing would be so long, still if the end isn't nigh ... I can sort of see it as a distant glimmmer on the horizon.
As in my semi-response above, just what these things were is really complex. Except in a handful of deliberately structured formations (the tank and mech corps), the Red Army was actually very diverse. Particular horrors to sort out are the various divisions thrown into the line in late 41 - some really were workers' militias, some just badly trained and equipped regular rifle divisions, but for example the NKVD formations used at the time (the combat ones) were a mix of very steely forces (who held Rostov in early summer 42 while the bulk of the Red Army slipped out of encirclement) and truely rubbish (in effect arming the local police).
by the end of September I'm over the border and thinking that Krakow would be a nice place to spend the winter. My constraint in the Ukraine is less whats facing me and more the increasingly long flanks as I push westwards there, make no progress in the Balkans and much much slower progress in Bielorussia and the Baltics. So the main obstacles are the twin frictions of lenghtening flanks and the usual collapse of my supply delivery, not opposition itself.
given your new 'location' ... can I offer you public congratulations.
Now:
a reminder to vote
first, its the quarterly aarland awards here, so wander off read aars and vote ... most authors like votes as much as they like active commentators ... not canvassing for votes as I've won the relevant category a couple of times already.
second, visit the resting home of elderly aars completed in 2010 and vote for the first HOI3 Iron Cross awards. They are all vanilla HOI, and they are all gems ... and the authors actually managed to finish them, which is something in itself, so reward them with your considered opinions ... you don't need to leave a comment, just vote in the poll.
Last edited:
"They dropped like flakes, they dropped like stars": The Balkans - Aug-Sept 1943
Even as Axis forces became increasingly drawn into the fierce battles in the streets of Bucherest, they were also trying to outflank the city to the south. Their first attempt to force the Soviet lines at Giugiu from 7 to 23 August was fended off in a sequence of battles that left 5,000 Soviet and 6,000 axis dead.
(Soviet positions near Giurgiu)
However, the Soviet defenders had little respite as the Germans attacked again on 25 August, this time spearheaded by the freshly arrived 12 Panzer division. By 1 September, the Soviet lines gave way.
Meanwhile, even as this fresh crisis erupted, to the north of Bucharest, a quick counterattack had caught 16 Pzr when it was committed to the Bucherest battles.
(soviet counterattack at Ploesti)
The result was the recovery of Ploesti on 6 August and its retention in the face of a major German offensive from 13 to 21 August.
However, even as one crisis was fended off, 9 Army faced a new threat. In this case the Tigers of 9 Heavy Armour crashed through the Soviet lines at Valenii de Munte and then at Onesti. By 18 August, the front to the north of Ploesti was shattered and the freshly designated 4 Ukrainian Front was scrambling to find any reserves to plug the line.
Fortunately, briefly the German offensive faltered and additional formations from the old 2 Army (on the Volkhov) had been diverted by Stavka from the Ukraine into Rumania. This formation, bringing in 7 new rifle divisions (but all veterans of 2 years winter fighting in the Arctic) took operational command of the battles to the south of Bucherest leaving 18 Army in charge of the slow retreat in Bulgaria. In the north, elements of 4 Army (attached to the 3 Ukrainian Front) continued to screen Chisinau leaving 9 Army in charge of the front from Bucherest to Valenii de Munte.
(OOB after 2 Army was committed to the fighting in S Rumania)
Bolstered, the Soviets were first able to shore up their defense lines at Ploesti to fend off yet another German assault by 6 September and the lines at Valenii de Munte were restored by a successful counterattack on 3 September
(SU-100s moving to the front, well able to knock out a Tiger from a well prepared ambush and they became the backbone of 9 Army's defense all autumn in Rumania)
and this time, fresh units were able to hold off a renewed attack by 9 Heavy Armour from 7 to 12 September.
Key to 9 Army's operational flexibility was Stavka's decision to allocate 2 of the freshly organised Mechanized Infantry formations.
(the mechanized infantry adopted similar tactics to those used by the squads used to close co-operation with the tanks)
Raised from the shell of shattered rifle divisions in the late Spring, equipped with a mixture of armoured lorries,
(early Soviet built half-track)
captured German equipment and some purchases from the US, these formations gave a degree of power lacking in the other rifle formations. To this was added a permanently attached brigade of SU-100s.
(SU-100s in ambush positions near Valenii de Munte)
The result was a formation with real power [1], the only problem for 9 Army was they were shuttled from crisis to crisis, and at times needed to be pulled from the line to recover.
(a moment of rest for the hardpressed units of 9 Army - all too rare at this stage of the war)
With 9 Army, having appeared to have restored the position to the north of Bucharest, the The Germans launched 3 major attempts to take the city directly from 3 September to 1 October. Although none had the weight or commitment of the July offensive, they had the effect of pinning the south flank of 9 Army and allowing the German offensive along the Danube to develop. However, German losses of 8,000 for under 2,000 Soviet dead, indicated the desparate nature of their attacks and the lack of preparation.
(the other advantage the Soviets had was excellent intelligence from VVS overflights, the main radar base at Sevastopol and mobile radar units such as this)
On the Bulgarian side of the border, 2 Army was driven back from Ruse on 27 September, and an attempt to regain Giugiu on failed on the same day.
As if to underline the perilous position of the Soviet forces in the Balkans, a renewed axis attack took Valenii de Munte on 2 October.
Generally the front in Bulgaria was static with both sides well entrenched and making use of the mountainous terrain. In Rumania, the front was shifting back and forth as each side attacked in turn. Bucharest was becoming key to the Soviet positions, as long as that was held, German gains to the north or south could be absorbed. However, the German pressure was mounting and it appeared as if OKH had prioritised elimination of the Soviet forces in the Balkans before turnng their attention back to the southern flank of the Ukranian forces.
The losses reflected the relatively even fierce fighting with 40.931 Soviet, 34,575 German and 10,990 Axis dead.
[1] - this combination has the combined arms bonus (the loss of speed is not that important as I used them intermixed with the infantry not the tank armies)
Even as Axis forces became increasingly drawn into the fierce battles in the streets of Bucherest, they were also trying to outflank the city to the south. Their first attempt to force the Soviet lines at Giugiu from 7 to 23 August was fended off in a sequence of battles that left 5,000 Soviet and 6,000 axis dead.
(Soviet positions near Giurgiu)
However, the Soviet defenders had little respite as the Germans attacked again on 25 August, this time spearheaded by the freshly arrived 12 Panzer division. By 1 September, the Soviet lines gave way.
Meanwhile, even as this fresh crisis erupted, to the north of Bucharest, a quick counterattack had caught 16 Pzr when it was committed to the Bucherest battles.
(soviet counterattack at Ploesti)
The result was the recovery of Ploesti on 6 August and its retention in the face of a major German offensive from 13 to 21 August.
However, even as one crisis was fended off, 9 Army faced a new threat. In this case the Tigers of 9 Heavy Armour crashed through the Soviet lines at Valenii de Munte and then at Onesti. By 18 August, the front to the north of Ploesti was shattered and the freshly designated 4 Ukrainian Front was scrambling to find any reserves to plug the line.
Fortunately, briefly the German offensive faltered and additional formations from the old 2 Army (on the Volkhov) had been diverted by Stavka from the Ukraine into Rumania. This formation, bringing in 7 new rifle divisions (but all veterans of 2 years winter fighting in the Arctic) took operational command of the battles to the south of Bucherest leaving 18 Army in charge of the slow retreat in Bulgaria. In the north, elements of 4 Army (attached to the 3 Ukrainian Front) continued to screen Chisinau leaving 9 Army in charge of the front from Bucherest to Valenii de Munte.
(OOB after 2 Army was committed to the fighting in S Rumania)
Bolstered, the Soviets were first able to shore up their defense lines at Ploesti to fend off yet another German assault by 6 September and the lines at Valenii de Munte were restored by a successful counterattack on 3 September
(SU-100s moving to the front, well able to knock out a Tiger from a well prepared ambush and they became the backbone of 9 Army's defense all autumn in Rumania)
and this time, fresh units were able to hold off a renewed attack by 9 Heavy Armour from 7 to 12 September.
Key to 9 Army's operational flexibility was Stavka's decision to allocate 2 of the freshly organised Mechanized Infantry formations.
(the mechanized infantry adopted similar tactics to those used by the squads used to close co-operation with the tanks)
Raised from the shell of shattered rifle divisions in the late Spring, equipped with a mixture of armoured lorries,
(early Soviet built half-track)
captured German equipment and some purchases from the US, these formations gave a degree of power lacking in the other rifle formations. To this was added a permanently attached brigade of SU-100s.
