Italian Gambit variation

[Oblio]

As allied, a variation of the Italian Gambit is to DOW Italy just one turn before the expected coming of Germany near Paris, generally beginning of May. Even if you don't try to take Rome, you can easily take Bari with the Canadian Corps, destroy the 3 Italian fleet with that corps + the French fleet ; RN to finish them off at low cost. I generally use all mediteranean ships + 2 french Atlantic ships. The remaining french cruiser is sufficent to find the UBoots before the RN sinks them, and later take care of German units venturing near the sea as U Boots will rather take care of RN. You then still have two turns to send the French in the Adriatic and kill at least one more Italian. You have all the time to make a stopover in Marseille so that your fleets have about 7 in supply. Depending on Italian awareness, you can even bring in the Algiers corps to help stiking in the port, they should have time to go to Malta on the next turn.

Impact on US readiness is limited to 10/12% which is no more than Ireland.

Costs :

- Italy enters war one or two turns ealier : 230 PPM

- USA enters war about 3 turns later (but not necessarily, depending on German DOW on Spain and Vichy vs the Russian status): 0/540 PPM

- Some hits at the RN costing about 200/250 PPM to repair

=> in total max 1000PPM

Benefits :

- You can expect to hold Bari for about 5 turns which is 50PPM for you -100PPM for Italy ; priority for Germany should be to convert France ASAP before they come and help the italians.

- 4 Italian fleets + damages to the remaining BB = 2000PPM

- stategic benefits of potentially deterring any Axis attempt in Egypt, or at least significantly increasing the life expectency of British foothold there ; in this situation, I think it even makes it worth for the Allied to seize Iraki oil.

This was only tested in rookie matches. I suppose that veteran players have used this strategy before. Please indicate whether you are still using it or else, what the Axis responses were.

Thanks

[Terif]

An italian gambit is still a posibility, also in veteran matches - with advantages and disadvantages.

Besides the already mentioned ones there are some other important ones:

- the ground units you are using for Italy are missing in the defence of France, so it usually falls earlier than normal.

- Since you have to move most of your navy into the Med, you either can not shore bombard the german forces in France or at least you risk loosing them to german naval attacks.

- when you first hunt the subs in the Atlantic, your ships have a good chance to not arrive in time near Italy before Germany reaches the outskirts of Paris

- After the italian gambit the allied fleet is in the Med and needs some time to move back to England. Perfect opportunity for a quick Sealion.

- When Axis don´t plan a naval warfare in the Atlantic they don´t really need the italian ships - but the ships are the only real valuable things they loose in a gambit. On the ground it is even an advantage for Axis (Italy is fast reconquered (=landed corps will be lost for UK), but USA is delayed and when beeing attacked Italy receives at the start additional 115 mpps(+ earlier war entry).

Nevertheless, an italian gambit is the only realistic chance for Allies to hold Egypt (+ Iraq). That´s the main advantage of it - but it has its risks.

[jon_j_rambo]

Yes, the ISG (Italian Ship Gambit) is a viable possibility. Against top players it's a little tougher to pull off, and there is some risk associated with it as stated by Terif.

[Tony_S]

I am not experienced as you guys but,,,,,,, I have never had enough forces to even consider the Italian gambit as I have been too focused on deffending France! Would like to try though, what is the best way to implement this plan? Any ideas???

[willebra]

Well, one variation of the Italian gambit is just to take Bari and to cripple the Italian navy (and perhaps to divert some German forces from the attack of France and/or make some MPP loss for the Axis: Italy is actually gaining 30 MPPs/turn less, as Sicily becomes disconnected). Crippling the Italian navy will make Axis operations around the Med more difficult/time consuming.

The minimum amount of forces would be two corps (the other perhaps from Algiers) and the existing fleet in the Med. Having an army and a corps makes the initial attack stronger and will help some in defending Bari afterwards.

With these you should be able to take Bari + port and destroy the battleship at the port of Bari and a submarine or cruiser outside the port on the first turn of the attack. You should probably stay with at least some of your fleet in Bari, so that you can finish of the cruiser/sub, but remember that this exposes the remaining ships to the Luftwaffe.

Anyway, if the defence of France is not going well and the Germans are able to divert airforce to the Med, then you should perhaps not attack at all, as they can retake Bari easily and your fleet becomes exposed.

