AI for MWiF-Italy

[Centuur]

But it is risky for the Italian too. The Italian army isn't what I call a first class army at all. Even against the Greeks it sure won't be a walk over for them.

[michaelbaldur]

ORIGINAL: Red Prince

[:)] It's okay. Picking up halfway through isn't always easy.

I actually agree with you. It's risky for the CW. They don't start with a lot of land units to spare.

land units are not the main risk .. it is does transporters ..

if they can be sunk, the axis have a year of free playing time ..

and CW need at least 6 transports and 3 amph in the late war ...

[Red Prince]

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

ORIGINAL: Red Prince

[:)] It's okay. Picking up halfway through isn't always easy.

I actually agree with you. It's risky for the CW. They don't start with a lot of land units to spare.

land units are not the main risk .. it is does transporters ..

if they can be sunk, the axis have a year of free playing time ..

and CW need at least 6 transports and 3 amph in the late war ...

That's also true. I was thinking about the fact that the CW has very little away from the UK, and needs some of it to fortify Egypt, Gibraltar, Malta, etc. If they commit heavily to Greece in '39 (and worse, if they lose some of those TRS and land units), they strip away other areas, leaving them vulnerable . . . and could even cause the early collapse of France.

Italy's position, though fairly weak, is at least consolidated in the early game. They have to decide where to use their feeble army to attack, rather than where to defend.

[Centuur]

Yes, but when the Italian army is committed in Greece, they haven't got enough forces left to attack the CW or France. The Italians are still restricted to combined impulses when attacking Greece (since they are not at war with a major power), which makes it even more difficult for them to move land units to other theaters.
It might be good Italian play, though, since a capture of Greece in S/O 1939 means an early alignment of Yugoslavia on the Axis side and gives the Italians some needed breathing space and resources. However, if the Italians set up to capture Greece, wouldn't the CW TRS (together with the French one)  be set up in the Med, to react to such an attack and get those four CW corps in Greece asap?
It isn't impossible to get those four CW corps in Greece and move them out the next turn, after alignment of Yugoslavia on the CW side. That the Yugoslavs will be crushed by the Germans next, is a pity for them, but better than to have them running around the map as Axis troops. If the Italians then decide to DoW the CW to crush the TRS is something which might occur.
Difficult to see al the consequences of such an early Greek-Italian conflict...

[Red Prince]

ORIGINAL: Centuur

Yes, but when the Italian army is committed in Greece, they haven't got enough forces left to attack the CW or France. The Italians are still restricted to combined impulses when attacking Greece (since they are not at war with a major power), which makes it even more difficult for them to move land units to other theaters.
It might be good Italian play, though, since a capture of Greece in S/O 1939 means an early alignment of Yugoslavia on the Axis side and gives the Italians some needed breathing space and resources. However, if the Italians set up to capture Greece, wouldn't the CW TRS (together with the French one)  be set up in the Med, to react to such an attack and get those four CW corps in Greece asap?
It isn't impossible to get those four CW corps in Greece and move them out the next turn, after alignment of Yugoslavia on the CW side. That the Yugoslavs will be crushed by the Germans next, is a pity for them, but better than to have them running around the map as Axis troops. If the Italians then decide to DoW the CW to crush the TRS is something which might occur.
Difficult to see al the consequences of such an early Greek-Italian conflict...

Actually, it might be an even more brilliant ploy for Italy to set up for Greece and not go for it. If it is a semi-strong setup, but not over-powering, even better.

That way, if the CW and France set up to support Greece, Italy has gotten them to start with their TRS out of position for anything else. Italy can then do something else, maybe even DOW the CW simply to try to kill those TRS. Maybe a wasted DOW, maybe not. If they ignore his setup, then it's time to strike, maybe with an extra German LND flown down to Bulgaria to compensate for the not-over-powering Italian setup.

As you say, very difficult to see the consequences. Gonna have to try them out and see, I guess.

[Centuur]

As the Italian, this is probably a nice way to start the war. You're not committing to a sitzkrieg that way and you'll give the allies something to think about. However, it is not something which is easy done, since an overpowering Italian set up isn't exactly possible. It probably leaves to many area's undefended (French Alps should be defended and Rome, to prevent the French together with the CW corps to knock Italy out of the war early). Together with a corps in Sardinia (to prevent an early capture by the CW of the resource there) that leaves 3 corps and an HQ max in Albania. Together with an German LND and the Bulgarian army, it should do the job, if the CW is not reacting...

[Ur_Vile_WEdge]

Wait, I might be missing something again, or playing with an out of date version of the rules, but I thought the Axis could only align Yugoslavia if, Yugoslavia is neutral, and the Axis control[font="times"] Italy, Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria, Greece and Albania[/font]. Now, depending on how the Nazi-Soviet pact stuff is working out, you might get some sooner rather than later, but I thought it was impossible to collect the entire set before the war against the USSR.


So I don't see how an early capture of Greece leads to an early aligning of Yugoslavia [&:]

[Red Prince]

If you're willing to risk the USSR taking Rumania, here's how it can play out:

• Germany (& Italy) DOW Greece in S/O '39; Germany can instantly align Bulgaria (bypassing the Bessarabia claim)
• Axis is it war with Greece, hopefully controlling Athens by the end of the turn; Greece is conquered by Italy
• When the USSR claims Bessarabia (prossibly J/F '40 or earlier), deny the claim; USSR at war with Rumania
• Germany aligns Hungary, supports Rumania vs. USSR
• USSR fails to take Rumania; Germany enforces peace (probably losing Bessarabia)
• Germany aligns Rumania
• Italy aligns Yugoslavia

Did I miss anything? [:)] Of course, this requires a co-operative USSR. But if they don't make the claim, Germany can DOW Yugoslavia and align Rumania anyway, and keep Bessarabia. Italy loses out on the backup home nation, but you've got to roll with the punches.

If you can't tell, I like the idea of messing around in the Balkans.

[Orm]

Another way to do it.

1) DOW Greece and align Bulgaria.
2) Conquer Greece.
3) Allow the USSR claim to Bessarabia.
4) Deny Hungary and Bulgaria claims on Rumania -> Rumania aligns to Germany.
5) DOW Hungary.
6) As soon as Hungary is conquered you can align Yugoslavia.

[Centuur]

If the USSR doesn't claim Bessarabia, aligning Yugoslavia early in the war isn't possible. However, the Allies then have to think about the consequences of a DoW of Germany on USSR at some point in the game. At that moment, the Axis can align Rumania, Hungary and Yugoslavia (in that order), which means all Balkan countries are active on the Axis side and those nice defensive cities in Bessarabia can't be used to defend the Odessa factory. It probably isn't going to be railed out in time.

[brian brian]

I have looked at an Italian attack in S/O 39 in terms of getting ashore, etc. but have never pulled that trigger, nor ever seen it done. Worries about the CW transport capacity are overblown......a lot of CW players would be glad to issue a DOW to start taking cracks at the Italian lift and convoy points, a pro-active way to defend the rest of the Med.

[brian brian]

It is an easy Axis response to any CW decision to say ... they can't defend everywhere, that means I'll just attack somewhere else. This is true, and it is the job of the CW player to prioritize where to defend. Malta is one of those places in my opinion. Defending Malta is a front-line defense for the rest of the CW's holdings in the Med. And the CW can defend a lot of places actually as they have a lot of MIL and TERR to put on the board cheaply. The Allies in general need to spend 39-41 throwing a lot of cheap infantry under Axis tank treads over and over again. Yes, they get killed. But they cost the Axis impulses ( = time) dealing with them, and that is what the game is all about. You only have a finite amount of time.

[composer99]

ORIGINAL: brian brian

It is an easy Axis response to any CW decision to say ... they can't defend everywhere, that means I'll just attack somewhere else. This is true, and it is the job of the CW player to prioritize where to defend. Malta is one of those places in my opinion. Defending Malta is a front-line defense for the rest of the CW's holdings in the Med. And the CW can defend a lot of places actually as they have a lot of MIL and TERR to put on the board cheaply. The Allies in general need to spend 39-41 throwing a lot of cheap infantry under Axis tank treads over and over again. Yes, they get killed. But they cost the Axis impulses ( = time) dealing with them, and that is what the game is all about. You only have a finite amount of time.

Might I add that, apart from France, it's hard for the Axis to bring those tank treads to bear against CW defences, as they involve crossing hostile expanses of sea (eg. shipping armour across to Egypt or invading the UK) or armour simply can't be used (an attack on Malta or Gibraltar unless the Axis goes through Spain in the latter case).

[composer99]

Not to say that it can't be done, of course; I've been the victim of not one but two succesful Sealion campaigns. But it does require both skill and fortune.

[Red Prince]

Perhaps this is sacrilidge: Early on, versus the CW, armour isn't the most important thing, I think. Because MWiF uses European scale for the whole world, I think it's more important for Italy to try to get units of any kind into places where the CW has little or nothing in the way of defenses. Force him to play on Italian terms by threatening to take over large amounts of "useless" land. Territorials may be rotten combatants, but a lot of them have good "speed", and the ones that Italy begins with (optional rule) can pillage East Africa and threaten North Africa, too. Yes, that's French, but the CW would probably rather see it go Vichy instead of Italian conquered.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: composer99

Not to say that it can't be done, of course; I've been the victim of not one but two succesful Sealion campaigns. But it does require both skill and fortune.

And the fortune part is what I don't like about a Sealion. It all depends on a small number rolls with the dice. It is a high risk option. If it succeeds, you'll probably win the game. If it doesn't succeed the problems are huge for the Axis.
Even if attack planning is optimal, the risks of a loss are pretty high. The problem is first to get ashore and second to stay ashore and in supply. The first part is the easy one of the two. The second one however is not...

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: Red Prince

Perhaps this is sacrilidge: Early on, versus the CW, armour isn't the most important thing, I think. Because MWiF uses European scale for the whole world, I think it's more important for Italy to try to get units of any kind into places where the CW has little or nothing in the way of defenses. Force him to play on Italian terms by threatening to take over large amounts of "useless" land. Territorials may be rotten combatants, but a lot of them have good "speed", and the ones that Italy begins with (optional rule) can pillage East Africa and threaten North Africa, too. Yes, that's French, but the CW would probably rather see it go Vichy instead of Italian conquered.

I agree totally. When I play the Italians, I always like to go to war with France early and try to capture Tunesia, Algeria and French Somaliland. Even a small exploit into Syria might be nice. Message to the CW is: please DoW me, since I'm very slowly but surely capturing all kind of nice places...
Off course, if the CW is doing a sloppy job on the defence of Gibraltar, I like to take a shot at it (a 40% opportunity of succes in an assault of Gib, I would always take, provided I will be able to have a reasonable defense there against an CW counterattack). Same with Malta (now it is a major port on my doorstep...). As the Italian, I wouldn't sit idle in 1939. Yes, the US doesn't like an DoW very much and there are some risks involved (don't fritter away the navy against the French!) but the boost in production and the lending possibilities from the Germans are very welcome for the Italians.

[Ur_Vile_WEdge]

My biggest concern about an Italian DoW on one of the WAllies in 39 isn't so much the U.S. entry; it's that you actually don't have a lock on the mediterranian right away. The British and French carriers are awful, but at the start you have a grand total of 1 gabbiano and 1 Lnd 3 to oppose them. You can build more fast, but for those first few turns, I've seen quite a few games where the British and French just throw battleships and carriers into the Med and sink convoys, interdict your supply lines, etc.


That being said, I almost always declare war on both France and England the first chance I get myself

[brian brian]

A lot of good thoughts here. I didn't mean the CW will be putting infantry in front of the Axis' actual tanks in every case - obviously, that would just be on the Continent. I meant two things....the Allies can't think "I won't defend 'there', the units will just get killed." My point it is, if you don't defend 'there', it won't cost the Axis any time to get 'there'. That and the glib response about "He who defends everything, defends nothing" shouldn't be used as a justification for hoarding too much of the CW land forces at home. (Though I never commit the CW MECH anywhere outside the UK until 41 usually). If a cheap CW infantry is lost, don't worry, just build more; there's lots to pick from. That's why I like the 7-3 INF on Malta....I like to build out the CW MIL pool so the London MIL can just keep reappearing right in front of the Axis perpetually.

And as was noted, the key to the CW defense is the Italian lift. So much so that many Allied players just simply plan on a DOW on Italy on the 4th impulse of the game to start taking shots at them.

But this is the Italian AI thread. As noted in the post just above, the Italian naval air assets aren't dominating in 1939. They can't be ignored, but they could be stronger. This makes a good case for an early Italian DOW on the Allies.....so the Luftwaffe can join in the fun as much as any other reason.

I think a main Italian desire should be Algiers/Oran, almost regardless of overall Axis strategy. If the French are dumb enough to pull their troops from Algeria without some CW replacements, the Italians should jump on this. As the French, I do pull the INF from Syria, as the early war Italians have a harder time operating in the Eastern Med. But even if the Axis target is Barbarossa '41, the Italians should consider an invasion of French North Africa. The point is to put pressure on the CW in terms of developing bases within range of Gibraltar. If you don't pressure your enemies, they have an easier time of doing what they want instead of reacting to you. I'm not sure I would land Italian tanks or HQs unless you truly are launching an anti-CW grand strategy. [Sea Lion is indeed high-risk, high-reward decision, but a "successful" Sea Lion doesn't necessarily win the game for the Axis unless the Allies fail a morale check and throw in the towel.]

My thoughts on overall Italian strategy are too colored by playing with LoC Vichy for so long; that argues for earlier Italian participation in putting rocks on the scale towards the French tipping point.

I do like messing around in Africa for fun and look forward to the new map, but without LoC Vichy rules in MWiF I'm not sure how much real pressure either side can put on the other anywhere but along the Mediterranean coast-line. It is fun to be able to pick up the attack dice for an all-TERRitorial battle deep in the heart of darkness or in some craggy mountain range in the Italian "empire" knowing it doesn't really matter to the rest of the war if you roll low; there is nothing to be gained but glory.

(And in LoC Vichy the best Allied counter-move is to land the at-start CW Infantry division in French Somaliland to deny the easy chit pick-up.)

[Red Prince]

I don't know that this can be used for the AIO, but I recently ran another test, and it helps a lot to have Germany & Italy both DOW Greece so that Bulgaria can be aligned. The Bulgarian unit (a 3-3 INF, I think) is set up so that it can get to Salonica. If you are using the option for movement along rail lines, it can get in and then back out of Salonica during the 1st impulse of a turn. If Italy is active, this gives the Italians a port to land 2 more units in Greece without having to invade.