Italy the um? something of hoi

[TeutonicKnight]

I I were to play Italy, and thats not too far fetched given my love for thier bravery in WW2. I would go economy/tech if I can. Militarily I would relegate myself to defending what Germany had conquered, for a price of course This would allow Germany to free up more of its troops to deal with the allies. They would still have to keep a small amount incase of an actual landing.

Only after, and only if, I could get fairly modern as say Germany, I would actually try and lash out on my own. I would go heavy navy/air so as I could try and act as England in EU2 and keep a stronger enemy at bay because the lack of a navy to get to me.

Given whats known there is very little I could gain from a war in Africa but to bog my economy down, but who knows I might have to give far more support to Germany there.

 

[Hartmann]

In my opinion, Africa is important to Italy for a number of reasons. As Italy, I would want to hold on to Lybia (and later, depending on what happens to France, Tunis) at any cost to avoid being invaded from the South. The best thing to make sure that this never happens is to get to the Suez. (Actually, when playing Italy, I would love to have Spain in the Axis, too, to get the Mediterranean "sealed" from both sides.) Once this is achieved, there are alot of further options: Greece, the Middle East ...

Of course, this assumes a lot of stuff going well.

Hartmann

 

[unmerged(10333)]

I think Italy would be an excellent target of annexation for Germany it being a Great naval base and it is nice place to springboard into the suez and oil rich mideast

 

[unmerged(1972)]

The reason Italy needs to take North Africa, is to keep the Allies at an arm's length. You need to seal the Gibraltar Straits, and you need to seal of the Suez Channel. After you have done that, there's nothing within range to really threaten you, so Italy can go wherever they want pretty much -- Greece, the Balkans, the Middle-East, the rest of Africa, Crimea even.

Once you have managed to take N. Africa, a not insignificant problem, you decrease the number of possible landing points for the Allies. You still have to cover the entire Atlantic coast, but at least the soft underbelly of Europe is covered.

You might argue that taking Gibraltar and the Suez Zone would be enough, but then they'd only go through the desert.

 

[unmerged(8000)]

Italy should certainly be a "game-changer" in HOI. In fact under a human brain her effort could easily give the axis the boost they need to finish off the British in Arfica and contribute to war against Russia.

It should be remembered that in 1938 Italy had 3% of world manufacturing while Japan had only 4 and France 4.5. Italy will certainly be no weakling in the right hands...

 

[Aetius]

Problem is that the US had 30%. As pointed out above the Italians had the same problem as Japan, no resources. The Italians also attacked in too many places at once the Greece campaign was fought at the same time as the North Africa campaign.

 

[unmerged(8622)]

Originally posted by TeutonicKnight
I I were to play Italy, and thats not too far fetched given my love for thier bravery in WW2. I would go economy/tech if I can. Militarily I would relegate myself to defending what Germany had conquered, for a price of course This would allow Germany to free up more of its troops to deal with the allies. They would still have to keep a small amount incase of an actual landing.

Only after, and only if, I could get fairly modern as say Germany, I would actually try and lash out on my own. I would go heavy navy/air so as I could try and act as England in EU2 and keep a stronger enemy at bay because the lack of a navy to get to me.

Given whats known there is very little I could gain from a war in Africa but to bog my economy down, but who knows I might have to give far more support to Germany there.

I dont know if i'd use any efforts to modernize my navy as a priority. Thats not to say, i wont use some of resources to further naval tech, but my biggest beef is to get a strong fighting army together, with enough armor to punch right through to Egypt with or without Rommel. Good Infantry, motorized if i can swing it, will be the key to winning a back and forth war i think, equipped with a crazy amount of AT and AA ability, my infantry will be the key to *holding* what i can possibly grab. I fully intend to throw everything into a N. Africa struggle. Malta, will be the first *real* engagement for me I think. With Malta gone, my navy wont be harassed constantly...not to mention convoys and troop transports.
Overall combining a fanatical determination with Production, infantry and tanks, and airpower will win the day in N. Africa!
Then using oil from the ME ill build a grand navy to protect Germany and aid in the conquest of Gibraltar and Portugal.
WHEW I cant wait to play this game!!

 

[unmerged(9422)]

Originally posted by Aetius
Problem is that the US had 30%. As pointed out above the Italians had the same problem as Japan, no resources. The Italians also attacked in too many places at once the Greece campaign was fought at the same time as the North Africa campaign.

Yes, the Italians and the Japanese had some of the lowest production rates out of the major powers (United States, Germany, British Empire, United Soviet Socialists Republics, Italy, Japan, ect. )

The Japanese also had no resources (As there are few resources in Japan), as you pointed out. The Japanese economy depended on Foreign Markets, and so when the Economic Depression started, many of these foreign markets closed, or couldn't sell to Japan.

Besides for North Africa and Greece, I believe the Italians also sent soldiers to help the Germans in Russia.

Meiji-Tenno

 

[Nikolai II]

Italy lacked in airforce, using radial engines instead of water-cooled which was a cardinal sin when more power was needed for faster planes with bigger guns. Also, due to inter-services rivalry naval air couldn't use torpedoes but had to resort to dive-bombing, not good.

Italy lacked in navy, using composite wood/steel armor structures instead of wood, and having no carriers, claiming to be able to reach all corners of the Med' with their exaggarated air force.

Italy lacked in army, having few tanks and many of them being either A:fake or B:tankettes. B isn't so bad since all others had them as well, but it's not a winning hand.


So, as I have mentioned in another thread, 1936 is a good place to start, since you can improve you position to at least get water-cooled aircraft engines, and invest harder in Spain promising them Gib' for alliance, then strike towards Suez. If you have carrier-based air it can be a good supplement since Italian sand-filters were lousy for desert warfare.


Also, Malta is a cornerstone since it's smack dab in the shortest route you'll have from Italy to Africa. Historically it was completely undefended when Italy DoWed, and a quick invasion could have netted it. As is the Brits will probably cover it better* but it has to go. (*which they should be hard pressed to do, just look at how feeble the defenses in Singapore was)

 

[unmerged(9362)]

Originally posted by Nikolai II
Italy lacked in airforce, using radial engines instead of water-cooled which was a cardinal sin when more power was needed for faster planes with bigger guns.

The problem is a bit more complex. In WW2 the most powerful engines were radials (expecially the ones used by US Navy airplanes), so radials aren't bad. The problem was that Italian industries hadn't experience in projecting radials. In fact Italy had excellent V12 engines in the 1920's and first half of the 1930's, but in 1933 (I don't remember the exact date, but before the beginning of HoI) the govern choose the radials, because are less vulnerable. So Italian industries had to buy the licenses of British and American radial engines, but those nations sold only the projects of old engines. Probably a player of HoI will not be able to return to the production of V12 engines, but he will buy the license from Germany. In fact in 1940 Italy bought the project of the Daimler-Benz DB601 and started its production as Alfa Romeo RA 1000 Monsone, and in 1942 bought the DB605, built as Fiat RA 1050 Tifone. There were plans to buy also the DB603, but then there was the surrender.

Also, due to inter-services rivalry naval air couldn't use torpedoes but had to resort to dive-bombing, not good.

I know there were a lot of rivalry between Navy and Air Force, but probably the Navy didn't use torpedo bombers simply because it didn't have suitable airplanes. Moreover the Navy Air Corps was composed only of recon planes and a few fighters used on battleships (the fighter Reggiane RE 2000 Falco). There were no dive bombers under the control of the Navy. There were 2 aircraft carriers under construction in 1943: the Aquila (90% completed in sept 1943) and the Sparviero (only at the beginning of the construction). The aircraft that had to be used on them was the Reggiane RE 2001 Ariete, a fighter bomber armed with 2 Breda-Safat 12,7mm and 2 MG 15/20 20mm guns. It was capable of carrying a 650kg bomb. There were also plans to use the excellent fighter Fiat G.55 Centauro as torpedo attack airplane. So, historically, the Navy hadn't bombers or torpedo bombers, but their use was planned with the aircraft carriers.

So, as I have mentioned in another thread, 1936 is a good place to start, since you can improve you position to at least get water-cooled aircraft engines, and invest harder in Spain promising them Gib' for alliance, then strike towards Suez.

I don't think Franco will enter war only for Gibraltar, moreover Italo-German help was already decisive in real history, but he didn't enter war. I hope in HoI it will be almost impossible to see Spain in WW2, as was historically.

If you have carrier-based air it can be a good supplement since Italian sand-filters were lousy for desert warfare.

German aircrafts used Italian sand filters too, I've never read they were not good.

 

[unmerged(9362)]

Originally posted by Aetius
Problem is that the US had 30%. As pointed out above the Italians had the same problem as Japan, no resources.

I think we had even more problems than Japan, because Japan had the control of oil and rubber of East Indies and of coal, iron and copper of Manchuria. Italy had only the few oil of Albania and the coal of Sardinia (there was a bit of coal also in Istria, but I'm not sure), the other resources were given to us by Germany, but only when they had enough for themselves.

 

[unmerged(3115)]

IF Italy had of managed to push thru cairo and take iraq then Germany would have probably beaten Russia.
Certainly the VVS (red airforce) would never have regained air superiority in 43 and positively the red army could never have mauled the wehrmacht so badly in '44.

half million trucks and the fuel to drive them is a hellofalot more mobile than horse drawn carts, yes? One thing to win a battle its another to maintain it and exploit it.

That would be my goal, to knock england out of egypt in 40 during the BoB and take iran and iraq (no problems with friendly local population either)

Not to mention the fringe benefits of all that fuel. What many dont know is while its true the luftwaffe starved for fuel in late war they also for many months earlier wanted for DECENT octane fuel.

Sort of hamstrung fighter performance.

 

[KRonn]

Italy could be an interesting nation to play. I think that you'd have to try and develop the military tech to a better point, or to where it has abilities to go against Italy's opponents. Probably can't expect to get too heavily bogged down, but to pick your fights as much as possible. A fairly strong navy to maintain some control in some Mediterranean sea areas.

Given the country's limited resources I'd look towards very limited strategic goals. Such as taking Egypt (with German help if necessary); and moving towards the oil and other resources that existed in the Mid East at the time. Not knowing the game yet, I don't know how attainable this goal is. Probably should be if Italy can be made stronger militarily & economically, and Germay can devote more forces to the N. Africa region.

 

[unmerged(7078)]

a germany/italy/spain alliance is possible . although spain and italy could have gone either way before about 37 or 38. The turks allegiance was always in question (although they did declare war on germany in 45) Britain had been trying to get Turkey in the war since France surrendered. There still could have been a Britain/France/Itlay alliance though and i want to test it out. This way Hitler would of had a problem

 

[Earl Uhtred]

One strategy that hasn't been mentioned is for Italy to remain neutral vs the Western Allies, perhaps striking at minors that become targets of opportunity, perhaps joining the war against Russia, but doing whatever it took to keep UK/US/France off the doorstep. Like Kentucky in the ACW, a neutral Italy could secure this theatre for the Axis in a way a belligerent one never could.

Malta was certainly important, but has been overrated.