[ August 14, 2004, 03:06 AM: Message edited by: willebra ]

[willebra]

Also, if the German's are already at the outskirts of Paris (and Italy will be joining due to that) then it will probably be too late to perform the Italian gambit anyway. This is because at this time the French typically aren't much of a force anymore and its no trouble for the Germans to shift some air and ground units to the Med.

[hellraiser]

i guess dow-ing italy has a single purpose: hinder or, less probable, interdict axis operations in the med - destruction of italian navy will make the transport of troops to N Africa very dangerous.

But there are some aspects to consider here: as Terif mentioned, if Allies commit to many troops/ships in the med they are open to sealion. Allied succes in the med (capturing north africa italian provinces and directly threatening iraqi oil will force axis player to attempt a sealion as complete possession of north africa and iraq is a war winning factor. Axis player should not bother to destroy RN deployed in the med or attempt to reconquer north africa - it is too time consuming and time does not favour the axis player at all. In this case, allies must hold UK until russia joins and have red troops immediately replacing uk forces in iraq/N Africa.

Most probably the axis player attempting a SL will not have enough forces to mount a full scale Barbarossa (as a lot of troops are engaged in the UK or getting reinforced and transported back on the mainland). Germany should establish a 2 rows corps defence supported by HQs in the east which is more than enough to repel any attempts of the russians to break the front (limited attacks against russian border armies should be performed if possible). This will buy enough time to redeploy the veteran troops in the east and start the 'real war'

OTOH, if allies mount a small scale assault on italy (capture the 2 undefended cities and attempt to destroy italian ships) axis player should immediately open the connection to sicily and op move there a german hq and at least 2 air units. If allies were lazy and did not transfer the ships towards the gibraltar strait, the RN in the med is trapped with the only purpose of delaying as much as possible the conquest of egypt. If the allies were smart and moved the ships west of sicily, germany will have additional problems when trying to get their hands on vichy france - buying italian subs should be considered for screening the transports headed for algiers.

In my opinion the med theater should be used only for delay purposes. The allied player should focus on disrupting the axis normal timing for dowing european countries and hope this will be enough to have a weaker attack on mother russia.

Nevertheless, as allies, one should not commit atlantic RN ships in the med. Rely on med fleet and the 2 french BBs for carrying out attacks there. Allies must hold UK at all costs (and ships are the most important defensive asset of early war UK) as UK is the major asset of the allied player.

Maybe i am right maybe i am not, i am not so experienced and probably there are more factors to consider. I am sure more experienced players will participate to this discussion as it is one of the most interesting and important aspects of the game.

[Sombra]

Well the italian gambit has been a hot topic in competive playing. While I like the possibility of the italian gambit other players as Avatar clearly don´t like it at all.

Whats the verdict. Any vote from the top players on this topic?

I believe that the italian gambit makes the game more interessting givng the Allies at least one weapeon to fight for the med.

[hellraiser]

hehe sombra

maybe sometime we can continue that game (hellraiser on my icq, remember?) in which you had russian troops replace uk troops in iraq and NA after my succesful sealion. That game is very open i think ... as russia has mpp advantage.

Anyway, i thought about a different axis strategy lately, opposed to the classic cookie cutter approach and I will need some inputs from good players in order to tweak it ... or abandon it Maybe we can talk on icq this week end about it

[Sombra]

Hi hellraiser, yes I am back from my holidays. I am looking forward to continue this game.

How about friday or this weekend? Will look for you on ICQ. Today alas I am batteling against Avatar.

That you were able to take England shows my stupidity and the disadvantages when the RN is taking shots at the italian navy.

[hellraiser]

99% i'm in for friday ... i will confirm on icq

[Curry]

In competitive play I believe the concensus is that a Italian gambit is fair and totally legal. The Rome Gambit is what is not fair nor legal. There is a major difference between the two.

I use to try the Italian gambit when I first started playing. But I rarely or never do now for the very reasons Terif gives. I dont think its worth the effort and your resources can be better used elsewhere.

[Friendly Fire]

I have never launched the Italian gambit but I have had it played twice on me. The Allied player sent the carriers down to the med as well, which is a huge mistake.

I won a quick victory both times (UK falls before USA or USSR enter). Clearly the response in my games was to kill France fast, feint Norway, and land with guns blazing on the east coast of the green and pleasant lands! But in these games the Gambit was performed with far more assets than Oblio describes... both allied players left themselves absolutely defenseless. It seems to me there is some value in the strategy if properly played, especially against an unprepared Axis player...

