No, I disagree, every account I have read describes the Italians as hopeless fighters. You explain away all their military failures to leadership? They failed in Greece, they failed in France, they failed in Africa, and they failed in the med, and thats all atributable to poor leadership. Thats a bit coincidental I think.
Do yourselves a favour, go onto google, search Italians eastern front, and read articles on how they fought.
Am I saying the Russians never retreated? No! I used it as a historically correct generalised factual statement. Stalin had a policy of not one step back. It basically meant that if a Russian retreated, or if a Russian was found behind enemy lines, then they were either shot or sent to the gulag. A big enough incentive to not retreat, wouldn’t you say? And yes that incentive did work!
Yes they probably had poor equipment, and yes they probably had low fuel, and yes any chance they had they ran like hell for the hills! Italians weren’t and aren’t good fighters, and I am by no means saying this is a bad thing! They just are preferential towards fine wine and women, and who can blame them.
As for historically correct, the game is meant to be correct up to spring of 1942, or at least close to historical correctness. Then its up to you to decide the future. Making out that the Italians were good soldiers for the sake of the game, is a bit too far fetched.
Nice. Not to go into sweeping generalizations here but I’m inclined to fervently agree with you. I specifically study the Waffen SS and the Italians ran all the time at the Russian front. 109’s and Stuka’s returning from sorties would make strafing passes at the Italians who were literally running away, leaving the Germans all alone back there.
True account from “Eagles Of the 3rd Reich. The men who made the Luftwaffe”
There was one airfield left in a certain sector of the Eastern front and Russian planes were close by. The Luftwaffe were scrambling to get the few planes they had ready, into the air. The Italians were manning the 88’s that defended the field. As the German pilots scrambled a few planes in the air, Russian fighters and bombers were in clear sight and heading directly for the field.
The Italians actually got up and started running away from their when they saw the first planes coming, leaving all the scrambling pilots and their planes, sitting ducks. That disgusts me.
No, I disagree, every account I have read describes the Italians as hopeless fighters. You explain away all their military failures to leadership? They failed in Greece, they failed in France, they failed in Africa, and they failed in the med, and thats all atributable to poor leadership. Thats a bit coincidental I think.
Do yourselves a favour, go onto google, search Italians eastern front, and read articles on how they fought.
Am I saying the Russians never retreated? No! I used it as a historically correct generalised factual statement. Stalin had a policy of not one step back. It basically meant that if a Russian retreated, or if a Russian was found behind enemy lines, then they were either shot or sent to the gulag. A big enough incentive to not retreat, wouldn’t you say? And yes that incentive did work!
Yes they probably had poor equipment, and yes they probably had low fuel, and yes any chance they had they ran like hell for the hills! Italians weren’t and aren’t good fighters, and I am by no means saying this is a bad thing! They just are preferential towards fine wine and women, and who can blame them.
As for historically correct, the game is meant to be correct up to spring of 1942, or at least close to historical correctness. Then its up to you to decide the future. Making out that the Italians were good soldiers for the sake of the game, is a bit too far fetched.
Nice. Not to go into sweeping generalizations here but I’m inclined to fervently agree with you. I specifically study the Waffen SS and the Italians ran all the time at the Russian front. 109’s and Stuka’s returning from sorties would make strafing passes at the Italians who were literally running away, leaving the Germans all alone back there.
True account from “Eagles Of the 3rd Reich. The men who made the Luftwaffe”
There was one airfield left in a certain sector of the Eastern front and Russian planes were close by. The Luftwaffe were scrambling to get the few planes they had ready, into the air. The Italians were manning the 88’s that defended the field. As the German pilots scrambled a few planes in the air, Russian fighters and bombers were in clear sight and heading directly for the field.
The Italians actually got up and started running away from their when they saw the first planes coming, leaving all the scrambling pilots and their planes, sitting ducks. That disgusts me.
Not to take away from what you are saying I know you are very well read so don’t take this the wrong way. Aren’t there a lot of stories where British troops stop to have afternoon tea when they had the upper hand?
It’s been a wile since I read up on this but I think something to that effect took place when they were moving ARM to reinforce Operation Market Garden but don’t hold me to that.
My point is every nation has military units that for what ever reason in your case run away or in my story take a break. Military discipline is a learned behavior that truely takes years to master.
Granted some nations are better at it then others but that can be solved by making some in the totem pole with seasoned experiance.
LT
@LT04:
No, I disagree, every account I have read describes the Italians as hopeless fighters. You explain away all their military failures to leadership? They failed in Greece, they failed in France, they failed in Africa, and they failed in the med, and thats all atributable to poor leadership. Thats a bit coincidental I think.
Do yourselves a favour, go onto google, search Italians eastern front, and read articles on how they fought.
Am I saying the Russians never retreated? No! I used it as a historically correct generalised factual statement. Stalin had a policy of not one step back. It basically meant that if a Russian retreated, or if a Russian was found behind enemy lines, then they were either shot or sent to the gulag. A big enough incentive to not retreat, wouldn’t you say? And yes that incentive did work!
Yes they probably had poor equipment, and yes they probably had low fuel, and yes any chance they had they ran like hell for the hills! Italians weren’t and aren’t good fighters, and I am by no means saying this is a bad thing! They just are preferential towards fine wine and women, and who can blame them.
As for historically correct, the game is meant to be correct up to spring of 1942, or at least close to historical correctness. Then its up to you to decide the future. Making out that the Italians were good soldiers for the sake of the game, is a bit too far fetched.
Nice. Not to go into sweeping generalizations here but I’m inclined to fervently agree with you. I specifically study the Waffen SS and the Italians ran all the time at the Russian front. 109’s and Stuka’s returning from sorties would make strafing passes at the Italians who were literally running away, leaving the Germans all alone back there.
True account from “Eagles Of the 3rd Reich. The men who made the Luftwaffe”
There was one airfield left in a certain sector of the Eastern front and Russian planes were close by. The Luftwaffe were scrambling to get the few planes they had ready, into the air. The Italians were manning the 88’s that defended the field. As the German pilots scrambled a few planes in the air, Russian fighters and bombers were in clear sight and heading directly for the field.
The Italians actually got up and started running away from their when they saw the first planes coming, leaving all the scrambling pilots and their planes, sitting ducks. That disgusts me.
Not to take away from what you are saying I know you are very well read so don’t take this the wrong way. Aren’t there a lot of stories where British troops stop to have afternoon tea when they had the upper hand?
It’s been a wile since I read up on this but I think something to that effect took place when they were moving ARM to reinforce Operation Market Garden but don’t hold me to that.
My point is every nation has military units that for what ever reason in your case run away or in my story take a break. Military discipline is a learned behavior that truely takes years to master.
Granted some nations are better at it then others but that can be solved by making some in the totem pole with seasoned experiance.
LT
OMG LT :lol: Nice Mr. T quote! Thanks for making me laugh.
I feel what your saying. Some Italians “The Blackshirts” and other units that were fervently national socialistic did fight well but in my personal opinion, they were few and far between collectively. The British breaking for tea is hilarious!! I love that. However, thats just the British bieng the prim proper “anything less would be uncivilized” people they can be. I’ts also them just taking a break, not running out of cowardice. On the Eastern front, the Italians had quite the reputation for straight up, running away while fighting with the SS and Weirhmacht. THAT is cowardice.
If you want another hilarious tidbit about the British:
During the Battle of Britain, captured Luftwaffe pilots were held in college dorm type settings. Their “jail cell” was a bunch of guys with bunk beds sharing a big room. The British allowed them to hang up pictures of Hitler and other Nazi propaganda plus they all had a pool table and card tables to play on. They would be served tea and were allowed as much honey as they wanted. The same thing with marmalade.
Sometimes the Germans would try these hilarious stunts to escape. (What were they going to do? Swim the channel?) One German pilot in particular beat a guard down and got away only to be caught outside in moments. They put him in solitary confinment for a week. Well that was the week of christmas. So on Christmas, they had Santa come visit him in his cell, give him some candy and they gave him a roast dinner complete with a nice glass of wine! I love it. I love the respect they treated those pilots with, even when they were unruley.
Of course they were hoping the Germans would return the favor with their pilots but that atmosphere didn’t take as well over in the German POW camps for some reason.
They did in Stalag 13. Just ask Sgt. shultz. 
LOOK AT MY NAME!!! italiansarecoming italy fought hard italy if in japans place woudl take over chian italy just didnt have enough german support expecially when the usa came
germany came with supllies to late + whe germany attacked russia and said oh im gonna leave great britian som1 who just wooped my ass to italy som1 just a bit higher then france.
ya italy fought hard and im surprised they held out that long
so dotn say italians in ww2 were useless they creamed probably more egyptians then egyptians creaming italians booya italians say hi and win
Sure Italians were poorly equipped and with bad leaderships but italian men were still able to fight well. Italian units behaved bad on average and Italy was “the soft underbelly” of the Axis as Churchill said. This is History but there are also a lot of exaggeration on bad episodes. And if one consider specific bad episodes have also to consider specific good episodes.
As for winners and losers writing history. As the winner exalt italians, according to you, they also exalt Germans or not? We have the myth of the invincible panzers divisions that at last were all shredded to pieces no matter their supposed superiority. How was this possible? Maybe some italians were in the key role of the panzers divisions?
Losers, instead, give all the shame of Germany defeat to Italy, so: Germany needed Italy to win otherwise how could be possible to lose for the lack of support from a useless ally? I mean if Italy was useless and Germany lose cause of Italy then Italian support has to be necessary to Germany for winning. If one is responsible of a defeat then he has to be important for the victory too.
There is a lot of propaganda about Germany efficiency in WWII, spread out by the winners for increase the value of their victory and by the losers to exalt their nation. While exalting the Whermacht, however, it is also necessary to give an explanation of its defeat. Easy done: Germans lose the war because they was allied with Italians. It is easy to say and also it is more convenient.
We in Italy have a proverb that in english may be roughly translated in this way: “if you ask to the water vendor if his water is fresh than he will surely answer that it is cold and pure as the ice”.
In the field of fun house rules…
It is possible to use house rules in wich Italian units hit on 0 while attacking and immediatly run away while on defense, naturally they have to receive the fire of the attacker. This may be done considering defending italian units able to provide opening fire to all the attacking units and then retreat (run away) after removing the casualties and without firing back.
Probably it is also useful to consider German units able to absorb three or more hits before being destroyed and hitting on 6 both in attack and defense.
And finally the more important rule: even if Axis lose the game German player may never be considered loser and may give the guilt of the defeat to the Italian player!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
ITALY deserves to be played man dont dis italy ok
italy was rly good dont dis em man i coem and say boo ya the reason italy lsot u.s.a and gb had combined forces against italy which is the strentgh of japan with out all the islands and peaces of chian no dissing italy except for greece they sucked in greece
Here is my two cents on the subject…
First, do not underestimate Italian special operations. They pulled some of the most daring & amazing stunts during the Second World War.
Second, Italian naval doctrine in the 1930s was built around speed. Italian warships were by far the fastest units on the sea at the time. They just weren’t properly deployed to use their speed to their advantage.
I would highly recommend The Mediterranean for some futher reading.
The italians did well in some wars but many in italy did not see the reason to fight for the axis besides gettting paid.
The italians did go through rough times like eastern front when the italians ran away a lot. How the italians sacrificed fleets(i would say)
The italians fought the greeks when fighting egypt and lost no surprising (greece was fairly strong if greece and the british fought italy with some german help the greeks and brits would probably win)
The italians did fight well in the african wars well early african wars when great britian could not send as much supplies since germany kept bobming the brits.
The italians i would liek to piont at they did not lose in africa until the u.s.a came in
Hitler also woefully underused certain Italian units. In Case blue, Hitler chose not to send the elite Mountain Itlalian units to help conquer the Caucasus. These Crack Alpini soldiers trudged along the hot, flat plains of southern Russia in the summer of '42, guiding mules while keeping their now useless climbing gear under canvas, close at hand but far from use. These men along with other elite Italian units were used as a ‘barrier’ between the Hungarians and Romanians (two historical enemeis) in the sixth armies left flank at Stalingrad. Such circumstances are to blame for such dreadful performances on the eastern front. Low morale, poor leadership (both Italian and German), and a powerful Soviet counter-stroke.
The axis could have done so many easier things even if germany took great britian russia and u.s.a when they joined germany could have still won. the axis just always chose bad moves except at the very very begining of the war like germany going through belgium and such smart moves 
Somebody noticed that russians fought stronger and better then Italians
that might be true, cause in the USSR, it takes more courage to retreat then to advance…
Italy should get it’s navy, and it would balance game up: now, we always have a germany takin moscow in ± round 3-4
with italy, game might last longer and still give germany a chance to win.
and, we have some new, cool Italian pieces because of AA50 
Our group added Italy into AAR and starting poking around with AAE to have them too. Our version of AAR with them is a good bit similar to what the Anniversary setup, with Italy, parts of the Balkans and northern Africa split between Germany & Italy. Most of the navy in the Med went to Italy, but Germany was given a transport. Germany’s IPC values were bumped up and Russia was as well to compensate.
Our thoughts were that the AAE setup could be much the same, though spread out abit more with the extra territories. Maybe a couple extra British units in the Oil territories and additional IPCs to Russia.
I really enjoy this Historical discussion But I am very interested in adding ITALY to AAE.
Just to weigh in on the Above off topic discussion: ITALY fought well Early in the war. I just finished reading Winston Churchill’s politzer Prize winning History (All six books) of the Second World War. 1940/41 ITALY was a real threat to UK possessions and shipping in the Med. Remember that ITALIANS pushed the Brits all the way to Egypt at this time! Even ITALIAN subs were a huge problem and this is not represented in AAE. It was inadequate leadership, supplies and commitment to the conflict that lead to the military disasters of teh invasion of Greece and Africa!
As for the topic at hand:
Has anyone tried adding Italy?
Are there enough units in the AA50 game to be used in AAE with ITALY?
I think this will balance the game… I know of a game breaker strategy (Maybe post somewhere in this forum) where Germany goes straight for Moscow and ignores the rest of the war… (That is cheap by the way) Not 100% sure you need to bulk up Germany… The separation of some resources to ITALY may alleviate the above strategy and make players play the game in the way it was originally intended?
AARHE already did this we have map file and rules to go. 1942 with italy is the name of file.
I have to change my original opinion of the Italians upon further studies of the SS. While many of their units performed horribly on the Russian front, units enganged in repelling operation TORCH performed with extreme bravery. They originally were not allowed to where the SS patch on black and eventually many Italians wore red collar tabs with white SS runes instead.
After heavy losses and an extraordinary performance engaging the allies invading Italy, Himmler awarded them full SS status “with all rights and priviledges.” Even units not involved in the fighting directly were awarded this promotion. They were brought into Germany for further training. I’m learning that staunch Italian facists volunteers performed extremely well in the European theater despite being outnumbered and suffering heavy losses. Many units were upgraded to official SS units with a German officer as commander.
@Imperious:
AARHE already did this we have map file and rules to go. 1942 with italy is the name of file.
Are there set-up charts available for AAE with ITALY?
Under Tekkyy signature. look in house rules files
1942 italy
Italy in AAE!!!
Try this site:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/20457
It is not a boxed game as it seems to be; just a rules set.
My group play A&A Europe with Italy this way:
Italy control N. Italy, S. Italy, Libya and Tunisia, a total of 8 IPC at start.
Germany control the rest, a total of 32 IPC at start.
Turn order:
Germany
USSR
Italy
UK
USA
We use the pieces and rules from A&A Anniversary ed. But with destroyers at 2 in combat value, the Brit set-up need 4 cruisers, or Germany need 2 subs less.
This pretty much fix the broken game. Germany used to buy 8 tanks against 8 russian infantry, and because of this they conquered Moscow in turn 5. Always. But not any more. The game is much more balanced with the A&A Anniversary rules and cost.
Also, to spice up the game:
The German army was very efficient because they used “Combined Arms tactic” and “Auftragstaktik”. So when german units attack or defend, roll all dice simultanesly, and then assign the hits to the proper units. Like germany attack with 4 inf, 2 tanks and 1 bomber. Roll 7 dice, and assign the 1’s to the inf, and the 3’s or less to the tanks, and a 4 or less to the bomber. The other army,s use the old Commanding system from Napoleon, so they roll all the infantry dice, looking for 1’s, and then roll all tanks dice, looking for 3’s or less, and so on.
In naval battles, the brits use the Combined Arms tactic, and roll all dices simultanesly, and then assign the hits. And the other navies must roll the old fashion system, column by column.
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/20457
It is not a boxed game as it seems to be; just a rules set.
hmmm, so the Italian Fleet remains German?…. I think that is best summed up by quoting a William Shatner song, “I just can’t get behind that.”
why not make them Italian since all the units there are Italian already. I didn’t see it in the rules either, but unless Germany can build in Italian shipyards they won’t be able to add to the fleet unless Italy does it, which means loss of coordination of the fleet.
My group play A&A Europe with Italy this way:
Italy control N. Italy, S. Italy, Libya and Tunisia, a total of 8 IPC at start.
Germany control the rest, a total of 32 IPC at start.
Aldertag, now this has some promise.
Do you find that with Germany is often moving into the ‘boot’ to bail out Italy too often? I’ve seen the 30-10 split to start but does 32-8 make much difference?
Do you find that with Germany is often moving into the ‘boot’ to bail out Italy too often? I’ve seen the 30-10 split to start but does 32-8 make much difference?
With 30 ipc’s, Ge can buy 10 inf first and second turn, then 6 tanks + for the rest.
With 32 ipc’s, Ge can buy 8 inf and 2 art first and second turn, then 6 tanks + for the rest.
At 8 ipc’s, Italy can buy 1 inf and 1 tank each turn, and that is enough to both conquer the Mid East and support Ge in south Sovjet. Of course Moscow still must fall before D-day. With this split, that is not as easy anymore.
With this split, Ge got not so many options. It stand between SeaLion or Barbarossa. And this is historicall correct and give a good feeling. For game balance, the inf in Ge controlled Morocco and Crete should be Italian infantry. Maybe even the 2 inf and art in Ge controlled Greece could be Italians.
I would also change a bit on the map. Let Bessarabia cover down to the Black Sea, since it did historically. One more space between Rumenia and Stalingrad. Also split Belorussia in two territories. One more space between Berlin and Moscow. It is true that Belorussia have diffucult terrain like the Pripjat Marshes, big forests, dirt roads and swamps, natural obstacles that dont favour fast movement. And ouch, the Allies start winning again, and the game is not broken anymore.
