Advice to the Newbie: The Italian gambit

[Harrybanana]

I still consider myself a Newbie as I haven't even finished a single pbem game yet but I have started 5 all as the Allies. Yeah I know I should try the Axis but I just can't bring myself to do it yet. Anyway, I noticed something by accident in my 1st game that I then looked for in my other games; namely an under defended Northern Italy on my 1st turn (ie Spring 40). In 2 of my games it was defended by only 1 militia and in 2 others it was defended by only 2 militia. This is suicide for the Germans. All it took was a couple Aircraft carriers, some heavy ships to fire shore bombardment, the artillery and milita in Gibraltar and the Inf in England to wipe out this force capture NI and Italy Surrenders (well actually I guess it would have taken a lot less than this but I'm a cautious guy). There go all those nice ships in the Med not to mention the cost to the Germans to repair those factories and resources. You can then Strat move out your invading force so the Germans don't even get the satisfaction of destroying them. Now I'm not trying to gloat here, if I were playing the Germans I might have done the exact same thing; in fact I did do the exact same thing several times against the AI and got away with it. The point being, if you're a newbie DEFEND ITALY. I should add as an aside that in 1 of the games where I invaded Italy my opponent turned the tables on me and successfully invaded Scotland on his Summer 40 turn. It will be interesting to see how it turns out.

One final point is that I think the rules should be changed to provide that Italy only Surrenders if the Allies control either Both Northern and Southern Italy or else 1 of them and control all of North Africa. Just my 2 cents worth.

[Grotius]

I agree that it seems odd that Italy surrenders once you take one of those two provinces. I guess Italy did surrender before the entire nation was liberated by Allied forces historically, but even so, I'd have required us to seize more than one province, if not necessarily all provinces.

[ratprince]

Harry, Grotius;

I agree with you Harry. I just started a PBEM game today and first allied turn I saw that Southern Italy had 2 militia an arty and an AA. This was crazily undefended! I was able to gather 16 transports in the central med on turn one with 2 carriers and hvy and lt fleets. Small carrier air attack to knock out the arty, then went ashore with 9 units. I captured it easily and then reinforced with everything I could pull from everywhere! There is no way the Germans can take it back this next turn (barring statistical anomalies in dice!) The Italians are gone...no fleet. Basically it means that the Germans are already on the ropes. I can funnel huge numbers of troops and supplies in to Italy now each turn. I suppose they may be able to pull every unit in Germany and throw me out....but the death knell has sounded, so to speak.

I would say to hints on this:

1) Defend BOTH Italian provinces AND Sicily! Enough so that they cant "risk" taking them.
2) Maybe make a patch so that it takes one "boot" province + 2 others for the Italians to capitulate.

Later guys!

MIke

[Harrybanana]

Hmm, actually Mike I don't know as I would have thought to attack Italy if it had 2 militia an AA and an Arty. But your right, by bringing in 9 or 10 land units 2 carriers and some hvy fleets the Allies could make mincemeat of this force. So it begs the question how strong would the defenders have to be to deter the Allies? If you had 2 AA and/or ftrs they should be enough to handle the carrier air so your arty will survive. But 1 arty alone won't be enough. So what do you think would 2 AA/Ftrs, 2 Arty, 2 militia and 2 Inf be enough? Or is that now overkill? The Germans will be hard pressed to maintain that kind of garrison in both NItaly and SItaly for long. Also you say you invaded SItaly. Where was the Italian Fleet? In port? or did you have to bounce it 1st?

[Grotius]

I suppose one counter-strategy for the Axis player is indeed to use the Italian fleet to guard against invasion. But yeah, the starting garrison in Italy seems weak, and in any case it seems odd to require Italy to surrender the instant either of those two provinces is taken.

[Ron]

I don't have a problem with the Allies being able to invade(though historically the ability of such a move on the part of Great Britain alone seems highly questionable), but the fact Italy 'surrenders' that early with the loss of one region and loses all her Militia, Transports and Navy seems farfetched. Italy's warweariness wasn't apparent at the war's beginning. If anything the game should reflect the wavering of Italy's resolve later in the war, ie '43 historically. Until that date Italy should generate Militia upon invasion like other powers.

As it stands now it is an exploit on the uniniated IMO. As with Strategic Command, where Italy could be knocked out of the war with an early Allied gambit, the players agreed to a houserule curtailing such a move. In this case, at least everyone should 'know' beforehand.



Ron

[Grotius]

Until that date Italy should generate Militia upon invasion like other powers.

That would help. And I'd also support requiring the Allies to capture two Italian provinces, not just one. Devs, any comment?

[Joel Billings]

AI has been improved to better defend Italy in the next patch. We have discussed possible rule changes but don't expect one in the next patch. If you want to eliminate Italian surrender, you can find the info to elininate at the end of alliance.txt. If I find out from Keith an easy way to modify that code, I'll let you know.

[sveint]

I just started a PBEM game today

That was me - ouch!

[ratprince]

Harry, et al;

I think the key for Italy protection is a "combined arms" without requiring huge numbers:

1) 1 AA
2) 1 Ftr
3) 2 arty (in case one gets hit)
4) 2 Militia
4) 1 Infantry

This is not a huge force, but the addition of the extra arty will make invasion....prohibitive. The allies can only get 2 carrier air to attack turn one. The AA and Ftr can deal with these. On the off chance 1 CAG gets through, only one arty can be hit, leaving one for amphib defense. Each unit coming ashore will then be fired at by the arty (at diminishing power of course, but the units invading are traveling so far their evasion sucks!)

There is always the Italian fleet move to central med. However this is prhibitively expensive in supplies and I wouldnt think a first option. This fleet presence will pretty much nullify a southern italy attack turn one.

Another fleet mechanic might be to float some subs in various locations to create op fire roadblocks. Turn one, it would take "effort" for the allies to sink/get around them.

Additionally, an air unit placed in Sardinia will totally "hose" this first turn Italy strike. A ftr or tac in sardinia will Op fire at every single ship passing through the eastern med. This will basically eliminate the potential for invasion. Of course, the allies can always whack that unit, but then that saves Italy....

Just my thoughts on safeguarding Italy without "nerfing" the game engin/mechanics.

Later all!

Mike

[Uncle_Joe]

While I agree that all of those methods will help defeat a first turn attack like this, the fact remains that it shouldnt even be a realistic possibility IMO. What allows it is the 'convenience' feature of Transports not spending movement points if traveling over other Transports that have not moved. I believe this feature is intended to prevent needing to move every Transport 1 or 2 spaces in order to extend a chain.

Unfortunately, it can be abused to launch 'surprise' invasions of massive scale with no prep work (and no chance to defend against it). IMO, Transports off of South Africa and near Madagascar should not be viable threat to Northern Italy (especially going all the way west around Africa!) within a 3 month turn. To me, this is an undesirable exploit of an interface aid and should be corrected as such. It forces the Axis to guard against completely unrealistic invasions FAR earlier in the war than the Allies would ever have been able to mount one.

Perhaps I am incorrect and things like this were intended. If so, then so be it. Its 'counterable' so its not like it breaks the game, but it does convey more of a 'beer and pretzels' game feel than anything like a simulation of WW2. If its not intended, I'd like to see some 'safe guards' put in place to make it less possible. Personally, I think all Amphibious invasions should be impossible from more than say, 3 or 4 zones away. It just shouldnt even be allowed IMO. Either that or Tranports that use the 'free move' (ie, move more than 7 MPs) should lose their Amphib capability for the rest of the turn (or half it rounding down or something). Barring any of that, Italy should simply have a few Militia at start to disuade such tactics.

I'm curious to see how things like pan out in the near future with the game. Now that everyone is starting to grasp the mechanics and how to best use them, I'm sure we'll be seeing many more completely off the wall strats coming out. It will be interesting to see if the game's mechanics can stand up to them all. If not, I hope the patches keep coming to continue to improve the game and remove undesirable 'exploits' of the game mechanics.

YMMV.

[tai4ji2x]

well, good thing the devs keep in touch with the community. unlike some other games i've played recently, which shall go unnamed...

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: Uncle_Joe

While I agree that all of those methods will help defeat a first turn attack like this, the fact remains that it shouldnt even be a realistic possibility IMO. What allows it is the 'convenience' feature of Transports not spending movement points if traveling over other Transports that have not moved. I believe this feature is intended to prevent needing to move every Transport 1 or 2 spaces in order to extend a chain.

Unfortunately, it can be abused to launch 'surprise' invasions of massive scale with no prep work (and no chance to defend against it). IMO, Transports off of South Africa and near Madagascar should not be viable threat to Northern Italy (especially going all the way west around Africa!) within a 3 month turn. To me, this is an undesirable exploit of an interface aid and should be corrected as such. It forces the Axis to guard against completely unrealistic invasions FAR earlier in the war than the Allies would ever have been able to mount one.

Perhaps I am incorrect and things like this were intended. If so, then so be it. Its 'counterable' so its not like it breaks the game, but it does convey more of a 'beer and pretzels' game feel than anything like a simulation of WW2. If its not intended, I'd like to see some 'safe guards' put in place to make it less possible. Personally, I think all Amphibious invasions should be impossible from more than say, 3 or 4 zones away. It just shouldnt even be allowed IMO. Either that or Tranports that use the 'free move' (ie, move more than 7 MPs) should lose their Amphib capability for the rest of the turn (or half it rounding down or something). Barring any of that, Italy should simply have a few Militia at start to disuade such tactics.

