"Grand Strategy" Discussion Thread

[H Tower]

um, while I'm vectoring my troops towards, Ploesti, the Berlin attack has been pushed back, we're going to wait for more artillery to be brought forward, in the mean time the two ukranian fronts are going to make a push against the Germans on the Don river

[H Tower]

um, while I'm vectoring my troops towards, Ploesti, the Berlin attack has been pushed back, we're going to wait for more artillery to be brought forward, in the mean time the two ukranian fronts are going to make a push against the Germans on the Don river

[H Tower]

51 minute double post

[greeny]

Considering that our current frontline is a VERY long very and very curvey. I think straitening it out might be a good idea: a strait frontline has a much greater concentration of troops. Damn, but thats probably an operational decision is it?
Anyway our front line basicaly has 2 "sticky out bits" (salients) culminating in Perikop and Warsaw. While these are well placed for leading "Two major thrusts towards Berlin and Ploesti with the intent of capturing both by the end of winter 1944-45." I think "Hold along the River Don" should be repaced with "Liberate all reamining Soviet territory under German occupation."
implying ATTACKS on the other fronts to catch up with the "sticky out bits".

[yop73]

Indeed, Steve, it's time for you to begin discuss this. You've been using this example many times now, but it's now time to give the final directions.

Could you please post our objectives for this war? (like in your example, but then for real )

[EZRhino]

I would say the ultimate objective would be to penetrate at least as far into the German fatherland as Russia did historically by the time the scenario finishes.
However, I advise caution, the Nazi's have at least one more card to play. March 43' innitiates Operation Citadel, and if we are not carefull we will have to deal with dozens of Nazi superunits operating with impunity behind our lines.

[The ANZAC]

Yeah I definitely second watching out for Citadel.

I think we should discuss that: how are we going to deal with the units created behind our front line in june/July '43?

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by greeny
Considering that our current frontline is a VERY long very and very curvey. I think straitening it out might be a good idea: a strait frontline has a much greater concentration of troops. Damn, but thats probably an operational decision is it?

Yep sure is. And we can talk about that here but we should probably discuss in STAVKA thread.

This is a good sign! It sounds like we are learning! Thats great!

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by yop73
Could you please post our objectives for this war? (like in your example, but then for real )

Yop I already did, see my July 17th post. My plan all along was to start with what I was using as an example.

Its meant to be as simple as that. Im still looking for comments however. Especially an economic comment from EZRhino maybe or maybe greeny or maybe PinkyGen since all have experience dealing with finances?

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by The ANZAC
Yeah I definitely second watching out for Citadel.

I think we should discuss that: how are we going to deal with the units created behind our front line in june/July '43?

Im not going to tell you guys to stop talking about this here if that is what you prefer but Operation Citadel and how to handle it is an Operational Issue. Thats the Marshalls area and probably should be dicused in the StAVKA thread.

[EZRhino]

Originally posted by conmcb25 Im not going to tell you guys to stop talking about this here if that is what you prefer but Operation Citadel and how to handle it is an Operational Issue. Thats the Marshalls area and probably should be dicused in the StAVKA thread.

Yes, it is mostly an operational matter, but it has a significant impact on the strategic level as well, and the implications of that must also be taken into consideration in whatever plans we are formulating.

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by EZRhino


Yes, it is mostly an operational matter, but it has a significant impact on the strategic level as well, and the implications of that must also be taken into consideration in whatever plans we are formulating.

Well I wont disagree BUT it is still an operational issue.

Once we establish a "Strategic Direction of the War", then the Stavka can discuss this operationally and how dealing with it operationally will affect the Strategic Comanders Intent or goals for lack of a better word.

And by saying this Strategically:

"Hold along the River Don and launch Two major thrusts towards Berlin and Ploesti with the intent of capturing both by the end of winter 1944-45."

I am implying that operationally the Marshall will have a plan to deal with Operation Citadel. Because if he doesn't then satisfying the "Strategic Direction of the War" maybe in peril.

So with that simple statement there are all kinds of implied tasks to get from where we are now to the end state.

And figuring out what those implied tasks are and then developing plans and executing plans to deal with them should get him to the final goal. Bu thats the Marshalls job and is inherintly Operational in nature.

Im not saying it isn't important, because it is! Im just saying it isn't strategic. It is Operational. And I trust the Marshall enough to know he will figure out the implied tasks to get him to the strategic goals.

Hopefully Im explaining this well enough.

[PinkyGen]

Economically strategy? Get as much money as possible, spend said money in the Urals and at the front.

What does this mean? The following, and if I touch on operational issues, I'm sorry, I find it confusing deciding what's operational and what isn't, so ignore me if I cross the line.

1. Hope Yop can keep those convoys coming, and possibly build an additional airport in caucas oilfield areas to help increase the cash.
2. Build wonders that help with finances, sometimes rushing them if occassionally valuable. (Aka, electrification, Labor Front to a lesser extent, Civillian Donations to a far less extent).
3. Eliminate wasteful structures, such as those marketplaces in cities not growing, and Leningrad's sewers. This program has slowed down because the cities are growing, and we are currently doing well money wise.
4. We fully support the drive to Ploesti.
5. Encourage front commanders to capture Nazi cities with gold and nice improvements to sell off.

Some of these have been accomplished, such as building of airports to help with the convoys.

With money, only the first few things are grand strategy. It basically boils down making sure to have a cash flow going.

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by EZRhino


Yes, it is mostly an operational matter, but it has a significant impact on the strategic level as well, and the implications of that must also be taken into consideration in whatever plans we are formulating.

And this is my point about establishing a strategic direction of the war.

Because then the Operational issues we will FOCAS on, will lead us to the Strategic Goals.

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by PinkyGen
It basically boils down making sure to have a cash flow going.

I think you just found your strategic goal.

All of the other stuff is IMPLIED tasks that will lead you to the end state which is a always positively growing cash flow right?

See its as simple as that! We set the Strategic direction of the war. You go ahead and figure out the implied tasks to get us there whcih you already have more or less.

Good job!