Why is Beyma wrong?

[composer99]

The US entry hit alone makes it not worth doing in 1939, in my opinion.

The USSR also cannot afford to get bogged down in Turkey or take heavy losses if a Barbarossa is on the menu.

Can it be done? Yes. But if we were to incorporate the option as something the AIO could do, I would assign it a low probability of occuring.

[jesperpehrson]

ORIGINAL: composer99
Can it be done? Yes. But if we were to incorporate the option as something the AIO could do, I would assign it a lot probability of occuring.

I would vote for it to not be in at all. The advantages are next to none and the risks are huge.

[brian brian]

ditto. if you want to try this at home you can command the Allies vs. an Axis AI though, would be fun.

[Gendarme]

What about a German-Italian invasion of Turkey if they have already closed the Med?

Pros -- Istanbul taken, opens Black Sea to Italian fleet which can aid Germany in attacks in Ukraine and other areas.
2 resources, one factory.
Land route to Middle East and Cacausus.
Only two hexes needed to take Turkey out, Istanbul and Ankara.
Turkey has no fleet, and if Med is closed, Allies can't help out unless they have secured Iraq already.

Cons -- Axis would be attacking a minor who could've potentially been aligned. Kind of like going through Spain when you could otherwise align them, after the difficult but not impossible task of invading Gibraltar.
Turkish army is large for a minor.
Lots of mountains to fight through.
Russians could reinforce easily, and block rail line into Cacausus (again, fighting in mountains). However, the more land units the Soviets commit, the weaker their western front will be...

I've suggested on the Wif list that if the Axis capture Istanbul, they may align Greece by ceding the European side of Turkey to Greece. Greece under Metaxas was almost a fascist state. As far as I know, there is nothing to suggest that Greece wouldn't have joined in the party, at least in a limited way, if the CW was entirely out of the Med and the Axis were dangling bits of coveted territory. And Greco-Turkish antipathy is well-known, in light of the 1921-22 war and subsequent exchange of populations, a sort of ethnic cleansing in its day. This would be a similar rule to invading Gibraltar and then ceding it to Spain for alignment. This idea didn't elicit too many comments.

Anthony DeChristopher

[SLAAKMAN]

A DOW on Turkey by the USSR in '39 would be a dream come true for the Axis. The risks for the Allies are enormous and rewards somewhat marginal. However I do like the daring "what if" possibilities that could come out it. (Im praying my opponents in our Global Campaign are reading this now as Im playing Germany and Italy). [:D] 

I've suggested on the Wif list that if the Axis capture Istanbul, they may align Greece by ceding the European side of Turkey to Greece. Greece under Metaxas was almost a fascist state. As far as I know, there is nothing to suggest that Greece wouldn't have joined in the party, at least in a limited way, if the CW was entirely out of the Med and the Axis were dangling bits of coveted territory. And Greco-Turkish antipathy is well-known, in light of the 1921-22 war and subsequent exchange of populations, a sort of ethnic cleansing in its day. This would be a similar rule to invading Gibraltar and then ceding it to Spain for alignment. This idea didn't elicit too many comments.

Anthony DeChristopher

That is an excellent option idea. I'd vote for it. [:D]

[Jimm]

I've suggested on the Wif list that if the Axis capture Istanbul, they may align Greece by ceding the European side of Turkey to Greece. Greece under Metaxas was almost a fascist state. As far as I know, there is nothing to suggest that Greece wouldn't have joined in the party, at least in a limited way, if the CW was entirely out of the Med and the Axis were dangling bits of coveted territory. And Greco-Turkish antipathy is well-known, in light of the 1921-22 war and subsequent exchange of populations, a sort of ethnic cleansing in its day. This would be a similar rule to invading Gibraltar and then ceding it to Spain for alignment. This idea didn't elicit too many comments.

Anthony DeChristopher

That is an excellent option idea. I'd vote for it. [:D]

Agree that its a nice one. PoliF has some options about ceding territory to minors & I adapted this into an additional DOD option for our game; I dont think this one was on it but it should be. However...I think the place for this is Days of Decision , its a bit counterfactual for what the limited alignment rules are in standard WiFFE.

[Jimm]

ORIGINAL: Gendarme

What about a German-Italian invasion of Turkey if they have already closed the Med?

Pros -- Istanbul taken, opens Black Sea to Italian fleet which can aid Germany in attacks in Ukraine and other areas.
2 resources, one factory.
Land route to Middle East and Cacausus.
Only two hexes needed to take Turkey out, Istanbul and Ankara.
Turkey has no fleet, and if Med is closed, Allies can't help out unless they have secured Iraq already.

Cons -- Axis would be attacking a minor who could've potentially been aligned. Kind of like going through Spain when you could otherwise align them, after the difficult but not impossible task of invading Gibraltar.
Turkish army is large for a minor.
Lots of mountains to fight through.
Russians could reinforce easily, and block rail line into Cacausus (again, fighting in mountains). However, the more land units the Soviets commit, the weaker their western front will be...

This should be a definite option for the Axis, probably one to be taken up on the Germany or Italian AI thread. The relative apparent ease of grabbing Istanbul via sea and or through Bulgaria (setting aside completely conquering Turkey) and the possible benefits of totally unhinging any Russian defence in Ukraine seem to me to speak for themselves.

[composer99]

But how many German offensives into USSR stall at the Ukraine so badly that they need to be reinvigorated by invasions from the Black Sea or a threat to the Caucasus from a conquered Turkey?

[Jimm]

ORIGINAL: composer99

But how many German offensives into USSR stall at the Ukraine so badly that they need to be reinvigorated by invasions from the Black Sea or a threat to the Caucasus from a conquered Turkey?

An offensive doesnt have to stall for the strategy to still be useful. For instance a strong Russian defence on the Dneiper especially vs a 42 Barbarossa could be time consuming for the German to overcome. Barbarossa isnt always carried out in ideal circumstances by the Germans, and the builds for a close the Med strategy for instance might work well to complement an attack through the "soft underbelly"

[Zorachus99]

ORIGINAL: Jimm

ORIGINAL: composer99

But how many German offensives into USSR stall at the Ukraine so badly that they need to be reinvigorated by invasions from the Black Sea or a threat to the Caucasus from a conquered Turkey?

An offensive doesnt have to stall for the strategy to still be useful. For instance a strong Russian defence on the Dneiper especially vs a 42 Barbarossa could be time consuming for the German to overcome. Barbarossa isnt always carried out in ideal circumstances by the Germans, and the builds for a close the Med strategy for instance might work well to complement an attack through the "soft underbelly"

The soft underbelly is tasty in '41 too

[composer99]

On the whole, I think as the Axis I would rather have the option of aligning Turkey. At least that way, when I open up all those hexes for the Allies to invade in 42-43 I can use Turkish units instead of bringing in someone else's (reducing my available corps elsewhere in Europe/USSR) to plug it up.
 
But that is just preference. There are indeed some pros for invading Turkey - mainly allowing Italain naval access to the Black Sea and overland access to the Middle East (especially Iraq & Persia) without using a gazillion HQs to trace through the desert, so it's definitely worth considering. Probably more worth the Axis considering doing it than the USSR.
 
On the other hand, think of the Western Allies: If they can muster up the sealift & the units, a Turkish campaign can be a great idea. But they should think of coordinating it with the USSR (if the Russians can spare the units) to present the double/triple threat (invasions by sea; overland from Caucasus; overland from Syria).
 
It would probably be part of a wider campaign in the Balkans to stretch the Germans, by making them divert forces from elsewhere to prevent the beachheads from expanding into a full-fledged invasion, making things easier for the Allies in Italy, the USSR, and France.

[brian brian]

or just another cheesy way to get a red objective hex on the periphery of the real Axis powers and get an approach route to the rest of the red hexes in Central Europe before the Reds get there in all their Ford trucks.

I'd rather have the Turks aligned as Germany than conquered by a long way. There is a way to beat a strong southern Dnepr defense ... threaten it enough with tanks to hold it in place while the heavy effort (good INF, ART, Stukas, HQs) goes for Smolensk and then the beautiful river line is outflanked.

[Gendarme]

Invading Turkey as the Axis is not a stunt I would try unless the Med has been closed, that's for sure. The point about Allied invasions and guarding hexes with other units than your own is a valid one, and that is the reason that as the Axis I would rather align Spain than invade. Then there are Spanish units doing garrison duty, helping out in the effort.

If the Med is closed, than the Western Allies can only interfere in Turkey by marching overland from the Persia-Iraq, if those places have been secured already. And that route only has a limited lifespan once the IJN is in the war. Otherwise, they can land in Murmansk with HQ's and units, rail down to Turkey, but that supply line is also tenuous for the Western Allies, so I think with a closed Med and only Russia helping out, Turkey would be toasted. (Or roasted?)

Another thing to consider -- if the Axis spends 1940 and 1941 beating up on the CW, attacking convoys, closing the Med, than a Mar/Apr 42 invasion of Turkey (in the nice Med weather) may be a good way to open up a war with the USSR. German units in Turkey allow USSR to break the pact, which is something the USSR might not otherwise be able to do if the Germans have been amassing a land army in the pact area all game. To avoid being surprised, the USSR could DOW Germany, but that would mean lost USE, so both sides get something out of that.

OK, I'm spinning around in circles here.

Anthony DeChristopher

[Jimm]

I believe enough said so far to suggest it is a possible option especially for the Axis side, if not one that would be a first choice?

I'd like to think there was always the possibility that the AI "might" do something outre even if its only on a 1-2% chance rather than always being utterly traditional.

[composer99]

Agreed. We have imagined circumstances where the Axis might contemplate an attack on Turkey:

• the one-two-three punch of overland access, paradrop/invasions and shore bombardment/ground support means it can be done with relative ease if the RN and British Army has been booted from the Med
• if you can do it in enough time to get troops set up at the eastern frontier before starting a 42 Barb then it's a beautiful starting line for going after Baku and even Astrakhan and beyond (strategic encirclement of the Ukraine/factory line, perhaps?)

So it seems reasonable as part of a Close-the-Med package.
 
On the whole, I think the Allies (with or without the USSR) should have a 5-8% chance of gunning for Turkey if it meets their strategic requirements; the Axis should have a 3-6% chance if it meets theirs, and the USSR should have a 1-3% chance of attacking Turkey on its own if it's not going for a border stuff and can spare the PARA/invasion forces.