Building Italian fleet - is there a point?

[dondoolee]

@U-505:

The problem with sending a Japanese CV to cover the Italian fleet is that the Allies move in between Japan and Italy(UK after Japan and the US after Italy). If you need to move the fleet to a different sea zone for any reason, either the US or UK will be able to hit one of the isolated fleets while they are in transition.

I’m not saying that you shouldn’t send the Japanese CV because of that, I’m just saying that’s what you should be concerned with.

I agree 101% the main problem is keeping the navy together, however there should be enough of a tipoff to when you can and can not move the navies due it taking a couple of turns for the allies to reach the Med.

Now look at what happens if Italy builds a carrier.

What does the carrier do, it costs 14 IPC’s to build from a 10 IPC country.  That’s 1 full turn of unproductivity, on top of that what does the carrier do?  It doesn’t attack, it can establish no zone of control,how much is this going to help?  If I’m the axis I want to blow s*it up!  Leave the pure defensive stuff for those sissy allies.  I just spent 14 dollars from a 10 dollar country that doesnt help me attack, I can still only send 2 units to Africa, and now I am short ground units.  On top of which a carrier in the Med doesn’t do much to extend any useful range for the Italian fighter.  If you use Jap or Ger fighters this makes a carrier with 2 planes that just sits there.  If the allies ignore it you just wasted 14 dollars something that does nothing.  Essentialy you are in danger of buying something more expensive than a destroyer and less useful due to no attack power.  Why is the Japanese carrier better than this?  Because it is free and the airplanes on that carrier can be useful if Japan decides to pick a little bit on Africa. And for those who want to buy a carrier and an airplane, congrats you just spent 24 IPC’s on units that can’t take or hold land from a 10 IPC country and you can still only funnel 2 troops at a time to Africa/ Russia assuming you have any ground troops after going hog wild on a defensive navy.

Cruisers are almost just as useless, but at least they can attack (and you can still attack w/the Ita plane too).  Battleships are just too pricy to be usefull, and submarines are gimmicky and would probably warrent their own topic of when and when not to use subs (though they are cheap cannon fodder in the right situation).  If you insist on an Italian capital ship the destroyer may be the best option, but I still don’t see the use of it with Italy’s ltd funds.

Look at the Transport ship though, this is the only ship I could see being profitable.  It activates another ship bombartment, and it gives you increases threat an flexability, plus you may save a little money by not purchasing tanks to rush to the Eastern Front by just using transports to shuttle inf/art.  This is the only real viable navel option I see, a boat that is cheap and poses a real threat, that’s what the Axis have to look,at especially cash straped Italy.

You also have to figure, if Germany can build a few extra planes (and maybe even a bomber) this in a way is providing a defense to your ships, this is helped even more if you have a Jap carrier their (If you feel protecting the Italian fleet is that important and that much in peril).

Another important thing to look at, is that time is not on the Axis’ side.  Time spent building purley defensive units is slowing you down.  The allies essentially HAVE to build unproductive units.  Everytime the US sends a tranny with 2 units on it it wastes 7IPC’s.  They also have to spend money on destroyers, carriers, etc in the first few turns.  All things that can’t attack or take land, this is to good an opportunity to be as aggresive as possible in the most cost effective way possible.

Finally, and most importantly how important is the Italian fleet to the Allied army?  If it was their top priority, it would be sunk by turn 2 without you even getting to use it.  Britain could simply build 3 bombers on T1 (bringing the total to 4) and has a good chance of having an extra fighter from Egy the most Italy can have in defense is 1 Bat, 2 cru, 1 Des.  Perhaps America would build the convoy fleet the first turn.  If the Italian navy really is that important, it will not get a chance to survive.

@bongaroo:

@dondoolee:

And fleets are not better on defense than Infantry.  1 Infantry unit costs 3 ans defends at 2, 1 destroyer costs 8 and defends at 2.

I was referring to naval combat.  Not to the best unit for defense.

CVs are better on the defensive and so are any planes riding on them.  Also, in Italy’s case specifically, on defense you’ll be facing either the US, or the UK one at a time.  On the attack your facing them combined in SZ12 more than likely.

