What is the downside of the "Spain Gambit?"

Fury Games has now signed with Matrix Games, and we are working together on the next Strategic Command. Will use the Slitherine PBEM++ server for asynchronous multi-player.

Moderators: MOD_Strategic_Command_3, Fury Software

Post Reply
canuckgamer
Posts: 1153
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 3:20 am

What is the downside of the "Spain Gambit?"

Post by canuckgamer »

My friend and I are playing our second 1939 campaign game and I am the Allies again. In the first game he won by not declaring Vichy France and using diplomacy to bring Yugoslavia to the Axis side. Both these developments were key to the Axis victory. They provided significant combat units and Gibraltar fell. In fact most of his southern front consisted of Spanish and Yugoslavian units.
In our current game, he is using the same strategy. It is now May 1941 and he is approaching Algiers. Yugoslavia is at 66% for the Axis. The DE for a pro allied coup for Yugoslavia in March 41 did not occur since France had not surrendered. I am hoping and assume that as soon as France does surrender it will happen. Can anyone confirm this?
It looks to me like there is a lot more upside to pursuing this strategy even though it is not what happened historically. I am thinking that in the upcoming update there should be some adjustments so there is more downside when using the Spain Gambit.
User avatar
Hairog
Posts: 1587
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Cornucopia, WI

RE: What is the downside of the "Spain Gambit?"

Post by Hairog »

It is almost universally agreed that Hitler lost the war when he invaded the Soviet Union in 1941. The second most egregious error IMHO was not taking care of Gibraltor and the Suez Canal, thus allowing the Allies to dominate the Med. Third was not focusing when he did invade the USSR, and many agree that he should have been focused on Baku and all the oil and mines in between. in 1941 the SE of the Soviet Empire was the only thing worth focusing on after all the manufacturing was moved to the Urals (which, by the way, was an incredible feat).

So I would say that your opponent is a good student of history and you're in for a hard-fought game.

The Spanish Gambit is a very historical possibility and should be in the mix or the game is not valid. It was one of Hitler's choices and probably his best one.

I have been working on mods for both SC3 Europe and WAW as well as WarPlan that starts just after France surrenders. I hate slogging through the Polish and French campaigns just to get to the point where most of the choices open to the Germans are available. Batte of Britain, Sea Lion, Vichy, Barbarossa, Gibraltor, North Africa, if and when to invade the USSR, go north or south if I do, etc. all start with decisions in 1940
WW III 1946 Books
SC3 EAW WW Three 1946 Mod and Naval Mods
WarPlan and WarPlan Pac Alpha and Be
Sugar
Posts: 940
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:42 am

RE: What is the downside of the "Spain Gambit?"

Post by Sugar »

it is not what happened historically.

Historically the Axis lost. End of story. Why at all play a game where different outcomes are possible?

Getting Spain via Diplo got nerfed, that's the reason why "All of France" became a possible if not inevitable strategy.
canuckgamer
Posts: 1153
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 3:20 am

RE: What is the downside of the "Spain Gambit?"

Post by canuckgamer »

Hairog, any possibility that your Naval Mod 3.3 will be included in the upcoming update? I did install your earlier versions and there were some bugs. I think the mod would add a lot to this game. Thanks.
Post Reply

Return to “Strategic Command WWII War in Europe”