Italian Campaign at WW2N ready

[SeaWolf_48]

In my attempt to make a senario I have developed a campaign when Italy attacks France. This senario is for AI play only. It starts off kicking your butt from the beginning because England has more ships and bombers (which they had, Germany has bombers also- they had the most modern bombers in the world). This starts the Battle of the Atlantic, and the Battle of Britain after the fall of France (which will happen). This eliminates the Belguim debuncle and gives the allies Iraq. Because bombers and subs are hard to buy each side starts off with both and their research points. The USSR starts off with 2500 pts. this give them more troops at the beginning (which thay had). The US stars with 1500 pts. and they can buy bombers and tanks at the beginning.

SC is a great game but slow if you are a Allies player at the beginning. Not with this senario, Britain is fighting in africa, north atlantic, and over england right away. Make sure you play with FOG on!

I know some will like it and some will hate it, but I have fun with it.

You can find it at: www.ww2n.com/schq

P.S. there is also new units with SS troops, in the Third Reich stile. Also ignor the Poland thing at the beginning, I couldn't edit it out.

[ January 20, 2003, 09:49 PM: Message edited by: SeaWolf_48 ]

[Hueristic]

Downloading it now. THX

[Kuniworth]

Seawolf I hear your talk about Germany havin most bombers in 1940 all the time. How do you count then, with divebombers? Do you include old soviet airplanes??

[Wachtmeister]

Germany's bombers were resonably modern, but they were not strategic bombers, either historically or in game terms. For example, the German bomber fleet consisted mostly of the following:

Do 17 aka "the flying pencil" - converted Lufthansa fast airliner/mail hauler. Decent speed, light bomb load, very poor defensive armament.

He 111 - At best a medium bomber, somewhat slow -medium bomb load, poor defensive armament.

Ju 88 - By far the best machine. Very good speed, decent bomb load, better, but not great, defensive armament. Could also operate in dive bomber mode. Unfortunately, for the Germans very few were produced until around 1941.

The only German 4-engine "bomber" was the Condor, also a converted airliner design. With its weak structural design and light bomb load, the Condor's sole virtue was its long range, which was put to good use scouting for, and attacking convoys, in the North Atlantic. However, the attrition from both enemy fire and structural failure was high.

None of the German bombers were a match for the cababilities of the UK Lancaster, or USA B-17 and B-24. USA medium tactical bombers like the B-25 and B-26 were more capable than any German bomber, except maybe the JU 88.

Germany's bomber fleet was well suited for tactical interdiction and infrastructure bashing relatively close to the front lines, as long as the Germans had complete air superiority.

As the Battle of Britian illustrated, the German bomber fleet was not suited to a "true" strategic bombing role. Once Goering decided to switch to Bombing UK cities instead of airfields, Chain Home radar sites, and other military targets, the Battle of Britian was lost and Sea Lion no longer possible.

In game terms, I think is is proper for the Axis to start without strategic bombers in the standard game. If Germany decides on "real" strategic bombers in SC, which they did not do in WWII, they can research and build strategic bombers, or have them "modded in" with the Campaign Editor.

[SeaWolf_48]

True germany's bomber were only twin engined and limited to bomb load, never competting with the allied ones; nevertheless the Luftwaffe bombed england from sept '40 thru may '41 in a strategic way until Barbarrosa started. 1000's of planes shot down and 1000's of lives lost (in our game MPP'S). This kept England tied down on there Island fighting the Hun from the sun! I think the game misses this point! Just my opinion

[Hueristic]

Whats with these 2 bitmap files? I know u don't expect me to change my sprites with these!

[Liam]

First of all the JU-87 is a divebomber, meant for use in the field. Not strategic uses... All the American and British bombers were heavier but even the Lancaster had to fly at night or die in too vast #s to replace! The HE-111 wasn't slow until later... At the time it came it great #s it was the Blitz Bomber and killed the Germans did much damage to British Cities. It's just that by 1941 and then on... That the German's didn't advance the their bomber technology any really. They saw no need for it, long range, heavy bombers... or medium...for that fact...

[Hueristic]

Wow Man that first turn hurts lmao

watching all those units get pulverized i'm in a desperate defensive mindset already and i haven't touched a thing I LOVE THE BEGINNING!

Hope it stays this good. But in the futur don't include files in the scenerio that are not needed i don't want those extra files you use them don't pawn them off on me. I like my little picture cons.

[Wachtmeister]

I don't mean to suggest that the German bomber fleet was incapable of doing considerable damage to the UK.