Italy needs a fleet and money spent on dropping more boats in the water to keep boots moving into Africa is a sound plan in my book.

Still if you want to defend Italy, 3 inf and 1 tank is better than spending 14 IPC’s for a carrier defending.  You get more bang for your buck using ground units to defend, plus you can use them to take land if they survive.  But you can get “free” defense from Japan, a German airforce to help you out, PLUS there is a decent chance you can get 1-3 surviving German subs to combine with your navy all at no cost to Italy.

[dondoolee]

@dondoolee:

@U-505:

The problem with sending a Japanese CV to cover the Italian fleet is that the Allies move in between Japan and Italy(UK after Japan and the US after Italy). If you need to move the fleet to a different sea zone for any reason, either the US or UK will be able to hit one of the isolated fleets while they are in transition.

I’m not saying that you shouldn’t send the Japanese CV because of that, I’m just saying that’s what you should be concerned with.

I agree 101% the main problem is keeping the navy together, however there should be enough of a tipoff to when you can and can not move the navies due it taking a couple of turns for the allies to reach the Med.

Now look at what happens if Italy builds a carrier.

What does the carrier do, it costs 14 IPC’s to build from a 10 IPC country.  That’s 1 full turn of unproductivity, on top of that what does the carrier do?  It doesn’t attack, it can establish no zone of control,how much is this going to help?  If I’m the axis I want to blow s*it up!  Leave the pure defensive stuff for those sissy allies.  I just spent 14 dollars from a 10 dollar country that doesnt help me attack, I can still only send 2 units to Africa, and now I am short ground units.  On top of which a carrier in the Med doesn’t do much to extend any useful range for the Italian fighter.  If you use Jap or Ger fighters this makes a carrier with 2 planes that just sits there.  If the allies ignore it you just wasted 14 dollars something that does nothing.  Essentialy you are in danger of buying something more expensive than a destroyer and less useful due to no attack power.  Why is the Japanese carrier better than this?  Because it is free and the airplanes on that carrier can be useful if Japan decides to pick a little bit on Africa. And for those who want to buy a carrier and an airplane, congrats you just spent 24 IPC’s on units that can’t take or hold land from a 10 IPC country and you can still only funnel 2 troops at a time to Africa/ Russia assuming you have any ground troops after going hog wild on a defensive navy.

Cruisers are almost just as useless, but at least they can attack (and you can still attack w/the Ita plane too).  Battleships are just too pricy to be usefull, and submarines are gimmicky and would probably warrent their own topic of when and when not to use subs (though they are cheap cannon fodder in the right situation).  If you insist on an Italian capital ship the destroyer may be the best option, but I still don’t see the use of it with Italy’s ltd funds.

Look at the Transport ship though, this is the only ship I could see being profitable.  It activates another ship bombartment, and it gives you increases threat an flexability, plus you may save a little money by not purchasing tanks to rush to the Eastern Front by just using transports to shuttle inf/art.  This is the only real viable navel option I see, a boat that is cheap and poses a real threat, that’s what the Axis have to look,at especially cash straped Italy.

You also have to figure, if Germany can build a few extra planes (and maybe even a bomber) this in a way is providing a defense to your ships, this is helped even more if you have a Jap carrier their (If you feel protecting the Italian fleet is that important and that much in peril).

Another important thing to look at, is that time is not on the Axis’ side.  Time spent building purley defensive units is slowing you down.  The allies essentially HAVE to build unproductive units.  Everytime the US sends a tranny with 2 units on it it wastes 7IPC’s.  They also have to spend money on destroyers, carriers, etc in the first few turns.  All things that can’t attack or take land, this is to good an opportunity to be as aggresive as possible in the most cost effective way possible.

Finally, and most importantly how important is the Italian fleet to the Allied army?  If it was their top priority, it would be sunk by turn 2 without you even getting to use it.  Britain could simply build 3 bombers on T1 (bringing the total to 4) and has a good chance of having an extra fighter from Egy the most Italy can have in defense is 1 Bat, 2 cru, 1 Des.  This could then be followed by 2 more bombers for clean up by the US just in case.  Perhaps America would build the convoy fleet the first turn.  If the Italian navy really is that important, it will not get a chance to survive.

@bongaroo:

@dondoolee:

And fleets are not better on defense than Infantry.  1 Infantry unit costs 3 ans defends at 2, 1 destroyer costs 8 and defends at 2.

I was referring to naval combat.  Not to the best unit for defense.

CVs are better on the defensive and so are any planes riding on them.  Also, in Italy’s case specifically, on defense you’ll be facing either the US, or the UK one at a time.  On the attack your facing them combined in SZ12 more than likely.

Italy needs a fleet and money spent on dropping more boats in the water to keep boots moving into Africa is a sound plan in my book.

Still if you want to defend Italy, 3 inf and 1 tank is better than spending 14 IPC’s for a carrier defending.  You get more bang for your buck using ground units to defend, plus you can use them to take land if they survive.  But you can get “free” defense from Japan, a German airforce to help you out, PLUS there is a decent chance you can get 1-3 surviving German subs to combine with your navy all at no cost to Italy.

[ogrebait]

Each game will evolve differently, but I consider keeping the Italian fleet alive and a potential threat to the Allies as a major Axis objective. If the Italian Navy is destroyed, Italy is generally relegated to a very minor roll, and the Allies potientially have an uncontested 1-2 punch with the combined UK and US moves.

How much, and by what means, the Italian Fleet should be reinforced depends almost completely on what the Allies are doing. I’ve done minor naval builds when the Allies were not pressing in on the Med. On the other hand, in one game I kept building  boats until Italy had both the US and UK out-gunned in the Atlantic.

Regardless, Italy cannot execute its military options in a vacuum. Until such time that Italy builds a large enough economic base to stand on its own (which may never happen), Italy will need assistance from Germany in the early rounds, and then Germany or Japan in the later rounds.

[dondoolee]

@ogrebait:

Each game will evolve differently, but I consider keeping the Italian fleet alive and a potential threat to the Allies as a major Axis objective. If the Italian Navy is destroyed, Italy is generally relegated to a very minor roll, and the Allies potientially have an uncontested 1-2 punch with the combined UK and US moves.

How much, and by what means, the Italian Fleet should be reinforced depends almost completely on what the Allies are doing. I’ve done minor naval builds when the Allies were not pressing in on the Med. On the other hand, in one game I kept building  boats until Italy had both the US and UK out-gunned in the Atlantic.

Regardless, Italy cannot execute its military options in a vacuum. Until such time that Italy builds a large enough economic base to stand on its own (which may never happen), Italy will need assistance from Germany in the early rounds, and then Germany or Japan in the later rounds.

Very true, but in Rnds 1 and 2, I am guessing Italy is going to be wasting time and money building a navy 90%ish of the time.  But still, it can be re-enforced for free by the japs (turn 3) and even the germans (with surviving subs and an airforce build threatining the allies).  Not only that if for some reason the allies see an Italian navy as the #1 priority in their strat it can be killed off before it even gets a chance to do anything.  It just shouldn’t be seen as a “go to” or optimal strategy for Italy to be pushing for navel builds in the early rounds of the game.  Now the later rounds, there is no telling what is going to happen.

[bongaroo]

Italy is only a 10IPC nation when you haven’t exerted control on North Africa and the Med.

Just to clarify quickly, are you playing with NOs or not?  With NOs you should have Italy into the low 20s in a couple of turns.

A good reason for a CV for the Italian fleet besides the great defensive value of it with 2 fighters is that it really helps you keep your fighters mobile.  If you are having to land your fighters in Italy or North Africa, your limiting your mobility.  From a CV in any of the sea zones you’ll be able to reach all territories within Italy’s theatre of war.

[dondoolee]

@bongaroo:

Italy is only a 10IPC nation when you haven’t exerted control on North Africa and the Med.

Just to clarify quickly, are you playing with NOs or not?  With NOs you should have Italy into the low 20s in a couple of turns.

A good reason for a CV for the Italian fleet besides the great defensive value of it with 2 fighters is that it really helps you keep your fighters mobile.  If you are having to land your fighters in Italy or North Africa, your limiting your mobility.  From a CV in any of the sea zones you’ll be able to reach all territories within Italy’s theatre of war.

