Is Capturing Moscow THE Victory Condition? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series



Message

Akmatov -> Is Capturing Moscow THE Victory Condition? (3/31/2013 1:17:55 AM)

Edging closer to burning the cc :)

I read something in one of the posts that implied that capturing Moscow resulted in an immediate German victory. Also read in Alfred Seaton's The Russo-German War that the fall of Moscow ending the war would have been very questionable. Just checking if Moscow is an instant game winner or if a German victory is a bit more involved?



mrchuck -> RE: Is Capturing Moscow THE Victory Condition? (3/31/2013 2:33:37 AM)

My own personal opinion is that it would have been very difficult for the Soviet Union to have carried on if Moscow had fallen. Unlike 1812, it was a crucial transport and population centre, and also the political ramifications would have been very large. Alexander Werth in 'Russia at War' gives a good feel for just how shaky things were in late 1941. Certainly the SU continued to hang together, but had the defence and subsequent counter-attack not gone well, who knows? Here also Hitler made the mistake of not consulting the Japanese, who according to Tsuji at least, were greatly offended, and after years of preparing the 'Northward' option, abandoned it and attacked the western allies instead. Had the Japanese and German attacks been, if not co-ordinated, at least roughly simultaneous, there would have been no Siberian reserve and hence no counterattack, regardless of how well or otherwise the SU did against the Japanese forces--though it's hard to see that they would have done much more than stand on the defensive in the East, due to the relative value of European Russia vs. Siberia. Even this would have been a distraction.

There is also the consideration that it was an objective the Red Army pretty much had to defend, and if the Germans had arrived earlier and been more successful, they might well have destroyed a fatally large chunk of it. As it was they came pretty close to doing just that.



Walloc -> RE: Is Capturing Moscow THE Victory Condition? (3/31/2013 3:00:22 AM)

In game term there are two "different". 41-45 campaign scenarios. A 290 VP(victory points) one and a 260 VP one. Achieving the points depending on scenario choosen will result in sudden death victory. As a general rule Moscow is far from enough to gain either, one need a ways more. So in short, no, Moscow generally isnt a instant win to the german side. One could ofc set up a case of Moscow being the tipping point, but i never seen an AAR where that is the case.

Kind regards,

Rasmus



Akmatov -> RE: Is Capturing Moscow THE Victory Condition? (3/31/2013 6:56:02 AM)

Walloc - thx, that is exactly what I was looking for.

mrchuck - that is a historical discussion way beyond the scope of my gaming question, but tempting. :)



carlkay58 -> RE: Is Capturing Moscow THE Victory Condition? (3/31/2013 1:35:54 PM)

As the writer of the 'capturing Moscow is a German victory' comment - I was being sarcastic at the time and there is no truth to the matter. However Moscow is a transportation hub, has a lot of industry and manpower, and is also an emotional location for the Soviet player. I have had several Soviet opponents surrender when it falls (i.e. withdraw from the game) so there is something to be said about it in Human vs Human play. The AI, however, is not yet emotional and will continue to fight on.



Akmatov -> RE: Is Capturing Moscow THE Victory Condition? (3/31/2013 10:13:39 PM)

Honestly no idea who write the comment that stuck in my head. However shortly after reading it, I was reading Seaton's brief comments regarding the majority of Russian armament industry being located further east and his opinion that the Germans would have had to continue to the Urals for a sure victory. Having Moscow as a major source of victory points makes good sense, not properly respecting the high quality of WitE, I had thought it might have been an automatic victory condition.

