Is it too easy to bring Italy to the center ?

[Franciscus]

May be this is WAD, and I do not know all the implications of choices, but the few several times that I made a "dry run" of the GC (allways as CP, of course ), almost allways was I able to bring Italy to war on the side of the Central powers just by selecting diplo poker as Germany and by accepting the serbian conditions and making concessions to Italy as AH, without any diplomatic action, and with Turkey still neutral.
I do not think that this is necessarily bad, mind you.
What is the experience of other players ?

[PhilThib]

I believe some uncertainty should be added here, may be on Italian start level...I have the same experience.... but not that many attempts

[Franciscus]

[vonRocko]

Yes Italy almost always comes in if you choose poker and concessions.But there are the penalties! Germany looses the early august attacks,parlaiment levels drop,etc.
I don't know what the long term effects will be,because I usually restart for one reason or another. But maybe Italy will be a drag on your side.(I doubt it though).
But it does free up two A-H armies for the Russian front!

[felipye]

...and lets you attack relatively weak Cote d'azur defenses with your whole Italian force (not sure how that works out, but it seems Italia mobilizes two big armies that are free to deploy/move there in the middle of 1915.)
If Italians break into France there, dont see that anything can stop them from marching to Paris, provided that Germany applies enough pressure on the main frontline to keep the french troops from redeploying

[Offworlder]

Yep and considering that the French army keeps launching attacks in Alsace-Lorraine in unfavourable terrain, the Italians could prove to be decisive.

Actually I refrain from using the options mentioned because its too easy. The Italians are numerous and have a decent economy backing them and so become a real pain to their opponents, whoever they are. The French are so concentrated on their former borders with Germany, that they are unable to really intervene effectively against the Schlieffen sweep, let alone send at least another army south to stop the Italians.

BTW as the Austrians, there is a way to transfer at least one army to the Russian front. As soon as the Italians declare war, hit them with all you got. Normally they only have one mobalised army that could threaten your hold in the area if backed up by other armies, but its mostly made up of inexperienced units. Sweep them out of the mountains and don't stop until you reach Piave. Then leave all the mountain troops of the VII army and transfer it wherever you need.

[calvinus]

I know a few LGG boardgamers who share with you the exact opinion... Diplomatic Poker is too easy!

[Tamas]

Well, maybe. But Austria loses quite a few NWs with those concessions. Also, Italy DID have a binding treaty, afaik, if France declared war upon Germany, which basically happens if you choose diplomatic poker.

[dougbush93]

I know a few LGG boardgamers who share with you the exact opinion... Diplomatic Poker is too easy!

I would be one of those LGG boardgamers who would agree. Getting Italy in so easily and so early via diplo poker basically throws the game to the Centrals. Maybe bringing in the United States and England automatically (and early, perhaps immediately for England and early 1916 for the USA?) would be a proper balancing mechanism.

Doug

[Big Muddy]

I have yet to reach 1915, quite a few practice runs as Allies. England is very easy to join in, usually as early as second turn. Sometimes without the help of Dip.

[Le Ricain]

The funny thing is that when playing as the Entente I have reached the conclusion that Italy enters the war too quickly for the Entente. In my last two GC games Italy entered the war for the allies in September 1914.

[Tamas]

The funny thing is that when playing as the Entente I have reached the conclusion that Italy enters the war too quickly for the Entente. In my last two GC games Italy entered the war for the allies in September 1914.

Yes, often even the Allied AI also manages to bring them in early.

In my current Centrals game however, its January of 1916, and Italy is still neutral.

Don't forget, that they can be randomly pro-Central or pro-Allied, and there is D'Anzzio or how that gentleman is called. Very hard to predict them, and that is okay I think.

Has anyone really steamrolled AI France with the Italians?

[tagwyn]

Italy (?) steamrolled anyone??? Realistic? apY:

[calvinus]

Dear all, as soon you will become WW1 "experts" (and WW1 will have all gameplay bugs fixed, of course, also the most hidden ones!), you will discover the modding! You will find tons of excel files that will allow you to tweak all these matters... making Italy and Great Britain more reluctant to join the war, etc. etc...

[WhoCares]

It's 1916 and the Brits haven't joind yet, even though my CPs never had a diplomatic mission there. I'm fine with that
Italy I drew in myself (but letting Italy declare the war!) to launch an early offensive before they are ready, captured Venezia and sealed the frontline...

[calvinus]

And when next patch will come, you will see a lot of gameplay bugs fixed that will make the game much more balanced!

[Offworlder]

Well maybe reduce the effect of the diplomatic poker would be more realistic or increase the penalties for the Austrians. Please note that the Habsburg army (especially) resented the fact that Italy had snatched away Venice and the surrounding area in the Austro-Prussian War and the surrender of further territory was unthinkable. Also note that the Italians had claims to territory that went beyond the present boundaries of Italy.

As Tamas pointed out, the Italians had a standing alliance with the CP which they didn't uphold because of territory they coveted from the Austrians. Therefore it was concievable that they would have declared war on the allies. Remember, the allies promised a lot to the Italians (promises they didn't keep when victorius) just to rope them in the alliance. The traditional antipathy towards the Austrians (which is still felt up north) made the Italians lean towards the allies.

BTW tagwyn, despite all the popular myths about the Italians, they fought bravely in the most inhospitable terrain immaginable with all the cards stacked against them. The fact that they had butcher Cadorna at the helm, an army divided by region, speciality and class and antiquated equipment, told against them. It is worthwhile noting that the Austrians deployed some of the best troops against them (ex the Karstjaegers) and held all the mountaintops.

BTW I'm not Italian

[Tamas]

Yes, the Hungarian soldiers suffered untold horrors in their efforts to stop the Italians. Last summer I visited the area of the Isonzo river, now in Slovenia. Not only a simply beautiful small river valley, it also made my jaw drop to see where the frontlines actually were.

[Kardinal]

There were some serious obstacles with Italy joining the Central powers. It was totally reliant on imports, like 5 MT of coal and 2.8MT food, 1.5MT iron in 1917.

http://www.gwpda.org/naval/stats001.htm

During WWI Germany had problems with supplying coal even to Austria-Hungary. Getting through 14000t of coal daily through the Alps is not a trivial feat - done in WWII, though.
If they join Central powers, Britain stops delivering coal to Italy (main source of coal until late 1920s) and blockades foodstuff. Starvation might occur even earlier - although they could at least free up manpower for agricultural labor in Germany and AH.

[Tamas]

Blockade effects are modelled, 'though.

[Kardinal]

Not to the extent it would effect Italy, having the largest vulnerability to blockade. I read on the 'net (FWIW) that Italy had like three months of coal reserves when it declared war on the CPs, and the UK was witholding neutral (US and Italian) freighters bound to Italy with foodstuff and else to keep pressure on them.
So other than Italy honoring its alliance obligations in 1914 I see no chance it'd have joined the CP at a later time.

[PhilThib]

Or their should be severe penalties on the blockade table for Italy...

[Offworlder]

I don't know about blockading. Italy's long coastline really makes it almost impossible to blockade, and its access to the Adriatic, and the Balkans, really makes it invulnerable to blockade. Also note that the agricultural sector in Italy has been underproductive (for various reasons) since around the 1880's and therefore there was space to expand its agricultural sector.

Besides a combined Austrian and Italian fleet would have proved to be a grave menace to both the British and the French. Southern France is within easy striking distance from Italy and Sicily dominates the centre of the Mediterranean. Libya was another asset since it allowed Italy to strike both French and British interests in the Med. Frankly Italy in WWI was extremely important in Mediterranean and Balkan terms.

[Sheytan]

The Entente didnt need to blockade Italy physically. All they needed to do was maintain control of the choke points into the Med, IE, Gibraltar, and Suez canal. Further if Italy had access to closer supplies of materials it would no doubt have made efforts to secure said resources instead of bieng dependent upon GB for strategic materials, a potential adversary givin Italys pre war alliance obligations.

I don't know about blockading. Italy's long coastline really makes it almost impossible to blockade, and its access to the Adriatic, and the Balkans, really makes it invulnerable to blockade. Also note that the agricultural sector in Italy has been underproductive (for various reasons) since around the 1880's and therefore there was space to expand its agricultural sector.

Besides a combined Austrian and Italian fleet would have proved to be a grave menace to both the British and the French. Southern France is within easy striking distance from Italy and Sicily dominates the centre of the Mediterranean. Libya was another asset since it allowed Italy to strike both French and British interests in the Med. Frankly Italy in WWI was extremely important in Mediterranean and Balkan terms.

[Offworlder]

Pre-war Italy tried to curry favour with both sides. Keep in mind that Italy had a treaty (obviously secret) with France since 1902. Also it tried to diversify its sources. Obviously, as time went on they became more anti-Austrian (partly to deflect the people from internal problems) and therefore less ready to fulfill their obligations as set down by the Triple Alliance. Note that basically the CP had already written off Italy before the war and AH had already mobalised corps on the Italian frontier from the start of the war.

Fortunately in-game we could reverse the trend

[PDF]

I'm not a specialist at all in Italian politics of early 20th century, but find it very weird to have it join the CP - unless the CP is clearly winning ! Else Italy won't have gained nada, except a big blockade during the war and lots of problem after...
In the end I think Italy was to side with the likely winner, but rather late.
But moreover, I agree it clearly unbalance the whole war in favor of the CP. So why making "plausible" and oft-occuring a thing that didn't occur, seems unlikely to have occured, and unbalance the game ?

So the easiest solution would be to have a strongly neutral Italy,and give it diplo bonuses rather according to where is the war heading (NV of alliances) that on promises that only engage those who believe in them (I mean Ambs and diplo actions )

[jastaV]

I do not know what’s behind the game logic, (have not played WWI yet), but I’m sure there was not logic behind that happened in 1914-15 with Italian intervention.

Austria was a the natural enemy of Italy along the full XIX century.
Italy had an alley in France along XIX century in wars against Austria. Britain supported the Italian unification process too, at a political level.
In 1866 Italy and Germany, (Prussia) entered an alliance against Austria. In 1870 Italy proclaimed the unification under Savoia Crown: that same year Italian Volunteers lead by G. Garibaldi were in France to defend the Republic against Prussians.
At the beginning of XX century Austria was till controlling Trentino, Friuli, Istria, Dalmatia. They were Italian language and culture regions of the former Republic of Venice.
Austria was hated and till considered the natural enemy!

In 1911 things changed. Italy entered war against Turks for the conquest of Libya. The change in the balance of power in the central Mediterranean leaded to worsen relationships with France, (controlling Tunisia at that time), and Britain. Political isolation carried Italian government to active alliance with Germany and… Austria. This did not influenced natural hostility for Austria quite common in the people as in the intelligenzia.
When WWI begun Italy entered a neutral position, as allowed by alliance terms with Central Powers.
The country was politically divided in parties: in favor of a long term neutrality; in favor of entering war against Central Powers to liberate Trentino, Friuli, Istria, Dalmatia; in favor of the respect of the assistance treaty with Central Powers.
Secret negotiations with Central Powers and Entente leaded to a stall: at some point both sides were closed to offer Trentino, Friuli, Istria, Dalmatia to Italy. BTW, Istria and Dalmatia had been granted to Serbia too, by Entente powers!
Possibly, it was the street to take the decision: it was an impulsive action triggered by Dannunzio and other tribunes populi to lead Italy to join the Entente!

In game term it is not realistic having Italy entering war in 1914. 1915 is to be the decision year, with opposed sides NW influencing Italian political decision but with the random event “Dannunzio and the street” possibly moving Italy at war against Austria.

[jastaV]

BTW tagwyn, despite all the popular myths about the Italians, they fought bravely in the most inhospitable terrain immaginable with all the cards stacked against them. The fact that they had butcher Cadorna at the helm, an army divided by region, speciality and class and antiquated equipment, told against them. It is worthwhile noting that the Austrians deployed some of the best troops against them (ex the Karstjaegers) and held all the mountaintops.

BTW I'm not Italian

Other powers armies were not less divided by region, speciality and social class.
Think of the muntinational Asburgic and Romanov empires, or the british regimental tradition as regard regional divisions.
Russian equippement was not better Italian one.
Social class divisions were then so rigid in Russia as in Britain.

I'm Italian and I'm very familiar with places where WWI was fought.
The rought, mountain nature of the theater was a great advantage for defenders, a terrible drawback for attackers: but that was for Italian as Austro-German troops.

Cadorna was not a military genious: he failed in the same way, and going after same strategies as other nations commander in chiefs.

In 1917 Italy experienced a major defeat at Caporetto-Tolmino and was very closed to capitulation. Situation in French trenches was not better at that time with only court-martial and executions keeping french soldiers to fight.
Russia had already collapsed!

Italian Alpini were well trained mountain troops as were Austrian Karstjaegers.

[jastaV]

Dear all, as soon you will become WW1 "experts" (and WW1 will have all gameplay bugs fixed, of course, also the most hidden ones!), you will discover the modding! You will find tons of excel files that will allow you to tweak all these matters... making Italy and Great Britain more reluctant to join the war, etc. etc...

I'll not candidate myself for WWI modding!
Not now, not soon: I'm already deeply engulfed in NCP modding/editing!
I just wonder if AGEod engine games, (NCP, AACW,..) modding/editing knowhow could be easely transferred here or if WWI is a brand new codes universe.

BTW, congrats for the subject choice: looking to board-game WWI is expected to be a great PC game, with a bit more efforts!

[Tamas]

People, you forget something: to make it "sure" (and then you still have a dice roll to overcome) to have Italy join the CP at the onset of the war, you have to:

-play Diplomatic Poker as Germany. This gives up your pre-turn, and give Russia enough time to mobilize thus eliminating her penalty for combat values in August. This in effect makes the Schlieffen plan totally worthless, and pulls the teeth out of the Moltke Plan as well, not to mention Ruprecht.
-Austria has to give up Tyrol to Italy. Not only this sort of nullifies the Italian "casus belli" against Austria (in the eyes of their own public opinion), it also decreases Austrian National Will, which can decrease to dangerous levels by the end of the first year, as a result.

We can argue that perhaps Austria should suffer worse consequences, but I think it is realistic to assume, that the Italian government would feel they may have trouble bringing the people to war against a country which just gave them all the territories they (publicly) wanted. (I know Italy eyed supremacy on both sides of the Adriatic).