Usually w/o NO’s.  But that still doesn’t change the fact that if the Allies find the Italian navy that valuable it will not survive past T2.  If they are not kiling it, then clearly they have other priorities, and you are building an expensive, purley defensive unit from a country that should be offensive minded, on top of which it is your poorest country as well.  It still doesn’t change the fact that the unit that you wish for can be supplied for “free” by a much richer country.  And if the Italian fighters for whatever reason are important to you to be on a carrier, you can just send the Jap fighters elsewhere and land Italian fighters on the Jap carrier.

It also doesn’t change that it makes it easier for the allies to ignore the Med fleet completly when you buy a purley defensive unit.  If you just bought planes instead of a carrier, you would be: buying a cheaper unit, buying a much more flexible unit, adding to defense, and simultaneously threating the allied fleet. Also, if the allies really wanted to gun for Africa and didn’t feel like dealing w/ the med fleet they could probably pull that off.  For example, the UK could have a SAF IC while the US does suicide trannies to ALG, all while ignoring your fleet and keeping their fleet in the Atlantic fully intact and able to invade Europe.  Would you spend yet another 7 ipc’s on navy to make another transport to keep up with allied shipping and factory builds?  If you did you just spent 10 on an airplane, 14 on a cv, and 7 on a tran all by turn 3?  I think that may be leading the Italian to spending their way out of relevance.

Now later on in the game (maybe even starting at turn 3) there may be a point to be building a navy (assuming Italy has gained a bit in IPC’s).  But still, for no cost to Italy you can have 2 fig, 1 car, and maybe as much as 3 subs staying in the Med all by turn 3.  And if the allies valued your navy that much you wouldn’t evn get a chance to build a carrier by T3. Why waste money on a carrier in the med?

[bongaroo]

Well, good luck in your games when one of the Allies neuters Italy and leaves you in a game of 3v2 essenitally.

[fanofbond]

yea Italy is a very important part of the axis, but an umimportant threat to the the players of the allies.  In my current game Im playing Italy took control of the eastern us for part of the round(till US tank blitz took it back) because Uk fleet decided to blockade a small Germany fleet.(1 BB) After the taking of eastern Us the Italian fleet was at the mercy of the Uk fleet (4 Battleships).  Now in our games though I don’t believe Italy’s fleet will live long anymore.  Yes though they can be a huge part of the game.

[SgtBlitz]

If KGF is the strategy used by the allies (and often is), building a fleet for the med should be a priority for the axis, period.  Japan should definitely be able to spare a carrier, planes, bs and whatever else it can funnel through the suez if America isn’t building anything in the pacific.  If italy doesn’t add to its fleet every turn though, that japanese fleet won’t have enough punch to do much by round 3 when it gets there.  Building a carrier either round 2 or 3 can effectively double the size of the fleet at that juncture, making it much more survivable.

Also, a waiting carrier for german or japanese planes to drop onto is awesome, since only America can intervene in 41’ between Axis turns (Italy (carrier I2), America, Germany (drops fighters G3), Russia (no units in Med), Japan (also drops fighters, adds fleet J3) .  Usually only a few American units can reach the fleet by round 2, so an attack by America on a full powered italian fleet may be reconsidered, or just lose them badly needed units. The best part is that you get a combined fleet off italy by the middle of round 3.

At this point, the allies have the same problem you usually have with attacking combined fleets; one power doesn’t have enough units to make it worth fighting high value battles and risk losing all their supporting pieces (i.e. fighters and subs are expendable, while bombers, transports and carriers are not).  You can’t attack them, they can’t attack you.  Usually a stacking war develops in SZ 12 with the allies bringing everything but the kitchen sink… And italy can hold the fort by buying a few subs a turn or blocking with a destroyer at gibraltar, japan can bring up new naval units as needed too.

And finally, the best part about it is that if it DOES get sunk and was just a huge waste of time, it was just that, a diversion.  By now it is Round 5 or 6 and Germany is waltzing through Russia, and Japan is unstoppable with 70+ IPCs.  If the allies ignore it, force them to pay attention by threatening the supply route from America to Europe. Hope this helps.

[Upside-down_Turtle]

@SgtBlitz:

If KGF is the strategy used by the allies (and often is), building a fleet for the med should be a priority for the axis, period.  Japan should definitely be able to spare a carrier, planes, bs and whatever else it can funnel through the suez if America isn’t building anything in the pacific.  If italy doesn’t add to its fleet every turn though, that japanese fleet won’t have enough punch to do much by round 3 when it gets there.  Building a carrier either round 2 or 3 can effectively double the size of the fleet at that juncture, making it much more survivable.

Also, a waiting carrier for german or japanese planes to drop onto is awesome, since only America can intervene in 41’ between Axis turns (Italy (carrier I2), America, Germany (drops fighters G3), Russia (no units in Med), Japan (also drops fighters, adds fleet J3) .  Usually only a few American units can reach the fleet by round 2, so an attack by America on a full powered italian fleet may be reconsidered, or just lose them badly needed units. The best part is that you get a combined fleet off italy by the middle of round 3.

At this point, the allies have the same problem you usually have with attacking combined fleets; one power doesn’t have enough units to make it worth fighting high value battles and risk losing all their supporting pieces (i.e. fighters and subs are expendable, while bombers, transports and carriers are not).  You can’t attack them, they can’t attack you.  Usually a stacking war develops in SZ 12 with the allies bringing everything but the kitchen sink… And italy can hold the fort by buying a few subs a turn or blocking with a destroyer at gibraltar, japan can bring up new naval units as needed too.

And finally, the best part about it is that if it DOES get sunk and was just a huge waste of time, it was just that, a diversion.  By now it is Round 5 or 6 and Germany is waltzing through Russia, and Japan is unstoppable with 70+ IPCs.  If the allies ignore it, force them to pay attention by threatening the supply route from America to Europe. Hope this helps.

Yes, I think a KGF is completely out of the question, still, the Allies may go that rout.  If it’s KIF, and Italy looses its fleet, time for plan B: build infantry and hold tight.  Turn Europe’s “weak underbelly” into a 6-pack, and request support from Germany if they can spare infantry.

[dondoolee]

Time is not on the Axis’ side, and you are buying a very expensive (for Italian standards) piece of equipment that can not project aggression, take land, or pressure Russia.

You HAVE TO assume that the UK player (and a good chance, even the US) #1 priority is to make sure any sea zone it finds valuable is secured.  You have to assume he is paying attention to every ship and airplane and seeing if his fleet can potentially be overtaken.  He HAS to do that, it is his job, that is what the UK does.  He has to know how many turns it would take for the oppents to get all the pieces together and attack him, and he has to know how much time he has to prepare and what to and not worry about it.

You also have to assume that if he values the Med sea zone most, you are dead.  The fact is though, the Allies don’t place a high value on having strong ships in the Med.  If it was worth it, they would be there.  They can land troops in Africa while largly ignoring the Italian fleet (they will either suicide transport, or bring a fleet down there that is simply to big to be sunk).  And if they wanted they could build an IC T1 in SAF if they valued Africa that highly, so that would give them 2 places on a continent to stage attacks, while you are sorely lacking meaningful units because you built an expensive, defensive fleet.  On top of that they may be bombing your capital (Italy is a juicy target anyway), if they bomb well enough they may even prevent you from buying your carrier T2, that would really screw you.

On T1 and T2 Italy has bought nothing aggressive and still has the amount of ground units it started with, and even with it’s impressive fleet (which is most likely just moveing back and forth in 3 remote, out of the way sea zones) can only ship 2 guys at a time to any given front.

And for those advocating buying a Tranny, a Fig, AND a carrier that is insane. 31 IPC’s later, you have no ground units  but you do have a totally sweet fleet!  Not that I advocate this, but for 34 IPC’s you could build 2 bombers and a fig.  This immediatly makes Italy more aggressive, coupled with German planes and bombers on France (this will give you 2 fig, 2 bomb) you are threating the allied fleet even more (maybe forcing them to waste more money on ships) you can support attacks easier with ground troops, AND you can bomb Britain.  You are doing all this while still protecting your fleet.  This is much more useful than 1 carrier 1 fig 1tranny (I still wouldn’t recomend it). And still if you need a carrier your buddy Japan has got one for free.

