Global Game Setup

i was just thinking about this. That would be awesome. Especially the 1946 setup.

@shohoku201:

What are the chances of the AAE40 realeasing with not just the Global 1940 setup but another setup for a later date like 1941 or 1942 like in AA50?  That would be sweet

I endorse this product and/or idea !

1946?

@idk_iam_swiss:

1946?

Allies win!  Rematch?  Allies win!  Play again?

@Croesus:

i was just thinking about this. That would be awesome. Especially the 1946 setup.

Is this the game where Russia and USA go head to head?

churchill was planning to draft former nazi’s, and turn them against the russians after the defeat… no  cold war if the allies levels moscow…  i think a post august 1945 setup is a good idea, even though i dont think thius will be an option

@Brain:

Is this the game where Russia and USA go head to head?

Read this link, buddy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable

Cool idea. but im glad it didnt happen. Both sides had nuclear capabilities after the war. Russia would have won.

Russia didn’t have the bomb until 1949.

oh. but there were more russians. maybe that would be a fun way to play to continue the game. After the axis are defeated… Russia vs EVERYONE!

It would be better for a cold war game to start at or around korea, and tensions escalate in europe.

@idk_iam_swiss:

oh. but there were more russians. maybe that would be a fun way to play to continue the game. After the axis are defeated… Russia vs EVERYONE!

In a lot of games Russia gets eliminated first.

@idk_iam_swiss:

Russia would have won.

No, I dont think so.

At that time, Russia had been in war a very long time, and had lost 12 millions of the best men. At that time USA had mobilized 16 million men and had only lost 240 000 of them. The Allied oilfields was safe, and the Russian oilfields in Caucasus was in range of UK bombers in Persia. Also there was a lot of Polish, Baltic and Ukrainean insurgents that was fighting the Russians until 1950’s and they would have contributet to the allies effort. Also the Allied airplanes was better than the Russian, a fact proven in two separate dog-fights between US and Russian fighters over Berlin in april 1945, and later again proven during the Korean War.

My conclusion is the Allied would have won, and Stalin would propably move to Irktusk.
Happy ending.

i bet it would have taken the russians several more years to develop the a-bomb. they stole the technology from the us, wasn’t able to develop it themselves… a couple of a-bombs over moscow, stalingrad and so on i bet the russian bear wouuld have folded or found a new home in siberia. if that is not the case i would have no problems seeing that the allies would have draftet what was left of the germans and sent them on a operation barbarossa v2.0.

USA would have made short work out of Russia and probably should have. Patton had the right idea.

Well, Stalin didn’t fear the nukes. After all, USA only had 2 at that time, and no ICBMs that time, so USA still had to launch the bombs. Good luck launching them in key places as Stalingrad or Moscow, soviets had much more planes than Japan when Hiro and Nagasaki, and you have to travel a long run. Maybe they could nuke Leningrad with some good spy work (confusing soviets about the place where the nuke is dropped), but that was of no use after how germans left the poor city

There were more problems: soviet land army had gross numerical advantage, T-series where far better than allied tanks and you can guess political ramifications in places where commies had some force as China, Greece, Italy and even France. You have to explain USA’s public opininio why attack a former allie that didn’t attack first, etc. No walk in the park, just more kills and not clear victory. Truman did well not attacking, Patton only wanted the glory

But as fantay scenario, 1947 is better after chinese civil war is done. Allies vs soviets and chineses, a fair 4 players scenario

USA would have established air superiority and then air supremacy in no time and then the bombs would have been raining in Russia.

@Brain:

USA would have established air superiority and then air supremacy in no time and then the bombs would have been raining in Russia.

Right, just like they did in Vietnam.

@Razor:

@Brain:

USA would have established air superiority and then air supremacy in no time and then the bombs would have been raining in Russia.

Right, just like they did in Vietnam.

I think having air superiority over soviet union at late 40s was a bit more difficult than doing over Vietnam at late 60’s. I think you overestimate USA’s air potential at that late 40’s (or maybe you subestimate soviet air) and also forget in that scenario soviets would play in her homeland, and that gives advantage as did for brits in 1940

You see a USA’s easy victory. I see a sure carnage with an uncertain result. Attacking the soviets without provocation was not an option, and such attack would put the soviets as the offended and “good guys”. You don’t want give Stalin such propagandist weapon