Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sgt Barker

Not about territory per se, but a thought on Soviet casualties. The size of the Red Army in 1942 after only losing say 2 mil vs 4 mil in Barbarossa is arguably not "historical" even though it follows actual recruiting numbers from the war. Why? Because mobilization, and especially commitment of units to combat, was a function of the losses taken earlier. In other words, if the Red Army had taken 2 mil fewer losses in the first months one can logically argue that there would have been 2 mil fewer raw recruits thrown into combat in 1942. Industry, transport, agriculture all suffered because of manpower shortages. And the waste of human life by throwing new divisions straight into combat mere weeks after being raised may have been done but even at the time was acknowledged to be just that, a waste.

Just as Germany's reinforcement schedule is based on not only a timeline but an assumed series of circumstances (confidence in Oct 1941, battered in March 42, confident again in Fall 42, really gearing up in 43 after 'stalingrad', and so on), so are the Soviet's.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sgt Barker

Not about territory per se, but a thought on Soviet casualties. The size of the Red Army in 1942 after only losing say 2 mil vs 4 mil in Barbarossa is arguably not "historical" even though it follows actual recruiting numbers from the war. Why? Because mobilization, and especially commitment of units to combat, was a function of the losses taken earlier. In other words, if the Red Army had taken 2 mil fewer losses in the first months one can logically argue that there would have been 2 mil fewer raw recruits thrown into combat in 1942. Industry, transport, agriculture all suffered because of manpower shortages. And the waste of human life by throwing new divisions straight into combat mere weeks after being raised may have been done but even at the time was acknowledged to be just that, a waste.

Just as Germany's reinforcement schedule is based on not only a timeline but an assumed series of circumstances (confidence in Oct 1941, battered in March 42, confident again in Fall 42, really gearing up in 43 after 'stalingrad', and so on), so are the Soviet's.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MengJiao
So one Russian incentive to hold territory could be some kind of global army efficiency award that gives all their units more movement points and a CV bonus since if they are holding on the must be doing better than the historical russians we always see.