Der Panzinator Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Here is something interesting to try. Let Germany soften up France but then let an Italian unit take over Paris. This gives Italy all of the French plunder and plus its resources. Once they get all this money they can then purchase some HQ's and tanks to roll over Spain, Portugal, and Vichy France. All this combined with Italy's large navy of 3 Battleships help to make it a significant power close to that of Britain. They can then either move down into the Med and finish off the British forces there and also take Iraq and Turkey. Or they can move out into the Atlantic and harrass allied shipping and possibly threaten Britain with invasion. Always seems like a waste to have Italy stuck with only 115 MPP's per turn. At this level they are almost a worthless ally to Germany. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Der Panzinator --- Nice comment. Finding a role for Italy beyond the $115/turn sit & spin strategy is worth some effort. Giving them France can be fun, but until you get Spain then "The Rock" you're stuck in the Med. Against the AI is one thing... jon_j_rambo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 You might want to visit what is currently Forum Page 5, "The Second Roman Empire" started by Zeres on Oct. 31 -- Sound paths are explored where Italy, whith a little help early on from the Germans, ends up with Southern France, Algeria, Syria, Yugoslavia, Greece, Egypt, Iraq and Turkey (if it doesn't join the Axis first). Many players agree there are good reasons for a strategy that boosts Italian power, the one in "Second Roman Empire" was Mussolini's grand fantasy -- without Swizerland, which has two armies, plunder, and can always be taken afterwards. *** *** [should be Italian postage stamp of the two dictators] *** *** [should be a Fascist Postcard with Il Duce in several martial poses] *** *** [should be an Allied Propaganda cartoon of Mussolini's brain in X-ray] *** *** [should be another postcard of Il Duce, this time wearing an infantry helmet] *** *** [should be photo of Mussolini and his mistress in death with Il Duce holding a Roman eagle] *** *** [ November 18, 2002, 04:39 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ancient One Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 It's always better for Germany to take everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I/O Error Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 That's certainly my opinion, yes. I use Italian troops ONLY for aiding in attacks, they are never the guys who capture cities and resource centers. Effectively I use them as cannon fodder, I just don't tell Il Duce that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J P Wagner Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 But how does Germany fare after you have allowed Italy to have all these MMPs? I would think that Germany's production would be too limited now to be able to hold off Russia, Britain, and US. Is the new Italian war machine sufficient to offset this problem? I'll need to try this variant out to see. How has the end game been for those who tried this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashblade Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 I would prefer to have one major power, for the simple reason that this way you can avoid duplicate research. At the very least you have to ducplicate IT to make anything out of both countries... past that I suppose you could branch off, Germany on the ground and Italy in the sea, but it just doesn't seem worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayJay_H Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Originally posted by Der Panzinator: Once they get all this money they can then purchase some HQ's and tanks to roll over Spain, Portugal, and Vichy France. All this combined with Italy's large navy of 3 Battleships help to make it a significant power close to that of Britain. .I never attack my fascist ally, the spaniard Franco! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayJay_H Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Originally posted by JayJay_H: German units are of higher value for combat so to me its merely a waste of production. And Axis conquering Spain, the minors wont be very amused about that and probably won't join the alliance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 In the games where I've loaned two German airfleets to Italy for taking Malta and later had Germany extend the comparativly small amounts of air units to help Italy take the Mediteranean, the Italians have always wound up very powerful without weakening Germany. Because of all the extra MPPs the Italian research develops quickly and enables Italy to field good units of her own. If Germany is having problems either in Russia or dealing with a landing in the West, it helps to have a strong Italy. Or -- you could just do everything with Germany. That also works. Either strategy works, except the German way Italy can never afford much research and doesn't emerge as anything. I prefer having two functional Axis powers. Agreed on Spain -- I've never found a need for invading it as the Axis. I don't even like invading Turkey -- in this game it joins the Axis fairly often and with good resources, why invade her? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yohan Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 I think the current research rules make it a waste. Just build Italian armies, HQs and research IT and anti-armour and you'll have good west wall troops and garrisons. Keep Germany as the offensive punch. This does not preclude and I agree with the loan of a few German air and an HQ to kill Malta, Alex and Suez. It might be a bit of a boring approach but it guarantees an Axis win (unless GB gets jets and IT 4 real fast) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 -- Yohan, Agreed it's a sound approach. Early on I liked giving Italy a shot at greatness, then found later it wasn't really that important. Now I vary my approach; both ways seem equally effective. To be honest, I don't think the Italians had a chance in the actual event. Mussolini, thinking the big war was still years off, bankrupted the country in Ethiopia and Spain. His timetable called for war readiness in 1941, not 1939. Militarily, I think Fascist Italy reached it's peak about the time Hitler came to power and was ebbing after it's conquest of Ethiopia. The only reason Mussolini entered the war in mid-1940 is because he thought it would end in a month or so. Surely he realized that, if it continued even with Britain alone, Italy would forfeit it's newly acquired East African possessions, along with 200,000 troops cut off from reinforcement and supply! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Billote Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 A strong Italy is much more useful than the "minor axis" units that might be gained from not conquering Eastern Europre and Balkins. Those units will never have HQ's and therefor are basically cannonfodder. I've tested different Italian strategies and have found that the Italias research tech extremely efficiently compared to the other main combatants. But they start with very limited resources. I like to move West and North for plunder with the Germans and leave the Balkins open for Italian conquest. I use the Balkian plunder to research anit-tank weapons, subs, industry and aircraft...I spread the points out evenly and let the chips fall where they may. Cheap, plentiful super subs will foil any allied plot to storm "the soft underbelly" of Europe. Good air units can replace German air units in France, if things get grim on the Eastern front. I don't send Italian units to the Eastern front, I use them to bolster defences in the West. A strong Italy makes things almost impossible for the allies. but to make Italy strong you must play it safe and make the most of the limited resources available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayJay_H Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 Originally posted by JerseyJohn: Because of all the extra MPPs the Italian research develops quickly and enables Italy to field good units of her own. If Germany is having problems either in Russia or dealing with a landing in the West, it helps to have a strong Italy. Okay, you all find it useful to have a strong Italy, but i always let the Jerries do ALL the work, otherwise its too simple - the "Big Three" should have at least a bit of a chance that makes the course of the war more interesting [ November 18, 2002, 10:49 PM: Message edited by: JayJay_H ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 "I always let the Jerries do ALL the work, otherwise it's too simple." -- JayJay__H I think the simpler strategy is to have Germany do everything, it's more difficult to nurse Italy through it's early difficulties and have her take Belgrade when the Hungarians, Bulgarians and Germans are actually doing most of the work. After that she's pretty strong and after taking Greece on her own (bypassing the Greek mountain armies) she's very strong. Regarding the Big Three -- I used to post a long preambe with all the reasons I thought Italy, historically, would have been unable to do any better than possibly hold her own possessions, except East Africa, of course. Among other things, Italy in 1940 lacked everything from spare parts for her ships to sand filters for her aircraft in Lybia as well as every form of oil product or reserve (no one knew at the time that Libya had plenty of it!). Her entry in the war was only a bluff to convince England she should also make peace with France. Mussolini knew his country was unprepared for war but wanted to grab some of the spoils before a peace treaty was signed. During the 1939-40 "phony war" a German HQ conference brought up the topic of Italy . Gerd von Rundstedt made an ominous prediction, "If it remains neutral we'll have to keep one infantry division to cover the Alps passages. If it joins the British we'll have to double that. If they join us we'll have to send a dozen divisions to defend Italy." I believe the key to Italy's usefulness, historically, depended upon Spain's early entry and the taking of Gibraltar and Malta, otherwise Italy is too exposed. Historically Hitler had fits when Franco didn't enter after the fall of France because that was the way Germany also saw it. Hitler had made the mistake of sending