Another fun thing I may be half tempted to try (just for sh!ts) if I were America and I saw Italy sit on their cash the 1st turn, is buy 5 subs and send them your way (it may be better to wait T2, but still).  You have nothing in your fleet to stop them AND your planes become useless.  Are you now going to build a plane, a tranny, a carrier, AND a destroyer?  If I could pull that sub stunt off and sink your navy, which i would have the cheaper navy and higher odds on (man,would that be a crowning moment of awsome)  all I have to do is camp 2 subs in your sea zone and you’ll never be able to build a navy again.  Either that or I could send them to screw around with the Japs a bit.  This would open Africa wide up, and in the mean time I keep bombing Italy, to kick while it is down, and to remind it of what a naughty boy it has been.

The world is going to war, people are being killed by the millions, ideological lines are being drawn, brave sacrifices are being made, every side is locked in an epic struggle of life and death/ good and evil on a scale that has never been seen before: except Italy, all Italy is doing is fiddle fuXXing around with some boats.

[bongaroo]

@dondoolee:

Time is not on the Axis’ side, and you are buying a very expensive …blah blah blah… except Italy, all Italy is doing is fiddle fuXXing around with some boats.

Wow, pretty upset about this to go and use censored curse words at us.  I think you are simplifying the problem too much.

Without a navy Italy cannot move it’s troops into Africa, without African IPCs Italy cannot afford the boats (and troops) needed to secure it’s holdings.

You can’t have one without the other.  In my games I enjoy watching the Allies spending money to put more boats in the water.  It buys Germany and Japan the time they need to crush Russia.

[DarthMaximus]

I don’t think Ita necessarily needs more of a fleet to help secure Afr.

They start with 2 inf there, and can get inf, 1 arm there on Ita 1.  The arm is important for blitzing.  At this point the UK should just have the 2 inf in Safr/Rho.  Round 2 you can get another 1 inf and 2 arm plus 1-2 ger units if you moved one to Balk or Bul (on G1) or even a Ukr survivor.

You simply can’t compete with a determined Allies assualt if they want Afr.  It just isn’t possible.  UK can dump 6 units and US can dump 8 (obviously not immediately) but very shortly.  All you need is a tank or two to blitz and clear out the 2 inf in Safr, which again can be done on say Ita 3 with the units you drop off in Ita 1 and 2.

While you are doing that you can send inf/rt/arm to bul/ukr to threaten Russian and the remainder of your Afr core to Trj/Per (then reinforced by J).  Once you claim the southern part of Afr via blitzing let Japan defend it for (assuming they have the resources) while you concentrate on Russia with Germany.

It doesn’t take too long for the Allies to nuetralize the Ita fleet, you simply have to assume you will lose it in Rd 3 (4 at the latest) unless you escape to the Red Sea.  The Allies can also have a realistic token threat on Rome by Rd 3 with up to 4 UK ground units + planes and 4-6 US ground units plus planes.  Not much but enough to make you regret buying ships on Ita 1-2 esp if you have them off the coast of Egy.  And if the Allies do force you to defend Sz 14 then they can use their DDs/CAs for fodder if needed conserving their air.

Finally an Ita AC w/ftrs alone won’t necessarily deter an attack b/c Italy has no cheap fodder, after the first hit taken to the BB you are immediately losing CAs or ftrs.  I’ll trade US or UK ftrs for either of those even if I can’t get to the AC or BB

For example (assume UK stacked Per and saved up to strike Trj on UK3)  Teh US can realistically send 4 ftrs, 2 boms + rd 1 buys (assume US sees Ita buy an AC and buys 1 bom)
The US can then attack with:
4 ftrs, 3 boms vs. 2 ca, 1 ac, 2 ftrs, 1 bb
Say 4 hits to 4.  The Italians already have to make a choice between losing ftr vs. ac.

Obviously that is just one example and takes some careful planning by the Allies (maybe some luck to), but the US is free to react to the Ita 1 buy (or non-buy) and easily has the flexibility to buy units to have a decent shot to sink the Ita fleet in rd 3.

