xerxes Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 A historical accurate force makeup in the early desert war might feature an Italian force attempting to breakout of an encirclement: Italian: 2 battalions of green Italian infantry (0 bonus HQs): 2400 points 1 company of regular Italian infantry (reasonable HQs): 500 pts 5-6 guns of regular and vet quality: 300 pts 20 L3 tankettes: 1000 pts total: 4,200 points British: 8 Matildas: 1,000 points 1 company of vet infantry w/ transport: 700 points 1 25lb FO: 120 points Total: 1,820 points Now the bad thing is, the Matildas are almost indestructable. The Italians won't win this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romulus Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 I would consider those thousands and thousands of young volunteers that enlisted the Italian Social Republic and kept fighting together with the Germans. Many chose that side (the Axis) not because they were deeply fascist but because they considered the Armistice as a dishonour for Italy because it represented a betrayal. Most volunteers were employed in the fight against the partisans but many were involved on the frontline together with the Germans against the Allied. Peppe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaMaX Posted October 1, 2003 Author Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by xerxes: Now the bad thing is, the Matildas are almost indestructable. The Italians won't win this one. Well, in '41 KV heavy tanks were also indestructible, but Germans reached Moscow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Chapuis Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by Quintusarrius: I remember reading about one of the philosophers of the early Italian Fascist movement vehemently advocating the abandonment of pasta as part of the national diet and the adoption of rice, due to the obvious martial prowess of the Japanese and the apparent love of peaceful contentment endemic in the Italian psyche. hummm - I'm beginning to wonder if that guy escaped and made it to the 'waffle' thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by xerxes: A historical accurate force makeup in the early desert war might feature an Italian force attempting to breakout of an encirclement: Italian: 2 battalions of green Italian infantry (0 bonus HQs): 2400 points 1 company of regular Italian infantry (reasonable HQs): 500 pts 5-6 guns of regular and vet quality: 300 pts 20 L3 tankettes: 1000 pts total: 4,200 points British: 8 Matildas: 1,000 points 1 company of vet infantry w/ transport: 700 points 1 25lb FO: 120 points Total: 1,820 points Now the bad thing is, the Matildas are almost indestructable. The Italians won't win this one. But their main guns don't fire HE, only AP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 While the Italian army didn't meet too many of its objectives, you have to remember that most of their problems (resulting in surrenders etc.) are something of operational consideration. In a CM tactical fight, one of the conditions is that both sides are capable of fighting and are under a united command. Germans surrendered en masse in 1945, but you don't see dozens of scenarios about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by Sergei: While the Italian army didn't meet too many of its objectives, you have to remember that most of their problems (resulting in surrenders etc.) are something of operational consideration. In a CM tactical fight, one of the conditions is that both sides are capable of fighting and are under a united command. Germans surrendered en masse in 1945, but you don't see dozens of scenarios about that. Yes, exactly what I've been saying. Well put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berlichtingen Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by Gamax: No, Berlichtingen, you are missing the point. It doesn’t matter WHY Italians surrendered. They did surrender, and that’s what matters. No, you are missing the point. In CM you are playing relatively even battles. In history, the Italians fought well in relatively even battles. So, there is NO justification for a surrender command. None, Nadda, Get it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Tiger Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Hi Mr. Dorosh.. I guess we're supposed to admire the Germans for being too weak-willed and/or stupid to surrender in February 1943 when they should have, ensuring the deaths of millions more people, the razing of thousands of acres of useable farmland, destruction of entire cities and rail networks, and etc. Hmmm.. you are thinking the poor civilians hade a choice to surrender? Im skeptical at this...with the figthing man busy on the front and the Gestapo in the back...plus the outstandingly Bombing of civilians who put them more together, from the ideology standpoint. The only group was the military who was able to stop AH and his comrades...but after 43 he put to many AH faithfools into the Wehrmacht...not to mention the growing up SS-Units. Some Generals tryed it...but this crap wont die...so the History ended how wie know it today...and no Civilian revolt hade stopped this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doodlebug Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Please ease up on Gamax. He is trying to raise a valid point even if a little bit too flippantly. As gamers we're all prepared to fight to the last squad if there's the slightest opportunity but, as everyone points out, there were mass surrenders of many nationalities not only the Italian Army. Is there any justification for looking at the inclusion into CMAK of a refined morale system that triggers a mass surrender of troops sooner than we've seen in CMBO or CMBB? Yes I know that global morale etc etc already produces this effect but normally it's only the last remnants of a command that give up when the huge majority has already been killed or wounded. Do the terrain difficulties of desert fighting require a re-appraisal of this aspect of the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romulus Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Some people speak without knowing how things actually went. Let's read what was maintained by people who were involved in the North African theatre. Gen. Alexander: "Two things must be noted in the Axis defeat [in North Africa]: first of all, in the end when the battle was turning into a defeat for the Axis, the Italians did fight better than the Germans. The German morale had completely fallen down at the end of the [African] campaign. German well-armed units with many ammunitions and provisions SURRENDERED in strong defensive positions where they could have resisted for many days..." "...as it has alredy been seen, the Italian soldiers, commanded by Gen. Messe, kept tight and fought fiercely" I would like to remind some people who don't know history that the first to surrender in Tunisia were the Germans not the Italians! Gen. Alexander (on the London Gazette): "Italian officers and soldiers had showed all the time for 40 months, even when there was no more victory chance, that when they could not win they were anyway able to die heroically" Times (5/15/43): "...the Italians deserved the respect of the British troops thanks to their combativity" In the (British) official bulletin of the campaign of Tunisia it is stated: “The enemy counter-attacked several times bearing heavy losses. It was noticed that the Italians fought particularly well outclassing the Germans that were on the frontline with them" "On 12 May 1943 several en masse SURRENDERS by the Germans took place..." "Gen. Von Armin, Commander of the Army group surrendered to the commander of the 2° Gurkas while the Italians resisted for a longer time" I am sorry for the bad English of the quotations but I had to translate the text from Italian. I must thank all the people in this forum that do not give credit to some ridiculous stereotypes. Thanks Peppe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Most writings by Allied correspondents or soldiers during the war itself can probably be dismissed as uninformed at best, or at worst as propaganda to make themselves look good to their superiors... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romulus Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Most writings by Allied correspondents or soldiers during the war itself can probably be dismissed as uninformed at best, or at worst as propaganda to make themselves look good to their superiors... Yeah, that could be true but why did they all point out the good performance of the Italians when it is compared to the one of the Germans in North Africa? I mean, they don't say Italians and Germans are both tenacious etc...They just point out that the Italians, in certain cases, outclassed the Germans. If they actually wanted to look good to their superiors they could have praised both Italians and Germans. It would be better, wouldn't it? Anyway, I just quoted that text just to show not that the Italians were the most courageous (this would be a ridiculous assertion) but that even the Germans surrendered en masse even before the Italians. Peppe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaMaX Posted October 1, 2003 Author Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by Berlichtingen: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Gamax: No, Berlichtingen, you are missing the point. It doesn’t matter WHY Italians surrendered. They did surrender, and that’s what matters. No, you are missing the point. In CM you are playing relatively even battles. In history, the Italians fought well in relatively even battles. So, there is NO justification for a surrender command. None, Nadda, Get it? </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xerxes Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 I think it would be good to be able to modify the global morale starting point (or rate of change) in scenarios. That would be useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by Romulus: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Most writings by Allied correspondents or soldiers during the war itself can probably be dismissed as uninformed at best, or at worst as propaganda to make themselves look good to their superiors... Yeah, that could be true but why did they all point out the good performance of the Italians when it is compared to the one of the Germans in North Africa? I mean, they don't say Italians and Germans are both tenacious etc...They just point out that the Italians, in certain cases, outclassed the Germans. If they actually wanted to look good to their superiors they could have praised both Italians and Germans. It would be better, wouldn't it? Anyway, I just quoted that text just to show not that the Italians were the most courageous (this would be a ridiculous assertion) but that even the Germans surrendered en masse even before the Italians. Peppe </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by K_Tiger: ...many AH faithfools...What a delectable way to put it! Sir, I congratulate you on your creative neologism! :cool: Michael [ October 01, 2003, 02:23 PM: Message edited by: Michael Emrys ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berlichtingen Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by Gamax: Secondly, if Soviets are penalized in CMBB by longer command delays, why should we spare Italians in CMAK? Their poor equipment has nothing to do with their poor leadership and lack of motivation.How do longer command delays bare any relationship to your belief that Italians should surrender more often? Command delays are based on equipment, doctrine, etc, while your surrender idea is based on situation. (btw, what makes you think the Italians don't have longer delays?). To single the Italians out for this is just plain insulting to them. Lowered global moral is adequate penalty for them. And I repeat, it is not simply because they are Italians. It is a simulation of their lack of motivation (and the other reasons mentioned in this thread).Absolutely no need for this. Make them weakened or exhausted conscripts and start them out panicked, and you get the result you are looking for (and also a scenario that's about as exciting as Jabo to play) And forget about that Surrender order. Why? That was what started this, and that is the indefensible position that is being defended [ October 01, 2003, 03:01 PM: Message edited by: Berlichtingen ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Determinant Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 If you feel strongly that national qualitative differences should be modelled then that can be done most easily through giving units a lower experience rating. Make all Italian infantry conscript if that's how you feel about them. See p 146 CMBB manual. But surrendering on the battlefield is far from straightforward. There's the old story about defenders fighting hard, surrendering at the last minute, and being shot down by the attackers with the cry of 'Too late, chum'. I have seen this happen a couple of times in CMBB with immobile HMGs. Always a chillingly realistic sight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Tiger Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Thank you for the flowers Michael...or was it sarkasm? Cant find a description in my dictionary for the word -delectable-...is this a own creation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbtler Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 Oh no please... Another one of these guys like Gamax, and I'm gonna throw up. ( just preparing a big cup near my computer for the future...) As have been said by other guys vastly more knowledgable than me, every soldiers of the known civilized world have surrendered in different wars and in different circumstances. And Gamax, if you are from one of these countries of semi-God-like humans that never surrendered , just tell us, it would be great to know that there REALLY are uber-mensch out there. thanks [ October 01, 2003, 04:59 PM: Message edited by: Newbtler ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaMaX Posted October 1, 2003 Author Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by Berlichtingen: How do longer command delays bare any relationship to your belief that Italians should surrender more often? Command delays are based on equipment, doctrine, etc, while your surrender idea is based on situation. (btw, what makes you think the Italians don't have longer delays?). To single the Italians out for this is just plain insulting to them. Absolutely no need for this. Make them weakened or exhausted conscripts and start them out panicked, and you get the result you are looking for (and also a scenario that's about as exciting as Jabo to play) No, you are not right. And, please, don’t be stubborn. You say that that command delays are based "on equipment, doctrine, etc". That could be true for artillery delays, but it's certainly not true for command delay of a single squad. Why should soldiers in Soviet squads need more time to react than German soldiers. Are they morons. Certainly not! The truth is that BFC tried to SIMULATE command structure of Soviet army in that time. That's why all Soviet units have increased delays, although that's not really fair, as I said before. Someone not familiar with CM could interpret that as insulting to Soviet soldiers who fought bravely to save their country. The same way you are misinterpreting my idea about lowered moral of Italians. There is simply nothing insulting about in my idea. If someone gave me a rifle and told me to fight for Nazis my moral wouldn't be high either. Now, with my idea to reduce global moral of Italians I tried to SIMULATE problems in their army: poor leadership, lack of motivation to fight, poor equipment, etc. And yes, these problems are only Italian problems. Other armies had different problems. But here we are talking about Italians. My solution might not be the best solution, but that's what this thread is for. Making them "weakened or exhausted conscripts and start them out panicked" is not what I am looking for, because you can do that with any army, and I want something that will distinguish them (just as with Soviets). And for the last time: "Surrender" order was only a joke (that only one person in this thread understood, as it seems). My idea was to do something about mass surrendering of Italians in WWII. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaMaX Posted October 1, 2003 Author Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by Newbtler: Another one of these guys like Gamax, and I'm gonna throw up. ( just preparing a big cup near my computer for the future...)Hey, was that an insult? And Gamax, if you are from one of these countries of semi-God-like humans that never surrendered , just tell us, it would be great to know that there REALLY are uber-mensch out there. But, you know what? I really am for one of those countries that never surrendered!!! :eek: But we are really not "uber-mensch". Guess which country is that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romulus Posted October 1, 2003 Share Posted October 1, 2003 I have just looked at your email address. You should be from the "former" Yugoslavia, now known as Serbia and Montenegro. There is no need to go to the WW2 in order to find a mass-surrender by your country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave H Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 Originally posted by David Chapuis: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Quintusarrius: I remember reading about one of the philosophers of the early Italian Fascist movement vehemently advocating the abandonment of pasta as part of the national diet and the adoption of rice, due to the obvious martial prowess of the Japanese and the apparent love of peaceful contentment endemic in the Italian psyche. hummm - I'm beginning to wonder if that guy escaped and made it to the 'waffle' thread </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts