Shouldn't the French be fighting the Soviets?

[M1A2C Abrams]

According to the 1989 blogpost the French are going to be in this game defending Southwestern Germany from Czechlslovak invasion in an upcoming DLC but I am sitting here thinking that wouldn't it make more sense from a gameplay perspective for the French to be the ones facing off against the Soviet thrust of the invasion while the US faced off against East Germans exclusively?

A very basic principle of the art of war is that you attack the enemy's week point. Which often means attacking a specific nation in a multi-nation coalition. Using some examples from WWII the Nazis attacked France through Belgium in order to avoid their defenses. They also focused their attacks against the Anglo-Canadians in Normandy 44, the Soviets attacked Romania in Steel Division 2. I think the Soviets would be obsessed with forcing a deep penetrating breakthrough into West Germany so they could bypass the strongest NATO forces.
Now in my opinion the strongest forces would be the US because they have a strong list of units across the board with the Abrams, Bradley, Apache, M270 and the F Teen series fighters for air support, the only area they're really lacking is air defense but I think that's okay due to their active air power.

I would rate the West Germans as second best due to having the Leopard 2, M270 and the Marder which is debatably better than the M1 Sherman and M2 Bradley but they don't do as well with combined arms or air power without apaches and a poor air force.
Britain would be third I think and that may be a controversial pick but the best French tank in use at the time was the AMX-30 which is 65 points in Red Dragon versus the best British tank which is the Challenger 1 and 115 points. Other than that I think they're pretty comparable in the fact they both have a lot of sucky equipment compared to the US and West Germans.

If I was a soviet commander (since the Soviet Union was the best equipped Axis power undeniably with all others essentially being equipped with their older stuff) I would focus my attack against the French. Using the East Germans and maybe some of my lower priority troops to distract the US forces at the Fulda Gap so that they won't be able to help the French. I wouldn't want to be wasting my T-80 tanks on a meat grinder against Bradleys firing TOW missiles from the trees and calling in A-10 strikes.

[busboy999]

Early access. More diverse NATO and Pact content is coming.

[просто чел]

At 1970-1980 Soviets had around 68+k different tanks on active service. If we would like to conquer any1 that was the nice time to do. Just all Europe at once. French , Germans whatever. In 1945 Soviets army was 3 times bigger then all Europe force + USA, that was also a splendid time to take Europe. But we did not . Russia Do not coduct offencive wars ever, but when attacked by some1 the result is always the same. Our troops marching on enemy capital. Moreover Russians didnot loose any war in history, rember that fact and stop watching fake news on TV )

[M1A2C Abrams]

Originally posted by просто чел:

At 1970-1980 Soviets had around 68+k different tanks on active service. If we would like to conquer any1 that was the nice time to do. Just all Europe at once. French , Germans whatever. In 1945 Soviets army was 3 times bigger then all Europe force + USA, that was also a splendid time to take Europe. But we did not . Russia Do not coduct offencive wars ever, but when attacked by some1 the result is always the same. Our troops marching on enemy capital. Moreover Russians didnot loose any war in history, rember that fact and stop watching fake news on TV )

The Soviet Union entered WWII by invading Poland alongside Nazi Germany as based on a secret alliance they had formed with the Nazis to carve up Eastern Europe. They were one of the offensive belligerent axis powers during WWII for the early stages of the war.

Their invasion of Poland was also stupid because it gave the Nazis a land border to invade the Soviet Union from wheras if they had sent their invasion force to protect Poland instead then the Nazis would have never been able to attack. The Soviet Union through their own stupidity got 50 million people murdered. Most of which were their own people. I can't believe how cucked someone would have to be to defend their own government like that.

Also if you're a Christian you should be even more upset because most Soviet citizens were destined for hell when they died because of the state atheism policy. Not only did the government you're defending rob your own people of their natural lives but they also robbed them of their eternal lives.

The reason they didn't attack the US in 1945 was because it would have been a curb stomp in favor of the US. The Soviet Union lost 3 men for every Nazi casualty they inflicted, On the inverse the US inflicted 20 Nazi casualties for every one they took. Meaning the Red Army would lose 60 men for every American casualty. that is if we count Nazi forces all equally but in reality the Eastern Front was populated with 2nd rate and 3rd rate troops while the West had their most elite forces.

Also the Soviet Union would no longer have American economic aid so their ability to supply their forces would cease.

[просто чел]

oh man, alternative history from TV.
The only one point right here is a Molotov Ribentropp Pact . That was done for 1 reason by 1939 USSR has not been ready to figtht Germany. We need more time. Poland was doomed from the start . Thay should give up Danzig for demands but they thought French and anglo sax would help them to defend . History showed they were very wrong.