I am aware that the government had largely evacuated Moscow to points east as the Germans closed in, but had Stalin refused to leave. I assume he had a last minute bailout plan. However, had both Moscow fallen and Stalin died, I do wonder if the Soviet Union could have held together. All speculation, but I doubt anyone could have effectively replaced him under those circumstances.



aspqrz02 -> RE: Is Capturing Moscow THE Victory Condition? (3/31/2013 11:24:27 PM)

The problem is that there is really no benefit to a surrender to the Germans ... their plans require that they starve and work to death all of the urban population of captured Russia and about 60% of the overall population ... that is what Lebensraum actually meant. Sure, they'd not entirely implemented their plans because of purely practical reasons, but their occupation policies were brutal enough that surrender was *obviously* less attractive to the majority of average Russian citizens than was fighting on, even under Stalin. With Stalin gone, the effectiveness of the Soviet war fighting effort could only vastly improve. No realistic successor was as incompetent at anything but personal survival as Stalin.

And an armistice would be only temporary, until one side or the other was ready to go again.

As for Moscow being a transport hub. Yes? So what?

Sure, it would have been a temporary hit, but the Soviets proved adept at ripping up un-needed rail lines and using the materiel so gained to re-route lines around German occupied areas where needed for efficiency. And most of their railroad gear was being supplied by Lend Lease anyway. It would not have, in and of itself, been a war loser.

Second guessing how national morale would react in situations that never actually occurred is always difficult, but I'd guess that some sort of instant Russian collapse, or even an actual surrender or anything other than a purely nominal and temporary armistice is very to extremely unlikely.

Phil



hugh04 -> RE: Is Capturing Moscow THE Victory Condition? (4/1/2013 2:30:35 PM)

Capturing Moscow is not decisive. We captured Moscow in early August. Stavka not only relocated they suddenly stopped all back channel communications. Even our fall back communication channel based in Zurich could no longer get a response from the communists. I then ordered our generals to continue with the conquest of Russia. Holder refused to issue any orders saying it was not fair to continue attacking if his russian counterparts failed to give their weekly orders. I suspected treason and had the gestapo arrest the general staff. They refused. I threw many tantrums to get the german army to do something, but they all ignored me. I begged them to redeploy forces to france to beat back the now powerful western allies. But everything remained frozen in place. Montgomery eventually captured Berlin and I was captured. Tomorrow, I am to be hanged and still nothing has been heard from Stalin since August 41. I do not understand.

vandev



1jasonoz -> RE: Is Capturing Moscow THE Victory Condition? (4/2/2013 12:50:27 AM)

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the Soviets make peace overtures to the Germans prior to the commencement of Operation Typhoon but these were re-jected by Hitler who wanted un-conditional surrender whilst the Soviets wanted the ceasation of hostilities along the line of the then front line?

Why shouldn't the German player be able to achieve a sudden death victory if they can attain something similar to the historical German invasion conditions when this peace overture was made prior to operation Typhoon; i.e. count land captured (cities etc) and soviet casualties suffered (and similar German casualties).

This would have the affect of stopping Soviet players from simply retreating in the face of German advances and actually having to put up some resistance, whilst also requiring the Germans to manage their attacks for fear of breaching the historical German casualties and not meeting this sudden death victory condition (and faced with a longer war than they were prepared for?)



aspqrz02 -> RE: Is Capturing Moscow THE Victory Condition? (4/2/2013 8:16:04 AM)

The "peace overtures" are thought (with some considerable reason) to merely have been the Russians doing their usual mind games ... a maskirovka ... though, if things had gotten appreciably worse (than even the loss of Moscow), they may have become more serious.

However, how serious would such overtures *really* have been? I'm pretty sure that all they would *really* have meant would be that the Russians were trying to get a breathing space to make a comeback from.

YMMV.

Phil



swkuh -> RE: Is Capturing Moscow THE Victory Condition? (4/2/2013 1:47:11 PM)

1st issue: It takes more than Berlin to beat Axis and more than Moscow to beat Soviets, quite rightly.

2nd issue: What would GHQ or Stavka do when the capitals fall, essentially w/o collateral vistories? Who knows? as neither happened.

Speculation is interesting, but IMO, fruitless w/o documentation. And any documentation is long gone along with the principals.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.308594