(SU-100s in ambush positions near Valenii de Munte)
The result was a formation with real power [1], the only problem for 9 Army was they were shuttled from crisis to crisis, and at times needed to be pulled from the line to recover.
(a moment of rest for the hardpressed units of 9 Army - all too rare at this stage of the war)
With 9 Army, having appeared to have restored the position to the north of Bucharest, the The Germans launched 3 major attempts to take the city directly from 3 September to 1 October. Although none had the weight or commitment of the July offensive, they had the effect of pinning the south flank of 9 Army and allowing the German offensive along the Danube to develop. However, German losses of 8,000 for under 2,000 Soviet dead, indicated the desparate nature of their attacks and the lack of preparation.
(the other advantage the Soviets had was excellent intelligence from VVS overflights, the main radar base at Sevastopol and mobile radar units such as this)
On the Bulgarian side of the border, 2 Army was driven back from Ruse on 27 September, and an attempt to regain Giugiu on failed on the same day.
As if to underline the perilous position of the Soviet forces in the Balkans, a renewed axis attack took Valenii de Munte on 2 October.
Generally the front in Bulgaria was static with both sides well entrenched and making use of the mountainous terrain. In Rumania, the front was shifting back and forth as each side attacked in turn. Bucharest was becoming key to the Soviet positions, as long as that was held, German gains to the north or south could be absorbed. However, the German pressure was mounting and it appeared as if OKH had prioritised elimination of the Soviet forces in the Balkans before turnng their attention back to the southern flank of the Ukranian forces.
The losses reflected the relatively even fierce fighting with 40.931 Soviet, 34,575 German and 10,990 Axis dead.
[1] - this combination has the combined arms bonus (the loss of speed is not that important as I used them intermixed with the infantry not the tank armies)
loki: Thanks for the well wishes. Things are certainly different.
Epic fighting. If this were the only front in the Axis-Soviet war, I'd be worried about your fortunes, but as it is, the Germans are clearly fixating on an unimportant front to the detriment of the crucial ones.
Of course, we could laud the AI for roleplaying the Germans quite well. Tunesia in 1943, Kursk, the Ardennes, Himmler's offensive in northeastern France in late 1944, Spring Awakening in Hungary... All examples of the Germans throwing precious forces at lost causes.
Then again, what better use could the AI have found for those forces in the Balkans? Sure, it could have strenghtened its defenses in the Ukraine, but I feel that it would only have slowed down the inevitable - it's not like the Germans could have pushed you back.
Epic fighting. If this were the only front in the Axis-Soviet war, I'd be worried about your fortunes, but as it is, the Germans are clearly fixating on an unimportant front to the detriment of the crucial ones.
Of course, we could laud the AI for roleplaying the Germans quite well. Tunesia in 1943, Kursk, the Ardennes, Himmler's offensive in northeastern France in late 1944, Spring Awakening in Hungary... All examples of the Germans throwing precious forces at lost causes.
Then again, what better use could the AI have found for those forces in the Balkans? Sure, it could have strenghtened its defenses in the Ukraine, but I feel that it would only have slowed down the inevitable - it's not like the Germans could have pushed you back.
To fully reinforce how much manpower would you need right now. The Germans are obviously not out of the fight yet.
I'm a little confused about the mechanized division. When you say captured German equipment, are you role-playing or does this mod have the Captured Armored Brigade from ICE? CoWW2 doesn't have it, but the earlier mod seems to be somewhat different.
Would STAVKA consider a strategic realignment of the Balkans front by redeploying the forces in Bulgaria into Romania, and thus shortning the lines - allowing the reinforcement of the more important Ukranian and Baltic fronts? I did not use the "R" word, so don't shoot!
Would STAVKA consider a strategic realignment of the Balkans front by redeploying the forces in Bulgaria into Romania, and thus shortning the lines - allowing the reinforcement of the more important Ukranian and Baltic fronts? I did not use the "R" word, so don't shoot!
Also, organisations like the 'fortified districts' made up of machine gun companies and artillery battalions, that could occupy a large amount of front line without requiring much manpower. Then there were the Light Infantry Brigades used in the Petsamo offensive in 1944, with two ski battalions, two naval infantry battalions with Canadian-supplied landing craft, reindeer-drawn artillery, and a light tank battalion.
NKVD formations that were made up of former Border Guards tended to be at least as good as regular army units. Some form of 'banditry' wasn't that rare along long parts of the Soviet Union's borders in the Caucasus, Central Asia, and the Far East.
What a bunch of rogues and scoundrels! I hope the police catch them.
There's a book I've been reading, T-34 in Action, which is a collection of tales from Red Army tank commanders from World War Two. One of them describes the destruction of three Tigers by a pair of lend-lease Valentines, which were low and quiet and were able to sneak into a position where they got close-range flank shots. So it's not just SU-100s that can ambush Tigers.
Now they know what it's like for the German armoured forces.
I didn't mean to launch a big comment about the diversity of the Red Army... I just grew up reading Tom Clancy novels and the 'english translation' he's generally assigning to mot/mech forces is "## (Guards) Motor Rifle Division". I was just wondering if that was still correct as I'm setting up my own minimod for a group of my friends one of whom will be playing a 'Soviet' country and I wanted to give technically correct flavor names for divisions.
Hi, yes, thats a good anglicised version that would capture any Soviet formation of the era where the infantry regularly used trucks for movement to and around the edges of the battlefield - in that sense it doesn't matter if the formation is pure infantry or has an armoured element assigned.
Ah, but we like our comments wide-ranging and rambling.
Well, at least I do. It's amazing, the kinds of things I've learned from the side questions and answers on these forums.Anyway, on with the show!
Long time luker here, when can we expect a Central Asian update? (Also first post!)
first AAR i am reading, was looking around for soviet tactics advice,...and I am hooked. have to say great way of storytelling!!!
i keeps reminding me of Discovery Channels Battlefield.
i keeps reminding me of Discovery Channels Battlefield.
For the Soviets, remember that you can trade space for time - though most industry is to the west of the Urals, so you can be badly hurt. Also do lots of logistical strikes. Forget ground attack / interdiction. Starve the Axis armies of their supplies, and life will be a lot easier. From a 1936 start, you can easily stop the Germans before Smolensk, by setting up a properly balanced force structure, building industry in the east, and researching proper techs. You might also end up with no Great Patriotic War, as I did once, if you build up your forces too strong...
The other start dates are more challenging, as loki has demonstrated in both USSR AARs. 1938 seems to be a tougher challenge than 1939, due to the force balance.
The other start dates are more challenging, as loki has demonstrated in both USSR AARs. 1938 seems to be a tougher challenge than 1939, due to the force balance.
I think your last comment is particularly to the point. The consequence of their relative fortress around Chisinau is twofold. One they can keep up a lot of pressure in the Balkans (& this doesn't ease up till 1944), second is its as effective at stalling my drive westwards as any direct defense (that I could probably chew to pieces - especially in the open terrain of SE Poland).
The next post will start to indicate a problem that again lasts well into 1944 - which is I can't keep on pushing west and need to divert a lot of force to clearing out this very irritating thorn in my flank ... so lets give the AI kudos for coming up with an elegant solution to its problem in containing the Red Army in the south.
I started the summer about -300 (at that time I notionally had 300 left). My combat losses in the summer battles are just short of 500,000 (so 500 MP in paradox terms). I have about 100 left, so my guess is the gap is now about 6-700, and it gets worse.
I use lots of solutions, but one that really helps is when I retake Riga and Estonia. That immensely shortens the front and I can afford to send some weak units to the rear or to hold key ports and not worry about their notional strength. The other help is of course now having access to almost all my manpower producing regions.
tis creative licence to be honest. But in the spring-early summer battles I pocketed about 5 PzGr divisions and the Soviets had few problems with recycling German equipment - once their engineers had removed all the technical stuff that didn't work properly.
The Balkans is really hard to interpret. One view (that I had when playing) is that ok I'm making no progress, getting pushed back a bit, but overall keeping a lot of axis formations busy. Writing it up now, I think a wiser set of moves would have been to clear them out of the Chisinau region and even up the line from the Ukraine through E Hungary to Rumania. The reason I didn't was I didn't fancy clearing a lot of quite strong German units out of those rivers and mountains ... but I now think that would have been the better choice.
Its where the perspective of doing the AAR this way really comes into play. You see a bigger picture and set of options than when doing a play-report cycle.
Looks like no Berlin for Christmas.
