Italy the Forgotten Land

[Vypuero]

The 39 was tweaked more for balance, and the scenarios were much closer to the true OOBs.  I agree we could start NAF with very little for both sides, but we added the forces so each side had a fairly strong force without shipping them in, since after all Italy doesn't enter until the middle of 1940 in any case.

[targul]

42 scenario maybe balanced but by then the Axis is preparing for its death.  I wouldnt mind 40 since Poland is a given but 42 is simply too late for me.

[Happycat]

ORIGINAL: ozarkmichael


Happycat, you will win the match if you can remember( or find) what Stalin's opinion of the invasion of Italy was. I bet he put on a diplomatic smile and publicly wished the West good luck, but he privately thought it wasnt the right thing for the West to do.

Well, we might have to call this one a draw. I remember (but cannot cite a source) that Stalin's reaction to the invasion of Italy varied according to his audience. If my recollection is correct, his reaction to the Western Allies was along the lines of "I guess it will do..."; his public utterances to the Soviet citizenry barely gave a nod to what was going on in Italy; his reaction among what passed for his "inner circle" (it is doubtful he every really trusted anybody) was more positive. That positive reaction grew to euphoria as more and more Allied troops became bogged down in Italy. Some Germans were being drawn off of the Russian Front, and more importantly, Allied progress was slo-o-o-o-w. As you correctly point out, Stalin was a strategic thinker, and slow progress in Italy (and later in western Europe) totally worked for him. Undoubtedly he wanted to see lots of Allied soldiers involved in fierce fighting with the Wehrmacht. What he did NOT want to see was any development that threatened to translate into a rapid Allied advance towards Berlin, Vienna, or Prague.

So, I will take no point for this one, but appreciate the discussion! [:)]

[Tordenskiold]

I would just like to add some related information: Vichy France also covered Marocco, Algerie and Tunis. The allied did not exactly know which way the French forces here would react when they launched Torch in 1942, landing in both Cassablanca, Oran and Alger. It was some fighting but pretty soon the Vichy forces, gave up.

German and Italian forces where deployed and in Algeria and Tunis the US forces for the first time met the Germans in land battle. Later US officers said that if it havent been for the experience gained here, D-day could have been a catastroph. The Axis surrendered in early 43 pushed from both west and east and 200.000 Axis forces went in to captivity. Based on this, the PP from Marocco, Algerie and Tunis should benifit the Axis. Do they? Anyhow, it is not correct that these where independent countries and the Axis forces should be free to move in these areas. If the PP points for Vichy France goes to the Axis, the same should apply to Nort Africa.

Churchill was the main architect for invading Italy to soften the Germans and divert forces away from Western Europe. He also suggested to invade Greece for the same reason, but the Americans went against it.

In the game I am playing against the AI the Allies crosses the English channel and attack directly in the area around Normandy. It seems the US forces are not first based in England, but goes straight from the US to the beaches. I crush them easily even though they have full superiority on sea and in the air. I would like the Allies to invade Italy, which would be much more easy for them since all I have their is garrison troops. It seems the Allies do not "see" my forces (FOG on).

Furhtermore, if the Allied started by taking North Africa it would (by my suggestion) mean that
they conquer some PP from the Axis and tie up some Axis forces as well.