[[EUG] MadMat]

Originally posted by M1A2C Abrams:

Shouldn't the French be fighting the Soviets?

I'm not sure I'm understanding fully your comment, but France will be fighting the Soviets too.
The latter were pretty much on all front:
* Soviet & E-Germans facing CENTAG (Americans & W-Germans)
* Soviet, E-Germans & Poles facing NORTHAG (British, W-Germans, some Americans and others)
* Soviet & Czech. facing SOUTHAG (French, W-Germans, some Americans and others)

[Savoy]

Europe have no military..see all those US bases in europe...they never left Europe after ww2.

[просто чел]

Originally posted by Miskyavine:

Originally posted by просто чел:

At 1970-1980 Soviets had around 68+k different tanks on active service. If we would like to conquer any1 that was the nice time to do. Just all Europe at once. French , Germans whatever. In 1945 Soviets army was 3 times bigger then all Europe force + USA, that was also a splendid time to take Europe. But we did not . Russia Do not coduct offencive wars ever, but when attacked by some1 the result is always the same. Our troops marching on enemy capital. Moreover Russians didnot loose any war in history, rember that fact and stop watching fake news on TV )

dont forget tho the US military in the 1980S had over half of the worlds modern combat aircraft not NATO just the USA split between the USAF USN and USMC.

of those 68K tanks the USSR had maybe 1-200 or so were equal qaulity to the 3500 M1A1s and 2200 Leopard 2s supported by 15000 M60 pattons 6500 Leaopard 1s 3500 AMX-30s While not having Armor, having advanced gunsights Thermals and FCS advantages would have helped immensely.


As for WW2 it was won in the factories and in the sky neither one would have worked well for the soviets had the US not held the Soviet Economy up singlehandely with lend lease.
Torwards the end of WW2 the USSR still had not achieved econmic independance or air superiority and had to have the US fly over and shoot stuff down for them... Had lend lease not happened the USSR would have been bled dry like the Chinese trying to fight off the Japanese.

2200 Leopards what ??? give me a proove . lol.
Be sure if armada of 68+ k tanks is moving to ur position only nuke will save the ass not less.
Panthers and tigers outclassed T-34 's and shermans , but they were so little in numbers that cound not change the whole situation in war.
M1 abrams were across ocean. when they arrive at europe the will be all over by the time ) Some very small defencive forces of aglo sax had been positioned at west berling

[[EUG] MadMat]

Originally posted by просто чел:

2200 Leopards what ???

Actually, the Bundeswehr indeed took delivery of, AFAIK, 2.115 Leopard 2 in eight batches from 1979 to 1992.
To add to the 2.437 Leopard 1 accepted from 1965 to 1976.

Of course, all might not be still in working order by 1989, but the 2.000 mark for both models is clearly a given.

[просто чел]

Originally posted by EUG MadMat:

Originally posted by просто чел:

2200 Leopards what ???

Actually, the Bundeswehr indeed took delivery of, AFAIK, 2.115 Leopard 2 in eight batches from 1979 to 1992.
To add to the 2.437 Leopard 1 accepted from 1965 to 1976.

Of course, all might not be still in working order by 1989, but the 2.000 mark for both models is clearly a given.

Ok. but were a talking about timalaps of 1970-1980 Khrushev and Brezhnev regtime.
Leopard 1 was a paper tank with 10-15 mm armor. A Glass gun, same for amx15, 30, 30b

I wonder how many indeed leopards 2 are now active service in Germany. 100-200? i mean that can really shoot and move )
I dont mind anything against Germany, but by time 2022 Poland and Ukrain is more military capable then Bundeswer

[просто чел]

Originally posted by Miskyavine:

Originally posted by просто чел:

Ok. but were a talking about timalaps of 1970-1980 Khrushev and Brezhnev regtime.
Leopard 1 was a paper tank with 10-15 mm armor. A Glass gun, same for amx15, 30, 30b

I wonder how many indeed leopards 2 are now active service in Germany. 100-200? i mean that can really shoot and move )
I dont mind anything against Germany, but by time 2022 Poland and Ukrain is more military capable then Bundeswer

1989 isnt now 250 tanks in service today means nothing for a game based in 1989 also if disrepair of leo 1s is a problems im pretty sure a signifigent portion of said 68k tanks most of which were T55s were stored in similar if not worse condition in the 1980s with tanks requiring full overhauls to be ready to use again. the moisture and humidity in eastern europe is hell on anything made of steel with rust accumulating within months if not properly maintained.

30k T-72 of all varations had been manufactured by all period of time. T-72 is not Т-54 or Т-55. That was over plenty enough for all europe . And it had very nice armor and speed

[просто чел]

Originally posted by Miskyavine:

Originally posted by просто чел:

30k T-72 of all varations had been manufactured by all period of time. T-72 is not Т-54 or Т-55. That is over plenty enough for all europe . And it had very nice armor and speed

DU dont care bout yer armor and K5 equiped tanks were very very rare.

