-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
The Italian AI doesn't seem to care about the French border too much. The Germans will react however, it's temping to exploit southwards but I think the best thing is to push for the Alps ASAP and make a defensive line, so the Germans cannot reinforce. Italy must have lost a lot of IC in its northern plains, not that they had much to start with. They will struggle to maintain TC , supplies, reinforcements and upgrades now. However the hilly terrain as you work south favours the defender, as you're discovering. Treat them with respect here!
It is commonly believed that the Italians were utterly useless IRL, but I did read somewhere that in fact, in between the Fall of France and Operation Overlord, WWII was basically Germany vs USSR and UK & USA vs Italy. Weren't most of the divisions in North Africa Italian? They were commanded by a famous German OFC, but was there an element of inverted "spitfire snobbery" here?
ie. In the Battle of Britain, defeated Luftwaffe pilots always claimed to have been shot down by a Spitfire, when in fact most German aircrew were shot down by Hurricanes.
In that light the Italians did well to hold out as long as they did..
ie. In the Battle of Britain, defeated Luftwaffe pilots always claimed to have been shot down by a Spitfire, when in fact most German aircrew were shot down by Hurricanes.
In that light the Italians did well to hold out as long as they did..
Yes. Their quality was debatable, but under Rommel they were certainly not as useless as during Operation Compass, which resulted in a total disaster for the Italians, despite massive numerical superiority they had. I think that it was one of the most stunning defeats during WWII.
The Italians being a distraction for the Allies does not mean they were good fighters. I know you didn't say they were good fighters, but the general idea is that the Italian were crap fighters; which is not necessarily the same as "utterly useless". The only campaign the Italians were able to win in WWII without any support from their allies (i.e. Germany) was the conquest of Somalia land AFAIK. In that campaign, the Italians had 24,000 men against 4,000 British troops; which shows how ridiculously outnumbered the British were, and also the irrelevance of the campaign strategically given such small numbers on both sides.
There any many myths surrounding WWII, which also include Dunkirk, the 'Battle of Britain' itself (and the also hidden aspect of British and French treatment of civilians prior to France's capitulation, on a similar scale to that of the so-called 'rape of Belgium' in 1914).
Their fighting performance was so abysmal it beggars belief. Operation Compass, a British offensive, was 36,000 British versus 150,000 Italians; with a British victory and 115,000 Italian PoWs.
Greco-Italian War: 565,000 Italian versus less then 300,000 Greeks; 90,000 Italian casualties and 59,000 Greek casualties with a stalemate.
IRL if more German troops had been allowed to be sent to North Africa, then that campaign might have ended very differently. We have the stubbornness of Italian generals to thank for that mistake by the Axis.
Last edited:
With the emphasis on "might". Most of Rommel fanboys are just like him - they ignore logistics. If Rommel had logistical problems with the number of tanks he already had, the situation would get WORSE if more tanks arrived.
Don't get me wrong, Rommel was a good commander. He just wasn't that great as some people make him.
I was not ignoring logistics. Why do you think I made reference to "the stubbornness of Italian generals"? Because Germany could not send anymore divisions without the Italians withdrawing several of their own - which they vehemently refused.
I am more appraising German fighting ability, at least when compared to the Italians.
Note that I didn't say that you were a Rommel fanboy or that you ignored logistics - that was a more general comment. However, I think that we can agree on "might" 
. There was no guarantee of success, no matter how you look at it.
. There was no guarantee of success, no matter how you look at it.
Ah ok, my apologies for misunderstanding, yeah we can agree.Note that I didn't say that you were a Rommel fanboy or that you ignored logistics - that was a more general comment. However, I think that we can agree on "might"
Slightly detracting, but anyway: that also applies to the possible situation of Germany having air superiority over southern-England in 1940 and Sealion.
Their fleet has taken heavy losses against the French fleet (and that taking into account that France never upgraded its fleet (attachments).
Good progress in Italy! But it's "La Spezia", with a single "z"
Ups! Sorry, Lapsus Brutus
Indeed.
Exactly. We got to a point where the battles in Italy were painfully expensive (manpower wise) and the Italians were well dug in.
Valid points
Remember that the Italians are facing mainly Canadian troops in Europe and South Africans in Africa. The main French and British force remains in the Franco-German border
Interesting, it seems the Regia Marina has little use in the game. Guess the best time to attack would be in the winter, when the weather makes it extremely unfavourable for carriers in battle; but then the Allied navies have plenty of capital ships with which to sink the Italian ships. So I don't really know what to do with the Italian navy.
Sorry for detracting. :blush:Valid points
I'll remember. How does the org and morale of the Canadians and South Africans compare to the British and French?Remember that the Italians are facing mainly Canadian troops in Europe and South Africans in Africa. The main French and British force remains in the Franco-German border
You're able to pursue German u-boats right into the Kattegat and North Sea, where is the Luftwaffe? Maybe it would be best to just have stacks of destroyers and carriers when attacking submarines. Battleships have no sub attack value and are thus just a drain on the stacking penalty. Carriers have little combat value in sea provinces where the weather is raining or frozen. But well done so far, very interesting AAR.
Last edited:
All over France and Italy. France actually got quite irritated about all the German planes on french sky. We had half of the British fighters and all the French and Canadian air forces in France and the other half of the British in Italy. We deployed a lot of AA guns in both places, and although we shot a lot of planes down, more kept coming
With the war on North Africa coming to a close you'll have another 13~ divisions to call upon. My guess is Italy.
Good to see the fierce air battles with the Luftwaffe, it looks like the RAF will come out on top.
Good to see the fierce air battles with the Luftwaffe, it looks like the RAF will come out on top.
You don't want to be making an Amphibious assault with Motorised Infantry. Go to the Statistics Tab within the game and click on Army Unit modifiers. Marines are best for "shore attack" obviously but Mountain or Para can be used in a pinch, otherwise just go plain infantry over anything mechanised.
What's the optimal number of divisions again? 3?
If you have the transports and plain inf divisions to spare, I suppose you could rotate a second attack in the moment the first peters out, should exhaust the defenders.
I'd have ignored the minor Italian territories and used my trasnports and INF to do that. Your goal is to destroy divisions (which you have done in North Africa, but are unable to do in mainland because you can't make encirclements, they are too well defended ATM), failing that, take out their industry. Territory for territory's sake is not worth your time.
Bear in mind you can separate the transports from the capitol ships and have the big boys do a shore bombardment mission at the same time. Still, with a hilly province , beach modifier and 2 defenders its not going to be easy.
What's the optimal number of divisions again? 3?
If you have the transports and plain inf divisions to spare, I suppose you could rotate a second attack in the moment the first peters out, should exhaust the defenders.
I'd have ignored the minor Italian territories and used my trasnports and INF to do that. Your goal is to destroy divisions (which you have done in North Africa, but are unable to do in mainland because you can't make encirclements, they are too well defended ATM), failing that, take out their industry. Territory for territory's sake is not worth your time.
Bear in mind you can separate the transports from the capitol ships and have the big boys do a shore bombardment mission at the same time. Still, with a hilly province , beach modifier and 2 defenders its not going to be easy.
Imo Mot and Mech are relativly good at amphibios attack if compared to infantry. Marines are clearly superior. However, one should notice that their supriory increase with their tech level. Before Mar1942 those marines are only sightly better than Mtn or Inf.
Unless changed by naval doctrines 3 divisions can do shore attack without additional penalty. Naval doctrines can increase that number to 4, 5, 6 and even 8 in 1952.
Very good points. Unfortunately at the time I had no marines (I had some on the construction queue). The trick of rotating attack is definitely worth a try on my next game.
Very interesting. I actually didn't know about the optimal number. The more I play this game, the more I learn the importance of the different types of units
------
I will upload the next chapter later when I get home.