Baltic States - improvement?

[Mark Stevens]

At present the Baltic States armies are never deployed on the map, unless playing an Eastern Crusade game. In fact they were not inconsiderable, but after the Fall of France Stalin was able to pressure the Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian governments to allow the 'peaceful*' occupation of all three countries. As there was no longer any hope of support from the West, and there were already Soviet troops stationed in some areas following earlier unequal treaties, the Baltic governments agreed in order to avoid a bloodbath.

My suggestion would be that the Baltic States' armies start deployed on the map, in Static mode.

If there's an Eastern Crusade, they'll activate as Axis controlled as usual, except far more accurately depicted than the three generic corps we have at the moment.

If, in a 'normal' game, the Axis capture Paris, an Allied TO will appear for the USSR to annex them which will disband their forces and allow the same unopposed Soviet occupation as at present.

If the Allied player wants to raise the proficiency level of the Red Army, or just wants to give the Red Army some practice, he can choose to invade earlier: this will activate the Baltic States units as full Axis minor allies, although prior to the Russo-German war the exclusion zone will prevent other than the Finns or Swedes from sending any units to assist. There will be an Axis Supply Point in Riga. If the Allied player has already gone for Finland this might stretch him a little.

If (when!) the Red Army occupies Kovno the Baltic States will surrender anyway. Whether done peacefully or forcibly, this will still have the potential to lower the USEV.

Does this sound sensible? I'd like to use TOAW III to introduce more features into the scenario, if I can avoid buggering up the already delicate Event structure. Speaking of which, I can't seem to type 'Activate 1,000' in the Event List - I need this in order to cancel the TO, although in the converted scenario I can see that the cancellation Event is 1,000 and it is in place for existing cancellations.

Appreciate any comments on the general idea and advice on the last point.

(*'Peaceful' in a strictly military sense, of course - the Soviet occupation was followed by the customary rigged elections, arrests, deportations and executions as elsewhere.)

 

[Mark Stevens]

(This won't affect the small Baltic SS anti-partisan units that are already in the scenario.)

 

[Mark Stevens]

You type '999' for TO cancellation, although I still see that those converted from the pre-TOAW III scenarios show as '1,000'. All very odd.

 

[JAMiAM]

You type '999' for TO cancellation, although I still see that those converted from the pre-TOAW III scenarios show as '1,000'. All very odd.

That's correct.

 

[Merf]

I'm curious on why you'd link Soviet occupation/invasion of the Baltic states to the German occupation of Paris. I know that historically the Soviets occupied them when the Germans were "busy" in France, but wouldn't the Soviets have done the same if the Germans were unsuccessful early in the war or if they were "busy" elsewhere?

The only reason I can see for the Baltic states resisting a Soviet invasion/occupation is if they think the Germans will come to their aid.

Does the scenario automatically assume a German-Soviet non agression pact has been signed? How about making the signing of a pact an Axis theater option and linking removal of the Baltic states units to that? Balance it with a strong possibility of early Soviet entry sometime in the first year of the war if no pact is signed and the Germans invade Poland. Have a slim chance that a gambling Axis player could occupy the whole of Poland and later, when invading the Soviet Union, start that much farther east.

 

[Mantis]

I'm at work, so I can't get into too much detail, but it's my understanding that the Germans absolutely required the pact (due to the goods traded), and would not have been able to undertake so successful of a Euro-campaign without thiese much needed supplies...

Can look up numbers later, perhaps!

 

[Mark Stevens]

I'm curious on why you'd link Soviet occupation/invasion of the Baltic states to the German occupation of Paris. I know that historically the Soviets occupied them when the Germans were "busy" in France, but wouldn't the Soviets have done the same if the Germans were unsuccessful early in the war or if they were "busy" elsewhere?

The only reason I can see for the Baltic states resisting a Soviet invasion/occupation is if they think the Germans will come to their aid.

Does the scenario automatically assume a German-Soviet non agression pact has been signed? How about making the signing of a pact an Axis theater option and linking removal of the Baltic states units to that? Balance it with a strong possibility of early Soviet entry sometime in the first year of the war if no pact is signed and the Germans invade Poland. Have a slim chance that a gambling Axis player could occupy the whole of Poland and later, when invading the Soviet Union, start that much farther east.

You're right in that the only reason I'm thinking of linking the Fall of France to the Soviet TO to disband the Baltic States' forces is that that's what happened. Evidently Stalin wanted to see what would happen in the West before he moved. Probably right in that there were other combinations of circumstances in which he could have done the same (certainly a grisly German defeat in the West, although then the game's over anyway) but although the scenario tries to give players a range of options I'm eager to avoid it straying toooooooo far from the historical reality. For the same reason we're stuck with the German-Soviet pact, although you should note that the Allied Player choosing the 'Extend Maginot Line' Option would allow the Germans to attack in the East first. Including 'slim chances' that something really drastic can happen and alter the historical course of the war goes against the general idea behind the scenario.

 

[Mark Stevens]

That's correct.

And you'll note that '999' typed upside down is '666' i.e. the Number of the Beast from the Book of Revelations, leading me to suspect that the Evil Editor is alive and kicking in TOAW III.:devil: