The obvious disadvantage of this strategy is that attacks on Soviets are made I3 / G4 instead of a G2 or I2 / G3. Since Italy did not handle Greece / Southern Europe, it will have a decent can opening force on the Eastern Front sufficient to take any territory (unless the russians make a stand) and having the Germans land their significant air force to prevent a counterattack. If there are no attractive targets on G4 (e.g, Russian Navy, bordering territories), then I believe Germany can reinforce the Russian territory(ies) captured in I3 (e.g., both Eastern Poland and Baltic States) without a declaration of war (thus collecting 5 IPC again?)
I like this though because the German airforce should be quite strong and a late declaration of war to Russia gives the 5 extra IPC to Germany multiple times, prevents Russia to do the middle east trick and prevents Russia from getting its other war NO.
If the German stack lead by repeated robust Italian can openers on an instoppable on it’s march to Moscow, then we should have this:
G4 (German stack in Baltic States with war on or not, if at War consider taking Karelia / Vyborg) - On R4, Russians need to abandon Leningrad (retreat to Archangel or total consolidation in Belarus or make a stand there)
On I4, Italians open belarus or take Leningrad.
On G5, Germans attack Belarus to reduce russian stack with superior firepower (and retreat if counterattack threat looms) or reinforce Italian belarus conquest.
On I5, assuming Russians fell back, Italians Open Smolensk
On G6, Germans reinforce Smolensk. (throughout this process, watch for ways to strat bomb russia with benefit of strong air force).
on G7 or G8 decisive attack on Moscow.
Waiting a bit to attack the Russians and save Italians troops for the can opening will lead to larger battles on the russian front or a planned retreat (which is good for Germany). This would create steady momentum for Germany (who can fight on their own terms, preserve their forces) and gradually weaken the Soviet union. If the outcome of the decisive battle in Moscow is in doubt, then just “go around it” and let germany create a steady flow of infantries and planes that slowly strangles the soviets while leaving options open on the Eastern front (e.g., strategic bombing, mechanized strikes supported by air force). This further complicates the US’s role to strike Italy.
The Italian buy on I1 was not determined, but I now think that 1 tank / 1 mech in Northern Italy is the right choice to the condition that at least 2 German fighters land in South Italy (better yet 3) to preserve some Italian air power (leaving tac bombers to cover Tobruk)
So because of this, I would adjust my first turn to this (shifting one bomber and one tac from 111, allowing for extra German fighters to land in South Italy instead of Tobruk). By taking the losses in SZ 97, this allows the German to inject 20 or 30 IPC in Italy’s economy and put the UK in further trouble. If UK chickens out, this German airforce (2 - 3 fighets and 1 tac in south italy + 2 Tacs in Tobruk), ensures that the UK leaves the med.
Build 2 fighters and 1 destroyer, Save 2
Take 106 with 2 subs (117 / 118) (87% win)
Take 91 with 2 subs (103/ 108) (85% win)
Attack 111 (BB, DD, CA) with 1 sub (124), 1 fighter (Norway), 1 fighter (Holland), 1 tac (Western Germany) 2 strat (Germany) 85% with scramble, 98% without
Attack southern France with 1 armor (Great Southern Germany), 1 tac (Germany) and 2 mech (Great Southern Germany) - 98% win
Take France Turn 1 (7 infantry, 2 mec, 3 artillery, 5 tanks) 97% win
Attack French Fleet with 2 fighters (Western Germany), 2 Tac (West Germany) (99%) 2 Tacs contnue to tobruk and one or 2 fighters land in south italy
Take Bulgaria with 1 infrantry from Romania / Finland with 1 infrantry from Norway
Take Yugoslavia (3 tanks, 6 infantry with 3 from great southern germany, 1 from romania, 2 from slovakia, 2 artillery from great southern Germany), 1 tac from Poland, 1 fighter from Slovakia (1 fighter continues to South Italy, Tac Continues to South Italy)
