WWII: USA vs. CCCP

[MilitiaSniper 0]

ok, looks like u put that wrong some how.... What do u mean? like, keep the russian soldiers from attacking or keep them attacking?!

CWO2 EvenLease USMC *Salute*

I'm just trying to find a way for a long battle. With out causing lag!

Sincerely, MilitiaSniper

[AtStWalker 0]

Do you have a link? I can't find a website!

Sincerely, MilitiaSniper

http://www.storiamilitare.org/be45

I'm the mod leader

[MilitiaSniper 0]

I am trying really hard to have the first mission done TODAY!

Sincerely, MilitiaSniper

[MilitiaSniper 0]

Ok it's done. All I gotta do is find a site to post it to!

Sincerely, MilitiaSniper

[MilitiaSniper 0]

I was hoping to have it done the other day.

But the overview pic. isn't working right.

So I'm gonna wait on releasing the beta mission.

Until I get it the way I want it to!

I hope soon!

Sincerely, MilitiaSniper

[.COMmunist 0]

I just saw this topic. Interesting. Some facts are wrong, but overall idea is very interesting. About a month ago I finished a book by a famous British WW2 historian Alexander Werth. He was a British war correspondent in the USSR during the entire war. I like it, because he is not biased. Most western historians only guess on what the hell was going on there in the USSR during the war. Plus their opinion is very biased towards the west. Soviet historian also are biased. So, this British correspondent is an ultimate source of REAL information. According to him Western armies had no chance against Stalin in Europe. Soviet army was stronger, more experienced, more numerous. By the end of the war Germans realised the enevidable fact of a loss, so they decided that it would be better to be ocupied by the Allies, rather then Russians. After all the war crimes commited by SS in the USSR, Germans were afraid of the retaliation. They would send their best troops to the Eastern front and less experienced ones to the West.

Allies toyed with the idea of invading the USSR during the battle of Stalingrad. There is a rumor in the last couple of years that if the Soviets would of lost the Stalingrad, the Allies would of sign the pack with the Germans.

There was an agreement between Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchil at Yalta (Ukraine) that the Soviets would capture the Berlin. Allies didn't encounter much resistance going through the western Germany, but the Soviets had to fight for every little village in the East. So, Allies just set there and had to wait for the Russians to break through to Berlin. Allies could of taken the Berlin at will, but they had orders not to.

Stalin wanted to keep going after the Berlin, but the atomic bombs in Japan stopped him. Actually this is the real reason why the bombs were dropped. Japaneese generals told American generals that Japan is about to surrender. It was the matter of the Emperor signing the surrender orders. But Americans went ahead and bombed two cities full of civilians to demonstrate to Stalin the power of the bomb. In our days it would be considered the worst war crime in the history, but at those days ppl were used to fighting and nobody made much outcry about it.

Perhaps you might want to incorporate all this info into your compain.

[harley 3 1185 0]

Somewhere in the OT section there was a very long debate about the use of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the roots of its use. I think we eventually came to the conclusion that the Generals were in no way responsible for any peace feelers, that any peace feelers were routed through the Japanese embassy in Moscow, that any information regarding a peace settlement had already been dismissed at Potsdam.

Influencing Stalin was of course one of the reasons for using the bomb, but certainly not the main one, considering how close the invasion date of Hokkaido (Operation Coronet if my memory serves me right) was.

Had, before Yalta, the Allies adopted Montgomery's "Thust" into Northern Germany straight for Berlin, the war probably have ended with Berlin in allied hands. Instead, with Bradley's "Broad Front" strategy, the allies became bogged down.

I have to dispute the suggestion that the allies had it easy nearer the end of the war; the last British offensive in North-Western Germany became bogged down by horrendous last-ditch fighting. Certainly U.S. casualties didn't decrease significantly.

I'd personally say that the Russian and Allied (with German) armies would have been equal, an ominous result which should make MS's campaign very interesting. The British and Americans had the mobility and the superior equipment. The Russians had greater numbers and the ability to mass tanks unlike any other army in history. Experience levels would have been roughly even, as the Russians would have lost alot of good men in the slog through East Prussia to Berlin.

Can't wait for a beta mission, MilitiaSniper. Keep it coming !

(Forgive the hijacking of your thread again)

[.COMmunist 0]

When you say that the Allies had better equipment then the Russians, besides the bombers and atomic bomb what else do you refer to?

