Axis diplomatic targets?

[Alcibiades73]

I have asked this question on multiple threads, but nobody has actually answered, I assume because the question got buried under other questions. So I started a separate, dedicated thread.

Basically, I need guidance on what countries to target as Axis in terms of diplomacy. I did have a vague idea as Germany, and I stuck 3 chits in Spain and 2 chits in Turkey. I also considered Sweden. Are these sound choices? I am having second thoughts about Spain, because that's an additional potential route of amphibious invasion - potentially an even more of a "soft underbelly" of Axis than Italy. And since I have abandoned constructing a large German surface fleet, the idea of controlling Gibraltar is no longer as exhilarating either.

In contrast, I have not a clue in terms of Japan's diplomacy, and I invested 0 chits. (Japan also seems a lot more MPP-starved than Germany as well.) Is it even worth investing in diplomacy as Japan? I don't see any neighbors that is either 1) favorable toward Japan in terms of initial disposition, or 2) strong enough to offer a lot of aid.

[Platoonist]

In playing as the Axis I've always given diplomacy the cold shoulder. When it comes to MPP expenditure it just seems best to go all in and concentrate it solely in research and production, rather than dispersing it on what seems like a very murky and ambiguous investment. Especially after that one experiment with Yugoslavia, where expensive diplomatic efforts just went up in smoke.

You're right about Spain being something of a weak flank. In one game against the Axis AI, the southeast coast of Axis-partnered Spain proved to be wide open. Omar Bradley and the troops were in Madrid about three turns later. It sure beat slogging up the Italian corridor.

[ForzaA]

Targets will depend a lot on your overall strategy (and whether MP or AI)

Turkey's a good target for Barbarossa, Spain's good for a naval strategy (extra ports, fair number of ships built and buildable)
(Sweden's a bit of both, also of note is that they might be used to complete the railroad to Norway (and thus the mines both in Norway and Sweden) via Leningrad

You can also choose to invest in various Majors (in particular, of course, USA and USSR) to reduce their mobilisation, reducing their income pre-war (and potentially keep them out of the war depending on the strategy pursued)

Very speculatively, there's also the DEI you can invest in to try and activate them prior to the US oil embargo (it will prevent the convoy from being cut)

[pjg100]

One point to know about diplo - I think you mentioned in the other thread that you can only invest three chits per minor. That is correct with respect to Spain, but not with respect to other minors, as to which you may invest up to the max available from your majors. Also note that JA and USSR cannot invest at all in diplo WRT Spain.

[Alcibiades73]

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

In playing as the Axis I've always given diplomacy the cold shoulder. When it comes to MPP expenditure it just seems best to go all in and concentrate it solely in research and production, rather than dispersing it on what seems like a very murky and ambiguous investment. Especially after that one experiment with Yugoslavia, where expensive diplomatic efforts just went up in smoke.

That seems definitely the sensible approach as Japan; I do, however, have some excess MPPs usually as Germany, and the Turkish and Swedish options seem viable at least.

ORIGINAL: Platoonist


You're right about Spain being something of a weak flank. In one game against the Axis AI, the southeast coast of Axis-partnered Spain proved to be wide open. Omar Bradley and the troops were in Madrid about three turns later. It sure beat slogging up the Italian corridor.

Franco was smart to not listen seriously to Hitler's overtures.

ORIGINAL: ForzaA

Targets will depend a lot on your overall strategy (and whether MP or AI)

For now I am playing just against AI.

ORIGINAL: ForzaA

Turkey's a good target for Barbarossa, Spain's good for a naval strategy (extra ports, fair number of ships built and buildable)

(Sweden's a bit of both, also of note is that they might be used to complete the railroad to Norway (and thus the mines both in Norway and Sweden) via Leningrad

If you had to pick?

ORIGINAL: ForzaA

You can also choose to invest in various Majors (in particular, of course, USA and USSR) to reduce their mobilisation, reducing their income pre-war (and potentially keep them out of the war depending on the strategy pursued)

Is it really possible to permanently keep USSR or USA out of war? Also, I am not sure if it is desirable for Germany to keep USSR out, since there are no natural avenues for expansion in that case.

ORIGINAL: ForzaA

Very speculatively, there's also the DEI you can invest in to try and activate them prior to the US oil embargo (it will prevent the convoy from being cut)

I'd rather just seize that oil!

