Talking Turkey: Alternate History from 1936

[Bullfilter]

Basically, we are all agreed that we need to let the russians take over most of the front in Eastern Europe.
We also need to try and find where the Italian army is, and where they are not.
And then, with both these done, we can plan and prep something up.

My fear of the allies sweeping in seems prescient given they are already in sardinia, if but barely. If they see Italy move away or buckle, then surely the ai must awaken at some point and either siege the island, land in Italy or land in France?

We must take all pains to prepare, but then act with all haste. The longer we tarry, the greater the chance of the allies, or even the amercians, landing in force in europe.

And we do not want that, for us in Italy, and for Russia...anywhere really.

The nuance here is there is really no ‘Allies’ to speak of, just Britain, the Commonwealth and Free France. Frankly, with the US in the Comintern we would be very happy for them to land in force somewhere in Europe, as anything they gain goes to the Comintern cause. All along I have had this factional (once joined) cause as the first priority.

That said, I think it’s unlikely to happen, given the evidence to date. If the British surprise us all by actually doing something material in Italy or Western Europe, we’ll see what comes of it. A good chance they’ll be smashed by the Axis, but if they get too big for their boots, then WW3 could be initiated. With America against them, it would not be pretty. And we’d have a pretty interesting war in North America, where the US have been keeping the bulk of their forces ...

 

[37th Armoured div]

We also need to try and find where the Italian army is, and where they are not.

The secret to world domination is striking unprotected targets unawares, but if a target is unprotected, would it not be considered valueless?

I wonder if we should launch the attack from the ocean. A direct landing will certainly be more costly, so turkeys manpower will cry for aid, but would it not be worse if the landed divisions run out of supply? are there unprotected ports in the region? Or perhaps we have those transport planes we used for Crete? could they launch an air supply operation if needed?

in other news the Turkish enclave in Poland makes me laugh. After the war, can we keep it, just to add another star to the flag?

I just realized why I asked for an invasion of Corsica. Turkeys flag must grow!

 

[Wraith11B]

I think that the best reason I can re-articulate why we should go in on Sicily is that, historically, it was a holding of ours for about a century or two (albeit in 900s), not to mention that ports on the southern coast will be well away from any predations from what remains of the Regia Marina and especially to the Regia Aeronautica. If the former sallies forth, it will likely stand to be destroyed by any of our forces in the area.

Another quick RFI: has the USN been in the Med still in the strength that they were, especially for carriers? Because if they have, then they might be able to provide air cover that isn't affecting our own numbers. It's also easier for the USN to provide said cover if they're in the area of the Sicily that they might not provide in the Adriatic.

 

[diskoerekto]

I think that the best reason I can re-articulate why we should go in on Sicily is that, historically, it was a holding of ours for about a century or two (albeit in 900s), not to mention that ports on the southern coast will be well away from any predations from what remains of the Regia Marina and especially to the Regia Aeronautica. If the former sallies forth, it will likely stand to be destroyed by any of our forces in the area.

Another quick RFI: has the USN been in the Med still in the strength that they were, especially for carriers? Because if they have, then they might be able to provide air cover that isn't affecting our own numbers. It's also easier for the USN to provide said cover if they're in the area of the Sicily that they might not provide in the Adriatic.

Sicily has been a Muslim holding back in the 900s or so, but it was never Turkish as far as I know. The only part of modern Italy that had been once Turkish is the very heel end of the boot, like the tip half of the province of Galatina (the citadel of Otranto) that was conquered by Mehmed II in 1480s or so as a staging ground for the conquest of Italy proper in the following spring. After conquering Kostantiniyye and announcing himself to be the Kaiser of Rome, he saw at least the southern half of Italy as the natural holdings of this title. Just before the spring he suspiciously dropped dead and his relatively passive heir became the Padishah. So a sliding doors kind of moment in history if he somehow avoided getting poisoned.

After this brief detour, I must say I'm not opposed to a Sicilian invasion. It's just that even if we take Sicily first, we'll need to plan an invasion of the mainland as well anyway. And in the other option where we land on the mainland first, then we'll need to take care of Sicily eventually since there is a VP province as well. So the decision is in which order we attack.

 

[TheButterflyComposer]

I think that the best reason I can re-articulate why we should go in on Sicily is that, historically, it was a holding of ours for about a century or two (albeit in 900s), not to mention that ports on the southern coast will be well away from any predations from what remains of the Regia Marina and especially to the Regia Aeronautica. If the former sallies forth, it will likely stand to be destroyed by any of our forces in the area.

Another quick RFI: has the USN been in the Med still in the strength that they were, especially for carriers? Because if they have, then they might be able to provide air cover that isn't affecting our own numbers. It's also easier for the USN to provide said cover if they're in the area of the Sicily that they might not provide in the Adriatic.

Sicily has been a Muslim holding back in the 900s or so, but it was never Turkish as far as I know. The only part of modern Italy that had been once Turkish is the very heel end of the boot, like the tip half of the province of Galatina (the citadel of Otranto) that was conquered by Mehmed II in 1480s or so as a staging ground for the conquest of Italy proper in the following spring. After conquering Kostantiniyye and announcing himself to be the Kaiser of Rome, he saw at least the southern half of Italy as the natural holdings of this title. Just before the spring he suspiciously dropped dead and his relatively passive heir became the Padishah. So a sliding doors kind of moment in history if he somehow avoided getting poisoned.

After this brief detour, I must say I'm not opposed to a Sicilian invasion. It's just that even if we take Sicily first, we'll need to plan an invasion of the mainland as well anyway. And in the other option where we land on the mainland first, then we'll need to take care of Sicily eventually since there is a VP province as well. So the decision is in which order we attack.

Don't get sidetracked people. The whole point of our war at this point is for us to capture Italy entirely, for the glory of the United republics.

So, unless there is a strong chance of the British stealing something, we should focus on winning, not specific capture targets post war (we are aiming for Everything after all).

I do hope we don't have any complications with the british in sardinia. We're going to have a big enough headache with them in North Africa, the middle east, and the islands they own in the Med.

At some point, we need to fight the vicht french too before the britsh take it all...

 

[Bullfilter]

The secret to world domination is striking unprotected targets unawares, but if a target is unprotected, would it not be considered valueless?

Haha, that might be the case for a reasonable human player, but the AI isn’t always a good judge of value

I wonder if we should launch the attack from the ocean. A direct landing will certainly be more costly, so turkeys manpower will cry for aid, but would it not be worse if the landed divisions run out of supply? are there unprotected ports in the region? Or perhaps we have those transport planes we used for Crete? could they launch an air supply operation if needed?

Well, whether against protected or unprotected targets, we’ll be attacking from some sea zone. As for manpower - there’ll be more on that in the coming chapter. It will depend on things at the time whether we try to land right on a port, or next to one then attack and hope to capture it before supply runs out. There’s not too much point doing recons on ports now, as it may all change before any future landing

nb, we don’t have any transport planes. Crete was an entirely seaborne op.

in other news the Turkish enclave in Poland makes me laugh. After the war, can we keep it, just to add another star to the flag?

Don’t think there’d be enough to merit a star, but we’ll see.

I just realized why I asked for an invasion of Corsica. Turkeys flag must grow!

Corsica either. But if we can get Syria off them down the track, that would certainly qualify!

I think that the best reason I can re-articulate why we should go in on Sicily is that, historically, it was a holding of ours for about a century or two (albeit in 900s), not to mention that ports on the southern coast will be well away from any predations from what remains of the Regia Marina and especially to the Regia Aeronautica. If the former sallies forth, it will likely stand to be destroyed by any of our forces in the area.

I will seriously consider it for staging/operational reasons, especially if I think we won’t havethe ground strength or air power to risk landing on the peninsula first.

Another quick RFI: has the USN been in the Med still in the strength that they were, especially for carriers? Because if they have, then they might be able to provide air cover that isn't affecting our own numbers. It's also easier for the USN to provide said cover if they're in the area of the Sicily that they might not provide in the Adriatic.

They have been sending battle groups through, sometimes CVs, but not sure I can rely on them doing too much.

Sicily has been a Muslim holding back in the 900s or so, but it was never Turkish as far as I know. The only part of modern Italy that had been once Turkish is the very heel end of the boot, like the tip half of the province of Galatina (the citadel of Otranto) that was conquered by Mehmed II in 1480s or so as a staging ground for the conquest of Italy proper in the following spring. After conquering Kostantiniyye and announcing himself to be the Kaiser of Rome, he saw at least the southern half of Italy as the natural holdings of this title. Just before the spring he suspiciously dropped dead and his relatively passive heir became the Padishah. So a sliding doors kind of moment in history if he somehow avoided getting poisoned.

After this brief detour, I must say I'm not opposed to a Sicilian invasion. It's just that even if we take Sicily first, we'll need to plan an invasion of the mainland as well anyway. And in the other option where we land on the mainland first, then we'll need to take care of Sicily eventually since there is a VP province as well. So the decision is in which order we attack.

All true. Will refine planning in due course.

Don't get sidetracked people. The whole point of our war at this point is for us to capture Italy entirely, for the glory of the United republics.

So, unless there is a strong chance of the British stealing something, we should focus on winning, not specific capture targets post war (we are aiming for Everything after all).

Yes, agreed. If we can take it all by ourselves, great, but as long as the Comintern gets it that will do.

I do hope we don't have any complications with the british in sardinia. We're going to have a big enough headache with them in North Africa, the middle east, and the islands they own in the Med.

They landed there with one division months ago then have done nothing since. I expect more of the same!

At some point, we need to fight the vicht french too before the britsh take it all

In time, but for now I’d rather they are left alone.

All: well into writing up the next episode now. Thanks for all the comments.

 

[diskoerekto]

I do hope we don't have any complications with the british in sardinia. We're going to have a big enough headache with them in North Africa, the middle east, and the islands they own in the Med.

One positive thing is that, they landed on a rather insignificant province. As far as I remember there's only one province that has resources/IC/MP/leadership on the island and that's the one on southern side.

 

[nuclearslurpee]

“On that, I have marked in yellow the proportion of the line we are principally holding, stretching from east of Krakow all the way to the Adriatic Coast,” Örlungat continued, gesturing at the wall map. “I contend that it is now simply too much ground for us to hold comfortably with the forces we have, especially given the increased pressure the Axis has been exerting of late.”

One thing that sticks out is how incredibly short the Russian section of the line has become. We should expect them to solve many problems for us by rolling through Poland in the near future. Slowly, but surely, like a steamroller.

“No new major offensives before at least the end of the year, I’d say” added Örlungat. “Just maintain the defence. Conduct counter and spoiling attacks if we must, or to shorten the line, by all means. And take any targets of opportunity. But no major contested advances, including towards northern Italy, until we know we can maintain them. Really, we need the Soviets to advance through Poland while we pull our line west, out of Poland entirely in due course.”

I sharply disagree here. Leaving game mechanics about combat efficiency aside, even if we run our frontline divisions down to 80% strength in the process of making an offensive, that is entirely worth it and manageable for the purpose of making critical strategic gains, most importantly putting pressure on the Axis to keep them from boarding up on the Soviet front. An offensive towards Trieste is, I would argue, criticially necessary to shorten our line and advance into defensible terrain before winter. The rest of our salient problems will be solved by our Russian comrades.

“Professor Nukeluru Slorepee also broadly supported the Kırmızı Plan, subject to further discussions and noting we were at this time in no position to conduct any major landings in the short term. His view was that ‘Sicily is too out of the way to accomplish anything, but as long as we can reconnoitre in advance to ensure that Italy is not manning Sicily or the boot. An attack on Taranto will be valuable and easily supported from the air to boot’. I'm sure no pun was intended [].

A bold, bold assumption there.

"Two, we keep preparations going on the assumptions of a major landing anywhere from central Italy to Sicily, and decide on a specific area and landing sites closer to the proposed D-Day."

Already trying to name drop ahistorically early I see.

And we’d have a pretty interesting war in North America, where the US have been keeping the bulk of their forces ...

You'd think, but last time I invaded the USA I found they'd put all their divisions in...wait for it...Ethiopia.

I am as confused as the rest of you, yes.

 

[Bullfilter]

One thing that sticks out is how incredibly short the Russian section of the line has become. We should expect them to solve many problems for us by rolling through Poland in the near future. Slowly, but surely, like a steamroller.

I’m glad, as that was very much the effect I was trying to generate by marking it on the main campaign map. Our thrust north via Hungary and into southern Poland has really stretched our line. I had hoped the Soviets would have closed things up more by now. You will see how I attempt to remedy this in the October chapters.

I sharply disagree here. Leaving game mechanics about combat efficiency aside, even if we run our frontline divisions down to 80% strength in the process of making an offensive, that is entirely worth it and manageable for the purpose of making critical strategic gains, most importantly putting pressure on the Axis to keep them from boarding up on the Soviet front. An offensive towards Trieste is, I would argue, criticially necessary to shorten our line and advance into defensible terrain before winter. The rest of our salient problems will be solved by our Russian comrades.

Well, I must confess to having some inside knowledge here, as that supplement was written after I’d played October through. See what you think after the next couple of updates. Won’t spoil too much, but . I had some brigades with 0% strength after the worst of the fighting. And my initial aim is to shorten the line in the east, thus freeing enough units to hold from Vienna to the Adriatic (which becomes problematic) then gather enough to make that drive towards Venice, not just Trieste, which is actually part of the invasion plan.

You will also see that attacks and local offensives (which I’d consider Trieste to be) to rationalise the line are not banned, but nothing as big as the Hungarian or Slovakian offensives will be contemplated. Until we’re ready to go for Venice, pre-invasion.

Already trying to name drop ahistorically early I see.

Oh, d-days and h-hours are fairy standard nomenclature (which I used a lot in many of the early chapters). That one is kinda the D-Day, though.

You'd think, but last time I invaded the USA I found they'd put all their divisions in...wait for it...Ethiopia.

I am as confused as the rest of you, yes.

Wow. When I’ve looked in this game, they’ve all been on the Canadian and Mexican borders. Probably because the US is Comintern.

 

[nuclearslurpee]

Well, I must confess to having some inside knowledge here, as that supplement was written after I’d played October through. See what you think after the next couple of updates. Won’t spoil too much, but .

Cheater, cheater, pumpkin eater.

 

[Wraith11B]

There really has to be a way to lower the US threat feeling from it's neighbors. Like I'm sure that a Threat Impact Reduction effect could be put in for Mexico and Canada.

Or maybe not. Who knows.

 

[Bullfilter]

There really has to be a way to lower the US threat feeling from it's neighbors. Like I'm sure that a Threat Impact Reduction effect could be put in for Mexico and Canada.

Or maybe not. Who knows.

In this case, it’s not entirely illogical, given the difference in factions. It’s quite conceivable they could come to blows in a WW3 (not that one is really expected or being planned in this AAR).

 

[37th Armoured div]

I am not a hundred percent on this, but maybe you could tag switch to America and ally Canada and Mexico?

Then Roosevelt really would have no fucking excuse for this shit

 

[Bullfilter]

I am not a hundred percent on this, but maybe you could tag switch to America and ally Canada and Mexico?

Then Roosevelt really would have no fucking excuse for this shit

Tempting, but I have a self-imposed no tag policy (other than briefly for getting info for AAR reports), mainly as a handicap feature in favour of the AI. Also, given they’re in the Allies and US is in the Comintern, not sure how that would work out/whether it would be an option. Don’t know that aspect of the game well enough.

 

[37th Armoured div]

Tempting, but I have a self-imposed no tag policy (other than briefly for getting info for AAR reports), mainly as a handicap feature in favour of the AI. Also, given they’re in the Allies and US is in the Comintern, not sure how that would work out/whether it would be an option. Don’t know that aspect of the game well enough.

I feel you, mate. There’s been games where Germany just sat there peacefully

 

[Bullfilter]

I feel you, mate. There’s been games where Germany just sat there peacefully

No such problem in this one - as you will see in the October chapters!

 

[37th Armoured div]

Roosevelt
We have been attacked by japan, my citizens, but Never fear, Our navy will protect us! Flash cut to the USN ships sunk list. Let this pathetic war with japan not distract us from the true threats of Canada, and Mexico! We all know canada will attack us for alaska, and that mexico wants to EAT US! To protect us from this deadly threat to our existence, I have deployed the army who bravely stand on guard on the mexican border!

Stalin & Inonu (But more Stalin)
Fucking What the actual fucking son of a fucking piece of AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

 

[diskoerekto]

Is Mexico also in the allies? I wish comrade Stalin swayed them to the Comintern cause

 

[TheButterflyComposer]

Is Mexico also in the allies? I wish comrade Stalin swayed them to the Comintern cause

Mexico van always be converted later. Given how unstable it was, it really more depends on outside factors like the Soviets and US influence.

Bigger concern is can we make the US more socialist than it was already leaning? And I think...yes, very possible here.

 

[Bullfilter]

Is Mexico also in the allies? I wish comrade Stalin swayed them to the Comintern cause

From memory, I think so, but will have to check.

Mexico van always be converted later. Given how unstable it was, it really more depends on outside factors like the Soviets and US influence.

Bigger concern is can we make the US more socialist than it was already leaning? And I think...yes, very possible here.

Perhaps, but in cold hard game terms - US politics doesn’t really matter of course, because once you’re in the faction, there’s no leaving it anyway. One of the black and white, not very realistic things about HOI3 as a base game. My mod (currently on hold as HOI3 seems to be irretrievably broken on my PC) was looking at a few ways to loosen that up a bit by broadening the diplomatic options of countries.