They are, and, as above, it continues. Well I do get to Berlin in time for Christmas, just not December 1943.
Also, organisations like the 'fortified districts' made up of machine gun companies and artillery battalions, that could occupy a large amount of front line without requiring much manpower. Then there were the Light Infantry Brigades used in the Petsamo offensive in 1944, with two ski battalions, two naval infantry battalions with Canadian-supplied landing craft, reindeer-drawn artillery, and a light tank battalion.
NKVD formations that were made up of former Border Guards tended to be at least as good as regular army units. Some form of 'banditry' wasn't that rare along long parts of the Soviet Union's borders in the Caucasus, Central Asia, and the Far East.
...
There's a book I've been reading, T-34 in Action, which is a collection of tales from Red Army tank commanders from World War Two. One of them describes the destruction of three Tigers by a pair of lend-lease Valentines, which were low and quiet and were able to sneak into a position where they got close-range flank shots. So it's not just SU-100s that can ambush Tigers.
Now they know what it's like for the German armoured forces.
There are compelling Soviet accounts of a T-70 from ambush taking out 2 Panthers, the first using its flame thrower, the second when the Panther made the mistake of turning its flank to the Soviets. In general, up against the heavier German armour, even when notionally on the offensive, Soviet doctrine put a lot of emphasis on use of ambush if possible.
If anyone is interested check out this website: Russian Battlefield, it has a stupendous range of sources on Soviet doctrine, OOBs, tactical manuals as well as a lof of the Tank pictures I'm using. Helps if you can transliterate from Cyrillic, but most of the stuff is translated into English.
Some of the NKVD rifle formations were very good. On the western axis most of the border troops were killed in the opening days and Stalin didn't trust the populations in Central Asia and the Caucasus enough to remove the border formations from those regions. The result in late 41 was a number of them were little but armed police, even worse Beria insisted (for a short while) on them being led by NKVD not army officers. Stalin stopped that nonsense quickly enough after a few disasters up around the Volkhov and Kalinin sectors.
Ah, but we like our comments wide-ranging and rambling.
Indeed, one of the many delights to these forums is the sheer range of expertise both in comments and by writers. I've learnt a huge amount about eras and nations I have no other interest in.
Long time luker here, when can we expect a Central Asian update? (Also first post!)
Thank you for the first post ... glad its grabbed your attention.
I'll be back in Central Asia in three posts (including the next one). I want to bring the Western sector to the end of September so that'll be 2 for the Ukraine and 1 more for Bielorussia. I can then make the shift to the rather grim autumn-winter battles.
And as I usually do at those transition points, pick up on wider events and I'll look at manpower issues in more detail.
Again, welcome and glad you are enjoying it.
I've not yet played FTM, apart from a bit with the battle scenarios but it does seem as if the AI has made another major leap in being a challenge.
In general, I think you have 3 tools to enhance the difficulty level. One is the rather broad option of setting the difficulty level itself - hard is good as it makes little real difference but it buffs the AI usefully. Making a commitment to using the AI yourself makes a real difference - I think using say the army level AI is akin to adding another difficulty level. The final one is to use the later starts. If you do a Soviet or US game from 1936 you have so much hindsight to apply that inevitably it becomes easy to outperform history. Less so with Germany as the 36-39 period is dynamic.
For the Soviets I think the 39 and 40 starts are the hardest, 41 oddly isn't too bad unless you role-play the first few weeks. You'll get all that armour away from the border battles and that sets you up for some really powerful counterblows later on. With the US a December 41 start is the way to go ... all those historic decisions made and now you need to sort it out.
Overall Paradox design the 1938 as balanced for MP, so depending on the country you play it has advantages or disadvantages to ensure that balance.
Now before the next post ... a reminder:
a reminder to vote
first, its the quarterly aarland awards here, so wander off read aars and vote ... most authors like votes as much as they like active commentators ... not canvassing for votes as I've won the relevant category a couple of times already. But as above, AARland is full of surprising gems, and its fun to discover them.
second, visit the resting home of elderly HOI3 aars completed in 2010 and vote for the first HOI3 Iron Cross awards. They are all vanilla HOI, and they are all gems ... and the authors actually managed to finish them, which is something in itself, so reward them with your considered opinions ... you don't need to leave a comment, just vote in the poll (but comments are always nice to read)
Last edited: