Italy Painted Pieces

@Juan_de_Marco:

I disagree with taranto on a different level: positioning and denial of objectives. It’s worth a lot more for the british to keep a larger fleet alive in the med than to kill the battleship of the Italians. And if you get all the good defensive units together at Malta seazone, the Italians have to split up their fleet if they wish to clear it. Now if you can make sure you keep some air units around, the transports will sink too.

I’m with you.  Not very big on Taranto.  Not only what you said, but I feel it thins the UK up a little too much by having to bring planes down from London.

Other than the first game of global I ever played as the Allies, letting the Italian fleet be has never been the difference between an Allied win or loss.  The way you keep them at bay is by getting a solid US/UK force to SZ91 early in the game.

India stands there. 2 subs doesn’t always convoy the entire income. still get burma and west india for 1 inf. Why would anyone leave their capital?

\ S /
                                                                                          ~~~~~
Hey guys, look at that steaming pile of BULL–---->        ~~~~~~
                                                                                      -––—––

Be careul not to step in that.

That was precisely my thought, McLovin.  I feel, at this point in time, Germany needs a method to produce warships in the Med.  If one allows Italy to take S. France, this - essentially - means that Germany has to build a complex in Yugoslavia.  This may be a good idea in the long run anyway, making it a little easier to reinforce the south against Russia. (OOB this could be a major complex, Alpha 2 I do not think it can.)

I feel an Airbase would be nice to accompany the complex in Yugoslavia, if you go this route, since then you can put 6 fighters in the air for cover air patrol.  But again, if you have S. France, I think you would not need this. (Little harder since you have to build Italy in one zone and Germany in another instead of combined, but much cheaper.)

One needs to be prepared for every outcome.  That’s all I am saying.

@deadbunny:

the USA can build a massive fleet and either take Rome or move into Africa(I have seen both done in a single turn).

Do you mean building the fleet and taking Rome and Africa in the same turn? I must be misunderstanding this post.

Well, if I had written it, I think I would have been referring to SZ 92 which is where the US may want to be at the end of turn 4. It can dump troops into both Italy and Egypt. Maybe as a turn to take away victory cities? Otherwise, I’d just go straight for Italy and reinforce it next turn.

Awesome.  Thanks for everyones help!

@RedHunter:

@calvinhobbesliker:

I think in Poland, the calvary was attacking German inf, and then tanks showed up.

You would be wrong to think that. Polish calvary and German tanks never clashed. The Polish horsemen ran like hell when they saw tanks because they weren’t insane.

You just finished me sentence.I did not mean to imply the cavalry decided to fight the tanks.