starving UK

[Wildcat_PL]

This is a neverending story topic. It wasn't solved properly in HOI2 games, nor in Arsenal. maybe DH decisions/events might help here. As Germany I managed to bomb UK down to under 55 IC and under 50 convoys. They aren't able to bring those rares from malaysia, their oil reserves should be dropping, they cannot supply their divisions outside the island. Yet 20 divisions in Egypt get supplied from their egyptian 3IC puppet.
C'mon I bombed 2/3 of their industry, killed all the convoys, destroyed all capital ships. They should be getting some kind of "low-prestige" dissent hits.

Also all their trade agreements are at about 95%, some at 100%. UK has no capital ships, my navy is about 30 subs and 6 CV destroying convoys in Celtic Sea. How do they keep that efficency of sea trades.

Shouldn't I be able to bomb their fuel reserves? Does stockpile limits lower when their IC gets bombed or is it tied to the max IC built?

Perhaps a set of events that work just like "ersatz conversion", increasing rares or oil for money, energy and dissent cost.

What can I expect to happen with UK?

 

[Gort11]

There should really be events for the UK (and possibly Japan, not sure how dependent they were on imports) where if they go down to less than a certain number of convoys they're forced to surrender, or they get huge dissent penalties or something.

As it is, I just invade the UK by dropping paratroopers in Exeter and rushing every tank in the Wehrmacht across on ships. Far less effort than carrying out an air war.

Gamey as hell though.

 

[am300307]

Well i dont think there would ever be a chance for UK to starve since they have a giant (USA) supporting them. Unless your willing to sink USA's ships and then go to war with them.

 

[Gort11]

Well i dont think there would ever be a chance for UK to starve since they have a giant (USA) supporting them. Unless your willing to sink USA's ships and then go to war with them.

Well, that's what Germany actually did, wasn't it?

Also Doenitz wanted about 300 U-Boats for his blockade, and ended up with a far fewer number than that. It would be nice to be able to see if Doenitz was right after all.

 

[T.j. Arnold]

I don't think the U.K. would have surrendered even if their industry was put on a standstill.
They knew the U.S. would get involved (the world did, it was inevitable), and with their ability to outproduce the world I think they'd just hold out until then.

The Egypt thing I can agree with, however.
I don't see how the U.K. can supply all those troops when I, as Germany with full transport ships, am having a logistical nightmare in Canada...

 

[am300307]

Well, that's what Germany actually did, wasn't it?

Did what?

 

[unmerged(189717)]

They knew the U.S. would get involved (the world did, it was inevitable), and with their ability to outproduce the world I think they'd just hold out until then.

IMO, the USA enetring the war in 1941 was everything else that sure, especially from a 1939 or 1940 perspective. Without the German-Italian DOW, the USA might as well have focused on beating Japan quickly and not getting involved into another European war. They were pro-UK, sure, but they also recognised Vichy France and the Soviets were not their best buddies.

 

[Epaminondas]

I agree with Leonaru on this. Although Roosevelt kept edging the US closer and closer to direct intervention in Europe, the fact that he had not been able to engineer a DoW on Germany by December 1941 testifies to the general reluctance of the US to commit itself to war. Then think of the mechanics of actually getting a DoW on Germany and Italy through the Congress after Pearl Harbour. How would he have framed that - "We're going to exact just retribution on the treacherous Japanese, and hey, while we're at it, we may as well clean up the Nazis and Fascists as well"? Who's going to vote for a second and third war when you already have a doozy of one on your plate already?

I think a good argument can be mounted that, without the German and Italian DoWs, the war with Japan would have delayed US intervention in Europe even further.

 

[lightyears]

i would also like to see some improvements in the convoy warfare area, its seriously underdeveloped compared to the other parts of the game

 

[Gort11]

Did what?

Sank the US's ships and went to war with them. Like in the text I quoted.

 

[am300307]

Sank the US's ships and went to war with them. Like in the text I quoted.

Germany never went to war with USA just because they wanted to sink their ships. If USA sent a huge navy with supplies to England in exchange for debt i doubt the Germans would attack them, and if they did i bet the American people wouldnt be too happy about it.