[harley 3 1185 0]

If I recall the Russians weren't so hot in the transport department - relying to a very large extent on American built trucks and jeeps (just like the British, but we weren't about to go to war with the U.S. for sure). The Russian communication equipment (Radio, land-line) was awful and in short supply. The Garand Rifle was superior to any variant of Mosin-Nagant rifle (Tokarev Semi-Auto rifles not being in large circulation to problems). Russian anti-tank rifles weren't as effective as Bazooka's and PIATS (although I'm sure both sides would have made liberal use of Panzerfausts and Panzershrecks). British and American Artillery, thanks to the far better communications and guns, was more effective than Soviet Artillery, although "Stalin's Organ"s would have been rather useful en masse, I'm sure.

The Allies, thanks to a massive pool of transport aircraft and vehicles, would have been able to sustain operations far easier than the Soviets did, who scavenged like an army out of the eighteenth century, and would have been able to mount Airborne Operations, which the Russians were rarely capable of doing.

I'm not saying that the Allies would have had a field day licking the Russians, because they most definately wouldn't. But the Russians certainly wouldn't have had it so easy as well. My two cents.

[Airbourne Alchaholic 0]

Patience is the key to a good product! Take your time, even with the beta! I can't wait to try it out, it should prove interesting!

OT: Am I right in saying that it was many a year before the Russians first tested and started developing Atomic technology? I heard it wasn't until the late 40s (early 50s) that the USSR had a fully working Atom Bomb at their disposal.

I know it's a tradgic thing to say, but if the majority of Russian troops were in Berlin at the end of the war, the Americans could've followed the agreement (Stalin gets Berlin) and pulled out, only to bomb it a few days later. Although this would probably effect their "hearts and minds" campaign.

Also, if the Alliance did invade Russia, would there have been a good chance of another "Stalingrad-type-of-event" happening? If Russia gained a victory, would the same thing happen all over again?

These are just 3 in a haystack of possibilities, someone should open an OT forum, it could make an interestic subject.

[.COMmunist 0]

Harley,

Your information is a little bit off for the year of operation. Everythinh you say is true for up to 1943. By 1945 the Soviets was a very different army. The best medium tank is T-34. It was very fast, very rugged and Germans could never duplicate the incredible armor that the tank had. In order to make as strong armor as T-34 had they had to graduate into a heavy tank group. The best submachine gun of the WW2 is PPsh. Germans loved to capture that gun and use it better then anything else. It was very reliable ( at those days standards ), easy to maintaine, great firepower, and large ammo drum. By the end of the war Soviet mostly used domestic ZIS trucks that performed to par with anything western. IL-2 Shturmovik was by far the best anti-ground plane of the war. Artillery was ALWAYS better then German or Allies. For that read some of the german sources. Russians outgunned almost all of the others combined. Extensive use of Katyushas (missile artillery) could not be compared to even the famous Allied bombing rades. No doubt the Allies had better bombers and Navy, but in the ground forces they were inferior to the Soviets. If you have the patience to read 500 pages book by Alexander Werth called Russia at War, it is an excellent source of another side of the story. Unfortunately, most ppl in the west don't know about the Soviet side of the story. During the Cold War both side try to downplay each other's role, so I am not surprised that in the west people thinks that the Russians won the war by scavaging.

[harley 3 1185 0]

Hmm, I think I might start a topic on this in the Off-Topic forum, although I totally see where you're coming from, .COMmunist. I know Werth to be a good historian of the French in the aftermath of the Last War, so I'll have a look for a copy of Russia at War. I admit, my knowledge of the Russian war effort is nowhere near as solid as other areas, so I'll give it a good reading. Cheers.

[/hijacking]

[MilitiaSniper 0]

That's not a banner. But a rough draft picture!

Ok I need at least 2!!! BETA Testers!

First come first serve!

After the 2 Beta Testers.

I will post it!

Please send me a Private Message if you REALLY wanna Beta test this mission.

I will need you feedback A.S.A.P.!

It's about a 8-10 minute mission!

You will need to think about how you are gonna play the mission. (Cause you have radio commands. And will have to use them, when you think you need them!

YOUR.., decisions will affect the outcome of the game!

Sincerely, MilitiaSniper

[MilitiaSniper 0]

Ok guys it's released!

But I'm gonna leave this thread open for discussion and updates about new missions!

"Blood Oath" Mission for "The EAGLE vs. The BEAR"

I hope you all enjoy it!

Sincerely, MilitiaSniper