Italy as a new Axis player

[Imperious Leader]

Forgot to mention. I really don’t think the neutrals are gonna get that same silly revised treatment where its an “out of sight out of mind” mentality where they are basically ignored. I think the classic MB edition tactic of invading neutral spain will reappear, except  they have some rules they don’t just roll over and let this happen. 30% more territories will allow alot of neutrals on the map and they cant be ignored.

what do you think?

[Krupp Steel]

How do you think it could be applied that they won’t roll over and die as you put it.Maybe an infantry or 2 are placed to defend it if they are ‘invaded’?

A card system which is random?Pay an extra xamount of IPC’s.Or  an uprising occurs at your arrival.Place these* units to combat your forces.?

idk these ideas aren’t very good just random ideas.

[Imperious Leader]

I think it will be random, because that the fun way to go about it.  So lets say for each IPC the neutral is worth you roll a d6

1= 1 infantry
2= 1 infantry
3= 2 infantry,1 artillery
4= 2 infantry,1 art, 1 tank
5= 3 infantry,1 art, 1 tank, 1 destroyer
6= 3 infantry,1 art, 1 tank, 1 fighter

Allies are invading Spain, and so German player just places the pieces in spain ( using his own pieces)

cards would cost too much, but i like them better.

So in our example: Allies invade Spain, Its now German controlled, German rolls three sixes…. and Allied invasion force is totally destroyed. I like that because it defeats the strategy guides that tell you “you must invade Spain by turn 3”  based on that bogus analysis.

Id like to see the A bomb back in the game so i can nuke the neutrals one after the other… " nuke then invade"

its the old idea of “sweep and clear”

[oldsalty]

I like that because it stops a player going after neutrals for cheap IPCs.  This way you need a specific strategic reason and a well executed campaign in order to occupy unless the dice Gods smile at you.

1.  Would the roll be done every time a player invaded even if the first one fail?  That could build a huge army in a hurry - good for the side that controls it now because of the invasion, bad for the invader!

2.  Would that be on top of any army they already have at set up, or would this replace set up?

[Lynxes]

/Imperious leader

Now we’re getting down to it! Trying to figure the Italy situation, I think that the changes will be smaller than you propose, if we try to extrapolate from the AARe changes I think:

Italy 16 IPCs;
Italy 8 IPCs (AARe never divided Germany into different areas!)
Balkans 3 IPCs
Sicily 2 IPCs.
Tripoli 1 IPCs
Tobruk 1 IPCs
Italian East Africa (1941 scenario) 1 IPCs

6 Infantry + 1 German Infantry (Afrika Korps)
2 Artillery + 1 German Artillery (AF)
1 Tank + 1 German Tank (AF)
1 Fighter
1 Bomber
1 BB
1 CA
1 DD
1 AP

More than this would make Italy too powerful! In the Med. I would expect: something like 6 sea zones, so that the British fleet in East Med. wouldn’t need to be reachable first turn. Malta would be added. It could probably be easily taken but with only one AP reinforcement of Africa could be more important (just as in the real war).

In Africa you would have Tripoli, Tobruk, Western Desert and Egypt areas, with an IC in Egypt. Then you could have a tug of war and everything not decided on the first turn. If balanced correctly, UK would have to move troops through the Med. to actually win vs. a good Italian, making the naval war all-important and Malta useful as a landing zone for troops (perhaps not totally historically correct but in the spirit of the war certainly). The naval campaign could be even in that Germany couldn’t commit subs and planes just like that due to different turn order, otherwise UK med. fleet would just be massacred!

Maybe the Afrika Korps could be able to forfeit its move and wait till the Italian move, in that way the desert campaign would be easier to conduct (?).

[losttribe04]

Do you think they will split E and W Balkins so both German and Italian can have an IC that will add to the med. fleet?

LT

[Lynxes]

My guess is that they might split Balkans into two, but not in order to put an IC in either of the areas. Maybe Italy will get both areas and all the Axis Minors would be included in the Italian forces (except Finland). This will unable the Germans to build an IC in Roumania/Balkans since this would unbalance the naval operations in the game.

[Imperious Leader]

In the war Hitler gave Italy duty to protect/police Greece, and most of Yugoslavia considering it in Italian sphere of influence.

I would think the Balkan allies are under German control. I think the Italian player will control a small deployment of “Africa corps” set up in Libya at start of both scenarios.

[losttribe04]

well if Italy does have a 16 - 24 IPC starting point the allies will be able to park in the med. and cut off the Axis advance early in the game.  Germany may choose to move a mass of troops into Rome to prevent an allied landing but I think that could really hurt the axis not being able to put boats in the water.

In revised you would never have though of sending a US fleet to the Med.  This is going to be interesting to see how little changes like this change the framework of ally / Axis strategies.

LT

[shermantank]

I think that Italy can really help the Axis powers in the Anniversary Edition (even though it didn’t help in WW2), but when would Italy play in the order of turns?

[losttribe04]

In the Pact_of_Steel triplea game Italy goes first then Russia.  The rest is the same as A&A revised.

LT

[squirecam]

@shermantank:

I think that Italy can really help the Axis powers in the Anniversary Edition (even though it didn’t help in WW2), but when would Italy play in the order of turns?

Italy helps/hurts, in that previously only the allies can get paid twice for swaping EE (w/o large japan forces) when Germany benefits once. However, in such a case, the allies can now swap a territory 3 times vs only twice before.

Also, Germany had all its units attack together.
If Italy is seperate, the Euro axis attack twice, but lose the “mass” advantage Italy IPC added to Germany.

[Imperious Leader]

I think its still alternating turns with axis followed by allies for sure in 1941, but reversed in 1942. I think Italy plays before UK deliberately to get rid of Uk crashing its fleet into Japanese as a gambit. That was totally impossible for UK to even consider in 1942. So Italy going before UK would present the threats that UK needs to respond to rather than get a free shot at Japan because the odds roller says do it.

[Krupp Steel]

Wow excellent points everyone,and couldn’t agree more IL about your dice=#of units for Neautral/Enemy territory.I f thats what you are saying,correct?

[Imperious Leader]

yea but it was just an idea of an easy way to do it. That way if you know whats in Spain or wherever , you can prepare and thats not fun at all. I prefer the random thing, anything that runs against preparation would make it more fun.

[Corbeau Blanc]

You guys forget the possibilities for “can opener” it gives to the axis.

If Germany open a hole in Russian defenses and Italians have a force of tanks in waiting, you get the perfect blitzkreig.

This means Russians need to be extremely cautious as soon Axis are able to mass within 2 territories of moscow ( Karelia, Belorussia ).

That frontline will be hard to defend now.

[Imperious Leader]

yes but Italy will have limited punch ability. But thats a good point.

The other thing is the Axis have balanced resolve to counter allied 1-2 punch because their will be no turn sequence that allows for 2 allied turns in a row, which is a kick in the arse for Axis.

[squirecam]

@Corbeau:

You guys forget the possibilities for “can opener” it gives to the axis.

If Germany open a hole in Russian defenses and Italians have a force of tanks in waiting, you get the perfect blitzkreig.

Italy is going to be hard pressed to conquer Africa, and save its own bacon rather than massing tanks for taking Moscow.

The idea of a 1-2 punch is fine. But Italy wont be half (or even 1/3) the offensive power Germany will be. Italy wont have enough IPC to buy masses of tanks (which isnt a good idea for them anyway).

Frankly, I like the idea of Italy as a distinct player. But even though Larry caved-in to us and made an Italy ruleset, I’m guessing the “better” (i.e. more competitive) version of the game will have Germany in control of Italy like in AAR.

But it is finally nice to have the option to play it either way.

[losttribe04]

With the one - two punch Germany will have to attack and Italy will have to occupy with INF.  Maybe Japan with some FTR’s.

LT

[Guest]

One thing that I am curious to see is if there is any provision for the Italian player to switch sides and join the Allies during the game.  That is basically what happened in 1943, and you had the US supplying the Italian Co-Belligerent Forces with military equipment, as the main Italian production centers were in North Italy.  Be interesting to see.  Also, I assume that the 1941 setup will reflect the Italian occupation of Ethiopia, with a small air unit component, maybe a destroyer and sub in Massawa, and some infantry units.  I cannot see any basis for an Italian Industrial complex in Africa, but figure that you will have a British one, with the option of building a US one as well.  The US was heavily involved in supporting the British forces in North Africa by mid 1941, following passage of the Lend-Lease Act in March of 1941.