@seancb we also use a giant piece of plywood because any oval table we could find won’t fit the whole board. Its much better to have something under the board (or vinyl) because prevents the board from getting knocked or moved and has at least some sideboard area for piles of chips and drinks and extras. Still, we need dice pits and another area to put most of our stuff because the game is simply that yuge.
South African Launch
-
Good morning Mr. T! Surprised that you are so focused right now on the G40 scenario since we are putting all our computing power down on the G42 analysis.
People here have laid out some conditions for the bid, but at least at the Gencon tourney, the rule is
place whole units, no left over IpCs
where you have like units
without limit to type or number per territoryThis also means that certain bids are mathematically inconvenient or even partially useless (such as 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13 etc) because they can only be used to place one or two certain unit or combination of units.
On the rest, I think some of the commenters here are right; You can’t under turtle the UK London square, and buying either industrial complex in Persia or Egypt is a risk (tho primarily without the bases or bid) not simply because it becomes a target for takeover/SB but also because it takes a large commit of money over time, money you will be spending each turn. What can happen there is you may drop some men on the UK sensing that Germany cannot Sealion you, but a strong German player can APPEAR not to be preparing for sea lion; or even not be thinking much about Sea Lion…until he sees you commit to a factory elsewhere. Germany can ramp its forces extremely quickly, can drop as many as 10 transports at a time. He has all the land and air pieces he needs to invade you, free, from the beginning of the game. It only takes him one turn to buy transports, reshuffle his tanks and build infantry (in Wgermany), land his air there, and he can destroy you on G3, G4, G5…and so on.
The biggest misconception is that Sea Lion has to be your plan. It can be a combination of a bluff, power projection and a contingency plan. Even when it never goes off; it still means you have to be careful where you place your UK fleets and what you buy (since Germany can use the WGer airforce and any naval units to shellac your fleet, wherever you build it).
I also misunderstood the allocation of territory but its very simple; the board split splits west and east. Everything west of the board split belongs to W UK and everything east of the split belongs to UK PAC.
See you at Gencon bro.
-
taam, am very pleased to see your response (was hoping you would have some insight). So it seems that the concern that most people have here is Sea Lion. I understand that Sea Lion is a very real concern, but I have also reached the conclusion that Germany performing operation Sea Lion is to the benefit of the Allies. As the British player you of course are very scared of Sea Lion, but in my games Ive found that if Germany goes Sea Lion, they lose. It is especially the case in this Strategy, and double so if the Americans go full Europe build in first several rounds. The Reasons are as such:
-
Germany is not building against Russia, now this is obvious but it is oh so ever true. Every turn and every IPC that is not spent on Russia increases the chance that Moscow stands.
-
Not a for sure thing. UK starts with 7 defending land units on its square in addition to the 5 I recommend buying on UK1. Also you typically have 1 Transport survive in the Atlantic and I suggested having it shuttle the Canadians over. This means that end of UK2 you are looking at 14 Defending Land units plus 3 fighters and 5 AA. Germany can of course have 10 transports with 20 attacking units and around 10 Aircraft ready but it is no guarantee seeing as the British will surely buy 10 Inf in response to a heavy transport buy from Germany. That means you are looking at for the British 23 defending @2, 1 defending @3, and 3 defending @4 plus your 5 AA. Against a German Attack of probably 5 inf @1, 10 art/inf @2, 10 tanks/fighters @3, and 5 bombers @ 4. Put that on the calculator as a must take territory and its 50.3% for Germany, Hardly worth it (link included). http://goo.gl/H2t3ow
-
London simply cant be held even if successful. The Americans can easily liberate London, whereas Moscow is extremely hard to liberate once captured.
-
Some might say that sea lion is worth it even if liberated just to destroy a major IC, but with this strategy 90% of your income all game will be spent in Africa and the Middle East so the fact your major IC was destroyed is of little concern.
So to me as an allied player I love to see Germany go sea lion.
As for my interest in G40 over G42, the more I look at G42 setup and board, the more it makes me love G40.
Cannot wait to meet you at Gencon taam, cheers 8-)
-
-
Just for kicks I ran your numbers through David Skelly’s calc.
Germany
10 inf, 5 art, 5 tanks, 5 ftrs, 5 tacs, 2 bmrs (w/10 tpts). They could also get cruiser and BB shot.UK
23 inf, 1 tank, 3 ftrs, 5 AAAGot around 74% win for Germany (over 80% if they get the cruiser & BB shot).
Add a ftr to UK and Germany is favored 58% (66% w/cruiser & BB shot)
The Germans could have 11 transports though and 2 more ground units would raise all those figures by 10 (80% becomes 90% and so on)
It would be rather costly for the Germans as they would prob be killing off a few air units at the end of the battle. I know we don’t see too many Sea Lions because of this cost and the Russian hoards that will be coming (not to mention the USA). With that said every now and again the Germans have to attempt it just to keep the UK honest, so if you leave an opening they very well might take it. Plus they could SBR you G2 making your defense even worse (German risk also involved in SBR).
You said several things about the aftermath if the Germans do Sea Lion.
-
Moscow stands, and the Russians will be coming–-no doubt, but I have seen the Germans def and regain initiative.
-
As pointed out above I think the numbers are much better then you think for a German Sea Lion.
-
The US can liberate London easily–That depends on where the US spent their income, what kind of fleet they have on the Euro side, and how quickly they can redirect (after Germany drops transports G2). The US very well could be held out of the war until London is taken locking them down in DC. It could be US3 before they could move to Gib, then US4 to attempt a liberation.
-
Your last bullet point is a little concerning. You basically said a successful Sea Lion won’t effect your strat much because you don’t really need a major IC in London (once liberated) because most of your purchases go to Africa and the Mid East.
When Germany drops transports in the water G2, as you said UK probably spends all its income in London UK2. No income UK3 if London goes down. On US4 London is liberated so England would regain its empire UK4, but won’t have any income to spend (collects end of UK4). So UK5 they can finally buy units again, but those purchases hit the board at the end of UK’s turn so really it is UK6 before they can do anything or go anywhere. Just saying if you lose London your strat goes out the window because you can’t build in any of your minor ICs for quite some time and they become vulnerable to capture. If you can’t build in Egypt, and Italy has most of its fleet intact that’s a problem. With USA going full tilt Euro the Japanese may decide to take out the other half of UK, and become a problem in the Mid East too.
Yeah Germany is going to have a rough time, but Italy and Japan can draw some of the heat, make some gains and help out defensively. Games after a Sea Lion can be really fun for both sides, its like the wild west anything goes lol.
-
-
while I see your point Wild Bill you ran numbers with 2 additional bombers than I did which does draw the averages WAY up. Also typically at least one destroyer survives the battle of the Atlantic which I could use as Blocker or to stop the amphibious shot. As for the Italians, the UK fleet is large enough at end of UK2 that if London falls your fleet is large enough to wipe out the Italian fleet or at least strong enough that they cant attack it which would allow me to park it in SZ98. Also as an allied player I will gladly be “kept honest” if it means increasing my chance of winning.
-
note that WBs ## of UK units is pretty optimal; maybe 1 more fighter or so but thats lime 100% spent on turtle. no doubt that this is why people feel the bid should help Uk
-
You can stop the bombardment w/dd from one direction, but the Germans could go around Scotland and hit England from the other side. That isn’t an ideal place for the German navy because they would rather be in Chanel sz110 so they have an option of building an AB to protect their investment. Depends on if the US has a couple loaded carriers in sz102 and some bmrs with in range.
Don’t get me wrong, I like what you have strung together, and I have done many of those things as UK in the past. The fact that you didn’t do Taranto means that the London ftr stayed for home defense instead of going to the Med. I just think I would drop another ftr on London to sure that up better, it can always fly down later. You also gave the UK a damn good bid so there really isn’t any reason to take that risk.
I’m sure you have probably done much of what you posted already. If you have success your opponents will start to look for ways to mess you up. If you are really strong in one theater, you probably have some weaknesses in others. The axis will look to exploit that, and Sea Lion is a possibility.
