Avatar47
Posts: 162
Joined: 9/3/2005 Status: offline
|
Indeed in the Allies hands it does threaten those countries you said UJ. I would even further say that a later game entry into Norway, say in 42-43, is still a good strategic option for the Allies. Norway should be considered a possible theater of war for the Allies perhaps, because holding it, especially with Bomber and Tactical Air units can really threaten Germany's scandinavian assets, as well as hitting the Kriegsmarine in the Baltic. It's a great springboard into Denmark like you said, and if I could add, to W Germany and, if the Baltic is Allied, maybe E Germany too. It's definitely worth a look. Most Axis players, including myself, don't seem to be invading Norway because of the aforementioned associated garrison, supply costs. If a game comes up where I'm having trouble opening up a real 2nd front as the WAllies in 42-43, I think I could consider the North..... In regards to Hitler's 'fortress europe' mentality, too much was wasted defending Norway for an attack that never came. In any case, it would have been better for Germany if Britain DID invade Norway before the Germans and DID cut off the iron. Germany would still have beaten France in May-June 40, and Britain, a now seemingly equally aggressor nation doing anything possible to defeat Germany, would not have the moral world support that it enjoyed in real life. Germany, imo, would have easily crushed a lonesome UK in any spring '41 Norwegian campaign, if the Brits hadn't withdrawn by then already. Don't know even if the USA would have lend leased those 50 destroyers if Britain had gone and done a thing like that....
|