Italian surrender event

[snoopy1710]

Hi,

in my recent UK game (DD 1.3a, Core 0.31, N/N) I finally overran Italy in spring 41 (north africa -> sicily -> southern Italy).

The "Italy surrenders to the Allies" event fires off which still has some issues:

- Italy becomes my puppet and joins the allies (fine)
- Italy keeps her total Army/Navy/Airforce which would be a tremendous asset for the allied player (and it is a pain in the rear end to delete all the stuff)
- Ethopia declares independancy (fine), as does the Italian Social Republic (fine) which the UK immediately declares war upon (WHAT! Me?). Needless to say, this nets me 10% dissent which I believe is a wee bit besides the point (just eliminated the #2 axis power)
- the ISR has more than 50IC while my puppet Italy has 30 (even though i burdened them with 20% dissent). this totally unrealistic, maybe 10% of that?

Snoopy

 

[unmerged(65036)]

- Ethopia declares independancy (fine), as does the Italian Social Republic (fine) which the UK immediately declares war upon (WHAT! Me?). Needless to say, this nets me 10% dissent which I believe is a wee bit besides the point (just eliminated the #2 axis power)

It really ought to be the other way around; the ISR was a German puppet and was forced to continue the war, like it or not. So it would make more sense for the ISR to declare war on the Allies, and take any dissent hit for continuing the war, than for the Allies to declare war on the ISR.

- the ISR has more than 50IC while my puppet Italy has 30 (even though i burdened them with 20% dissent). this totally unrealistic, maybe 10% of that?

Snoopy

Actually, the majority of Italy's industry was (and, as far as I know, still is) in the north of the country. This is the region that was kept under German occupation as the Axis puppet ISR, whereas the poorer, agricultural south was under Allied control.

So it actually makes sense that most Italian industry would be in the ISR, assuming that the ISR controls the areas it controlled historically. It holds most of the industrial concentrations in the country.

 

[HistoryMan]

We've already looked at the dissent hit, and amended the event to give the UK a -10% dissent after the DoW. In the longer run, it may well be (as suggested) that we just push the RSI into the Axis, which should have the correct effect.

The issue of the Armed forces switching sides is complicated - it might be that the command line for the independence of the RSI isn't properly set, or that the commands don't fire in the proper order.

Tim

 

[snoopy1710]

Actually, the majority of Italy's industry was (and, as far as I know, still is) in the north of the country. This is the region that was kept under German occupation as the Axis puppet ISR, whereas the poorer, agricultural south was under Allied control.

Well, I don't mind the proportion between the 2 Italies but the absolute amount of IC for both of them. AFAIK both didn't play a significant role after 43, hence my suggestion of a 90% ic penalty for both of them.

It might actually be easier to annex Italy as a whole, having the north defecting to the axis side and keeping the south as UK occupied/annexed (for supply reasons - if the south has virtually 0IC you need to manually send them supplies/oil to keep the allies troops supplied. and the ai sure wouldn't do that). Just a thought.

Snoopy

 

[unmerged(65036)]

That makes some sense. The catch is that there was a nominally independent Italian government; the Italians actually surrendered to the Allies without having their entire country overrun. So it makes sense for Italy to continue to exist.

The IC penalty might make sense, but I'm not sure it's reasonable to simply dismiss Italy's industrial production as 'not significant'. I don't know what the Italians were actually doing from 1943 to '45, but I'm sure they were doing something.

 

[HistoryMan]

Part of the issue is that Italy's performance is usually over-represented, in any case. It never devoted anything like as much of its' economic output to Military purposes as Germany or even Japan, let alone the Allied powers.

Still, Italian Military spending in 1944 and 1945 (this is a combined sum of both Italy & the RSI) was about 2/3 to 3/4 what Axis Italy had spent in 1942 & 1943. Given the likely resource shortages Italy will face in game by this time, this doesn't sound improbable to reproduce in game to me.

Tim

 

[snoopy1710]

I proceeded to give the north (RSI) to Germany while the south (Italy) to the UK. While not exactly historically correct I think this option is better with regards to game balance.

Actually I read on wikipeadia that the north fielded some 50,000 troops while the south added about 20,000 to the allied cause:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Social_Republic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Co-Belligerent_Army
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Co-Belligerent_Air_Force
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Co-Belligerent_Navy

the only sizeable contribution was the Regia Navale: "Altogether, five battleships, eight cruisers, thirty-three destroyers, thirty-nine submarines, twelve motor torpedo boats, twenty escorts, and three mine-layers joined the Italian Co-Belligerant Navy"

Snoopy

 

[Wolfhead]

I don't know what the Italians were actually doing from 1943 to '45, but I'm sure they were doing something.

Well at least it looks like they did produce some tanks:

http://www.comandosupremo.com/Production1.html