USSR couldnt even keep its extremely strained and struggling economy from full collpase during peace time let alone during any time of a actual crisis during war time how are we supposed to believe that they would be able to sucsessfully field 30k combat ready T-72s with another 30k of other tanks when they couldnt even produce enough food to keep 30% of there people from being malnourished? Im sure your right in production numbers but there no way in hell they would be able to keep them supplied properly let alone fit them in a area the size Texas without sustaining massive causualties and attrition.

How could we win NAzi Germany if all Europe factories were working on Germany?
How could we win Napoleon if He almost burned Moscow ?
How could С-125 AA could shoot down the modern F-117A stealth bomber.
How could Mig 15's in Korea make US stop bombing North Korea if the alliance had almost unlimited numbers of aircrafts.
Russia did not loose any war in its history.
Check how many wars did win beloved USA with their oversized military budget. u will be a bit surprised ))

Peace to all. And we are not going to invade Ukraine as it is spoken by TV.
They said Putin would launch an attack on Christmas or at least 5 January.
Nothing happened as always

[Calanorn]

Originally posted by Miskyavine:

Originally posted by просто чел:

30k T-72 of all varations had been manufactured by all period of time. T-72 is not Т-54 or Т-55. That is over plenty enough for all europe . And it had very nice armor and speed

DU dont care bout yer armor and K5 equiped tanks were very very rare.

USSR couldnt even keep its extremely strained and struggling economy from full collpase during peace time let alone during any time of a actual crisis during war time how are we supposed to believe that they would be able to sucsessfully field 30k combat ready T-72s with another 30k of other tanks when they couldnt even produce enough food to keep 30% of there people from being malnourished? Im sure your right in production numbers but there no way in hell they would be able to keep them supplied properly let alone fit them in a area the size Texas without sustaining massive causualties and attrition.

On the flipside (i have nothing against Russians or Russia) a conflict could have helped Russia, nothing gets the gears grinding and a population on the same page like a common enemy and a conflict.

As for the sustaining massive casualties that imo would also be less of an issue than it would be for the western world. Russia is willing to throw numbers to solve a problem. WW2 showed how Russia was more than willing to throw numbers to get the desired outcome.

[просто чел]

Originally posted by Miskyavine:

Originally posted by просто чел:

How could we win NAzi Germany if all Europe factories were working on Germany?
How could we win Napoleon if He almost burned Moscow ?
How could С-125 AA could shoot down the modern F-117A stealth bomber.
How could Mig 15's in Korea make US stop bombing North Korea if the alliance had almost unlimited numbers of aircrafts.
Russia did not loose any war in its history.
Check how many wars did win beloved USA with their oversized military budget. u will be a bit surprised ))

Peace to all. And we are not going to invade Ukraine as it is spoken by TV.
They said Putin would launch an attack on Christmas or at least 5 January.
Nothing happened as always

Lend lease kept the soviet economy alive. US sent more steel, fue; , food and vehicle engines and especially Trucks and trains to the Soviet Union then they produced. 2/3rds of utility used in WW2 by the soviet union were US made. Soviets would have full collapsed without US lend lease giving enough manufacturing equipment to build 200+ war factories.

China has the credit for Korea not the USSR losing 9 migs per F-86 kill in the jet war. B-29s at the time of Korea were 10 year old strat bombers lol

Russia has horrible terrain to fight on irrelevent aswell for a game that takes place in Germany in 1989.

Also try winning a war without losing 10 men per enemy kill.

Russia has never won a war by themselves always carried to victory by other countries doing the damage while Russians just died en masse Its really unfortunate.

Didnt USSR lose Afghanistan? A country were the terrain is acually worse to fight in then Russia.

anything pre cold war is irrelivent to this game especially blackpowder era conflicts also also Whole of Europe vs France there were 5 other countries fighting France in the napoleanic wars not just RUSSIA Napolean lost to the Russian winter not the Russian army.

14 mln Germany loose
22 mln Soviet loose
400k USA loose.

Who one WW2 war? OF course USA and France )))
go on

Afganistan is a real shame for USSR that is indeed . We have to withdraw military forces.

[Hyrikul]

Originally posted by Savoy:

Europe have no military..see all those US bases in europe...they never left Europe after ww2.

France is the main military in Europe, closely followed by the UK.


Show me the US base in France.

Spoiler: there is none. De Gaulle kick them out since 1965.

[просто чел]

ok conversation is over. Read books or see some documentary films how ww2 was in real life. thanks for talking