-
I see what your saying WildBill, and appreciate your feedback :-) I will keep your ideas in mind.
-
note that WBs ## of UK units is pretty optimal; maybe 1 more fighter or so but thats lime 100% spent on turtle. no doubt that this is why people feel the bid should help Uk
Sorry taam but I do not understand what you are trying to convey, could you reword it for me, apologies :-)
-
The German Kriegsmarine purchase and Sea-Lion threat has to be executed with Egypt/Gib/Middle East and S. Africa money in Mind.
Japan must wait till J3… for this scenario to work…
Given a good UK defense for a Kriegsmarine buy… then the next target should be Gib for Germany.
If Italian Navy is left untouched on UK1 (except Malta), then on I1 navies combine and take Greece. Sacrifice 1 TR if Gib is empty… and take Gib
Save $10, collect $21 the $5 bonus almost pays for 2nd TR… (S.Fr + Greece+ Kenya - all S.African forces in Kenya… all N. African forces in Tobruk… do not venture into Alexandria)G2 - Land 3 FTRS in Tobruk. Clear English Channel… Non-combat navy to Gib … make sure to keep 1 Tank on TR (unload in Gib)
I2 - with 24, buy CV+2TR … N.Afro-Italians forces go to Alexandria, S. Afro-Italian force to Sudan…
G3- Attack USSR as usual… German Navy to S.France with a 1 TR (Keep Mech+Inf) build… Bring SBRs to AlexandriaI3 - Unload everything on Egypt… (3 TR loads+ Alex+ Sudan) and take it if possible…
G4 - Reinforce Egypt…make it expensive for Allies to take it back… the original TR + TR buy puts 4 units on Egypt…and the Axis navy by a 1-2 punch can push through the Red Sea and take S. Africa… or Middle East …and lots of UK money, very quickly… Tank+Mech are deadly on their own with a TaC+SBR… not to mention 2 other TRs that can unload 1 Inf each…Say is on G5, Madagascar, S. Africa, Tanganyika, Sudan, fall to Germany… or Iraq! and I5 reinforces Iraq… , the bonuses start piling up…
If this is done efficiently, and Egypt falls to Italians…then the Middle-East is in play… If Egypt falls to Germany…then hold Egypt as far as possible… and rush back to block Gibralter.
But this does 5 things…
A) Both Italy and Germany get the $5 bonus a turn (even without the Med)
B) Force UK to build in South Africa… hence less money to help the US fleet, and no money to help USSR
C) Force India to send help West… making its fall all the more easier…
D) Force US to send part of its fleet to take Egypt… making Berlin safer
E) Although Moscow is safer… economically speaking, if India falls on J5/6… and Middle East /S. Africa fall on G5-I5… then Axis will be in a very strong position -
I am very confused how does this play into my South African strategy? Certainly not a counter because some of the moves you recommended would be eliminated for Italy after UK1. Especially the fact that I Wipe out Ethiopa on UK1. Maybe I’m missing something though? If so I Apologize :-)
-
Tirano -
Given that you eliminate Ethiopia… and you build that navy off Egypt…
If 2 of 3 Italian navys are left intact to join…
and the Germany Navy swings around …
The Egyptian navy will either have to sit in the Red Sea… or be obliterated. -
I would be quite ok with that because it repurposed resources from Russia which means she will stand.
-
This strategy will hold the Mediterranean quite effectively. However, you will lose the game if Germany and Japan are played properly.
Now many will probably be saying that you should grab a fighter over an IC, however I do not think 1 fighter will change Germany’s mind on whether to do Sea Lion or not.� Now to those who say an IC in Egypt is a gift to Italy, I understand your reasoning, but with this strategy it is not.�
The fighter is better in London because it can go other places faster if necessary without need for an Atlantic navy to get it there. In short, it is more flexible than building infantry in London, and if your sea zone 106 transport survived you can bring in two additional ground units from Canada with no issue. If you want to move infantry, you have to have a transport to move them and to have a transport you have to be able to protect it, which means you must build additional fleet or pin your air force to London (cutting down your mobility) if the Luftwaffe is in West Germany, Holland, or Normandy.
So yeah, build the fighter.
-
SZ91 Cruiser, Gib Fighter, Malta Fighter -> SZ96 (Gib Fighter land on SZ98 Carrier in NonCombat, Maltese Fighter land in Cairo)
-
Alexandria units ->Cairo.
-
South African Inf ->Transport (From Bid), SZ71 fleet ->SZ81
-
SZ98 Fleet -> SZ81
-
Quebec Inf+Tank -> Transport, SZ106 Fleet ->SZ119 (Do this during whichever phase you need depending on if a German sub is there)
So you are planning to build up a Mediterranean fleet. Awesome. But you are leaving part of it to die in sea zone 96 while you build in sea zone 81. Why waste the units by letting Italy destroy them in detail instead of massing your fleet in sea zone 81 and moving back into the Med on UK2?
Also, I didn’t see any reference to you deploying a blocker to sea zone 99. That means Italy can do a joint amphibious/overland assault on Egypt proper, which you have barely reinforced, on I1 with two infantry, three tanks, one mech, a strategic bomber, two cruisers, and a battleship. Italy has a 50% chance of winning this battle, trapping your sea zone 81 fleet outside the Med until UK3 at least (longer if the Luftwaffe lands there on G2, to be reinforced by slower forces from Tobruk and an Italian build in Egypt on I2. 50% of the time in this scenario, you have lost the Mediterranean, Africa and the Middle East. That’s pretty much game…
- If Japan does NOT do J1 DoW: 1 Transport 3 Inf
With this strategy UK Pac helps UK Europe as much as possible when not pressured so the Transport and Inf are to send towards your fleet in SZ81 if Japan did not do DoW, if they did you are turtling up.
This is a huge gift for Japan! You sending four ground units and two transports (one of which was built instead of two more ground units!) west to Africa. Now Japan can come light for Calcutta, or come normal heavy and then destroy your Middle East presence after it crushes India with a LOT of force remaining…
Pacific Combat and NonCombat
A lot of this depends on what Japan did but a few things here do not change regardless(I will list only those), but you are 100% defense so do not move units into china, retreat retreat retreat. Defend Calcutta.- Inf+Art load on SZ39 transport, SZ39 Fleet ->SZ76 amphibious assault Ethiopa (Plus Anglo Sudan Forces)
This is a 76% battle for you. If you lose (one time out of four you will), you have weakened India and not gained anything in the process. Sure, you killed a couple of Italian units. You would do better to have taken Persia with those forces and retreated the Anglo-Egypt Sudan forces into Egypt proper. You have 0% chance of losing, make one more IPC out of it (two more IPCs 25% of the time), gain two free infantry (another six IPCs), set yourself up to take Iraq on UK2 (another two IPCs), and secured Persia as a landing zone for planes that you might later send to Moscow or India.
Even when this battle works, you can’t stop the Italians from taking a UK territory on I1. The infantry in Italian Somaliland can take something, or the tank from Tobruk can blitz in/out of Alexandria, or Italy can move into Alexandria in force and reinforce amphibiously, to be further reinforced by the Luftwaffe landing there on G2 after sinking any remaining Allied ships in the Med. In short, killing Ethiopia does you little good for a lot of risk.
- SZ37 Battleship (if alive) ->SZ39
Why sea zone 39 instead of 79? The position of the battleship on UK2 would be the same, but parking it in 39 might allow a J2 attack to kill it.
UK2 On…
At the start of UK2 it should all be self explanatory, you are building a Rome Invasion Force right outside of Cairo, You should be building Transports in South Africa and land units+warships in Cairo (build a carrier for round 2) this is your new Normandy, sure its obvious what you are doing after round 1 but you are already a true threat.� You should have a fleet that looks like this in SZ 81 at end of UK2.
4 Trans
3 Destroyer
2 Cruiser
3 Carriers loaded (last one gets loaded from UK2 purchase of carrier in Cairo with the Egypt and India fighter landing on it)
1 Battleship (possibly)You are assuming that neither Italy nor Germany kills the sea zone 96 fleet before UK2. That is a hefty assumption if the Axis is being properly run. Even if that does happen, you still have a sizable fleet though – the Med will be yours!
It takes you a minimum of three turns to get Egypt-built fighters to Moscow and four turns to get London-built fighters to Moscow. If you don’t start sending them early, you won’t have enough for Russia to hold off a well-planned attack on Moscow. Germany will come out of the Moscow battle with a stack of thirty tanks plus surviving mechs, which will descend on the Middle East like locusts. But at least you’ll have a pretty fleet in the Med to pick up the survivors from Egypt. You might even take and hold Rome for a while.
You are sacrificing any hope of Moscow standing against a G6/G7 attack and instead putting a threat on Rome.
You should also have 2 more transports new coming out of South Africa and Possibly more from India if Japan still has not done DoW at this point.
Wait, you are going to have India build ANOTHER transport (two more ground units gone, plus whatever the transport takes away!) and strip it of some air force? I see no way you can challenge Japan in Calcutta at all this way even if the US is going KJF (unless you have Mr Magoo running Japan).
This also works really well if America is going KGF because you can focus Rome while they either liberate Leningrad and Scandinavia or open a front in France.
If the US is going KGF and you run the UK this way, at least you’ll get to go home early for dinner following the Pacific victory. There is ZERO hope of India making any kind of dent in Japan, which will leave it more than enough manpower to go and kill ANZAC fast before the US can get there.
Marsh
-
-
@Marshmallow:
This is a 76% battle for you. If you lose (one time out of four you will), you have weakened India and not gained anything in the process. Sure, you killed a couple of Italian units. You would do better to have taken Persia with those forces and retreated the Anglo-Egypt Sudan forces into Egypt proper. You have 0% chance of losing, make one more IPC out of it (two more IPCs 25% of the time), gain two free infantry (another six IPCs), set yourself up to take Iraq on UK2 (another two IPCs), and secured Persia as a landing zone for planes that you might later send to Moscow or India.
My mistake – I did not include the support shot for the cruiser from sea zone 39 in my calculation. This is an 85% battle for you. You win basically four times out of five.
Marsh
-
Tirano -
Given that you eliminate Ethiopia… and you build that navy off Egypt…
If 2 of 3 Italian navys are left intact to join…
and the Germany Navy swings around …
The Egyptian navy will either have to sit in the Red Sea… or be obliterated.respectfully disagree. Assuming that Italy does not take Egypt on I1 (50% chance of success!) and loses no naval units on I1, Italy will be able to muster:
-
one battleship
-
two cruisers
-
one destroyer
-
one submarine
-
two planes
-
one strategic bomber
If the fleet in sea zone 96 dies on G2 (it should IMO), the UK have in the Med on UK2:
-
two carriers
-
three fighters
-
one tactical bomber
-
two cruisers
-
two destroyer
That is a 8% attack for Italy. Better to roll the dice with the attack on Egypt on I1! The chance is slightly higher (22%) if Italy built a third fighter on I1.
Marsh
-
-
Hello Marsh I would first like to thank you for your well thought out replies and for posting them, you will find though that I have picked them apart and have found that not everything you have presented is quite logical, so let me explain.
“So you are planning to build up a Mediterranean fleet. Awesome. But you are leaving part of it to die in sea zone 96 while you build in sea zone 81. Why waste the units by letting Italy destroy them in detail instead of massing your fleet in sea zone 81 and moving back into the Med on UK2?”
This “fleet” in SZ96 is a cruiser, thats is all, and it came from SZ91 IF it survived German Atlantic assault, this cruiser is not intended to live, I would be skeptical if it did, it is simply to help take out the Italian Destroyer and Transport.Now as for this, "This is a 76% battle for you. If you lose (one time out of four you will), you have weakened India and not gained anything in the process. Sure, you killed a couple of Italian units. You would do better to have taken Persia with those forces and retreated the Anglo-Egypt Sudan forces into Egypt proper. You have 0% chance of losing, make one more IPC out of it (two more IPCs 25% of the time), gain two free infantry (another six IPCs), set yourself up to take Iraq on UK2 (another two IPCs), and secured Persia as a landing zone for planes that you might later send to Moscow or India.
My mistake – I did not include the support shot for the cruiser from sea zone 39 in my calculation. This is an 85% battle for you. You win basically four times out of five."
You say you win 4 out of 5 as if that is terrible odds for the Allies? Would you not do an odd with 85% success any other time? very reasonable. But even so it is actually 98% seeing as you can bring the Tactical bomber from the carrier in SZ98 which increases your odds to 98% as I said. (to be fair I forgot to mention that)
“Also, I didn’t see any reference to you deploying a blocker to sea zone 99. That means Italy can do a joint amphibious/overland assault on Egypt proper, which you have barely reinforced, on I1 with two infantry, three tanks, one mech, a strategic bomber, two cruisers, and a battleship. Italy has a 50% chance of winning this battle, trapping your sea zone 81 fleet outside the Med until UK3 at least (longer if the Luftwaffe lands there on G2, to be reinforced by slower forces from Tobruk and an Italian build in Egypt on I2. 50% of the time in this scenario, you have lost the Mediterranean, Africa and the Middle East. That’s pretty much game…”
So Perhaps you did not account for all of my Egyptian forces ? Because surely you realize I will have 2 Inf from Anzac, 2 Inf from South Africa, Infantry 1 Artillery 1 Tank from Alexandria and then of course my original Egyptian forces which are 2 Infantry 1 Mechanized Infantry 1 Artillery AND the fighter from Malta that lands there. That brings the total to: 7 Inf 2 Art 1 Mech 1 Tank and 1 Fighter. Now match that up against your very Impressive “two infantry, three tanks, one mech, a strategic bomber, two cruisers, and a battleship.” You will find that the UK has a 97% chance of winning that fight, which is a risk I can afford. So that negates the need for a SZ99 blocker, or the risk of the Luftwaffe coming down.
Now regarding Calcutta you said that the Pac building transports and shipping Inf to them is great because now “Now Japan can come light for Calcutta, or come normal heavy and then destroy your Middle East presence after it crushes India with a LOT of force remaining…” If it comes light then my med force liberates it 2 Turns later, if they come heavy then I am still safe for a turn in sz81 because they cannot reach in 1 turn even with a naval base. If they head my way then i pull to SZ98 where now the Italians can hit me, but as you pointed out, they only have a 22% chance of winning. Especially if I have flown UK fighters down to Egypt and built an AB there, which is possibility in later rounds. And if not then no biggies perhaps the RAF is defending Russia.
And to this “Why sea zone 39 instead of 79? The position of the battleship on UK2 would be the same, but parking it in 39 might allow a J2 attack to kill it.” The reason is so that it is at a Naval base, so If Japan is for some reason going for an Early Sydney then I can maybe position this BB as a blocker and if Japan is doing a J2 attack on India then I have a blocker. So that is my reasoning there, although perhaps you are right and I should not put it there.
As for the UK fighter, that is simply a difference in opinions, and both of us have stated ours.
I think I have addressed everything that you threw my way, but if I did not let me know :-) Also I am sure I messed up something in this reply so let me know what it is ASAP lol
-
@Marshmallow:
Tirano -
Given that you eliminate Ethiopia… and you build that navy off Egypt…
If 2 of 3 Italian navys are left intact to join…
and the Germany Navy swings around …
The Egyptian navy will either have to sit in the Red Sea… or be obliterated.respectfully disagree. Assuming that Italy does not take Egypt on I1 (50% chance of success!) and loses no naval units on I1, Italy will be able to muster:
-
one battleship
-
two cruisers
-
one destroyer
-
one submarine
-
two planes
-
one strategic bomber
If the fleet in sea zone 96 dies on G2 (it should IMO), the UK have in the Med on UK2:
-
two carriers
-
three fighters
-
one tactical bomber
-
two cruisers
-
two destroyer
That is a 8% attack for Italy. Better to roll the dice with the attack on Egypt on I1! The chance is slightly higher (22%) if Italy built a third fighter on I1.
Marsh
Well, it does not have to be just Italy that kills this fleet.
Italy would drop off 2 T and 2 I onto Alexandria (via Greece waters)… to join the rest of the Tobruk forces.
Italy would throw everything at this UK fleet… and withdraw after a round… esp… if there are a couple of wounded CVs… and Luftwaffe should be able to mop up the survivors.
BTW, on I1 , should UK take all Alexandria forces and Sudan forces into Egypt… then Italy has a very very low chance of taking Cairo… 22% sounds rather optimistic…
-
-
“So you are planning to build up a Mediterranean fleet. Awesome. But you are leaving part of it to die in sea zone 96 while you build in sea zone 81. Why waste the units by letting Italy destroy them in detail instead of massing your fleet in sea zone 81 and moving back into the Med on UK2?”
This “fleet” in SZ96 is a cruiser, thats is all, and it came from SZ91 IF it survived German Atlantic assault, this cruiser is not intended to live, I would be skeptical if it did, it is simply to help take out the Italian Destroyer and Transport.Yeah, that was a misread on my part, but I think it was due to your statement that the Gibraltar fighter lands on the sea zone 98 carrier. Either the carrier is staying in sea zone 98 so that the fighter can land (dumb), the carrier is moving to sea zone 96 so that the fighter can land (also dumb), or that fighter is not landing on that carrier. Did you mean the Malta fighter continues to sea zone 81 to land on the sea zone 98 carrier? No, that can’t be, because as you pointed out I totally missed that bit about the Malta fighter landing in Egypt. I guess the Gibraltar fighter is landing in Malta?
Now as for this, "This is a 76% battle for you. If you lose (one time out of four you will), you have weakened India and not gained anything in the process. Sure, you killed a couple of Italian units. You would do better to have taken Persia with those forces and retreated the Anglo-Egypt Sudan forces into Egypt proper. You have 0% chance of losing, make one more IPC out of it (two more IPCs 25% of the time), gain two free infantry (another six IPCs), set yourself up to take Iraq on UK2 (another two IPCs), and secured Persia as a landing zone for planes that you might later send to Moscow or India.
My mistake – I did not include the support shot for the cruiser from sea zone 39 in my calculation. This is an 85% battle for you. You win basically four times out of five."
You say you win 4 out of 5 as if that is terrible odds for the Allies? Would you not do an odd with 85% success any other time? very reasonable. But even so it is actually 98% seeing as you can bring the Tactical bomber from the carrier in SZ98 which increases your odds to 98% as I said. (to be fair I forgot to mention that)
The tactical bomber does increase the odds considerably. But you are still forgoing a positional advantage in the Middle East and leaving free IPCs on the table. So, while the odds of the battle might be good, I still would not do the attack because…
by not blocking sea zone 99 you are giving Italy a chance to take Syria and then move into Iraq unopposed. It could be that you are intending to hit Iraq with your tank, mech, and a bunch of aircraft on UK2, but suppose Italy takes both Syria and Trans-Jordan on I1? Italy now gets Iraq for free on I2 (four free IPCs) and then on I3 the Italian tank blitzes into Caucasus to give Germany an NO (now up to 12 free IPCs for Italy and 5 more for Germany). That is 17 IPCs you’ve given to the Axis over two turns because you did not take Persia on UK1 and did not deploy a blocker to sea zone 99.
Furthermore, you are locked out of the Med on UK2 so all you can hit the Italian navy with is your precious aircraft. The Italian fleet is safe, which means the Italian transports are safe. The Italians are coming! The Italians are coming!
“Also, I didn’t see any reference to you deploying a blocker to sea zone 99. That means Italy can do a joint amphibious/overland assault on Egypt proper, which you have barely reinforced, on I1 with two infantry, three tanks, one mech, a strategic bomber, two cruisers, and a battleship. Italy has a 50% chance of winning this battle, trapping your sea zone 81 fleet outside the Med until UK3 at least (longer if the Luftwaffe lands there on G2, to be reinforced by slower forces from Tobruk and an Italian build in Egypt on I2. 50% of the time in this scenario, you have lost the Mediterranean, Africa and the Middle East. That’s pretty much game…”
So Perhaps you did not account for all of my Egyptian forces ? Because surely you realize I will have 2 Inf from Anzac, 2 Inf from South Africa, Infantry 1 Artillery 1 Tank from Alexandria and then of course my original Egyptian forces which are 2 Infantry 1 Mechanized Infantry 1 Artillery AND the fighter from Malta that lands there. That brings the total to: 7 Inf 2 Art 1 Mech 1 Tank and 1 Fighter. Now match that up against your very Impressive “two infantry, three tanks, one mech, a strategic bomber, two cruisers, and a battleship.” You will find that the UK has a 97% chance of winning that fight, which is a risk I can afford. So that negates the need for a SZ99 blocker, or the risk of the Luftwaffe coming down.
I did forget the two infantry from South Africa, and I totally missed the Malta fighter landing note. Mea culpa. Egypt is safe for now.
Now regarding Calcutta you said that the Pac building transports and shipping Inf to them is great because now “Now Japan can come light for Calcutta, or come normal heavy and then destroy your Middle East presence after it crushes India with a LOT of force remaining…” If it comes light then my med force liberates it 2 Turns later, if they come heavy then I am still safe for a turn in sz81 because they cannot reach in 1 turn even with a naval base. If they head my way then i pull to SZ98 where now the Italians can hit me, but as you pointed out, they only have a 22% chance of winning. Especially if I have flown UK fighters down to Egypt and built an AB there, which is possibility in later rounds. And if not then no biggies perhaps the RAF is defending Russia.
The earliest Japan should take India is J4, but J3 might be doable in this scenario if you’re building two transports with India and will have a total of six fewer ground units (it becomes eight fewer on UK3) there as a result. If Japan takes India on J4, you are going to still have your fleet in sea zone 81 or 98 to go to India’s rescue? If not, you are now at three turns to get to India.
You do have a big navy. You could probably fight the IJN in the Indian Ocean if Japan lets you. But if Japan is doing things right, by my rough estimate you would need to bring something on the order of ten loaded transports to recapture and hold India. What does that do for the prospects of Egypt vs the Italians? Keep in mind if your fleet is still in sea zone 81 and you’ve been doing naval builds that a patient Italy by now could have accumlated a large land force to kill Egypt. Obviously the specifics depend on the game.
A couple of other things to consider:
-
Just because Japan might come light for India doesn’t meant that it will be lightly defended when you get there.
-
If your fleet is parked in sea zone 81 on J4, that means Italy has been collecting a 5 IPC NO for three turns already without any opposition from you. By UK4 we’re up to 32 free IPCs for the Axis over the first three turns (assuming you let Italy take Iraq on I2).
-
Exactly when are you going to send help to Russia with India gone and the Middle East in flames? Once Italy takes Persia your fighter route from Egypt to Moscow is gone – anything you land in East Persia will just die.
And to this “Why sea zone 39 instead of 79? The position of the battleship on UK2 would be the same, but parking it in 39 might allow a J2 attack to kill it.” The reason is so that it is at a Naval base, so If Japan is for some reason going for an Early Sydney then I can maybe position this BB as a blocker and if Japan is doing a J2 attack on India then I have a blocker. So that is my reasoning there, although perhaps you are right and I should not put it there.
No argument with this. I like options. However, you could save a destroyer as the blocker and get the BB to the Med if you want it there.
Marsh
-
-
BTW, on I1 , should UK take all Alexandria forces and Sudan forces into Egypt… then Italy has a very very low chance of taking Cairo… 22% sounds rather optimistic…
The 22% was for the Italian fleet to take on a UK fleet. That has nothing to do with the battle in Egypt.
Marsh
-
Good Points Marsh perhaps I did miscalculate where the gib and malta fighter land. I appreciate your ideas for the middle east as well. All your thoughts I will try out in future games but until I test I wont alter my original post.
cheers :-)
Suggested Topics
