AFAIK historically Germany invaded Norway in order to secure the trade route of Sweden's steel. As well as providing bases for submarines in the North sea. However in game Germany has no issue with steel at all. Thought?
- 3
As Germany, are there any reasons to invade Norway at all?
- Thread starter him_15
- Start date
-
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.
In game Norway is nothing but a liability for Germany, just another place to garrison and defend.
As Germany I ignore it. Greece (and balkans) has better resources.
As Germany I ignore it. Greece (and balkans) has better resources.
- 2
- 1
heavy water production for 2x 200% nuclear research.
also sweden is a good target for a collab government to remove factories spent on tungsten. Norway provides a land border.
also sweden is a good target for a collab government to remove factories spent on tungsten. Norway provides a land border.
- 5
- 1
In my Germany games, I use Norway to launch an invasion on the north of the UK as a distraction, so my invasions across the channel have less resistance.
- 4
It's not hard to occupy with almost free war goal. Gives you some tungsten, you can form the Reichskommissariat out of it, you get bonus nuclear research and easy way to deal with the Sweden. Also it can be used to widern your approach to the northren sea.
- 4
- 2
- 1
Does it make a difference? You need two naval zones to launch from the North Sea both from German mainland and Norway.
How do you get the research bonus for nukes? 3000h and have not seen this.
Anyway, Norway should be handled differently. UK should also have a war goal on Norway/Sweden since that was the plan to cut off trade to Germany.
Anyway, Norway should be handled differently. UK should also have a war goal on Norway/Sweden since that was the plan to cut off trade to Germany.
- 3
- 1
UK already has a focus for war goals, but historically, Germany attacked first.
- 2
Naval control of the Northern approaches to Russia is useful for naval invasions of Murmansk and Arkanghelsk. Those are fairly decent victory points and will make the USSR surrender a lot earlier.
- 6
- 2
- 1
You need to control Norway or have it puppeted and have the 1st nuke tech researched.
Decision runs for 1 year
I think you also need La resistance as there is a operation by Britain to disrupt this.
- 4
- 2
Hopefully in Scandinavian rework they will introduce ice-free ports and a rewamp of trade system. I.e make Germany only to be able to import metals from Sweden during summer unless they control the port of Narvik. In addition would also make it more strategic with the Arctic convoys to Murmansk. This can also be done by denying Germany imports from Sweden if Norway is in the Allies or is neutral, but that isn't really simulating the situation, and least not the Soviet iced and ice-free ports.
UK and France should also, during the rework, get events to either align Norway or get a war goal against them, again if that happen Germany can't import from Sweden during summer, perhaps not at all as France and UK planned to take control of Kiruna in Sweden alltogether. It would also be vital if you don't want the Allies to box you in to the Baltic Sea once again. Much more difficult to pass your u-boqts and surface raiders through the Kattegat and Skagerak when the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force hold Norway.
As of now, I take Norway mostly as RP, but also to get bases for airplanes amd naval task forces. No, I do not min-max.
UK and France should also, during the rework, get events to either align Norway or get a war goal against them, again if that happen Germany can't import from Sweden during summer, perhaps not at all as France and UK planned to take control of Kiruna in Sweden alltogether. It would also be vital if you don't want the Allies to box you in to the Baltic Sea once again. Much more difficult to pass your u-boqts and surface raiders through the Kattegat and Skagerak when the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force hold Norway.
As of now, I take Norway mostly as RP, but also to get bases for airplanes amd naval task forces. No, I do not min-max.
- 7
- 1
I'm on the fence about Norway in SP.
On the one hand, who doesn't want extra IC and the resources in Norway? Even I can run Germany out of steel eventually. And the naval bases can extend submarine ranges for Germany's early crappy subs.
On the other hand, why pay the equipment and manpower cost to occupy it?
On the third hand, the equipment cost is pretty meager even without collaboration in place. And it's not like Norway is a huge manpower drain over time. Defending Norway isn't difficult, either.
On the fourth hand, what in the Hell else are you going to do while waiting for Romania to drop their guarantee or join the Axis if you attack France in 39.
- 10
- 2
- 1
Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden all boost your IC and resources.
Manpower drain is negligible, equipment -also.
Germany cares for oil, and Rubber, more IC can get you those 2 via synthetics. You don`t really care for infantry kit, you gain those in huge volumes capitulating european states, and can produce them with plentiful steel.
Strictly speaking none actually matter, since USSR is a walkover.
Manpower drain is negligible, equipment -also.
Germany cares for oil, and Rubber, more IC can get you those 2 via synthetics. You don`t really care for infantry kit, you gain those in huge volumes capitulating european states, and can produce them with plentiful steel.
Strictly speaking none actually matter, since USSR is a walkover.
- 2
I always combine norway with sweden. I attack sweden first (after denmark has fallen, I'm not harassed by the RN), capitulate it, and then overrun norway.
Norway provides a bit of tungsten, but the big load comes from sweden
Norway provides a bit of tungsten, but the big load comes from sweden
Invade sweden instead and let norway into the axis when GB attacks. If you need to satisfy a concern for how you get the steel, just slap down a level 5 railway from Copenhagen to the iron mines.
- 1
You just get a passive bonus for controlling one of the areas.
- 3
- 1
Defending Norway is not difficult and often costs the Allies a lot of casualties if and when they try to take it. If the Allies are allowed to keep the Norwegian ports, that completely bottles ups U-boat navigation out of the North Sea. Holding the the Norwegian ports and airbases makes it easier to attack Allied and Soviet convoys. Probably worth doing if it doesn't detract from reinforcing the main Western and Eastern fronts.
- 3
- 1
- 1
Yes, because there is neither iron ore itself nor its quality to matter (Swedish one was good) - you excavate steel right away, - and more importantly transporting resources half a globe away is free and instant, so Germany has little reasons to rely on Swedish deposits all that much.
Tbf, once Germany got Alsace-Lorraine they weren't as dependant on Swedish ore. But I agree, the resources should be revised in Germany-Sweden-France, or really across the board.
- 1
- 1