Matrix Games Forums

For the Axis players: is Norway worth invading in your opinion?

The Narvik Iron ore convoy is protected by default now and the resources in Norway are few.
I no longer bother taking it, but maybe I am missing something.
Waddayasay?

Only to prevent the British from invading Norway itself. Even if the British do not force the surrender of Norway all they have do is secure a port along the Nordic Iron Ore convoy route to interrupt the 25 pps from the Swedish iron fields. This could add up to hundreds of lost pps each year.

The Germans will then have to commit significant forces to expel the British from that port and if the UK follows up with a major force commitment to Norway they could possibly occupy all of Norway and use it as staging area to threaten a future invasion of Denmark -- gaining access to the Baltic with a coordinated invasion by the Soviets on Denmark.

However, I have played many games where neither the Germans or British invade Norway and it is of no concern for the duration of the war.

Yeah, that makes sense. Taking Norway to deny the Allies easy access. But even if the Allies would be so treacherous (poor neutral Norway), taking it as Germany could be done after the Fall of France or even in 1941 I guess. I think the UK is too weak before that?

Norway was important for sub bases and a safe passage for ships under air cover. Hard to do in a computer game. Even so it might not be worth it to invade.

PanzerMike wrote: Fri Nov 11, 2022 9:27 am Yeah, that makes sense. Taking Norway to deny the Allies easy access. But even if the Allies would be so treacherous (poor neutral Norway), taking it as Germany could be done after the Fall of France or even in 1941 I guess. I think the UK is too weak before that?

That depends on the extent of UK loses in France and on how much pressure the Axis put on the British position in Egypt. I am currently playing a game as Axis and the Allied player minimized his loses in the Battle of France and has two armor and at least a six corps equivalent in the Egypt/Middle east. He committed about three corps to take Bergen. I have to commit 6 corps and air assets to expel him.

Considering that conquering Norway costs only 30 landing ships (75 production), and gives you 1 resource and 1% increase in production (due to strategic resource), I think it's worth it if done early enough. As mentioned, it also prevents the allies from messing with this important production line.

An early conquest of Norway is unlikely to be countered by the allies for years, if ever, which means you may get that 1+1% production for the entire duration of the game. This pays for the 75 production many times over. Unlike in the real war, it gives no real benefit in terms of sub bases or other strategic advantages, but the production gain alone is worth it IMO.

Then again, my real world experience is limited to mostly AI game and only 2 incomplete multiplayer games, so take this advice with a grain of salt.

Yeah, sub bases or ship bases or long range bombers to interfere with the northern LL convoy route are not needed in the game. In fact,even with Norway taken, I never based any subs there ever.

i find the norwegian ports pretty useful for resupplying subs/surface ships raiding the n atlantic arctic convoys.

I base subs and ships there lba can base there to attack arctic ll and it is very worth it to protect the iron ore from Sweden, If Germany doesn't invade as the Allies I do and then Germany has a problem, they lose 25 per turn in the winter and the Allies can easily bomb Kiel, Berlin and Baltic ports and stage invasions of Denmark or northern Germany. My vote is yes it is worth it. Only time I don't invade is if I am planning a sea lion and can't spare the landing craft.