Bolt out of the Blue 5.3

[Elxaime]

You could debate Berlin until the cows come home. Personally I'm not convinced the East Germans would be happy to see a Soviet Arty Div draw up alongside them and start pounding Berlin and its civillian population into the dust. I'm even less convinced that the East Germans would of been overly keen on advancing into Berlin themselves and engaging fellow Germans in what is the most vicious type of combat. And as for the Soviets, I'm sure the loss of 200,000 men last time they entered the place would weigh heavily on the minds of some of their old guard as they were young enough to remember it!

I would guess the whole war scenario itself exists mainly in an alternative reality. This alternative reality supposes that in 1989 the Pact allies were sufficiently reliable not only to shoulder their burden of an offensive war, but also loyal enough not to betray the whole scheme in advance to NATO. As others have commented, the idea of a Pact strategic surprise of the scale the scenario supposes is a best case. That being the premise, not sure we need factor in East German squeamishness over a bombardment of West Berlin - East Germans upset at that would likely already have rebelled at the very notion of the war to begin with. But you are quite right, we can debate the might-have-been stuff until the cows come home.

I suppose what I should have said is that removing the option of using the Soviet 34th Artillery near Berlin more or less consigns the Pact to not taking the city at all without diverting some later reinforcements. I doubt the Operation Zentrum GDR division can make the difference by itself. But I am glad to be proved wrong.

In Beta, how did things play out in Berlin? Could the Pact take the city with just the Zentrum forces (minus 34th Arty)? Or did they have to divert follow on troops as well?

In testing there was only probing of the defenses and in feedback over the years Berlin is bypassed 8 out of 10 games

That is surprising...there are 8K VP in the city, plus the VP for destruction of the NATO garrison units (the Pact will suffer losses, but it is very unlikely they will have any units destroyed).

That said, it is very tough to model political dimensions that are not consonant with purely military considerations. For example, Britain sent additional Hurricane squadrons to France in May 1940 even though the BEF lacked the infrastructure in place to adequately support them. Churchill felt he had a political imperative to do so in response to desperate appeals from the French. Another WW2 example was Eisenhower acceding to De Gaulle's demand that Strasbourg not be abandoned to a German counterattack in late 1944 from the Colmar Pocket. It was sound military strategy to fall back and straighten the line. But Ike caved in so as to preserve Allied political unity. It is hard to imagine Soviet forces choosing to ignore Berlin if a WW3 ground war started.

On the other hand, forcing a player to do X or Y by imposing political considerations can lead to "idiot rules" that make a game not fun for one or both players. For example, tying a German-side WW2 war game player to some of Hitler's crazy last stand or "Fuhrerfestung" orders would mean a preordained outcome. In the end, Bolt strikes a good balance between alternative history and solid facts.

Well done again on a superb mod.