ORIGINAL: pjg100

One point to know about diplo - I think you mentioned in the other thread that you can only invest three chits per minor. That is correct with respect to Spain, but not with respect to other minors, as to which you may invest up to the max available from your majors. Also note that JA and USSR cannot invest at all in diplo WRT Spain.

Got it!

[ForzaA]

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73

If you had to pick?

If I'm playing "optimal", Turkey.
If I'm playing "for fun", Spain if Sealion, Sweden if Barbarossa.

I'd rather just seize that oil!

If they mobilise on your side, you get both the oil(+convoy) AND their troops

[Alcibiades73]

ORIGINAL: ForzaA


If they mobilise on your side, you get both the oil(+convoy) AND their troops

Ah, okay!

[ThunderLizard11]

Several schools of thought:

* None - invest all in units and research

* Turkey - flip and get access to Iraq/Persia and Caucuses. Get a pro=Axis event that moves them towards Axis at around 40-50%

* Yugoslavia - get unit and no need to garrison - need to flip before coup event

* Sweden - ships and units - usually would do later game

* Spain - close off Med - be careful not to flip early or it increases US mobilization

* Majors - expensive at 150/unit - I never use but some players like to roll the dice

[LoneRunner]

I generally don't use diplomacy as Axis because it's a gamble that typically does not pay off.

For example, the usual target for the Axis is Turkey. To influence Turkey to join the Axis, Germany gets 5 chits, Italy 3 chits, and Japan 3 chits. Each chit costs 50 MPPs and earns a 5% chance of influence. With 11 chits (an investment of 550 MPPs), the Axis has a 55% chance each turn to encourage Turkey to join the Axis. If you get a hit, Turkey will move 4-8% toward the Axis. Depending on where you start, you got to get a lot of hits before Turkey actually joins the Axis.

In a multiplayer game, your opponent will notice right away that you have invested MPPs in diplomacy. You can see your opponents investment by selecting "Reports", then "Graphs", then "Research/Diplomacy". The brown line shows diplomacy MPPs. The Allies will figure out that you targeted Turkey, especially if Turkey is actually influenced by your efforts and will respond by investing chits to offset your chits. Then, you can invest more MPPs to offset the Allies response.

Whew, it eventually turns into a bottomless pit of wasted MPPs when the Axis really needs to be investing in tanks and infantry for the invasion of Russia.

[Platoonist]

ORIGINAL: LoneRunner

I generally don't use diplomacy as Axis because it's a gamble that typically does not pay off.

Whew, it eventually turns into a bottomless pit of wasted MPPs when the Axis really needs to be investing in tanks and infantry for the invasion of Russia.

That's the prism through I've always viewed it. When you fund R&D or purchase units as Germany you know exactly where the money is going. Diplomacy is like trying to purchase an armor unit on some dodgy installment plan where it might show up in six months or eight months or never....

About the only time I engage in Axis diplomacy anymore is if I see the Allies are really leaning on Sweden. Can't afford to lose those iron ore mines.

[Alcibiades73]

ORIGINAL: ThunderLizard2

Several schools of thought:

* None - invest all in units and research

* Turkey - flip and get access to Iraq/Persia and Caucuses. Get a pro=Axis event that moves them towards Axis at around 40-50%

* Yugoslavia - get unit and no need to garrison - need to flip before coup event

* Sweden - ships and units - usually would do later game

* Spain - close off Med - be careful not to flip early or it increases US mobilization

* Majors - expensive at 150/unit - I never use but some players like to roll the dice

I am leaning toward Turkey now. And I didn't realize Majors cost triple the normal MPPs; that even more solidifies my reluctance.

ORIGINAL: LoneRunner

For example, the usual target for the Axis is Turkey. To influence Turkey to join the Axis, Germany gets 5 chits, Italy 3 chits, and Japan 3 chits. Each chit costs 50 MPPs and earns a 5% chance of influence. With 11 chits (an investment of 550 MPPs), the Axis has a 55% chance each turn to encourage Turkey to join the Axis. If you get a hit, Turkey will move 4-8% toward the Axis. Depending on where you start, you got to get a lot of hits before Turkey actually joins the Axis.

