Italy vs Germany any suggestion?

[iosys2]

Any suggestion IS WELCOME?

I play my standard scenario Rome vs Barbarians.

I gamely exploited Ethiopian war, never ended and for 2 years I send bombing mission on Addis Abeba so now I have rather high skill air leader plenty 3 some 4 and 5 even 6.

I tried to build IC along side with some units to try to raise the bad Italian IC.
As of Anschluss 1937 I went in an expatiation spree (Totally ignored by other power...)
Annexed Yugoslavia - 2 months
Puppet Czechoslovakia . 2 month
Puppet Hungary- 1,5 month
Annexed Greece - 1 month
Annexed Bulgaria - 2 weeks
Puppet Romania - 2 weeks
Annexed Turkey - 4 days !?
Puppet Persia - 3 months (very bad infrastructure never ending movement)
Annexed Afghanistan - 2 or 3 months (even worst infrastructure)

In this way I get some few IC, LP and all resources I need and I cut out Germany from South and east Europe (no ally, no resource).

Then I amassed my army on the border and guarantee Poland.

The Guarantee was a strategic (gamy) move that put me at war with Germany WITHOUT my puppets, so the front is limited to only Austrian.

The fact is that Germany is really overpowered, on Nov 1938 the ratio is
ITA GER
IC 207 278
LP 18.71 34.77!?!?!?!?!?!! (come on paradox!)
MP 457 1563!!!!!!! (and my land mass is far larger)
Land 185 412
Air 25 38
Naval 52 30 (useless I gonna dissolve it for MP)

I got slightly more LARM 23 ITA only 6 GER, But that was rather stupid as we fight in the mountains and Tank in mountains are bad.


My plan is to old the line and bomb like Hell in air superiority till I build more INF and Mountaineer, then try to cut from Bolzano to Czech border to encircle and vanquish some german division, then back to original defense line and repeat a couple of time, If I get stronger cut toward France encircle and free some France division.

Any suggestion?

 

[Kovax]

The problem in 1939 is that Poland isn't strong enough to tie up Germany for any significant length of time, and meanwhile France will just sit behind their wall until Germany comes to get them. It's just you and Poland against Germany, and Poland won't be in it for long. You might do slightly better when Germany is engaged in France, by guaranteeing the low countries; at least France will have to fight then, and tie up a lot of German troops for a few months. About 6-10 months into Barbarossa is probably your best chance to wreck Germany, since they won't have the usual Czech core territory or their Balkan allies to assist against the Soviets. Once they're fully committed, and the Spring rains end after a brutal winter of blood-letting against the Soviets, that's about the time I'd "go for it'. Of course, Italy guaranteeing the sovereignty of the Soviet Union seems a bit weird......

I agree that Germany is insanely overpowered in terms of Leadership. If you think Italy is underwhelming in that respect, try playing one of the smaller industrialized European nations (Netherlands, Sweden, Hungary, Belgium), where you get half of the Leadership of Italy for a country that was historically somewhere in the same general technology ballpark (or in some cases, more advanced).

 

[iosys2]

I m afraid that waiting for barbarossa doing nothing but bombing Addis Abeba gonna kill be of boredom.
Besides with such ridiculous disparity of LP, the more time passes the more backward my tech will be.

Guarantee Belgium or Holland can be an idea indeed.
But it make very little difference after all, and I think I can hold the line enough for Allied to join, Poland really last nothing.

I do not know whether say in my land and defend then try to encircle or strike and rush for the Danube border which also make a good defensive line and there tank can be useful, but I m afraid that attrition gonna be too much then

 

[marxianTJ]

I few things that seem to be misunderstood here that I'll provide advice for.

1. Building IC with a war coming in 1938 is a terrible idea, it would have paid to invest more in tanks. Because your IC builds couldn't possibly have paid off by the time the war started, so you essentially produced nothing during all the time you produced IC.

Why tanks? You cannot possibly hope to ever best Germany land army vs land army in a straight up fight. Italy in HOI3 simply doesn't have the MP to build enough units to both hold the alps AND push through them - the front is too narrow, and Germany is simply far superior in every way - you have to thin them out and the best way to do that is to open another front on terrain that is far less heavily garrisoned and far easier to move forward through. Your only advantage is that the Regia Marina should be able to trounce the Kriegsmarine at sea - use it.

Poland actually has a big army, but the AI simply can't defend it (the front is too large).

Anyways so tanks. Tanks do indeed fight poorly in mountains HOWEVER because of the way piercing advantage works in TFH, you *must* use them against Germany - build the biggest tanks you can in fact. The way piercing works is that so long as you have higher armor than they have piercing (as long as your medium tanks are up to date only other tanks can pierce them typically unless Germany has rushed AT techs). That means your tank bearing units will only take 50% MP damage per battle. If you have heavy tanks you're virtually guaranteed the piercing advantage unless Germany also has heavy tanks (impossible for Italy to do in 1938, but if you wait longer it would be possible to field at least a few probably in early 1940).

2. You could try to use the RM to dive on Berlin. It's gamey, but, if you can take Berlin VERY rapidly, you will rob Germany of *all* of its supply stockpiles. Which, due to the nature of Germany's resource situation, will mean they will experience a DRASTIC reduction in IC and experience intermittent supply shortages over the whole front - the only worry for you would be that you would then have to race France through Southern Germany to assure you didnt end up with a much bigger France.

So in short, I'd restart, and focus on building TPs and ARM.

Use the ARM to hold the Alps and to reduce the amount of troops you need to actually hold said Alps, and load as much stuff as you can onto transports, and on the first day of the war send the whole dang RM to Rostock (Eastern side of Denmark) and have a repeat Battle of Jutland, win it, and then land your whole army a few tiles from Berlin and try to gobble it up before Germany can reinforce to stop you. You would use a few tanks here too if you can (they will save you on MP and you may need some fast units to get at Berlin ASAP). You will also want to build some convoys pre-war just in case.

 

[Palmerdale]

I've never tried to tackle Germany. If I did, I would approach it a little differently.

I'd move against Yugoslavia, Greece and Turkey, annexing them, maybe puppeting a buffer country or two. The problem is going to be getting enough neutrality to DoW anyone. That usually comes around mid-to-late 37. I usually try to make quick work of Ethiopia, your idea of gaming them to remain at war should work to keep your production at speed. I don't know how this would affect your neutrality. Maybe it's a learning opportunity for me.

My usual goal as Italy is to claim the Med for myself, with resulting conflicts against Vichy France (or France) and the UK. A campaign against the Germans might keep the French and British off Italy's African holdings, but I wouldn't count on it. I would definitely have to cancel any plans for Africa until the conflict with Germany concluded. I could even see the possibility of the UK AI swamping the Japan AI while Italy occupied Germany's attention.

The actual conflict with Germany. If Germany and France are already at war, I'd try my best to befriend France and make my assault through France, with Marines and AT/ART, rather than try to come over the mountains. I'd definitely want some serious defenses along whatever border I would have with Germany, 2/3xMTN+AT+ART. If I decided to use a custom start, I'd scrap most of the navy (and navy techs) to be able to start building the MAR/MTN forces. I might even sacrifice any armor techs, even reclaiming the MOT LP. An all-fuel-for-planes policy. I'd also want Multi-role and CAGs techs early on. I'd even consider stripping Ethiopia entirely of troops and rebuild them in Italy with only a stronghold in Edd to keep the war going, trusting that Ethiopia wouldn't actually try to dislodge me and end the war.

 

[marxianTJ]

I've not tried to Italy Vs. Germany in hoi3 tbh, but I have played a lot of Italy. I don't see it happening unless you really game the system against them by taking Berlin early. I did do it several times in hoi2 and it was amazingly fun. Unfortunately, repeating similar tactics are not possible in HOI3 because the diplomacy system is so truncated.

Just for a taste.

In hoi2, you could do what Mussolini actually wanted to do in the 20s (just later) which is turn most of the Balkans into Italian puppet states by diplomacy and bombast alone. So after you forge alliances and special relationships with every nation in the Balkans, you would take Spain for yourself - after all, wasn't Spain one of the most precious parts of the Roman empire? So in short, you would destroy Yugoslavia, Greece, and Spain, while forging alliances with Bulgaria, Romania, and Hungary (even though historically bits or the entirety of these nations were Roman). In the meantime, Germany would still declare war on Poland and draw itself into a war with the Allies, and remove Austria and Czechoslovakia from the game.

Then Germany would eventually take out HOL and BEL and begin moving into France. That is when you would strike.... France! But *not* join Hitler. So essentially, you would end up carving up France and splitting it 50/50. Meanwhile you would now have a massive front, be settling in, in Africa, and have 3 friends, ready to invade Germany over a very wide front. Furthermore, your empire would be united overland excepting the African bits. Then you would stab Hitler in the back before he declared war on the USSR.

It was a really fun way to play, but not possible to do in hoi3, if nothing else than for the fact that if you were to DoW France you would immediately be placed into the Axis and unable to declare against Germany until the Allies were defeated - which would be most of the game.

 

[iosys2]

I have difficulty to put in place your suggestion

As for IC I disagree of course I did not spend 2 years only in IC, but at each cycle I had 2.3 IC build, Italy start with a micro IC comapred Germany and if it doesn't go up the GAP will be killing.

Regia Marina is useless as it can not go further that Gibraltar, An invasion with a rush to Berlin from North is just unthinkable
Even Convoy hunting is useless as Germany got nothing from Africa and Asia owned by Allied or me.

In HOI3 France or Britain seem hard coded to never ally Italy tried many time even 100% aligned with Allied faction so no chnances over there

Use Arm instead of Inf. And Mountaineers? Can try but I already saw that most of German inf at the border has piercing already at 8! while ARM has armor 5.
I can try to replace Alpini with LARM\ARM and concentrate Alpini where I wants break thru. In Alps mountaineers are faster than LARM

 

[Big Nev]

as long as your medium tanks are up to date only other tanks can pierce them typically unless Germany has rushed AT tech

Erm...

Nope.

What about TDs?

Actually, the way to stop getting stomped by German armour, in the Alps, is to spend research on the AT ammo & muzzle tech and build TDs.
This will keep your AT & TD piercing up with Arm armour.

Now I know TDs don’t have the armour to get you the 2x damage & ½ damage suffered for Hard-on-Soft, but you would probably not get that against Germany anyway. The important thing is to ensure that Germany doesn’t get it against YOU. Then you can rely on the fact that TDs are support bgds (so you get more meat in your frontage than a tank user) and the fact that you’re defending in mountains. Tanks (Arm,) get a -70 for defending in mountains but TDs only get -30.
So:
[3Inf+Arm] suffer -17.5 defending, and can get three divisions in to over-fill for 12 points of frontage.
[3Inf+TD] only suffer -7.5 defending in mountains. And you can stack four divisions up to 12 points of frontage.

[3Inf+AT] is even better as it gets no penalty at all but read on.

On the German attacking side…
[3Inf+Arm] suffer -57.5 attacking, and, similarly, can only get three divisions (to your four) in for 12 points of frontage.
Typical AI divisions will be worse. The only troops Germany can deploy that get decent stat’s are, of course, mountain troops, but the AI doesn’t mix armour, of any kind, with mountain troops because it’s stupid. Right?

Wrong, because THAT is where the TD comes in because it WILL get the armour Vs penetration bonus against MTN troops and trash them.


Obviously, it’s even better if you’re defending with [3MTN+TD] as this division gets a bonus of 15 and [3MTN+AT] gets +22 when defending in mountains. VERY difficult to shift.

 

[iosys2]

sounds good but I read in another thread that mixing Mont with any other brigade like Art, AT or TD will nullifies his mont bonus. It will be considered like Inf.

Is that so or not?

 

[Big Nev]

Unless they are reporting a bug I've never heard of, I don't know where that comes from.

Adding anything to a MNT division carries a penalty, yes, and I've given you the actual figurs from TFH for both MTN & Inf based divisions. You can clearly see the penalties which will be applied to each division in the division builder. Just hover your mouse over the tree.

I've been mixing TDs with MTN (& MAR) for years.

Another little trick I use is to split-off the TD so the pure MTN div can move quickly in to place & start digging in. When the TD catches up, re-attach & the whole division gets the dug-in bonus.

Rationalised as the MTN troops knowing where the TDs will be best placed & dig the hull-down possitions in advance. Something the Germans were renowned for.

 

[marxianTJ]

TD's would be a good way to start the tank production, since they do grant tank practical - although there are much more gamey ways of getting lots of tank practical. I'm mainly looking to build ARM here because of the cost savings in MP. German ARM will nullify your advantage, and German AT will nullify your advantage, but it'll basically be random chance as to whether or not Germany has divisions capable of piercing the ARM at all. Which is going to save on meager supplies of MP *somewhere*. The other problem with TD here is that in 38' techs they'll be pierced by regular infantry, so you're going to hemorrhage MP in those mountains whenever they attack regardless of what divisions they use to do it - and believe me they'll try because Germany will have massive numerical superiority no matter what you do.

I thought ARM had a gap with AT techs early game, I was wrong. But HARM still applies lol. But you'd have to be a real wizard to get HARM as Italy in 1938 (funny fact is France is actually the best country in the whole game for rushing HARM tech lol).

Building IC is a bad idea for Italy. Firstly, you have a limited supply of resources to even feed IC, and especially since you're fighting in 38' you're completely wasting all of the IC invested in IC because it takes 4-5 years to even pay off said IC. Here is an example.

We invest 5 IC in creating 1 IC in 1936, it typically takes most of the whole year to build. So you're sucking up 5 IC on producing 1 IC for a whole year. It will be 5 years before you're able to come out ahead, production wise, of where you would have been if you had just built units for those 5 years instead of building the 1 IC - not to mention cost savings from practical increases. That's why, in general, building IC is only a good idea if the war is very far away and you have nothing else better to do (and even then it's not that efficient). Since you're aiming to fight in 38/39, you're going to want to ONLY built units, otherwise it's an outright waste unless you can put the war off until 1941-42. 1,825 IC days to gain one IC, or for around the same cost, you could produce ~5.67 infantry brigades. Those 5 1/2 infantry brigades are going to be a LOT more valuable to you than the 1 IC you gain (until the opportunity cost of the 1 point of IC will win out in 1941 and beyond). Tanks are very expensive starting off and you will actually spend more IC on building ARMs early on than building the IC, but that's still progress that you wouldn't have made otherwise.

I would also vouch for Nev's MTN tactics, since Italy starts out with some MTN and Alpini troops, they would be perfect fits for the Alpine defense divisions There is a penalty, but since you'll have 2 years to move the MTN and their attachments into place, it wont really matter, all new attachments will just be bonus firepower. Depending on how Germany garrisons its border you may even be able to push into Germany a bit if you would want. I would look at the shapes of the tiles in the alps, and try to find some set up where you are forced to hold the fewest number of tiles which are open to the fewest number of other tiles for attack (so they don't get as many bonuses for attacking from multiple tiles). But if you could stick an ARM brigade on the MTNs that'd be even better because then you'd only lose 1/2 of your MTN's MP when Germany doesn't drag its tanks into the mountains.


I would also strongly advise against moving ANY troops into France, even if you're friends, because of a feature/bug in the game where if you move your troops into allied territory they are treated as "moving" thus their fuel and supply consumption is doubled, even if they're sitting still. Furthermore, the resources to feed them are "teleported" out of your stockpiles and into your ally's, so you can literally end up getting your units trapped in allied territory if you run out of fuel/supplies.

 

[Big Nev]

The other problem with TD here is that in 38' techs they'll be pierced by regular infantry

When have you ever seen Germany feild an infantry division that didn't include an AT bgd?

That AT bgd would pierce your Arm too, so you're still going to be better off with the TD divisions because neither division build will get you the armour bonus but you will get four TD divisions in the battle.

And let's not forget that an infantry division, with AT, attacking in mountains is going to get a hefty -50 to -60 compared to your -7½.

OK, IF you've managed to research the combined arms tech' by . . . 1938?
Never mind.


And I've had a daft idea about how to protect these divisions from the inevitable air attack. You can't add AA to them because it'll increace their combat penalty, something that you can't afford, AND it'll take a significant amount of meat out of the sandwhich.

So . . .

[HQ+3AA]

It has no frontage, so won't be involved in combat, but it's in the province so will shoot at any aircraft that try ground attacks

As you'll need a Corps bgd anyway, you could save a few officers.

 

[Palmerdale]

Unless they are reporting a bug I've never heard of, I don't know where that comes from.

Adding anything to a MNT division carries a penalty, yes, and I've given you the actual figurs from TFH for both MTN & Inf based divisions. You can clearly see the penalties which will be applied to each division in the division builder. Just hover your mouse over the tree.

I've been mixing TDs with MTN (& MAR) for years.

Another little trick I use is to split-off the TD so the pure MTN div can move quickly in to place & start digging in. When the TD catches up, re-attach & the whole division gets the dug-in bonus.

Rationalised as the MTN troops knowing where the TDs will be best placed & dig the hull-down possitions in advance. Something the Germans were renowned for.

I use a variation of this trick a lot. I build 4x(3xMTN) and 1x(4xAT) independently. When I deploy them, I'll manually join them to end up with 4x(3xMTN, AT). It usually works out that my MTN are deployed and in place when the ATs/ARTs join them. I'll also build 'caps' of 4x(AT, ART) to add to basic the 3xMTN troops once I have that tech.

I've never applied the decompose, move and reform trick. Is it really worth the (extra) micromanagement just to get a few days advantage on relocating and digging in? I've not noticed any substantial difference for digging in unless the province also has some level of fortifications. (There's a difference, it's just minimal. I'd think the hassle of the micromanagement might not be worth it). If the province is that important, wouldn't an airborne operation be better? Drop the paratrooper, move the MTN, then move the paratrooper back for another mission?

 

[marxianTJ]

I've seen plenty of Germany divisions with no AT - because they don't start with AT attached, and the AI doesn't attach brigades to extant units, so the starting German army will have no attachments at all, and those that do will only have ENG (besides the heeres HQ). As far as what they build after that it's all random chance - the AI can't actually tell if it's building an AT or an ART so whatever non-width brigades end up attached to a division developed by the AI is random chance - and there are lots of choices to make besides AT. So there will be plenty of vanilla INF, and AA floating around.

 

[Big Nev]

Umm...

Oh yeah. The starting units. Sorry, I was forgetting about them.

The AI has always fallen down there. Hmm . . .

But the rest isn't totally random.

If I'm reading it right, SecondaryMain = "anti_tank_brigade" means every infantry division (built) will be built with an AT bgd and... something else randonly from (tech's permiting) AA, Art, Eng, RArt, AC or SHArm.

 

[iosys2]

start having problem in the line German get down with 3 division 2xMNT+2TD
those seems able to beat my 2 division no matter LARM + INF or MNT+INF...
While I hope Armata 2 break the line from West I found out I can have Armata 1 attack the rear from Czechoslovakia; my NEUTRAL puppet (and it stays neutral!!)
But I may not have time to build the new army maybe a previous savegame and launch a preventive attack at half strengh

In the mean time I build a new army
Armata 1
4x 4xALRM
4x 2xALRM+2xARM
Armata 2
2xINF+AT+Art
2xINF+AA+Art
2xINF+2xArt
3xINF+Art

 

[Animum24]

I normally don't play too ahistorical and I have only once as a noob played as Italy. So take my advice with a grain of salt. But as my experience goes, there is one principle in army comp that I always follow no matter what: Keep it simple.
Your army comp is very complicated. A lot of specialised divisions. That makes you produce a lot of different things. Therefore you won't maximise your practicals and you waste LS. In addition, managing your army gets tedious and you can quickly be in a position, where your specialised AA div has to hold the line and fails completely. Or it gets there by accident. Management is simpler if you keep the variation between units as small as possible and keep the specialised where they belong.
Keep one mainline infantry template. It should be focused on staying power in offence and defence. High Org and high defensiveness and a leader with low to medium skill and defensive and offensive traits. Put them into Corps that will be the base line of your armies. Corps leaders have the same traits as well.
I'd suggest to use 3x INF or 2x INF + AT + Art. Get rid of the AA, they don't work properly. Use the IC to build a proper fighter cover. Produced in higher quantities, they get cheaper and cheaper. If you have less IC than your opponent for air stuff, invest the IC into defensive air units like fighters. So you can at least challenge him in the air. Bombers are expensive and pretty much useless if you don't have air superiority.

You shouldn't hesitate to put more IC into your specialists. They should do their job best. But don't have two who do the same job - efficiency, you know.
Those specialists should be able to beat any other division that is put against them in their special field.
Want a break-through specialist, use heavy tanks, artillery and other hard stuff.
Want an exploit? LARM and AC are your go to.

Now you need to assess how and where you are going to beat the enemy and equip your specialists accordingly. That should be your way to victory.

At least it has always been for me. Might be that I'm only a lazy player. The veterans on this forum have definitely different opinions on the matter.

 

[marxianTJ]

Without ARM/HARM present you're definitely going to want 5-10 (preferably 10) divisions per tile on the German border to have a chance at holding them permanently and then draw down from there as you need more troops elsewhere. You'll be fine until France falls - then life gets complicated because you'll be relentlessly bombed. You'll also want reserve corps sitting back so that, should a province start to fold, you can cycle in fresh troops, while sending depleted divisions to the rear. Think WW1.

I would also suggest that Italy doesn't have the IC to build an airforce that will contribute to the fight, so it's best to just let it go and hope the UK will impact them somewhat, and use Italy's starting air force on special occasions. You could *try* to build an airforce, but it'll end up being worn down 2-3 weeks in, and then you'll live without air cover anyhow for a few months so may as well get used to it.

 

[Kovax]

Personally, I'd let the naval techs languish, put a couple of points into armor techs and doctrines (mainly to produce faster light tanks with better doctrines, not go for medium or heavy armor), and concentrate primarily on Infantry, Artillery, and Interceptors, with a point invested in keeping your special forces current (MTN). If you keep your basic INF techs and doctrines high, plus ART in each division, you CAN match or beat Germany's infantry on a 1:1 basis. NOT having an AT brigade in each division means that you'll be throwing more Soft Attack at them than they throw back, because practically anything you put in your own division (like another INF or ART) will have higher SA.

Wait until Germany is stuck deep into the low countries, and then attack. Go straight for the VP locations, and try to knock GER out of the game with a gamey land grab before they can redeploy stuff to face you. Holding the Alps isn't a road to victory, it's merely a way of staving off inevitable defeat for a while. Rather than trying to bleed them dry without doing the same to yourself, you need to outrun, not outfight, Germany. Use your air units primarily for recon, so your ground units don't accidentally run headlong into German concentrations, and to engage any bombers that go after your ground units.

With GER not having the CZE freebies to boost its production and manpower, and fighting a 2-front war against both you and France for several months at least, you've got a chance to blitz the "soft underbelly" of the Reich. The loss of several major cities (with IC and Leadership) and the diversion of dozens of fighting units to deal with you should also adversely affect their performance in France.

I would have to agree with the other posters that Italy building IC is a bad idea. Italy has real problems with feeding its existing IC in the war. Worse, the payoff date is far later for Italy than for Germany, due to lower Practicals, lack of minister boosts, and other factors which make IC building at least a viable choice for Germany (and even there it's still pretty borderline, until it starts showing a clear benefit in late 1940 to '41).

Now I'm going to have to do an Italy vs Germany game, just to try this out.

 

[Palmerdale]

What does everyone think about upgrading the initial INF brigades to MTN brigades for this scenario? And what would you recommend doing with the starting CAV brigades (6, I think)?

As Italy, I also tend to transport all the MIL that starts in Ethiopia to the mainland and upgrading them usually to MTN. I've never found that Italy has the leadership to improve both the militia and infantry techs. So I simply convert everything to Infantry and live with that. The MIL can't stand up to the British regulars when they decide to liberate Ethiopia, at least in my campaigns.

I've recently had a good campaign with Japan, using mostly MAR-based units. I may try that with Italy, especially if I decide to attack through France or Czech.