Also if Ita buy a second trn before adding other ships, it probably won’t do them much good since it adds no defense to the fleet.  The US will attack 2 CAs, 1 bb, X trns with as little as 2 ftrs, 2 boms.

Afr is important but you don’t want to spend more resources on it then it is worth.

I think you claim what you can early with Ita, try and delay when the Allies get to Lib/Egy, while you maybe free up a Jap trn or two to reinforce the Ita/Ger held parts of Afr.

[dondoolee]

@bongaroo:

Wow, pretty upset about this to go and use censored curse words at us.  I think you are simplifying the problem too much.

Heck yeah I’m upset, my best friend was killed by poor Italian judgment.  So I tend to get a little emotional when I see it.

[dondoolee]

@DarthMaximus:

Also if Ita buy a second trn before adding other ships, it probably won’t do them much good since it adds no defense to the fleet.  The US will attack 2 CAs, 1 bb, X trns with as little as 2 ftrs, 2 boms.

I agree pretty much with your analysis for Italy.  And while I don’t really see building a tranny as the strongest option for a T1 or T2 build, I think it is more usefull than any other naval build.  And if you assume it is going to be backed by a jap carrier and german subs, you can probably get some good use out of it.  It would really help with the CAU and stalling the Allies a little more in Africa maybe, plus you could be buying less tanks as you could move more cheaper units just as fast to a needed front.

And maybe even as a joke move you could kind of pincer America with the Japs on one side and the Italians on the other.

[bongaroo]

@dondoolee:

I agree pretty much with your analysis for Italy.  And while I don’t really see building a tranny as the strongest option for a T1 or T2 build, I think it is more usefull than any other naval build.  And if you assume it is going to be backed by a jap carrier and german subs, you can probably get some good use out of it.

How many games of yours have a German sub in the Med, let alone multiples?  I’ve never seen any reason for the Germans to purchase any boats nor had an IC that was capable of building them into the MED.

How does this happen in your games?

[U-505]

@bongaroo:

How many games of yours have a German sub in the Med, let alone multiples?  I’ve never seen any reason for the Germans to purchase any boats nor had an IC that was capable of building them into the MED.

1 or 2 for me.

How does this happen in your games?

Germany attacks sz12 and one or both of the SS survive and on their turns either the UK or US have other priorities or they fear counterattack by Axis units so the SS are allowed to survive. They are dead meat if they stay in sz12 and it would be suicide to send them back up north so they go into the Med.

[atarihuana]

even if 2 subs survive. 2@1 vs DD / 2 bombers should be more than enough US1.

[U-505]

@atarihuana:

even if 2 subs survive. 2@1 vs DD / 2 bombers should be more than enough US1.

Absolutely. But, it sometimes ins’t enough. 1 hit each and the second SS would survive. And I can’t speak for what everybody would do with the US units when faced with the 2 SS in sz12. It doesn’t happen very often but I have had a game where there were 2 German SS in the Med.

I also have a KJF game going where it is turn 3 and 1 German SS has been sitting in sz12 for the whole game.  :-)

[dondoolee]

@bongaroo:

@dondoolee:

How many games of yours have a German sub in the Med, let alone multiples?  I’ve never seen any reason for the Germans to purchase any boats nor had an IC that was capable of building them into the MED.

How does this happen in your games?

1-2 can get put in there, and if you really wanted, Germany may be able to build a sub on T1.  Even so the subs are just a chery on top deal.  The Italian navy is dead as soon as the Allies want it gone.  The fact is the navy can be gone by t2 if the allies really thought it was that important, (especially if you sit a turn and wait to buy a carrier) The defense comes from German airplanes being a threat to the allied fleet.  There lies Italy’s best bet for defense (and still the Jap carrier if you really insist on defense).

I am of the opinion, the faster Italy can get ground troops out, and open up a point of a legit threat to Russia (Think about a 1-2 punch w/ Italy-Germany or maybe even Italy-Japan) the better shape the Axis are in.  This can be accomplished T3 or 4, and if the allies start comming in, use the Italians as a way to stall before the Germans have to deal with them.  Italy is in a prime position to get the Ukraine and Cauc don’t waste it.  I think the biggest easy mistake for either the Axis or the Allies is to over commit to Africa.  Usually when one does that the other side wins.