Vote for your favorite Battle Scenario

[Praetori]

What about Stalingrad? You can either retreat from the city and help reinforce the weak allied armies on the flanks or throw all your might into the battle.

The entire Case Blue and the invasion of Caucasus would make for some interesting choices for both a Russian and German side. Capture the oilfields before winter or take on the Red Army around the Volga.
Though for such a scenario there'd have to be more modifiers for weather (frozen rivers) as the weather played a crucial role in denying and then allowing the Red Army to supply their forces across the Volga and at the same time negating Luftwaffe's efficiency.

 

[Dev]

You need to have Semper Fi to vote?

Shame, I doubt I'm the only one looking forward to the Hoi3 salvation that For the Motherland might possibly be.

Anyway I'd love to see an Operation Unthinkable scenario (well campaign really) like the one in HoI2 and it would be nice if you weren't at war when the campaign starts so the player can get some time to reorganize units.

 

[PaxImperator]

You need to have Semper Fi to vote?

Shame, I doubt I'm the only one looking forward to the Hoi3 salvation that For the Motherland might possibly be.

For your information, you'll eventually need Semper Fi to get For The Motherland to work anyway. The game would become a nightmare to support if customers could mix and match expansions instead of installing them all linearly.

 

[misterbean]

I voted Unthinkable, if for no other reason than to see what it would look like. If anyone's interested in the op's name: it was given to the operation by sir Allan brooke to tell Churchill what he thought of the whole idea.

 

[Dev]

For your information, you'll eventually need Semper Fi to get For The Motherland to work anyway. The game would become a nightmare to support if customers could mix and match expansions instead of installing them all linearly.

Not really, but that isn't related to the point I was making.

 

[fabius]

I voted for Spanish Civil war, but would play operation Unthinkable much more. Spain would be a nice novelty for a game or two.

 

[unmerged(187441)]

I'd like to see a SCW scenario, but mainly because the SCW in the main game is broken in half, and it doesn't in any way represent the war. Spain just starts with too few units to have battle lines, so the end result is that either the war becomes just a bunch of units gallivanting around the country, chasing each other at marching pace, or we get two stable sides where one has so much more territory than the other that it's no fun.

How can the war where German doctrine was developed have so little to do with how the rest of the game plays out?

 

[LeeDub]

Unthinkable. Definitely Unthinkable.

 

[nestorius]

I voted unthinkable. While all the others are in place already, HOI3 is really missing alternate history scenarios or starts. For once I would like a war which isnt allies and comintern vs axis.

Then again shouldnt operation unthinkable be a grand campaign start instead?

 

[Gud3r1an]

Are they going to make only the winning scenario of this post? That would be shame, I'd love to see Fall Grune scenario, which would be very intense, historical, and hard for both sides. Uperation Unthinkable would sure be fun, but it's a very large scale operation, so imo it would be best to played in regular game anyway.

 

[unmerged(141516)]

I did not vote for any of them instead how about these
battle of the Philippine sea or Guadalcanal maybe market garden or Kharkov in 43
Imphal and kohima
heck a good pearl harbor one (where you might be able to achieve close to the same results)

 

[1alexey]

About Operation Unthinkable:

I really don't think that it should be a battle scenario. The scope is the worldmap, and it would entice multiple battles.

Militarily, it would have been a disaster for the Allies. The Russians were at their best, experienced troops and better weapons overall. They would have crushed them.
The atomic bomb barely would have played any role in the conflict... what would the Americans have used it on? Most Russians cities were already thoroughly destroyed after the war, with all industry dispersed far inland. Also, the bombs available in 1945, 1946 were much too weak to cause any damage to real cities. European cities are made of stone, not wood and paper like the Japanese houses. The only target would have been Moskva, and I doubt the Allied bombers would have been able to reach that. And if they did, they would've levelled one or two suburbs or boroughs, at best. Bombing troop concentrations would have been useless, what's another 100k casualties for the Russians?

As to how WWIII would have started: Probably the only person who seriously contemplated a war between the Allies and Russia was Stalin himself. What was to stop him from taking more of Germany? Or France, for that matter? Don't think that the Russians had forgotten that the French had tried to conquer them 150 years earlier. Crushing the one million Allied soldiers on the mainland would have been a piece of cake with the millions that he had under arms. It makes you wonder why he stopped. The Allies pretty much tried to appease him, basically giving him everything he wanted (half of Poland!), they even sent people to him to get massacred. Don't think they didn't know what they were doing..