However, in strategic and SC terms, I believe the actual German bomber fleet is better represented as part of the standard air fleets. The problem seems to be that level 0 air fleets with level 0 long range air are limited to the historical range of the Luftwaffe 1940 era fighters, while the actual German bombers had longer range. However, unescorted daylight German bomber raids over the UK were regularly decimated, hence the switch to night bombing around Sept '40.

It would be interesting to speculate how much additional resources the Germans could have had available for Barbarossa if they had not experienced the heavy air losses, resulting from bombing the UK until May '41. Germany could have limited its raids on the UK to "night intruder" missions against airfields, to good effect with very low losses. The UK after Dunkirk, until at least 1942 or 1943 was in no shape to intervene on the European mainland to any great strategic effect.

[Hueristic]

GERMAN subs in the MED???? How the hell did they get there? I still hold gil/suez!

[Wachtmeister]

I'm pretty sure a few U-Boats atually did operate in the Med during WWII. Apparently they were able to transit the straits of Gibralter submerged.

[Kuniworth]

Yes they did.

[Compassion]

Originally posted by Hueristic:

GERMAN subs in the MED???? How the hell did they get there? I still hold gil/suez!

Ever see Das Boot? Scary and high attrition rates, but doable.

[JerseyJohn]

In 1941 the British BB Barnham was sunk off the Libyan coast by a German U-boat (that's the one with the footage shot from an aircraft where it rolls slowly, sailors running along the upturned hull, and suddenly explodes sky high).

About the same time Italian frogmen sank Barnam's two sister ships in Alexandria harbor. They settled to the bottom, their decks awash by inches but the superstructures clearly above water. The British Admiral Cunningham had sailors raising and lowering their flags every day and looking busy so, from the Italian embassy they looked afloat, which is the report that went back to Rome (the frogmen invoved had been captured).

Italian subs were particularly good at skirting Gibraltar but were of little use as commerce raiders. One claimed to have sunk the ancient American BB Texas . It's captain and crew were decorated. In 1960 the Italian Government was informed the Texas was a floating museum and had never been fired at in WW II. The crew of the Italian sub were allowed to keep their medals and the official position was the U. S. had built a replica of the ship and kept the sinking a secret for propaganda reasons.

The strange thing about the Italian submarine arm is, while it's conventional models were too large and slow to be effective except for carrying supplies, their midget subs and frogmen were the best on earth. After Alexandria the British tried with limited success to duplicate their methods. Italian midget subs also operated in Gibraltar harbor using a supposedly scuttled merchantman for their base, entering and leaving through a below the waterline opening in the ship's hull. Late in the war, after Mussolini's ouster, Italian frogmen served on both sides, many of them going to the Royal Navy.

[ January 16, 2003, 02:29 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[SeaWolf_48]

Right on JJ

The Kriegsmarine sent U-Boats into the Med regularly (the Med flow in two directions at different depts thru the straights of Gibraltar, the subs would simply float thru at i/3 speed), and at two different times had 20 boats patroling in the western med. The game does not allow subs to enter the Med until Gibraltar has fallen to the Axis, so I stuck one understrenght sub unit in the med. in my Italian Campaign Senario. I also have SS troops in a new unit_sprite.bmp made to look like Third Reich Units. Try it, you'll like it!

[pzgndr]

In game terms, I think is is proper for the Axis to start without strategic bombers in the standard game. If Germany decides on "real" strategic bombers in SC, which they did not do in WWII, they can research and build strategic bombers, or have them "modded in" with the Campaign Editor.

I agree. I have not added German bombers to the Campaign mods for either 1939 or 1940.

The idea of prepositioning a low-strength U-boat in the Med is interesting. And the Brits also had some subs available down there. Adding a 2-factor sub in the Adriatic and at Malta, which players could build up and use later, is worth considering. Credit due to SeaWolf.

[SeaWolf_48]

I agree with you Bill if you consider that Strategic bombing is only what the allies did during 1943-1945. However the first strategic bombing to another country to destroy its planes, radar, and airfields during WW2 has to be the Battle of Britain. From Eagleday Sept 15, 1940 thru spring of 1941, the Luftwaffe spent it's entire energy and manpower trying to destroy the RAF, and Britains will to fight. You have read Churchill's books on that period, and they were very frighten of what the Luftwaffe was doing to their defences. This period of time should be represented in our game by some sort of expenditures of MPP's.