IMO, the USA enetring the war in 1941 was everything else that sure, especially from a 1939 or 1940 perspective. Without the German-Italian DOW, the USA might as well have focused on beating Japan quickly and not getting involved into another European war. They were pro-UK, sure, but they also recognised Vichy France and the Soviets were not their best buddies.

I probably agree USA wouldnt war Germany/Italy as long as the UK wasnt in a extreme condition like the OP is stating. But at the least send tons of planes/supplies/training/ships to the UK to prop them up. Meanwhile beefing up the USSR also.

 

[JohnnyDepressio]

I wouldn't say that britain would have surrendered, but I think there should be an option to have a white peace as germany with the UK and/or the USA if you germany hits their IC hard enought (eigther by bombing or starving or a combination of both). I had games there I bombed the UK to 10IC I also had a game there I bombed the US-east Coast from Newfoundland and Bermuda, reducing the US-IC from more than 500 to under 200. As I would be able to outproduce the US in this situation a white peace with the USA accepting German hegonomy over Europe dosn't seem to far off.

 

[unmerged(72431)]

Sank the US's ships and went to war with them. Like in the text I quoted.

I think what you are refering to is the sinking of the Lusitania in 1915. It was a british ship that carried a lot of americans at the time it was sunk.



Back to topic:

Maybe a chain of decisions can help here. As soon as some kind of trigger is activated, Germany gets the decision to block any access to great britain, meaning of course they attack any ship or plane that tries to move in and thereby risking war with the United States.

Then the USA get the decision to break through the barricade and help their british friends or leave it alone and don't get involved at this point of the war. This could move the USA's policy to interventionism or isolationism and increase or decrease relations with the UK.

Is a blockade of Great Britain worth risking war with the United States? You decide!

But you would have to make sure this doesn't affect historical gameplay.

 

[demanvanwezel]

Germany never went to war with USA just because they wanted to sink their ships. If USA sent a huge navy with supplies to England in exchange for debt i doubt the Germans would attack them, and if they did i bet the American people wouldnt be too happy about it.



I probably agree USA wouldnt war Germany/Italy as long as the UK wasnt in a extreme condition like the OP is stating. But at the least send tons of planes/supplies/training/ships to the UK to prop them up. Meanwhile beefing up the USSR also.

that was why germany actually DOW'd the USA so they wouldn't have to pitter-patter around the american ships in british fleets, it made for higher efficiency and so they could sink more supply ships (including american ones)

the US supplying the Brits I can see but the soviets?
don't forget that before WW2 came around that the SU was seen as the devil in disguise, I read somewhere that if germany had not been so aggresive then WW2 would have been everybody doggypile on the soviets

 

[am300307]

the US supplying the Brits I can see but the soviets?
don't forget that before WW2 came around that the SU was seen as the devil in disguise, I read somewhere that if germany had not been so aggresive then WW2 would have been everybody doggypile on the soviets

Yea but the enemy of my enemy is my friend. If UK is USA's friend and USSR is the enemy of GER than why wouldnt they send help to them?

 

[unmerged(238359)]

Yeah, the Allies sent vast amounts of equipment to the Soviets via lend lease. Though the numbers can be a bit contradictory, they are still quite a thing to behold.

http://www.o5m6.de/Numbers.html

http://www.theeasternfront.co.uk/lendlease.htm

http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/geust/aircraft_deliveries.htm

 

[Wildcat_PL]

Could we get back to original topic please. ATM I managed to reduce UK to almost ZERO effective IC. After bombing the only 4rares they have in Portsmouth It dropped to zero. Amazing. They have huge oil reserves but I guess thats OK. No IC is no fleet rebuilding, no more building convoys, no supplies. I'm struggling with soviets now.
Italy is still unable to break trough in Egypt though :laugh:

 

[unmerged(231586)]

"The Battle of the Atlantic was the dominating factor all through the war. Never for one moment could we forget that everything happening elsewhere, on land, at sea or in the air depended ultimately on it's outcome." Winston Churchill

Exactly, don't you agree? Churchill would also say after the war, "The only thing that really scared me during the war was the U-boat peril".

All of the doubters out there and those who have commented on this thread need to realize a true fact. That Churchill knew good and well that Britain could have quite easily been starved into summission. It has been speculated on for decades as well as in this thread wither or not Germany could have accomplished this.

Dornitz wanted a fleet of 300 U-boats as well as full contol over a Naval bomber air wing he tried unsucsessfully to get from Goring. Both Hitler and Goring totally undermined the intended strategy Dornitz wanted to implement.

It's like Wildcat_PL said. If anyone playing a campaing as Germany carries out this strategy from Sep-39' to June-40' Britain should not even need to be bombed or invaded to force a total surrender and annexation of Britain. Even if one is playing against a Britain AI, Britain should have to surrender if they are faced with the fact it's either give up or strave to death. That is the ultimate goal of Dornitz's blockade strategy. Force Britain to surrender without HAVING to invade the British mainland.

It was a realistic possibility to have happend if Dornitz was given the operational control that we all have as players. I hope the Devs take this thread seriously because if DH is to become the ultimate WWII game this strategy should be allowed to work.

Thanks for your time and consideration on this.

P.S. BTW to really put the German High Command infighting into perspective check this out. The Kriegsmarine Naval Intelligence office cracked the British codes in 1936. The Royal Navy did not change these codes until 1942. So, how do you think we could do as players of a German campaign starting out with 300 Type-VIIC U-boats divided into 10 wolfpacks, at least one Naval bomber air wing under our control. Oh and to top it off, we would be able to look at the map and know exactly where every single Royal Navy ship and convoy was and knew where it was going. Um, yeah good luck Brits! lol

 

[am300307]

"The Battle of the Atlantic was the dominating factor all through the war. Never for one moment could we forget that everything happening elsewhere, on land, at sea or in the air depended ultimately on it's outcome." Winston Churchill

Exactly, don't you agree? Churchill would also say after the war, "The only thing that really scared me during the war was the U-boat peril".

All of the doubters out there and those who have commented on this thread need to realize a true fact. That Churchill knew good and well that Britain could have quite easily been starved into summission. It has been speculated on for decades as well as in this thread wither or not Germany could have accomplished this.

Dornitz wanted a fleet of 300 U-boats as well as full contol over a Naval bomber air wing he tried unsucsessfully to get from Goring. Both Hitler and Goring totally undermined the intended strategy Dornitz wanted to implement.

It's like Wildcat_PL said. If anyone playing a campaing as Germany carries out this strategy from Sep-39' to June-40' Britain should not even need to be bombed or invaded to force a total surrender and annexation of Britain. Even if one is playing against a Britain AI, Britain should have to surrender if they are faced with the fact it's either give up or strave to death. That is the ultimate goal of Dornitz's blockade strategy. Force Britain to surrender without HAVING to invade the British mainland.

It was a realistic possibility to have happend if Dornitz was given the operational control that we all have as players. I hope the Devs take this thread seriously because if DH is to become the ultimate WWII game this strategy should be allowed to work.

Thanks for your time and consideration on this.

P.S. BTW to really put the German High Command infighting into perspective check this out. The Kriegsmarine Naval Intelligence office cracked the British codes in 1936. The Royal Navy did not change these codes until 1942. So, how do you think we could do as players of a German campaign starting out with 300 Type-VIIC U-boats divided into 10 wolfpacks, at least one Naval bomber air wing under our control. Oh and to top it off, we would be able to look at the map and know exactly where every single Royal Navy ship and convoy was and knew where it was going. Um, yeah good luck Brits! lol

I dont doubt its not possible for Germany to starve the UK, but i do doubt that the United States would let that happen. They could easily send tons of supplies in return for UK debt. There should be a event for the USA if the UK is in a dire situation they either choose to send tons of supplies, suffer some dissent, and suffer a huge diplomacy hit with Germany, or decline and become isolationist and gear up for war. Then Germany could get a event to either attack the USA ships and risk war, or let them go through.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Please get back on topic or continue this discussion in the history-forum.