I'm curious to see how things like pan out in the near future with the game. Now that everyone is starting to grasp the mechanics and how to best use them, I'm sure we'll be seeing many more completely off the wall strats coming out. It will be interesting to see if the game's mechanics can stand up to them all. If not, I hope the patches keep coming to continue to improve the game and remove undesirable 'exploits' of the game mechanics.

YMMV.

[Harrybanana]

Oops, here is what I meant to do

ORIGINAL: Uncle_Joe


Unfortunately, it can be abused to launch 'surprise' invasions of massive scale with no prep work (and no chance to defend against it). IMO, Transports off of South Africa and near Madagascar should not be viable threat to Northern Italy (especially going all the way west around Africa!) within a 3 month turn. To me, this is an undesirable exploit of an interface aid and should be corrected as such. It forces the Axis to guard against completely unrealistic invasions FAR earlier in the war than the Allies would ever have been able to mount one.

I mainly agree Uncle Joe, but in the 4 games I played and took Northern Italy it was guarded by only 1 or 2 milita. These can be taken out with your 2 WA Carriers and some hvy fleet shore bombardment and you can then assault from Gibraltar (only 1 sea space away) using just your milita and 2 trannies. Even if a milita survived the attack you just have to bring in the arty and use 4 transports. My point in starting this thread was that I wanted to alert newbies to this threat, while at the same time making my point that the rules for Italian surrender need to be tweaked IMHO.

However, many amphibious assaults were conducted over long distances. I think the Americans who assaulted North Africa came direct from the US. And I'm pretty sure the 1st Canadian Division travelled all the way direct from England before it hit the beaches in Sicily. Of course most troops would travel to near the beach in larger ships before being loaded into the landing craft to make the actual assault. My preference would be to allow units to transport to friendly Areas using trannies but see landing craft as a separate type of unit which units must be loaded into to assault enemy areas. This would give the Allies something else to spend all their production points on. Of course the game would than have to be adjusted in other areas to maintain play balance. Oh yeah, those landing craft shouldn't cost any pop either. However this may not be possible given the programing confines of this game. Will there be a GGWaW2?

[5cats]

Ahem, I got "the Italian job" from Banana too [:(]

For Sure Italy should generate Militia too! At least until '43. Later if Malta & Suez are captured.

It does seem weird that the WA can place like 12 transports in the Med on turn 1. (I've been testing this while trying to mount a defence) and hit Italy with 2 inf, 2 arty and countless militia THEN scoop them all up and return them home!!!
Fleets which benifit from "extended movement" shouldn't be allowed to transport invasion troops, and/or those transports 'passed over' should have their movement reduced appropriatly. You can get transports all the way from India, around Africa and into the Med...
Also, Italy had some decent infantry units (at least at the start of the war) which don't show up in GGWAW at all! How about Italy pops up 2 INFANTRY units in North & South Italy if attacked before '43!! Zip after that... realistic, effective...

[Harrybanana]

I agree that Italy should produce Milita like WA and Germany until North Africa is fully conquered. I wouldn't put a specific date on when this ends as historically the Italians were ready to surrender once they got beat in NA and saw the war was hopeless. But in any game it is possible for the Allies to knock Germany out of NA much earlier than 43 or for the Germans to own it right up to the end. I don't know how effective these milita will be in stopping an invasion by themselves though as they can easily be destroyed by shore bombardment. You will also need at least 1 arty and 1 AA or Ftr. I don't think Italy should get Inf units if invaded. That would be better than WA or Germany. I would have no objection to an Inf unit starting the game in Italy though; provided the Allies get something in return to maintain play balance.

[Bradley7735]

Ok, I'm not the best on WWII history in europe, but why is everyone saying that Italy shouldn't surrender with the current game rules. Why did France fall in 3 weeks? In 1938, no one would have said that France would surrender in 3 weeks. Is it that inconceivable that Italy would give up when things looked even remotely bad for her. My impression of her people in WWII (again, I'm not a great historian in this area) was that they were kind of along for the ride with Germany. Suddenly the homeland is being occupied. Now all the peoples are calling for Mussolini's head.

Forgive me if I'm way off base here.

[Harrybanana]

Well a bit different because the entire French army was baeten and most of the country overru by an enemy who could not be removed. Had the Germans simply landed some paratroopers in Paris but the French line otherwise held I don't think France would have surrendered. Perhaps the whole rule could be fixed by simply giving a "conquered" nation one turn to retake the territory. Would actually allow the WA to use those troops in Eastern France.

[sveint]

Not very historical but the best way to fight this is 2 fighters, 1 flak and 1 art in each Italian zone.

[Barthheart]

ORIGINAL: sveint

Not very historical but the best way to fight this is 2 fighters, 1 flak and 1 art in each Italian zone.

True... but it's not very historical for the Wallies to pull everything from around the world for an attack on Italy in the Spring of 1940 either.[8|]