Humbly

SeaWolf :cool:

[CalifVol]

One claimed to have sunk the ancient American BB Texas . It's captain and crew were decorated. In 1960 the Italian Government was informed the Texas was a floating museum and had never been fired at in WW II. The crew of the Italian sub were allowed to keep their medals and the official position was the U. S. had built a replica of the ship and kept the sinking a secret for propaganda reasons.

That's a very interesting statement. Could you please direct me to where I could read the full account?

THANKS!

[Hueristic]

Originally posted by SeaWolf_48:

The game does not allow subs to enter the Med until Gibraltar has fallen to the Axis, so I stuck one understrenght sub unit in the med.

Ahh computer buys it up to 13 right away and BAM! lol thats the last thing i expected but i gotta say lots of fun with alot of surprises. I won't mention any to ruin it but it is great fun.

[SeaWolf_48]

Thanks Hueristic, I wanted to get more units into the game, so I split several 10's into two 5's. I also add many more HQ's, all understrength, which all the major countries had been training for years.

I am glad that you enjoy the battle, I do respect your opinion!

[JerseyJohn]

CalifVol

I'd love to give you a book and author. I read it in a book published in the sixties and borrowed from the Winter Park, Fl. Public Library about ten years ago. I now live in New Jersey. I'm interested in finding out whether they eventually rescinded those medals (probably not) and I'll post whatever I come up with, would appreciate your doing the same if you come across anything.

I started a quick search on keywords Battleship Texas and came up with nearly 1800 entries! It might be easier to search Italian subs in World War II. Interesting how in searching for one thing you learn things about something else. The Texas, for example turns out to have been much more active in WW II than I realized. Considering her age at the time it seemed likely she'd have been used mainly in home waters, but the navy sent her into action in both the Atlantic and Pacific.

left click for historical photo of Battleship Texas

The book may have been about the Italian Navy or submarine actions. I don't think it was about the Battle of the Atlantic. I remember it discussed the problem submarines had in the Mediteranean, of being easily spotted by airdraft due the water beigng clear and much more placid than the Atlantic.

Another topic was the politics between Germany and Italy in conducting the submarine war. Germany would have preferred for the Italian subs to remain in the Mediteranean but feared Italy would make it difficult for their own subs to provision in Italian ports if they did so. Consequently Italian subs in the Atlantic operated in quiet areas near the Carribean, independant of German operations. Their tonnage sinking was negligable though as underwater cargo transports they were much more successful.

[ January 17, 2003, 12:17 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Wachtmeister]

JJ:

Isn't the British BB sunk by the U-boat in the Med BARHAM rather than BARNHAM.

If any of you all visit Houston, TX, home of the BB Texas, its worth the trip to go through it. As someone mentioned, the Texas is quite old even by WWII standards - comissioned around 1910. It has been very well restored. Ships were built to last in those days. In fact when the Texas was moved to its present location, near the San Jacinto monument a couple of years ago, it was able to raise steam and make the move down the Ship Channel under its own power.

[JerseyJohn]

Wachtmeister

I believe you're right, that battleship was the Barham and it was also the name of the class. It just seems to flow better on the keyboard with the n in there!

Those old Battleships were incredibly well protected and well built. They were the preferred shore bombardment vessel of the U. S. Navy, presumably to leave the newer models free in case an enemy counterattack occurred.

All the major navies modernized at least a few in the thirties and a lot of them saw extensive action in WW II. The British, for example, with the ill-fated Barham and her BB class, Queen Elizabeth, Warspite and Malaya. Rodney and Nelson (sister ships), Hood, Repulse and Renown (also sister ships, though later upgraded differently) were all of WW I or immediate postwar vintage as well.

In more than a few cases the old battlewagons were sunk in harbors and raised, repaired, and returned to active service. Most notable being some of the American BBs sunk at Pearl Harbor and the two British BBs sunk in Alexandria by Italian frogmen.

In contrast were the British Frigates of the Falkland War, their hulls made of light metals, principally aluminum they practically self-destructed when hit by missles. I'm sure I'm leaving myself open here but I'd like to know more about this and it's after-effects. The best way to learn about something is to put your misconceptions forward and have them corrected.

[ January 17, 2003, 06:13 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Hueristic]

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

The best way to learn about something is to put your misconceptions forward and have them corrected.

Hell yeah I do it all the time.

[CalifVol]

JerseyJohn:

Thank you for the response. I couldn't find anything on the web either.

If I find anything, I'll start a new thread about it.

Thanks again.