Rethinking Italian surrender

Moderators: firepowerjohan, Happycat, rkr1958, Slitherine Core

Post Reply
Schnurri
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 4:39 pm

Rethinking Italian surrender

Post by Schnurri » Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:01 am

The current Italian surrender model accurately reflects the reality where the Axis is on the retreat in 42/43 and the Italians have lost NA and portions of their home territory. In my recent game I am knocking at the doors of Omsk in summer 44, though I'll not make it, but the Russians are on their knees, Italy has a strong defense in Sicily and has repelled the intial invasion (no allied troops in Sicily). The Allies landed in the boot in 42 and have been stalled there til 44. The Allies landed in Normandy and were thrown back into the sea and landed in Vichy and were also repulsed. The only allied presence was south of the Gustav line and they had zero hope of ever making any headway. After a year they got Taranto and with Tunis only needed one more city for surrender. Big air attack and partisans take Turn and Italy surrenders although they actually outnumber the allies in Italy. Sour grapes but kinda dumb. Couldn't there be a changed surrender scenario for late in the game?

Schnurri
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 4:39 pm

Post by Schnurri » Thu Aug 11, 2011 3:30 am

So the question is - would the Italians really surrender if the Axis was winning the war just because they lost one city at the far heel of italy, Tunis, and one other random city? I'll win the game anyway it just seems really ahistorical (in a non-historical sense) and makes for a less clean victory. Suggestions - 2 cities for surrender in 42, 3 in 43, 4 in 44, etc. Any other ideas or am I just whining?

schwerpunkt
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Posts: 367
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:26 am
Location: Western Australia

Post by schwerpunkt » Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:58 am

Add one city for each capital over three that the axis controls? In your case that would mean 4 given that you hold Moscow (Paris, Berlin and Rome)...... Or 3 if the allies took Rome as the third city.....

zechi
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 763
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 1:42 pm

Post by zechi » Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:54 am

I do not think that this should be changed. In fact this is not an issue with Italy, but with the general surrender conditions in GS. The general game mechanic for surrendering is the problem. Nations in GS surrender indepently from the actual military or political situation. Most powers in GS surrender if their capital is captured. This is even the case if the capital is captured through a coup de main and the unit capturing the capital would be annhilated in the next turn.

In the real war most nations did not surrender when their capital has been captured, but when the military situation became untenable or if further resistance was hopeless. For example the French did not surrender because Paris has been captured, but because their armies were either encircled, in disarray or beaten. Most minor countries surrendered to Germany because their armies were crushed, overrun in a Blitzkrieg, but not because their capital has been captured.

However, as it will not be possible to simulate such "complicated" surrendering conditions easily in GS, we need to accept that sometimes a nation will surrender, even if it does not really make sense because the military situation looks good. I also do not feel that this is a big issue, as in a "normal" game between equal opponents the Axis will be hard pressed in 1944 and Italy will most likely be in trouble. Your game situation seems rather unusual and should not be the normal outcome. In a normal game it also should rarely happen that a nation surrenders despite a good military situation. Under normal circumstances a player will do anything to defend the capital of a power to avoid the surrender of the nation. Normally this will lead to fiercy fighting with heavy losses on both sides. If the attacker then manages to capture the capital, then it is realistic that hte "loser" will surrender. It seems your opponent did some major mistakes as normally he should have the initiative as the Allied player in 1944.

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4711
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Thu Aug 11, 2011 9:49 am

You're not the first and won't be the last to lose Italy prematurely. The introduction of paratroopers means that to avoid losses of cities it's important for Italy to garrison their cities. Then it would be very hard to capture one of them. If the Allies have air support you might need corps units and not garrisons in the exposed cities.

Schnurri
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 4:39 pm

Post by Schnurri » Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:40 pm

Just to be clear - everything was garrisoned - lucky air strikes and a partisan attack caused it to fall.

Post Reply

Return to “Commander Europe at War : GS Open Beta”