After hearing the idea of dropping a bid Sub off Egypt to aid in the SZ97 attack, I was a pretty big fan, but now I’m wondering if it is best to skip it.
What will usually happen is this: you bring the Sub in, and the Italians don’t scramble. If you have some losses, you might then get nailed by an Italian counter (depends on the presence of the French), or, you get nailed by German air that is then obligated to fly south to clean you out. So even in the most favorable initial outcomes for the UK player, your ships are usually sunk by the end of round 2 anyway. If you don’t have the Sub or go in a little lighter on planes, then the Italians scramble, but you’re still likely to win anyway with some heavier losses. However, in the scramble scenario, you’ve now killed off the Italian planes which is more of a big deal for Italy than your matching losses are for you.
If you don’t go with the bid Sub, you can use more of the bid to help clean out the Italians south of Egypt. I’m wondering if this is a better option since it makes it easier to reinforce Egypt. Even with a devastating SZ97 attack in round 1, the mass of Italians at Tobruk is a significant threat for several rounds if they didn’t thin it out by sweeping through North Africa. I’m wondering if other players using the Sub are having similar experiences.
I agree. The extra ships left in sz 97 usually just get crushed by the Germans anyway. Even if the second Italian destroyer gets killed and the sub can convoy for a couple of turns before the Italians can build another one, I think there are more useful things to do with the bid. For example, if you bid a tank in Egypt instead, you can do all the usual sz 96 and 97 stuff and also launch a very favorable attack on Tobruk.
For $6 I’d rather have 2 infantry in London or maybe $2 for UK an artillery in Buryatia.
Part of the appeal of the sub is that it is often still there UK2, to threaten whatever Italian navy is left, either off Italy or in sz 93. It’s a useful bid, but perhaps not the most useful 6 UK can spend.
You could always just NCM that SS into position off of S.France instead of risking its loss in SZ97 from the probable presence of the Italian destroyer. Germany can’t get to it and Italy will have to decide to either buy a DD on I1 and move it out of position to S.France on I2 to deal with the convoy or accept 2 rounds of SS convoys from there.
Carrier 16, dd 8, sub 6. Bship 20, cruiser 12, transport 7.
You are losing cheaper units to kill more expensive units. I do not see the problem. If you don’t want to lose your air, just land it on malta. Also I am sure you will score some defense roll hits with whatever you have left, so you usually net a small gain.
@Cow:
Also I am sure you will score some defense roll hits with whatever you have left, so you usually net a small gain.
There’s no question in my mind that the short-term gains favor the Sub. The question is can you get better long-term gains by spending that 6 PIC elsewhere. I’m starting to think the answer is yes.
You can only plan for so many long term gains. The axis usually push for a VC win which is within 10 rounds, so those gains have to pay off and come into play before you lose the game.
Also France has two sitting duck naval units therefor he already has attacks lined up. Forcing him to have more is not a bad idea. He kills that and leaves france naval, then you get that as a prize. He sinks french naval then you get to convoy and force germany to hit that instead of other potential attacks.
It is hard to match those short term benefits.
~
Gibraltar is not so bad depending on where the German air is. You probably want to block Italy from attacking it, because he has enough fodder units to do a 1 round attack, drop units on algeria, retreat into his transports. Then the german air sinks it and lands algeria (sub 2 fighter vs french naval). Also if Germany took southern france round 1 then Italy can hit the gibraltar fleet with everything.
So you are going to lose a blocker and commit 15 ipc to an airbase to save a carrier and cruiser… That is not as cost effective anymore.
Also Italy does get a decent round 2 attack at egypt forcing you to land air there on round 2 or blocking it with your naval and getting another airbase possibly.
~
Again two schools of thought, the short term and the long term one. The long term one is situational I feel.
The primary issue is what to do with the UK med units. You can stack into 92, go out through the Suez, etc. but there’s really no good spot to save them without letting Italy get big quickly and putting the middle east at risk.
So I guess I favor bidding the sub and attacking 97 until I see a more elegant solution I can steal.
97 is a high risk attack and the extra percentage the sub fodder gives saves those games.
When there is no scramble - the sub can’t be killed by German air, and already convoys Italy for 2 ipcs on average.
Then it can go attack leftover Italian ships from the 96 or 93 battle with the Malta bomber. Also helps take sea lion off the table.
Also, it’s pretty sweet rd 2 of UK1 97 attack when that sub hits the damaged BB and takes a 4 return shot off the table.
If there is a scramble it takes the hit instead of a higher value air piece.
Also puts Italy in a tough spot, has to attack 96, 93 and 97 rd 1 to clear the med and get the NO.
Basically, the UK fleet position sucks and Italy with 1 transport is a lot less effective than Italy with 2 transports and some coastal bombards.
Taranto guarantees the loss of all the British navy in the med, and it is a risky attack that puts the airforce at risk. Having a med “fleet in being” that sits in the red sea has worked pretty well for me. Giving 5 IPC to Italy for one turn and the extra transport has not been too much of an issue. I use bids for extra land units in Africa. But, I’m still willing to be convinced otherwise! :-D
If there is a scramble it takes the hit instead of a higher value air piece.
The sub wouldn’t be able to take the hit from scrambled planes cause there is no destroyer.
I don’t play with bids but i can see the advantage for both. I would probably rather have the land units. They always seem to be pretty thin for the first couple turns while sea lion is in play.
Taranto guarantees the loss of all the British navy in the med, and it is a risky attack that puts the airforce at risk. Having a med “fleet in being” that sits in the red sea has worked pretty well for me.
That’s a bit risky, since you won’t be able to cover Egypt and Jordan w/o a local IC. Italy can skip attacking Egypt and just seize and hold Jordan, giving them a gateway to the Middle East and ensuring your fleet in being won’t ever be a problem.
Gotta do the Med attack… and land any surviving air in Malta or Crete. If a carrier survives in 97, its gone man, its gone- so still land the air on land.
The sub can take the hit from bb and cruiser. of course it depends if the axis save their bb or not (if they do I keep the sub and lose dd instead).
so your losses if they scramble generally go carrier sub or dd cruiser fighter tactical bomber.
this is a good attack, bring in an extra fighter from london if you want to.