I also choke a bit on the plausbiity of the whole thing. I mean come on, would the Italians really sit idle while England sends the whole damn navy into the Med? Shouldn't this trigger Italian entry into the war?

[Sombra]

Friendly fire. You are right it is a bit unrealistic that whole nations sit there and say: Hey look at all these nice friendly little ships sitting at our coast.

But right now the axis is doing exactly the same : Norway, Vichy, Greece, Sweden etc. surprise landings with a huge bonus and knocking out the defenseless minors....

[jon_j_rambo]

Well, that's what Germany was good at, beating up on defenseless, sleeping farmers & little old ladies buying bagels, so the game is rather realistic. Come on, how hard is to take over Greece in real life? Isn't Greece just one big deli of greek dudes making gyros? What's in the Low Countries, Anne Frank wearing wooden shoes writing poems? Now, when it came to the RAF & RN, Fritz had to deal with a different type of war, one of Sea & Air. On the Eastern front, Hans found out it got a little cold driving 500 miles into Mother Russia, just to find x10 the number of enemies called Vladimir, all who were poor, desperate & didn't crap if they died. They along came G.I. Joe sporting shining new materials being cranked out in Pittsburgh & Detroit, Wolfgang was toast.

The whole Blitzkreig strategy was the only method to open the continent up. Bust a hole in the line & drive tanks thru. It's too bad the Russian front doesn't have more flanking, rather than just destroying units for MMP purposes.

[Sombra]

WEll Rambo if we put in the historical point of view, then it is although right for the british to beat the hell out of italy.

The italian navy never played a big role in the war and wasn´t there this famous battle between Italy and GB when 300.000 italians fought against 60.000 british with the results of 240.000 italian prisoners or dead? I have to look it up......

[Dragonheart]

As long there were official league games which is some time ago there was a rule called landing rule which forbids to DOW and land in the same turn in a major power (USA,Russia,Italy)

Only if both players agreed not to use this rule the italian gambit was allowed.

[Aztecace]

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

Come on, how hard is to take over Greece in real life? Isn't Greece just one big deli of greek dudes making gyros?

Well, the Italians had a very hard time of it when they invaded Greece during WW2. For a while it looked like they were going to be pushed out of Greece. Hitler was so frustrated at Mussolini's failure in Greece that he had to send German troops in to save his bacon. So thats what the Greeks did. Not to mention the Greek resistance after the Germans took over. They were not a buch of "dudes" making gyros.

[jon_j_rambo]

Come on man, no gyros, don't go "Medieval" on me Why else would one invade Greece? I love the gyros, with the real lamb meat. But even better, much, much better are the very tasty Greek "grinder sandwiches". Oh my do I love them. Grinders are served very hot & spicy, just the way the Legend likes them. But lets not stop at grinders, tell me about that Greek PIZZZZZZAAAAAAA. Yes, yes, yes, I love that "Za" by the Greeks. I grew up on it, that cheese, is something else.

My favorite restaurant was this Greek place in East Lansing where I went to college. We'd eat there all the time & go play video games at Pinball Pete's. We'd shoot real old fashion pinball all day, & drink very cold, cold root beer for 10 cents per cup.

Memories...Events like that can never die, they are as real to me today, as they were back then. Reminds of the good things in life

Praise the Lord, & pass the Greek food!

[Jev.Dk]

Dont go medieval??? you are as closeminded as a medieval peasant.

[jon_j_rambo]

@Jev.Dk --- It seems you are my new stalker friend, coming out of the political Forum, or are you now playing SC? How are you? Hope all is well. Something tells me the Holy Spirit is dealing with you. Amazing ain't it, what a few verses can do to you after going a few rounds with the Legend in the political Forum. This area is for SC gaming, but since you've joined the party, a verse just for you is below, the written word is very interesting...And the word became flesh & dwelt among us

12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

[Jev.Dk]

Well I give you that. You sure are quick as god is, running away when you cant retort in a discussion.

Troll

[jon_j_rambo]

What's the question? I answer to the best of my ability. I've told you numerous times, start a thread with specifics to get your request & questions answered. The Political Forum is wide open. Passing me a link to a thread with 50 different replays isn't specific enough, especially when I was the last to post, twice! The previous comments by others were just that, comments. There is a difference between a comment & a question. So......go start a thread (new) in the Political Forum. If you got something to say (type), then do it. I need specifics, because I don't have time to chase down the 1000 posts per day.