Admiral Canaris to talk with Franco, nobody knew Canaris was playing both sides and he convinced Franco it was in his best interests to remain neutral. The Spanish Civil War was over a little over a year and the country was in ruins. *** *** After their meeting, Hitler said he'd rather have his teeth pulled without anathstetic than meet again with "the Spaniard!" [ November 19, 2002, 03:03 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayJay_H Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 Originally posted by JerseyJohn: [QB *** *** After their meeting, Hitler said he'd rather have his teeth pulled without anathstetic than meet again with "the Spaniard!" [/QB]In a current Pbem i dont have to take the responsibility for the decision whether to conquer Spain or not - The allies declared war on her! So they doomed themselves - there is no port in lisboa or spain, they cant retreat and my rockets keep them under fire day and night. Spain belonging to axis territory means: far longer coastline to defend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Billote Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 Jay Jay- I usually land American forces on the East side of Spain in that situation, covered by Brittish ( Three if possible) aircraft carriers... then march north to the Vichy port of Marseilles.... Hitting the Germans with my free Vichy Battleship which is usually mine by then ( if the Germans are getting greedy)!! [ November 19, 2002, 03:54 PM: Message edited by: General Billote ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted November 20, 2002 Share Posted November 20, 2002 JayJay_H The Iberian Penninsula has the same quirk as Ireland, no port -- units can land but can't be taken out by sea! I think it should be changed in both cases. In SC Spain is a weird case, if it won't enter till Britain is already beaten, then how valuable is it to the Axis? Of course it boosts the available MPPs, but it would be of much greater use if it entered earlier. I, too, love zonking things with rockets! -- General Billote, Good Luck in your struggle against the Bosch, and of course, your trans Spanish strategy is worthy of a Wellington -- oops, sorry -- a Napoleon! [ November 19, 2002, 05:56 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayJay_H Posted November 20, 2002 Share Posted November 20, 2002 Originally posted by JerseyJohn: I, too, love zonking things with rockets! Really kicks ass, but the V-Weapons (rockets+5) could have a larger range. Agree with the ports, at least Valencia (in the mediterranean), San Sebastian or Lissabon/Porto could be inserted. The Brits could have an additional ressource in exchange, Glasgow for example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayJay_H Posted November 20, 2002 Share Posted November 20, 2002 There could also be some industry in Middle England (mining around Leeds and Sheffield) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zappsweden Posted November 20, 2002 Share Posted November 20, 2002 Germany has much better HQ than Italy so it is more important to give Germany the cash. They will build better armies and better Air support with the same amount of cash. If Italy takes France then Germany will take too long to reach their potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayJay_H Posted November 20, 2002 Share Posted November 20, 2002 Originally posted by zappsweden: Germany has much better HQ than Italy so it is more important to give Germany the cash. They will build better armies and better Air support with the same amount of cash.Totally agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted November 20, 2002 Share Posted November 20, 2002 ZapsSweden, Also agreed. My strategy has never been to give Italy anything that should historically have been Germany's. As a rule of thumb I allot everything conquered north of Yugoslavia to Germany and everything Mediteranean oriented to Italy. Though Germany has better HQs, it has a limited number of them. If Italy is developed properly she helps augment Germany when things are stretched tight. --- JayJay_H Fine point about middle-England; as shown on the map there's London, then wastelands east and north, then civilization picks up again at Manchester! Rockets, in SC, are pretty much a luxury. It would seem that they should have longer ranges, though I think the Germans, despite sending V-2's nearly into space, never targetted them for farther than 200 miles from the launch point. [next two photos should be the American Robert H. Goddard whose work, though little appreciated in his own land was openly acknowledged by the German rocket scientists, and Werner von Bruan] Regarding Ports: It just seems odd that Portugal and Spain had huge maritime empires for hundreds of years without having any ports! :confused: [ November 20, 2002, 04:11 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayJay_H Posted November 20, 2002 Share Posted November 20, 2002 Originally posted by JerseyJohn: It just seems odd that Portugal and Spain had huge maritime empires for hundreds of years without having any ports! :confused: You point it out again, if you get to think of this once more agreed with Jersey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts