Should the Allies Defend Spain?

[Augustus]

Just finished playing the campaign where the battle starts in Iberia as well. Played as Allies, no advantage.

Fog of War was on. Built UK Army units, plus HQ and air, shipped to Gib., while at same time fighting Germans in Iberia (used RN Carriers as well).

After about 8 months, was in position to move entire allied Iberian army into France, liberated Belgium, and moved into Germany.

So, if your strategy is to win early, yes, defend Spain, win, move into France, help Fr. attack Ger. forces, them move into the final kill. By summer '41, Soviets come in, and they walk all the way to Berlin.

Cheers...Augustus

[JerseyJohn]

Comrade, CvM

Without wishing to come down on our friend for putting in some levity not grounded in reality, I was about to post something but chose to wait till an inevitable posting such as your's [Comrade] was inserted first.

The French Army did not run. Part of it's tactical problem was it failure even to withdraw from hopeless positions. They were tough opponents in the Low Countries and much tougher opponents in France itself. They were always fighting under skies controled by their enemy and rarely had proper coordingation from their officers, who were routinely disrupted by either German air attacks or panzer thrusts cutting lines of supply and communication.

Both German and French losses in killed and wounded were high during the French Campaign. German losses had also been much higher in Poland than would appear to have been the case as presented on campaign maps.

I don't think French Bashing was intended. Most military fiascos and decisive defeats usually have a plausable reason and it's rarely with the fighting men themselves.

Soldiers of all countries are consistently brave when properly trained led and equipped. Those scenes of thousands of Italians surrendering to a handful of Brits in Egypt were not due to cowardess or any other nonsense, nor did the Brits ever claim they were. The thousands of Italian prisoners all had one thing in common -- empty canteens. Nobody lives very long in the desert without water. A similar situation goes for the Iraqis in this latest war. A man can fight other men but it's more difficult to battle lethal explosions sent by an enemy you can't strike back at. Their personal bravery was never in question, only whether or not they'd stand and die; many thousands of them chose to.

[ June 05, 2003, 01:31 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[JerseyJohn]

Augustus

Yes, if it's feasable for the Allies to defend Spain I believe they should do so and, as you say it makes a good, though rocky, gateway into Southern France. As Wellington proved at the conclusion of his Penninsula Campaign.

But in most cases, when the Axis player builds up first, then invades Spain, it's usually very hard and sometimes impossible for the Allies to get anything to Iberia before both Madrid and Lisbon have been taken by the Axis. Like the Greek and Finns, most of the starting Spanish forces begin with low supplies and low mobility.

[Augustus]

Jersey John

Spain is a pretty good foothold into mainland Europe...in this campaign, and by using this strategy, one brings the war to its' conclusion by end of '41.

I used to invade Sicily and knock Italy out by about mid-'43, then take till mid-'44 to end the war.

However, in my opinion, the AI still needs alot of work, especially when it is Axis AI. The Axis AI should almost 'guarantee' France's fall by June '40...but it does not.

Cheers

Augustus

[JerseyJohn]

Augustus

If you're only taling in terms of games against the AI then I'd agree.

Not sure what scenario we're talking about, the only one I know of is CvM 's Gathering Storm which incorporates the Spanish Civil War as part of the opening battle. It's based on the idea that the Sudatenland developed into a war instead of Munich with Poland on the Allies and Spain divided. It's a fine scenario, but the only one I know of with an activated Spain.

All the other campaigns I know of use Spain as a neutral. In several other by myself and others Portugal starts off on the Allies, but Spain is still left neutral.

When Spain is neutral and both sides are played by humans it is rarely possible to do the things you describe. Sicily is usually filled with units on the first appearance of armies waiting to land.

Spain, if invaded by a Human Axis player, is taken out with sledge hammer blows, the Spanish Army wiped out in a few turns and all the Allies have to work with is whatever they've managed to bring in through the south. As those units need to be transported from great distances they almost never arrive early enought either help the Spanish or hold the area around Gibraltar. That's really what the earlier discussion was about.

Do you play much against human players? If not, a few PBEM or IP games will show the game in an entirely different, and much more challenging perspective. The AI, at best, is only a sparring partner. Which is not to say it still isn't fun to play against, because it is.

Looking forward to the inevitable day when AIs become truly formidable adversaries.

[ June 03, 2003, 09:47 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[jon_j_rambo]

Should they Allies Defend Spain? No.

Why? Allies can't defend Spain. Axis will take it over in 2-3 turns. Allies have no supplies.

[JerseyJohn]

Agreed with Rambo, the Allies only get the chance to defend if the Axis launches a half-assed invasion. Most Human players have little trouble taking Madrid.

By the time Allied reinforcements arrive the Axis is usually closing in on Gibraltar.

[Augustus]

Jersey John

Yes, it is Gathering Storm campaign. Yes, it is against AI, not human opponent.

Cheers...

Augustus

[SeaWolf_48]

There is a way to stop the Italian scenario. Before war is declared on a nation, ships cannot be within one hex of the beligerant nation at sea. This would stop armies camping on the nations doorstep. Ships or troop transports wouldnot be allowed 50 miles from any neutral nation, thus when war begins troops couldnot land on the warring nation until the next turn.

This would have to be written into the game mechanics by the SC Game Gods however!

[ June 05, 2003, 12:44 AM: Message edited by: SeaWolf_48 ]

[JerseyJohn]

SeaWolf

That would be a great solution although it require some fancy footwork in the central Mediterranean. I’d hope Hubert, while he’s doing that, would also add a couple of corps at Bari and Trieste to make Italy more secure. An air fleet near Rome but not adjacent to the coastline would also help.

And speaking of help, thanks for extending it when our eccentric friend showed up, as always, you’re a valued and true friend.

Augustus,

If you get the chance, you might enjoy playing that scenario and those same tactics against a human player. Not meant in any way as a put down, only to stress that it's two totally different games!

[ June 05, 2003, 01:05 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Comrade Trapp]

I have only attempted to defend Spain once, and once was enough. I forget who I was playing against but he invaded Spain the same time the United States entered the war, so thinking I could create a foothold in continental Europe, I rushed 4 American armies, an American HQ, and 2 fighter units (1 American and 1 British) to the area. By time I got all my units in position, Spain had fallen and the Italian Navy was pounding my fleet stationed at Gibraltar (I had 4 BBs, 1 CA, and 2 CVs stationed there to counter the Italian Navy). Finally realizing that this was a big mistake, I began a unorganized evacuation of my troops in Spain while the Royal Navy fought off the Italian.

This is where things went to ****, as I was struggling to get 1 army out at a time my ground forces were being chewed up piecemeal by the German Army. To make matters worse, I had sent 2 American BBs to reinforce the British Royal Navy around Gibraltar, they were both heavly damaged by German Fighters and one was finished off by a sub.

I ended up only getting 2 Armies and a HQ out of Spain (the fighter groups were operated to England so there was no aircover) and out of the 4 British BBs, 2 American BBs, 1 CA, and 2 CVs..... Only 1 American BB, 1 British BB, and the 2 CVs made it out, every single ship was below 5 strengh. I had partially destroyed the Italian Navy but was forced to disengage because of the German airfleets that found my ships to be good target practice. It was the "Battle of Layete Gulf" in Europe.

Comrade Trapp

[JerseyJohn]

Comrade,

Yes, had a very much similar experience. If you need to evacuate it seems as though the troops have to be funnelled out because Gibraltar isn't well suited for the purpose.

The thanks I expressed earlier to SeaWolf and in exactly the same words apply to you, I'd copy them but I'm afraid I'd be accused of acting Who-or-ish.

[Edwin P.]

SeaWolf

Great Idea, something does need to be added to the program.

I would allow transports to be offshore, but I would have it increase Italian readiness by some amount. Thus the Axis could operate in corps to stop an invasion if Italian war readiness triggered Italian DOW.

Perhaps - 2 transports offshore +50% readiness, 3 transports offshore +100 Italian War readiness and of course if any allied transports or naval ships enter the Adriatic +100% readiness.

As for adding an extra corps, I would much prefer to see the number of troops remain the same, but that the location should vary. So if a transport is close to Bari then on the first turn there is a 60% that the Venice corps will appear in Bari, ie Italians see transports offshore and rush troops to threatended area.

If the transport is there for more than one turn the chance for moving a corps to Bari increases to 100%.

Another idea might be to give the Italians a Str 1 or Str 2 corps in the threatened area (say 25% of the time). This would represent troops rushed to the area at the last minute. The italians could reinforce it to full strength, if it survives and it would not be as unbalancing as giving them a free corps or two.

I would also like to see the Italian naval forces outside of Bari have a random chance to appear in the Adriatic sea.

[ June 05, 2003, 10:30 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Hueristic]

Originally posted by Comrade Trapp:

I hate when people post that French-bashing crap.

Yeah it does get sickening. It's easy to say u'd die rather than give in to naxi's but most people i've run into are full of bull**** and piss thier pants when called on it.

Americans tend to overlook the fact that we would have been defeated twice as fast if we had been in the same position France was.

But this i believe is a load of crap. See americans would not have allowed the low countries to not defend themselves. We take our defense alot more seriously than some petty political crap. If france had been the good ol USofA then The Low Gambit could very well have been a reality.

Besides, where were we while France was being overrun and Britian was holding on by its fingernails.......

Isolationists i believe were the flavor of the day at that time. just the type to not allow themselves to be put in Frances position.

AND BTW This Thread was Great Reading it's kep me up 45 minutes longer than i planned. LOL

[ June 06, 2003, 01:56 AM: Message edited by: Hueristic ]

[Comrade Trapp]

Posted by Hueristic: But this i believe is a load of crap. See americans would not have allowed the low countries to not defend themselves. We take our defense alot more seriously than some petty political crap.

United States:

US Army: 165,506 men

National Guard: 199,491 men

US Army Air Corps: 22,387 men

Combat Ready Divisons if fully mobilized in early 1940:

US Army:

9 Infantry divisions

2 Cavalry divisions

1 Armored brigade

National Guard:

18 Infantry divisions

(Modern equipment was for the most part nonexistent and training in the National Guard units varied from fair to poor).

Source of US Army Information

France:

French Army: 900,000 men (another 5 million men who had been trained and could be called-up in time of war).

French Airforce: 127,630 men

Combat Ready Units when fully mobilized in early 1940:

French Army:

100 Infantry divisions

3 Armored Divisons by Spring 1940

Source for French Army Information

Before the outbreak of WWII, the French Army was considered the best in the world, and in alot of ways it was. They had better armored units than any other country (including Germany) and their soldiers were well-trained by standerds at the time. Unfortionitly, they failed to use all of this to their advantage when they attemped to use WWI tatics against a "Blitzkreg" style war. The United States Army would have used its mobility to its fullest, but unfourntily did not have the men and equipment to fight a full-scale war at the time.

We take our defense alot more seriously than some petty political crap.

The statistics alone prove that statement wrong. We may take our defense alot more seriously now, but before Dec. 7th that wasn't the case. You could argue that Germany did not pose a imminent to the US since the US did not have any territoty within Germany's reach, therefore there was no need for a peacetime army. But Japan DID pose a imminent threat, the US did have territiory within Japan's reach. The Philippines for one was a American colony at the time, one that had 130,000 men stationed on it, and it was overrun by Feb 1942. I don't think anyone can argue with the fact that the US military was unprepared for a full-scale in 1940 or even in Dec 1941.

Isolationists i believe were the flavor of the day at that time.

contradicts

If france had been the good ol USofA then The Low Gambit could very well have been a reality.

Comrade Trapp

[xwormwood]

German Forces "Fall Gelb" / France 1940:

118 Infantry divisions

10 Panzer (Armored) divisions

1 Cavalry division

4 motorized Infantry divisions

2 motorized SS-divisions

1 Airborne division

(2574 tanks, 3834 planes)

Allied Forces

119 Infantry divisions

11 Armored divisions

7 motorized Infantry divisions

(3373 tanks, 2372 planes)

[Shaka of Carthage]

Hueristic

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Comrade Trapp:

I hate when people post that French-bashing crap.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah it does get sickening. It's easy to say u'd die rather than give in to naxi's but most people i've run into are full of bull**** and piss thier pants when called on it.

This is so true.

See americans would not have allowed the low countries to not defend themselves. We take our defense alot more seriously than some petty political crap. If france had been the good ol USofA then The Low Gambit could very well have been a reality.

Put the flag down. America as a nation has never been serious about its defense. It has no threats, and the biggest moats in the world... Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

We take our defense alot more seriously than some petty political crap.

Wasn't true back then, and it has gotten much worse now. We needed three (3) years in WWII to get ready, one (1) year in Korea and never did in Vietnam. Not such a sterling performance.

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by Heuristic:

Yeah it does get sickening. It's easy to say u'd die rather than give in to naxi's but most people i've run into are full of bull**** and piss thier pants when called on it.

Long time no see... good to have you back. :cool:

In regard to the above, my experience has been very much different.

MOST people (... and here I am assuming you mean the males, and that "most" would mean more than half of those) WILL defend... THEMSELVES, whereas they very well might get lost in a "group failure" of purpose, or nerve.

As has been said, the Human is capable... of damn near ANYTHING... especially when Annihilation stares them stupid in the face.

What was it JFK said?

Victory has a thousand fathers, and Defeat is an orphan.

Take for example, Iraq. Many, many folks are claiming virtual victory (... and, many, many of those... NEVER volunteed when their generation needed them... ready & willing, by their side)... AS A GROUP.

Individually, there are only some hundred thousand or so who actually had to put themselves on the line, yes?

And so it was in France in 1940.

That was a Political and an Institutional defeat. As individuals, the French soldiers were tough enough I'm quite sure, though probably not trained quite so rigorously, or bolstered by the same kind of Martial Tradition, as the Germans.

I have wandered many strange alley-ways, and IMHO... EVEN the lowliest, most abject-seeming person WILL arise and fight when the situation is desperate.

Not to say that their aren't cowards and craven people... that's true, but surely... the percentage is far, far smaller than... MOST PEOPLE, yes?

[xwormwood]

Immer Etwas

I agree 100%!

As far as i know every nations soldier in WW2 fought very brave.

Most soldiers stoped to fight when they learned that their leaders have betrayed, forgotten or simply didn't cared for them (France 1940, Italy 1940, Western Germany 1945).