In fact it would be a total disaster for the soviets.
You know to win against the Germans most women and children were working on plants for more than 10 hours/day,
our food producting centers were raised to ashes by war,
and americans&brits had a huge amout of manpower, and industry at their disposal.
In Soviet Union WW2 is called "Great Patriotick" for a very good reason.
Averything was given to win the war.
more than twenty milions died(military and civilian), compared to les than a milion brits and les than a milion US.
It was carried under the banner of protecting the motherland.
While the Soviet troops were stronger in europe, in the long run Soviet union had a nearly zero chanses to win an atrittion warfare.
more over, the soviets could hope to capture Asia, but thay cold not get into britain and america.
So the begining of war by Stalin wold be a no-brainer, both politically and military-wise.
And the fact that Stalin`s requests from Allies for USSR`s intervention into war with Japan were very modest only confirms the fact.

needles to say that over 80% of soviet oil was prodused in Caucas, which was perfectly rechable by allies bombers.

 

[juv95hrn]

In fact it would be a total disaster for the soviets.
You know to win against the Germans most women and children were working on plants for more than 10 hours/day,
our food producting centers were raised to ashes by war,
and americans&brits had a huge amout of manpower, and industry at their disposal.
In Soviet Union WW2 is called "Great Patriotick" for a very good reason.
Averything was given to win the war.
more than twenty milions died(military and civilian), compared to les than a milion brits and les than a milion US.
It was carried under the banner of protecting the motherland.
While the Soviet troops were stronger in europe, in the long run Soviet union had a nearly zero chanses to win an atrittion warfare.
more over, the soviets could hope to capture Asia, but thay cold not get into britain and america.
So the begining of war by Stalin wold be a no-brainer, both politically and military-wise.
And the fact that Stalin`s requests from Allies for USSR`s intervention into war with Japan were very modest only confirms the fact.

needles to say that over 80% of soviet oil was prodused in Caucas, which was perfectly rechable by allies bombers.

Yeah, the Soviet offensive into Manchuria vs Japan really shows how tootless the Red Army was after the war in Europe was over.

I'm sure the democracy of Great Britain would have been very eager to fit their "huge amount" of remaning manpower so soon against another die hard dictatorship after 6 years of war. For sure!

Western Allied troops had very little incentive to be "the last soldier to die in a war that was already won". The Soviet army was superior in most aspects like morale, knowledge of operational warfare, heavy tanks if not air support and logistics.

The scenario is about reconquering Eastern Europe from the Red Army soon after the war. Its not about winning a global strategic 10 year war.

With nukes (that didn't exist at the time), maybe. Without, no chance!

I predict this being a fantasy scenario with a Red Army very decimated due to demobilisations to give the allies a shadow of a chance.

 

[Danmark Rising]

I'd love to see Operation Unthinkable in the game but not necessarily as a battle scenario. I'd much rather it be a decision event that the allies can choose. If they do then they can declare war on Russia and the end date of the game is extended to say 1955 or so.

I'd also love to see a battle scenario for Korea and Vietnam; yes I know that they are out side of the date frame of WWII, but then so is Operation Unthinkable. Under the current time frame you would have only 2 years to defeat the USSR and it's allies.

 

[unmerged(169768)]

In fact it would be a total disaster for the soviets.
You know to win against the Germans most women and children were working on plants for more than 10 hours/day,
our food producting centers were raised to ashes by war,
and americans&brits had a huge amout of manpower, and industry at their disposal.
In Soviet Union WW2 is called "Great Patriotick" for a very good reason.
Averything was given to win the war.
more than twenty milions died(military and civilian), compared to les than a milion brits and les than a milion US.

It was carried under the banner of protecting the motherland.

How funny that protecting the Motherland didn't stop at the Motherland's previous borders. But seriously, don't play dumb.. Stalin always wanted to gain some territory in Europe and Asia. It's not as if he was any different from Hitler. The Russians have always had a 'Drang nach Westen'. Hitler and the great 'call for the motherland' were just an excuse for him to have fun and mess around with Russian divisions. He played Hoi3 for real on a grand scale.

