Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Problem with Italy

 
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 >> Problem with Italy Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 4:48:18 PM   
Lascar


Posts: 489
Joined: 10/7/2000
Status: offline 		After playing many games it seems clear that Italy enters the war at a distinct disadvantage compared to the other nations. Even if Italy is declaring war its army is deployed along the Austrian border unentrenched and is more often than not pounced on by the CP before it has a chance to attempt a proper defense.

Historically the Italian front was notoriously difficult to breakthrough and only the Northeast corner of Italy offered, to any degree, a practical avenue of advance into Italy.

To somewhat mitigate this disadvantage would it be reasonable to have the Italian army deploy fully entrenched at the start? Right now the CP can redeploy corps along the Italian border and have them fully entrenched before Italy enters the war, while the Italians may have to go through at least three impulses of CP attack with no trench building capability.

Post #: 1
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 5:01:35 PM   
ulver

 

Posts: 527
Joined: 9/9/2001
From: Danmark, Europe
Status: offline 		The problem is the unrealistic long front. In the real world the terrain was such that only a few mountain passes permitted any advance and those could be plugged with very slight forces. 3 Austrian and 2 German corps should be able to hold that front indefinitely whereas in GOA if they fail to knock out Italy the front requires about as many forces to hold as the entire Western Front. Again barring a knock-out blow against France or Russia the Central Powers have absolutely no chance in the endgame if Italy isn’t knocked out. In reality it wouldn’t have been that easy but in reality the US army would not have been able to smash though to Vienna from the Italian front as they will have no difficulty doing in GOA in 1918.

I would prefer that the effective Italian front was only 1-2 hexes wide as it was in reality but since it isn’t I suspect we shall have to live with the fact that Italy will only se 2 turns of war in most games. No CP player is gong to commit suicide by leaving them voluntary alive. If you don’t go for France you have little choice but to go for Italy to make the Western front reasonably short.

The game balance is such that the Entente can easily afford to lose Italy and Rumania as walkovers while the CP needs to do something truly extraordinary elsewhere to be able to have any chance if they actually stay in the fight.

If the Central Powers goes for Russia holding Italy presents no problem as France can just mass half her army on the Franco-Italian border ready to intervene.

< Message edited by ulver -- 9/2/2008 5:02:48 PM >

(in reply to Lascar)
Post #: 2
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 5:30:14 PM   
fighter36

 

Posts: 21
Joined: 8/31/2008
Status: offline 		how hard is it to get Italy to join the CP in a normal game? As I am playing my first game, I selected the Italians to join the CP so they started the game very pro-CP. In a normal setup, are the Italians right down the middle when it comes to which way they can swing?

(in reply to ulver)
Post #: 3
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 7:29:24 PM   
Lascar


Posts: 489
Joined: 10/7/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ulver


I would prefer that the effective Italian front was only 1-2 hexes wide as it was in reality but since it isn’t I suspect we shall have to live with the fact that Italy will only se 2 turns of war in most games. No CP player is gong to commit suicide by leaving them voluntary alive. If you don’t go for France you have little choice but to go for Italy to make the Western front reasonably short.

The game balance is such that the Entente can easily afford to lose Italy and Rumania as walkovers while the CP needs to do something truly extraordinary elsewhere to be able to have any chance if they actually stay in the fight.

If the Central Powers goes for Russia holding Italy presents no problem as France can just mass half her army on the Franco-Italian border ready to intervene.

That assumes a Russia first CP strategy. But a France first strategy is also doable, if a little more risky, but with some lucky battle results the CP can have France on the ropes in 1915 unable to send aid to Italy and the British have to decide if they want to split their reinforcements between saving France or Italy. If both Italy and France are lost in 1915 Russia is at the mercy of the full might of the CP and the British have no place to deploy their army except Egypt. Launching an invasion against a well defended and entrenched port is virtually impossible. Russia will inevitably fall and Britain and America at that point have lost the war.

I agree that ideally the crossable border between Italy and Austria is too long. But that would probably involve creating a new type of impassible alpine terrain. That may be impracticable from Frank's point of view. That is why I asked if starting the Italian units fully entrenched is feasible, this would at least give them some chance of holding out longer and give the TE some breathing space to do something.


< Message edited by Lascar -- 9/2/2008 7:30:40 PM >

(in reply to ulver)
Post #: 4
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 7:37:43 PM   
FrankHunter

 

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline 		It depends on what you guys figure but I could either give the Italians some trenches, reduce the stacking limit in mountains from 2 corps to 1, or leave things as they are.

(in reply to Lascar)
Post #: 5
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 8:03:47 PM   
ulver

 

Posts: 527
Joined: 9/9/2001
From: Danmark, Europe
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

It depends on what you guys figure but I could either give the Italians some trenches, reduce the stacking limit in mountains from 2 corps to 1, or leave things as they are.


I really like the idea to reduce stacking limits in mountains. Would allow the Austrian to hold the mountains with very few troops and would make it very hard to attack into Italy except via Venice.

(in reply to FrankHunter)
Post #: 6
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 8:17:44 PM   
Lascar


Posts: 489
Joined: 10/7/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

It depends on what you guys figure but I could either give the Italians some trenches, reduce the stacking limit in mountains from 2 corps to 1, or leave things as they are.

Reducing the stacking limit in the mountains, there are only two mountain hexes along the Italian border and they are in the western portion, which would then encourage the CP to attack from the east as they did historically. This is a good option.

Also giving the Italians the full number of trenches possible for the current tech level would also help balance the situation. After all, the CP can deploy and entrench its units along the border before Italy enters the war plus they already hold the rough and mountain hexes. It is important, if this is done, that the Italians start entrenched and not just have trenches available to be used in the second impulse following the entry of Italy into the war. The first impulse of the CP attack on Italy can be shattering.

Implementing both these changes will not make Italy unassailable, but at the same time they at least will have a fighting chance of surviving the initial CP attack. Then there is the possibility of a stalemate situation developing along the Italian front as happened historically.

(in reply to FrankHunter)
Post #: 7
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 9:21:09 PM   
geoffreyg


Posts: 123
Joined: 4/1/2008
From: London
Status: offline 		Similar to an earlier post of mine, the trouble with changing it would be to again shift the balance against the CP, the harder side already.
I would agree that reducing stacking in alpine regions to one might help realism but the game is quite correctly currently stylised and simplified in a number of aspects anyway.
Can anyone think of a change that would help the CP to counter balance this?

(in reply to Lascar)
Post #: 8
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 9:45:20 PM   
ulver

 

Posts: 527
Joined: 9/9/2001
From: Danmark, Europe
Status: offline 		Reducing stacking limits in mountains will not in and of itself tip the balance in the Entents favor – it will make it harder to attack on the Italian front for both sides making it harder but also less important to knock out Italy.

The problem is that they way things are Italy is far to important and tie up far to many CP forces. They should be a very minor factor – I would be fine with Italy’s production being considerably reduced in exchange for them being much easier to defend and much harder to attack into Austria from.

(in reply to geoffreyg)
Post #: 9
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 9:52:06 PM   
Lascar


Posts: 489
Joined: 10/7/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: geoffreyg

Similar to an earlier post of mine, the trouble with changing it would be to again shift the balance against the CP, the harder side already.
I would agree that reducing stacking in alpine regions to one might help realism but the game is quite correctly currently stylised and simplified in a number of aspects anyway.
Can anyone think of a change that would help the CP to counter balance this?

For the long term balance if Germany fails to knock out France or Russia early then the tide will inexorably turn against the CP. But in the first year of the war if Germany is able to knockout France in 1915 that balance will likely never be seriously upset. Britain will be forced to deploy in either Italy or the Middle east neither of which will enable them to directly support Russia with vital Industrial point shipments. Invading a well defended port fully entrenched, not hard for the CP to do once France falls, makes a British amphibious assault virtually impossible.

A successful German attack on France relies just as much on lucky out comes in a few large battles as it does on any brilliance on the part of the CP player. If Italy can be pounced on while France is on its last legs and is unable to offer any effective defense due to lack of poor forward deployment and entrenchments, that actually creates a great imbalance in favor of the CP at a critical point in the war.

Why should the CP be able to fully entrench its units along the Italian border in anticipation of an Italian attack and the Italians are unable to do likewise? Why would Italy enter the war voluntarily with its own army poorly deployed while the CP is in a solid defensive position entrenched in the Alps? This is an imbalance in itself. Even it is a local one it has long range consequences.

Perhaps Germany can be given some additional resources at the beginning of the war to tide them over until they are able to acquire more from conquered countries. They seem to be rather lean in the early phase of the war.

(in reply to geoffreyg)
Post #: 10
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 10:04:14 PM   
Lascar


Posts: 489
Joined: 10/7/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ulver

Reducing stacking limits in mountains will not in and of itself tip the balance in the Entents favor – it will make it harder to attack on the Italian front for both sides making it harder but also less important to knock out Italy.

The problem is that they way things are Italy is far to important and tie up far to many CP forces. They should be a very minor factor – I would be fine with Italy’s production being considerably reduced in exchange for them being much easier to defend and much harder to attack into Austria from.


Reducing the stacking limits seems to be the best way to recreate the geographical restraints imposed by the Alps. Reducing Italy's already low production rate will make their long term defense even more difficult. The Italians can only make serious attacks into Austria with significant British and French support. The Italian army by itself can not break through the CP line in the Alps unless that line is undermanned by the CP. If France falls or is near collapse the Italians will be pretty much on their own until the British can send some corps.

But I agree that Italy should not be a big avenue of attack in either direction. There should be some chance to breath through in the Northeast but by and large it should be more likely a stalemate.

(in reply to ulver)
Post #: 11
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 10:12:39 PM   
FrankHunter

 

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline 		I don't think decreasing the stacking limit in the Alps would hurt the design because there was already a low stacking limit there anyway which I put in for the reasons above.  Reducing that even further I see as just part of greater player experience showing the original limit was still a little too high.

Germany and Austria benefit also in that it makes the Alps cheaper to hold, freeing up corps for use elsewhere when the 15th battle of the Isonzo isn't raging.


(in reply to Lascar)
Post #: 12
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 10:16:18 PM   
FrankHunter

 

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline 		On the other hand I'm not sure about adding trench points to the Italians.   But again, I'd prefer to hear what you guys think.


(in reply to FrankHunter)
Post #: 13
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 10:41:01 PM   
geoffreyg


Posts: 123
Joined: 4/1/2008
From: London
Status: offline 		I would support the reduction in stacking limit in the alpine regions to 1 rather than providing trench points to the Italians. After all most if not all other countries start the game with no trench points.

(in reply to FrankHunter)
Post #: 14
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 10:41:20 PM   
Lascar


Posts: 489
Joined: 10/7/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

On the other hand I'm not sure about adding trench points to the Italians. But again, I'd prefer to hear what you guys think.



If the CP can fully entrench while in the Alps before Italy enters the war--either in anticipation of Italy entering the war on the TE side or with intent to do a preemptive attack on Italy--then why wouldn't Italy likewise prepare? Why would Italy voluntarily enter the war with their army exposed in the open with no trenches. Certainly after observing 6 months or more of war in France they would have also learned the lessons of the folly of trying to defend in the open.

Even with the trenches the Italian army is not likely to stop a determined CP attack, unless there are plenty of British and French corps to help them. But of course that support won't be there during that first critical impulse of a CP attack. I have seen many games where Italy is effectively knocked out after two impulses of a CP attack simply because they are forward deployed in the open. It is almost like a blitzkrieg. They should at least have a fighting chance even if they eventually surrender a few turns later. Right now they are out there like a lamb for the slaughter.

(in reply to FrankHunter)
Post #: 15
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 10:45:13 PM   
Lascar


Posts: 489
Joined: 10/7/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: geoffreyg

I would support the reduction in stacking limit in the alpine regions to 1 rather than providing trench points to the Italians. After all most if not all other countries start the game with no trench points.

They start without trenches because they were anticipating a mobile war in the open and soon learned that modern weapons had given the defender an enormous advantage. Italy is coming in much later and the CP is allowed to entrench all along its border with Italy. Italy has had the chance to see how the nature of war has changed and would obviously adapt.

(in reply to geoffreyg)
Post #: 16
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 10:50:03 PM   
geoffreyg


Posts: 123
Joined: 4/1/2008
From: London
Status: offline 		Judging from the way they conducted their Isonzo offensives I think they were rather slow learners in practice!

(in reply to Lascar)
Post #: 17
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 11:06:24 PM   
Naskra

 

Posts: 325
Joined: 3/12/2005
Status: offline 		My opinion:  reduce mountain stacking limit to 5 and give Italy 2 trenches.

(in reply to geoffreyg)
Post #: 18
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 11:09:57 PM   
Lascar


Posts: 489
Joined: 10/7/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: geoffreyg

Judging from the way they conducted their Isonzo offensives I think they were rather slow learners in practice!

The same thing could be said for the British well into 1917 but that didn't stop them from utilizing trenches from late 1914 on.

(in reply to geoffreyg)
Post #: 19
RE: Problem with Italy - 9/2/2008 11:47:18 PM   
ILCK

 

Posts: 422
Joined: 6/26/2004
Status: offline 		I would think that drawing the stalemate in the mountains is the best the CP should hope for so lower the stacking limits should make things better.

(in reply to Lascar)
Post #: 20
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War I] >> Guns of August 1914 - 1918 >> Problem with Italy Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.156