Italy and the Triple Entente

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Italy and the Triple Entente

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War I] >> Guns of August 1914 - 1918 >> Italy and the Triple Entente

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/5/2007 5:13:19 AM

Joel Rauber

Posts: 195
Joined: 10/4/2000
From: Brookings, SD, USA
Status: offline

Without checking the Italy joins the CP box, is it possible for Italy to join the CP.

I.e. can the CP make enough diplomatic overtures (along with good campaign results) to see Italy actually join the CP side?

_____________________________

Any relationship between what I say and reality is purely coincidental.

Joel Rauber

Post #: 1

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/5/2007 5:29:40 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

not through overtures....inthe Beta you used to be able to get Italy to join the CP by capturing Paris early enough, but I ahven't seen that happen since hte substantive release so I'm not sure if it's still in.

Diplomatic overtures can only hasten or slow a country joining - the side it wil join is always fixed....except for Italy.

Edit: oh and of course it you're feeling really strage you can always force a country that is lines up to join you to join "the other side" by declaring ar on it!! Don't laugh...I've sen it done in a PBEM game.....an inexperienced player...I offered to let him redo the turn but he declined......let's jsut say that game is more or less over & we'r restarting!!

< Message edited by SMK-at-work -- 9/5/2007 5:32:26 AM >

(in reply to Joel Rauber)

Post #: 2

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/5/2007 5:31:20 PM

Joel Rauber

Posts: 195
Joined: 10/4/2000
From: Brookings, SD, USA
Status: offline

If that is correct, it is unfortunate; I think that it should be possible for either side to end-up with Italy on their side; depending of course on diplomatic effort and the fortunes of war. Violations of neutrals being part of the diplomatic game of course. Perhaps this could be something for consideration in V1.5

_____________________________

Any relationship between what I say and reality is purely coincidental.

Joel Rauber

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 3

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/5/2007 6:19:30 PM

FrankHunter

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline

At first I was inclined to allow Italy to go either way and in fact early on overtures to Italy did have that effect. However I looked at Italy's situation pretty closely and I believe Italy had valid reasons for not supporting her allies off the bat. I think the price of her allegiance was simply too high for Austria to pay although Germany certainly would have preferred Austria to do just that.

But I didn't want to force players to accept my view of that situation, so I made it an option for Italy to lean toward the CP instead.

(in reply to Joel Rauber)

Post #: 4

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/6/2007 12:42:39 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

That's intersting Frank....I'd suggest that if the CP WANTS to put the resources into getting Italy onside then let them have that choice.

To be honest having Italy join the CP if Paris falls was a bit of a double whammy - perhaps better if that's goig to be retained that it just stays neutral?

(in reply to FrankHunter)

Post #: 5

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/6/2007 1:40:44 AM

Panzeh

Posts: 155
Joined: 4/4/2005
Status: offline

I'd like to see a substantial drop in Austrian national morale if the CPs make enough overtures to Italy to make it join. After all, Austria would be doing most of the giving to get Italy on board. Then the germans would have to reduce Austrian involvement in order to get Italian involvement.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 6

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/6/2007 1:44:22 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

I don't know that morale needs to be affected - having to invest a vast number of resources to diplomatic points would be enough IMO. the CP can't really afford that if things are tight.

(in reply to Panzeh)

Post #: 7

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/6/2007 6:39:46 AM

Joel Rauber

Posts: 195
Joined: 10/4/2000
From: Brookings, SD, USA
Status: offline

Naturally its a matter of opinion and reading history and how one does the mirky reading of what if situations in history.

I do remember playing the original SPI "Flight of the Goeben" game where they made it possible that Italy might join either side or more likely remain neutral (for the time frame of the game). It recreated quite well what I imagined to be the uncertainty the various powers had that first week or so of war and did an excellent job recreating some aspects FOW that weren't that well portrayed in wargames from that era.

Perhaps in some future version you could implement a third option that is an Italy can go either way option. I agree that it should more likely go to the TE, but if the CP is willing to put in the diplomatic effort and the TE ignores Italy, then I think it should be possible.

As SMK mentioned, the diplomatic costs alone might be sufficient cost to the CP.

At any rate it is just an opinion, but one that would enliven the diplomatic part of the game, perhaps.

_____________________________

Any relationship between what I say and reality is purely coincidental.

Joel Rauber

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 8

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/7/2007 1:29:05 AM

FrankHunter

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline

That's true, I could offer a third option allowing Austria to give up territory in order to get Italy onside or at least to stay neutral. I think Austrian morale might take a bit of a hit but it would be another option available.

(in reply to Joel Rauber)

Post #: 9

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/7/2007 10:46:26 AM

hjaco

Posts: 872
Joined: 3/23/2007
Status: offline

Hmm that will certainly have heavy influence on final victory so i think there should be a penalty there ?

(in reply to FrankHunter)

Post #: 10

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/7/2007 2:46:22 PM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

The penalty would be territory given up - it would have to include Trieste, so you could just take it as lost - or alternatively the penalty is lots of production spent on diploimacy - no-one is suggesting any sort of freebie.

(in reply to hjaco)

Post #: 11

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/7/2007 3:20:51 PM

boogada

Posts: 353
Joined: 8/17/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

Historically speaking I think entering the war on the CP side was never an option for Italy. Maybe if France had fallen in 1914 and Austria had given the Italians some territories (S�dtirol, Trentino, maybe Albania). But even if so, Italy would still never entered the war, they would have stayed neutral. But the Austrian government never really considered handing over territories to Italy at all. They were angry at the Italians for not entering the war as they expected their ally to do. (Same thing with Romania) Also they never thought about giving up German-Austrian lands (it might have been differnt in case of Poland or Serbia or something, but neither the German-Austrians nor the Hungarians were willing to give up lands they were living in). And finally accepting the national claim of the Italians the Dualmonarchy would have had to accept all other national claims too (Romania, Serbia, Poland, Czech...) , and they were fighting this war to resist these claims in the first place!

So the handing-over-land-for-neutrality-option is extremely unhistorical! Please don't do this.

Literature:

H�nak, P�ter (1969): Die ungarischen Staatsm�nner und der Kriegseintritt Italiens. Beitr�ge zur Au�enpolitik �sterreich-Ungarns in der Zeit von Juli 1914 bis Mai 1915, in: �sterreichische Osthefte, 11, S. 197-215.
Hekele, Martin (1996): Die Kriegszielpolitik der �sterreichisch-ungarischen Monarchie im Ersten Weltkrieg. Mit einer Gegen�berdarstellung der Kriegsziele der wichtigsten kriegsf�hrenden Staaten, Phil. Diss. Wien. (especially chapter 7)
Rauchensteiner (1993), Manfried: Der Tod des Doppeladlers. Graz. (especially chapter 9)
Zechlin, Egmont (1963): Das schlesische Angebot und die italienische Kriegsgefahr 1915, in: Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterreicht, 14, S. 533 � 556.

< Message edited by boogada -- 9/7/2007 3:35:44 PM >

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 12

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/7/2007 3:33:28 PM

Panzeh

Posts: 155
Joined: 4/4/2005
Status: offline

I think if france falls Italy should probably stay neutral for the duration, but otherwise the current setup is pretty realistic.

The CPs had little to offer Italy except vague promises of french colonies, which, to be honest, does not compare to what the TE could have offered.

(in reply to boogada)

Post #: 13

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/7/2007 4:50:41 PM

Joel Rauber

Posts: 195
Joined: 10/4/2000
From: Brookings, SD, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: boogada

. . .

So the handing-over-land-for-neutrality-option is extremely unhistorical! Please don't do this.

. . .

Don't worry, from Frank's comments I take it that "if it is done" and that's a big if, I'm sure it would only be a user option and not a forced change. That way folks who have a different take on the history could explore their "what ifs" through the game engine.

Nice to have included a reference list in support of your comments.

I've never read any of them, but no doubt provides a good list.

_____________________________

Any relationship between what I say and reality is purely coincidental.

Joel Rauber

(in reply to boogada)

Post #: 14

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/7/2007 6:51:06 PM

FrankHunter

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline

boogada, I agree with you. As I said, originally my thinking was more along the lines of AH's old Guns of August game where I figured Italy was up for grabs but I changed my mind after more reading on the subject. The current option for Italy to lean towards the CP is there for game balance reasons and because of Italy's pre-war alliance.

(in reply to Joel Rauber)

Post #: 15

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/7/2007 7:32:50 PM

Raynald

Posts: 37
Joined: 7/14/2004
From: Paris, France.
Status: offline

For what it worths, an Italian wargamer/history buf I knew thought exactly like boogada and Frank : a CP Italy wasn't going to happen.

(in reply to FrankHunter)

Post #: 16

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/7/2007 8:12:13 PM

Gendarme

Posts: 50
Joined: 9/19/2006
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Status: offline

From reading Denis Mack Smith, Italy and its Monarchy, if I remember correctly, there was a time after the start of the war in 1914 where King Vittorio Emanuele III was considering joining the Central Powers, especially when it looked like the Germans were going to take Paris. I believe troops were even sent to the French border.

Once the situation stabilized, that idea was abandoned. And the Allies went to work wooing and promising and buying. I've read that Mussolini's newspaper, a nationalist rag in favor of war on the Entente side, was funded by the French.

I don't think Italy could've joined either side in August 1914, they were in the midst of an upheaval known as Red Week, which saw socialist strikes all across the country.

From what I've read elsewhere, there wasn't any great desire among Italians to join the war, even on the Entente side. Definitely not the outpouring that is written about in other nations when they went to war in 1914. It was mainly the politicians who were enthusiastic about it.

Counterfactually, the same could be said if Italy's elites thought it better to join the Central Powers, that it would rouse no great public sentiment. The Italian people were just kind of being dragged around by the politicians and the King.

Before unification Austria had been seen as the enemy, but if Austria had ceded territories than that feeling would've been mollified. If going against the Allies, Italian territorial claims might have consisted of colonies, along with Nice, Savoy, and Corsica. Trent and Trieste would have to have been ceded by Austria.

The main problem, as mentioned above, with this scenario is Austria ceding territory. Germany was all for the idea but they weren't the ones giving up land. And such a move to placate nationalist claims on Austria were exaclty what Austria was fighting against. They're going to make an exception for the Italians? What effect would that have on Austrian morale?

In hindsight, Austria may have been better off just giving the territory. At worst, Italy would've stayed neutral, and that saves Austria a front to fight on. After all, it was on the Piave that the KuK's army finally broke from exhaustion in 1918.

With regards to the game, maybe it's just best as is. Italy neutral, diplomatic points being spent by either side to woo or make Italy stay neutral, and joining the CP if Paris falls since then it looks like a sure thing.

This is all my opinion based on hazy memory of books read long ago...

Anthony DeChristopher

(in reply to Joel Rauber)

Post #: 17

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/9/2007 10:46:40 PM

bis9170

Posts: 12
Joined: 9/9/2007
From: San Diego, CA
Status: offline

Gendarme's post rings true for me.

I hate the expression and it's over-use, but I think "staying the course" that has been set for Italy would bve best for the game. No freebies for either side, with the possibility of both the CP and Entente spending lots of points to woo Italy, and ending up getting nothing in return. No one said war was fair...!

//TB

(in reply to Gendarme)

Post #: 18

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/13/2007 9:09:36 PM

Akmatov

Posts: 495
Joined: 7/26/2000
From: Tucson, AZ, USA
Status: offline

As I understand the situation, Italy really couldn't side with the TE due to the fact that about 80% of her coal was imported from Britian - it would have been fast economic suicide.

However, Italy was the ally of AH and there were even well developed plans for the AH and Italian Navies to merge off Sicily in the event of war and go hunting for the French convoys out of North Africa.

I'm all in favor a complicating the players situation as much as possible as doing so tends to replicate the situation the decision makers had at the time. Italy placed herself on the market and went with the side that was winning and had the most to offer. Any tweeks in the direction of replicating that would be appreciated. Maybe something like what the beta sounds like, be the winning side and make overtures and Italy may join you. However, if Italy comes in I think there should be a cost to the 'winner' in terms of requiring heavy economic support if Italy is to field much in the way of a military effort.

(in reply to bis9170)

Post #: 19

RE: Italy and the Triple Entente - 9/13/2007 11:19:16 PM

SteveD64

Posts: 570
Joined: 10/26/2006
From: Shaker Hts, Ohio, USA
Status: offline

yeah, either economic support or forced to continue diplomatic overtures in order to keep them in the game (which basically amounts to economic support because it requires industrial points)

(in reply to Akmatov)

Post #: 20