A&A Global 1940 Essays: The Pact of Steel: Assisting Italy (Germany)

You nailed it Chris_Henry!

Nuff said. 8-)

@Chris_Henry:

For German help, I tend to immediately build a destroyer and transport off of Southern France. I’ll then increase that naval force slowly as the game dictates in other areas. Germany, in my mind, is perfectly set up to attack/hold/reinforce Gibraltar when/if the Axis take it. I usually have the Germans defend there, while the Italians build up a defensive force in Morocco. Again, this is assuming they reach that far before the US comes in. But that’s also why I build a German transport right away. They can assist in getting west in North Africa more quickly, while other Italian forces can marshal strength for an assault on Cairo.

Gibraltar in Axis hands, will force the US to respond even while still at peace. Axis transports in SZ91 and to some degree even in SZ92, pose a direct threat to America itself and/or to the lightly defended southern parts of Africa. So the US will build a fleet in SZ101 that will at least match whatever the Axis has around Gibraltar, simply because they have to. Once that fleet is there, the obvious thing to do is to add a few transports to it and aim for an amphibious assault. I really can’t see Germany and Italy defending Gibraltar and Morocco against the US.

@Herr:

I really can’t see Germany and Italy defending Gibraltar and Morocco against the US.

I definitely agree Herr KaLeun. That’s largely my point. They won’t be able to hold when the Americans come, not without some favorable things having happened before. My point was it delays US intervention in Europe, which only helps the Germans to hopefully knock on the Soviets and shore up defenses in the West.

@aequitas:

You nailed it Chris_Henry!

Nuff said. 8-)

Haha thanks aequitas! I certainly don’t claim to say this is fool proof, but that’s generally largely how I operate with the Italians/Med/North Africa!

@Chris_Henry:

@Herr:

I really can’t see Germany and Italy defending Gibraltar and Morocco against the US.

I definitely agree Herr KaLeun. That’s largely my point. They won’t be able to hold when the Americans come, not without some favorable things having happened before. My point was it delays US intervention in Europe, which only helps the Germans to hopefully knock on the Soviets and shore up defenses in the West.

Sometimes I don’t mess with Gibraltar for that very reason, I don’t want to attract US ships in the Atlantic when I’d rather be buying max fast movers to make it to Tambov.

In many games agasinst a savvy Russian player the Germans will need the factory in Ukraine to build for their final attack on Moscow. The odds by turn 6 are so close between the German advance and the Russians turtling in Moscow but also threatening a counterstrike that the best Italian can-openener might be Bryansk. If this is true then Italy can delay the 1 mech 1 tank buy until I2 and I1 maybe buy a fighter instead.

@NotEvenJail:

In many games agasinst a savvy Russian player the Germans will need the factory in Ukraine to build for their final attack on Moscow. The odds by turn 6 are so close between the German advance and the Russians turtling in Moscow but also threatening a counterstrike that the best Italian can-openener might be Bryansk. If this is true then Italy can delay the 1 mech 1 tank buy until I2 and I1 maybe buy a fighter instead.

I can’t get Moscow without another factory. I’m still learning this game and only have recently come to prefer Rostov as opposed to W. Germany for a factory build. Get your stack to Tambov (same think as stacking Bryansk), but it’s easier to lay siege to Moscow and surround them. Plus it’s a good position to counter UK incursions from the south. Other benefit of course is that it’s easier to fully secure Stalingrad.

Rostov isn’t that easy to secure if you also need forces to secure Stalingrad. How shop you stop ussr blitzing a tank into Ukraine if you move your main stack to rostov?

W Ukraine is easier but less useful after the fall of Moscow. I’d wonder if you are playing Germany right if you need either? As I’ve learned how to play axis, I’ve relied on such an ic less than I previously did.

@simon33:

Rostov isn’t that easy to secure if you also need forces to secure Stalingrad. How shop you stop ussr blitzing a tank into Ukraine if you move your main stack to rostov?

W Ukraine is easier but less useful after the fall of Moscow. I’d wonder if you are playing Germany right if you need either? As I’ve learned how to play axis, I’ve relied on such an ic less than I previously did.

I’m probably not playing Russia right, I agree there. However, for me, I’ve never got Moscow against experienced Allies’ players who know how to defend Moscow by sending adequate help to delay it WITHOUT another forward factory. I need the forward factories to buy artillery while mech continues to come from further west.

You stop Russia from blitzing to Ukraine with infantry blockers of course as you continue to lay siege to Russia and walk infantry around Moscow.

Simon, everything is situation dictates of course. You’re a better player than me. I’m sure you’ll figure out the marching order and if you try it you’ll come to like it more. It’s a slower process. Germany might have to stop and stack in Bryansk for 1 turn while a mech stack catches up. Then Italy can opens Tambov at which point Germany lands air and stacks Tambov. Mech hit Samara, and whatever is need to hit Stalingrad and Rostov. If you can’t secure Samara (and therefore Stalingrad), then you’re delayed a turn, but will inevitably get to kill more Russian troops. Anways, hopefully the situation on the board permits buying a factory in Rostov the turn after Germany captures it. A forward factory is delayed a few turns, but you buy 3 mech instead that you will need anyways.

Post-Moscow, Germany will need to build a factory on either Rostov or Caucasus anyways. So, you’ll start post Moscow with a 2nd factory in position.

@Herr:

@oysteilo:

@Herr:

Isn’t that a bit slow?

I1: take Bulgaria
I2: units move to Romania
I3: can-opening into Bessarabia and/or Eastern Poland

So in that scenario, the German followup will be as late as G4.

I think the important can-opening happens around (I4), I5, I6 in order to break through into volgograd and caucasus and later to threaten middle east by italy taking NW persia

The idea of can-opening is, to take the territory with Italy in order to allow Germany, and especially the German planes, to reinforce it against a Russian counterstrike. So I don’t think that any Italian drive to the south servers the purpose of can-opening because Russia is unlikely to have sufficient forces to strike back at either Volgograd or the Caucasus anyway in case the Germans would have taken it without Italian assistance. Which doesn’t imply that going that way is bad for Italy because there’s a lot of bonus to be had. But if you’re talking can-opening, then I’d say Bryansk on I5 would be the way to go.

@aequitas:

With Bulgaria, Yugo and Greece given to Italy, what punch will Germany have?
Any Allied player will be happy to harvest Italy…

Agreed. I’d much rather give Bulgaria to Germany to assimilate those troops and add some punch to the German drive into Russia.

I might be using it idfferent than you. The other idea of canopening is to force a russian retreat.
let say you stand in rostov with a german and italian stack, with at least 40 german tank+mech and 5-7 italian units., and 7+ italians. Then ussr has to retreat to moscow. if he stacks byransk, you can take tambov with the italians, and moscow falls on the german turn. Since ussr has to retreat, you get to take cauc, stalingrad and begin taking the middle east immediately.