In a multiplayer game, your opponent will notice right away that you have invested MPPs in diplomacy. You can see your opponents investment by selecting "Reports", then "Graphs", then "Research/Diplomacy". The brown line shows diplomacy MPPs. The Allies will figure out that you targeted Turkey, especially if Turkey is actually influenced by your efforts and will respond by investing chits to offset your chits. Then, you can invest more MPPs to offset the Allies response.

Whew, it eventually turns into a bottomless pit of wasted MPPs when the Axis really needs to be investing in tanks and infantry for the invasion of Russia.

Yeah, I understand it's a gamble for the MPP-starved Axis; but I am going to play just vs. AI for now, so that makes it a bit less of a gamble.

But do you really need to invest with all three countries to get results? Italy, for instance, does not even have the MPPs to produce units and research tech - much less diplomacy!

Let's say, I am aiming for an April 1941 start of Barbarossa. Can I with reasonable assurance get Turkey to join by January of 1941 or so, if I only invest with Germany and Japan?

[Alcibiades73]

Oh, I forgot to ask: What about Finland? Could they give me a fast back-door access to Leningrad? Or at least allow me to hit Leningrad from two directions, as my Barbarossa ground to a halt in Leningrad (as well as Moscow and Stalingrad) the last run?

[Shellshock]

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73




Let's say, I am aiming for an April 1941 start of Barbarossa. Can I with reasonable assurance get Turkey to join by January of 1941 or so, if I only invest with Germany and Japan?

It's been a while. But I recall in one of my training games I courted Turkey off and on as best I could afford it. A lot of wining and dining of Turkish officials in the Wilhemstrasse.

They didn't join the German cause until AFTER I defeated the Soviet Union in difficult struggle and Axis victory was assured. All those wasted points.

Gave up on the diplomatic model after that. Too chancy. It just seemd to make more sense to invest in a sure thing like more troops.

[LoneRunner]

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73


But do you really need to invest with all three countries to get results? Italy, for instance, does not even have the MPPs to produce units and research tech - much less diplomacy!

Let's say, I am aiming for an April 1941 start of Barbarossa. Can I with reasonable assurance get Turkey to join by January of 1941 or so, if I only invest with Germany and Japan?

Good question. You are right, Italy can barely scrape up 50 MPPs for diplomacy nevermind 150.

Without Italy, only 8 chits are available for the Axis to influence Turkey (Germany 5 and Japan 3). With 8 chits the Axis has 40% chance to get a hit each Axis turn and shift Turkey 12-24% (I had it wrong on the last post, according to the manual majors move 4-8%, minors 12-24%. However, I don't think the manual is correct.). Yeah, hits only occurs on the Axis turn when the Axis has the most chits invested.

Just using averages, at 40%, I should get two diplomacy hits every five Axis turns. So, on average, every five Axis turns I should be able to shift Turkey 36% (18% x 2).

In my last game France fell July 40. At the time Turkey was at 14%. In order to get Turkey to join the Axis I have to get Turkey to 90. After 90 I'm golden because Turkey will automatically declare war in one or two turns. Okay, in order to move Turkey into the Axis I needed to shift them 76% (14% to 90%).

Using the above figures, you will find that on average, it should take about 11 Axis turns to bring Turkey to 90%. That's about a year and that's if the Allies do nothing.

Throw Italy's chits into the ring and the chance for a hit rises to 55%. At 55% it should take about 8 Axis turns to bring Turkey to 90%. Again, that's assuming the Allies do nothing.

In my current MP game it's 1943 and the Allies invested chits into influencing Sweden. Normally I don't challenge the USA in diplomacy because their chits are worth 7%. However, I figured all Allied chits are tied up in Sweden. I immediately invested 10 chits into Turkey. Last turn I got a hit and moved Turkey 6%. Yeah, not the 12-24% that the manual states. So, it appears that the manual is wrong and diplomacy is even worse than I thought.

[Epekepe]

Actually the manual says:

"If diplomacy succeeds, there will be a favorable increase of 4-8% in the
targeted country’s political leaning towards your side, with a 33% chance of
that swing being 12-24% if the targeted country is a Minor."

[Alcibiades73]

ORIGINAL: Shellshock


It's been a while. But I recall in one of my training games I courted Turkey off and on as best I could afford it. A lot of wining and dining of Turkish officials in the Wilhemstrasse.

They didn't join the German cause until AFTER I defeated the Soviet Union in difficult struggle and Axis victory was assured. All those wasted points.

Gave up on the diplomatic model after that. Too chancy. It just seemd to make more sense to invest in a sure thing like more troops.

Yikes, did you court Turkey with all 3 Axis nations?

ORIGINAL: LoneRunner

Good question. You are right, Italy can barely scrape up 50 MPPs for diplomacy nevermind 150.

Without Italy, only 8 chits are available for the Axis to influence Turkey (Germany 5 and Japan 3). With 8 chits the Axis has 40% chance to get a hit each Axis turn and shift Turkey 12-24% (I had it wrong on the last post, according to the manual majors move 4-8%, minors 12-24%. However, I don't think the manual is correct.). Yeah, hits only occurs on the Axis turn when the Axis has the most chits invested.

Just using averages, at 40%, I should get two diplomacy hits every five Axis turns. So, on average, every five Axis turns I should be able to shift Turkey 36% (18% x 2).

In my last game France fell July 40. At the time Turkey was at 14%. In order to get Turkey to join the Axis I have to get Turkey to 90. After 90 I'm golden because Turkey will automatically declare war in one or two turns. Okay, in order to move Turkey into the Axis I needed to shift them 76% (14% to 90%).

Using the above figures, you will find that on average, it should take about 11 Axis turns to bring Turkey to 90%. That's about a year and that's if the Allies do nothing.

Throw Italy's chits into the ring and the chance for a hit rises to 55%. At 55% it should take about 8 Axis turns to bring Turkey to 90%. Again, that's assuming the Allies do nothing.

In my current MP game it's 1943 and the Allies invested chits into influencing Sweden. Normally I don't challenge the USA in diplomacy because their chits are worth 7%. However, I figured all Allied chits are tied up in Sweden. I immediately invested 10 chits into Turkey. Last turn I got a hit and moved Turkey 6%. Yeah, not the 12-24% that the manual states. So, it appears that the manual is wrong and diplomacy is even worse than I thought.

That's even more discouraging. But thanks - better than if I bank all my hopes on diplomacy and get disappointed in the game.

I guess diplomacy should be something that I may invest in, but cannot 100 percent count!

[Illiniwek80]

That's even more discouraging. But thanks - better than if I bank all my hopes on diplomacy and get disappointed in the game.

In my last game Sweden turned to me in 1942. Their troops took Murmansk, participated in taking Moscow, then after the USSR surrendered they were amphibiously invading South Africa.

[LoneRunner]

ORIGINAL: Epekepe

Actually the manual says:

"If diplomacy succeeds, there will be a favorable increase of 4-8% in the
targeted country’s political leaning towards your side, with a 33% chance of
that swing being 12-24% if the targeted country is a Minor."

You are right Epekepe. Not sure how I missed the 33%.

So the odds of converting Turkey are worse than I thought.

With a 33% chance of a 12-24% swing and 67% chance of a 4-8% swing, on average a hit would swing Turkey about 10% (9.96).
So with 8 chits invested, on average it should take about 19 Axis turns to swing Turkey in the Axis. Wow! That's about a year and a half. No wonder I gave up converting Turkey.

[Alcibiades73]

ORIGINAL: LoneRunner

You are right Epekepe. Not sure how I missed the 33%.

So the odds of converting Turkey are worse than I thought.

With a 33% chance of a 12-24% swing and 67% chance of a 4-8% swing, on average a hit would swing Turkey about 10% (9.96).
So with 8 chits invested, on average it should take about 19 Axis turns to swing Turkey in the Axis. Wow! That's about a year and a half. No wonder I gave up converting Turkey.

Yeah, it looks you have to approach and prepare things as if you won't get the alliance but will be happy if you get lucky and do get it.

[LoneRunner]

ORIGINAL: Platoonist


Diplomacy is like trying to purchase an armor unit on some dodgy installment plan where it might show up in six months or eight months or never....

About the only time I engage in Axis diplomacy anymore is if I see the Allies are really leaning on Sweden. Can't afford to lose those iron ore mines.

Haha, great analogy Platoonist.

Seems like investing in diplomacy on Sweden would be a bad play for the Allies if Germany still owns Denmark. As the Axis I would not respond diplomatically but wait until just before Sweden converts and invade Sweden. Really hard for the Allies to respond. The Allies would have wasted several hundred MPPs and the Axis owns the mines.

In addition, with all Allied chits tied up in Sweden, the Axis would have a free hand to go after another minor like Spain or Turkey.