While the Soviet troops were stronger in europe, in the long run Soviet union had a nearly zero chanses to win an atrittion warfare.
more over, the soviets could hope to capture Asia, but thay cold not get into britain and america.
So the begining of war by Stalin wold be a no-brainer, both politically and military-wise.
And the fact that Stalin`s requests from Allies for USSR`s intervention into war with Japan were very modest only confirms the fact.

needles to say that over 80% of soviet oil was prodused in Caucas, which was perfectly rechable by allies bombers.

If Stalin had crushed the Allies on land, they would have given up. Britain was seriously weakened, and the USA had such a high standard of living already that they would not have wanted a costly war somewhere in Asia or Europe. Don't forget it took the USA three years to launch anything major in Europe. Not a single bomb on the USA mainland. Americans were mostly complacent, and fat, and very happy that it all happened far away.

 

[jamhaw]

You need to have Semper Fi to vote?

Shame, I doubt I'm the only one looking forward to the Hoi3 salvation that For the Motherland might possibly be.

Anyway I'd love to see an Operation Unthinkable scenario (well campaign really) like the one in HoI2 and it would be nice if you weren't at war when the campaign starts so the player can get some time to reorganize units.

I don't think you do, I voted before I got around to registering Semper Fi.

 

[Will Lucky]

Unthinkable has my vote, would much prefer to run a full game from a theoretical Unthinkable start though.

 

[1alexey]

Yeah, the Soviet offensive into Manchuria vs Japan really shows how tootless the Red Army was after the war in Europe was over.
I predict this being a fantasy scenario with a Red Army very decimated due to demobilisations to give the allies a shadow of a chance.

Whell if you would be so kind to read my post you would see that i do not argue that
in 1945 soviet army was not stronger. But the Manchurian army was armed even worse than French in 1940.

in a long run thay would fail. IF thay atacked.
As I said the war against germans was do or die case. Nothing ellse.
As for aggresion against allies, it would be huge morale fail as "liberators" wold become agressors.

And the western allies nations would be in persisely the same case so soviets in german invasion:
win or be killed later by NKVD or enslaved.
So thay wold have fought to the and.
Because it was there only chance. If the Union captures Asia and recoves, thay would have none. So what would thay choose?
And once again. You forget the oil issue, strategick bombing and fleet.
All in all the soviet union would not start new war on in September 1945.

It was carried under the banner of protecting the motherland.
How funny that protecting the Motherland didn't stop at the Motherland's previous borders. But seriously, don't play dumb.. Stalin always wanted to gain some territory in Europe and Asia. It's not as if he was any different from Hitler. The Russians have always had a 'Drang nach Westen'. Hitler and the great 'call for the motherland' were just an excuse for him to have fun and mess around with Russian divisions. He played Hoi3 for real on a grand scale.
If Stalin had crushed the Allies on land, they would have given up.

Hitler crushed allies on land. Did thay gave up?
But i like you comments.
Then I guess For Churchil the war was just a way to get a bigger sellar and some more press attention.
Honestly Stalin was a freak but not an idiot.
He knew that Union would need time to recover. and that`s it.

While if the UK would be an agressor, the things could change strongly but kicking the allies from europe would take time enough for US and UK to make defences in India and China.
The other problem is that at if the population of china would support the Alies,
Ussr would be in great trouble.
Since USSR at that point had not enought population to fully suply it`s military and civilian (a lot was imported by land-lease) the loss of another 5-10 milions of soldiers would mean that soviet would have to draft industry workers and the gap would be slowly increasing leading to defeat. And thay wouldn`t have the time to restore any european industry in occupied europe if the "correct tactick" would be used.
But once again it woud be costly and the benefit of victory doubtfull. Which is why the operation never happen.
An interesting campain point but a bad battliscenario because of global scope.

But I vould sugest to stop the offtopick.

 

[Hearth]

Why can't all of them be with there?

But as long as Rommel<3s campaign in North Africa is with, I'm happy. BEST GENERAL AND THEATER OF WAR EEEEVER!

 

[unmerged(203997)]

Hitler crushed allies on land. Did thay gave up?

France did.