Heavy Taranto UK1 right move?

I’d need a little more information to consider this. Did Germany send any planes to Southern Italy to scramble against Taranto? Are the French ships in SZ 93 still alive? And, importantly, are there any German planes in Western Germany to protect the SZ 113 fleet? Because if there’s juist the cruiser, you may want to attack it with your bomber. If Germany took the risk to allow that, I’d be tempted to try and punish him for that.

Alternatively, you may want to throw everything (cruiser, destroyer, 4 fighters) at the SZ 110 battleship and build a carrier there to land surviving planes on. If Germany scrambles from Holland/Belgium, that’s not a good fight for him - but he’ll have to kill some of your planes if he’s serious about Sea Lion.

You will almost certainly lose everything to a German counter on G2, but you  will have neutered Italy for the time being and held Egypt. Also, you will have a 2nd line coming up from East Africa, with the Indian fleet. The pressure will stack up.
I prefer 6 and Ft, because if he does not go Sealion, you don’t have 9 more Inf sitting on England awaiting use T6 at least. It is all about how safe you feel. 
The game is not over after a Sealion, but holding Egyot without an IC and income, makes it hard.
Do Taranto and buy 9 Inf, if it makes you feel better.

@Herr:

(…)
Alternatively, you may want to throw everything (cruiser, destroyer, 4 fighters) at the SZ 110 battleship and build a carrier there to land surviving planes on. If Germany scrambles from Holland/Belgium, that’s not a good fight for him - but he’ll have to kill some of your planes if he’s serious about Sea Lion.

Speaking of alternatives, UK can build a CV in #110 and attack the CA + TRS in #113, depending indeed on how many scramblers there are in WG. This even can be done UK2:
Build 2CV for the channel to allow 2TAC + 2FTR + 1 STR to attack #113. But that’s only if opportunity presents itself ;-).

Taranto is a always a good one to discuss.
Let’s first make it clear that the UK cannot protect Egypt AND London if Germany goes for a GE3 Sea Lion while Japan waits in the east (no USA intervention till after London fell). So the UK must make that choice first.
Going Gibraltar with the UK fleet in the med will almost certainly ensure German doom if it persists in going Sea Lion. Problems start if Germany does not go for SL, but kills the RN (after Italy took Algeria). Luftwaffe loosing 3 air in the process.
If Japan stays silent in the east (still killing China and driving Russia west), the USA cannot intervene and Gibraltar will be next to fall, allowing the German fleet to enter the med, seriously threatening Egypt.

Now let’s discuss Taranto.
London will fall if Germany persists but this should leave Egypt AND Gibraltar in allied hands when the USA enters the war. The USA should at least destroy the kriegsmarine US3 immediately (all the TRS anyway) and only liberate London as a bonus, if possible. Since the USA must also protect Hawaii/Sydney, they usually cannot afford to spend enough IPCs in Europe to sink both the kriegsmarine and Liberate London in the short term, if Germany took it with a lot of surviving land units…

Seriously consider to send in some, or all ships from the pacific to assist in Europe, but be sure they’ll be back @ Hawaii before Japan can secure a Pacific 6VC victory. The kriegsmarine must go down and you better make it a favorable battle for the USA. Key units to produce are 2FTR + 2CV US1 and 4 STR US3 (landing in Eire after killing the kriegsmarine). Since those STR are most likely to get killed in Eire G4, take them as first losses unless you are sure they can survive a hit from German STR GE4.
If Germany has built enough naval units to protect its TRS, Russia should trample Eastern Europe.

Use the pacific fleet (if needed) as well to retake Gibraltar. It is a very vital location (seriously, without it, allies can forget any offensive operations in Europe). This may only be required if the axis keep the USA out of the war untill US4, allowing them to reinforce Gibraltar very heavily. Get the Pacific-USN in, retake it, get the Pacific-USN back into the pacific would be the drill.
Obviously, if the USA is in the war early already, no help from the pacific fleet is required in this situation, but it may still be required during Sea Lion!

@ItIsILeClerc:

@Herr:

(…)
Alternatively, you may want to throw everything (cruiser, destroyer, 4 fighters) at the SZ 110 battleship and build a carrier there to land surviving planes on. If Germany scrambles from Holland/Belgium, that’s not a good fight for him - but he’ll have to kill some of your planes if he’s serious about Sea Lion.

Speaking of alternatives, UK can build a CV in #110 and attack the CA + TRS in #113, depending indeed on how many scramblers there are in WG. This even can be done UK2:
Build 2CV for the channel to allow 2TAC + 2FTR + 1 STR to attack #113. But that’s only if opportunity presents itself ;-).

I was thinking along the same lines, and first wanted to do buy a CV on UK1 to put it in SZ 110 after taking out the battleship, so that the UK could send a bomber and a fighter to SZ 113. But then it dawned on me that of course, the planes in Holland/Belgium could scramble using the newly built airfield, so the UK would need everything to kill the BB, and have nothing left for SZ 113. As for later opportunities…. I think that having no planes in Western Germany to protect the SZ 113 fleet was a mistake, and Germany may well repair that G2.

@leontini:

thx guys for the suggestions
@Herr Kaleun
the germans brouught 1 TAC in Taranto, French Ships are still alive in SZ93, no there’s no plane protecting SZ 113 (buti don’t like to go with a bomber that rolls dice at 4 against a unit that rolls at 3)

You’re basically right of course, and I’d be reluctant about such a decision too. But like I said in my reply to LeClerc, I think Germany made a mistake here. And I’d somehow be tempted to try and exploit that mistake. Also, consider that when Sea Lion is coming, the bomber isn’t much of a defender, and if the attack does work, Germany’s loss is pretty big.
Let’s do the math. Chance that the bomber kills the cruiser = 2/3, chance that the cruiser kills the bomber = 1/2. That produces the following possibilities:
1. bomber lives, cruiser dies, so transports are dead too = 1/2 x 2/3 = 1/3
2. bomber dies, cruiser dies, so transports lives = 1/2 x 2/3 = 1/3
3. bomber dies, cruiser lives = 1/2 x 1/3 = 1/6
4. bomber lives, cruiser lives = 1/2 x 1/3 = 1/6
Number 3 is the really bad one. Number 4 is a reroll. Number one is the big win.
So that leaves number 2…. and now, there may be a little trick, if Germany left either Norway or Denmark empty. Not sure they did that because I didn’t ask, but who knows, maybe the German player wanted to “activate” those two guys in Denmark by marching them south. In that case, you may want to supplement the SZ 113 attack by taking Denmark, and now if number 2 of the above possibilities actually happens, you’re creating the threat of killing the transports with the French fighter.
And that would combine very well with Taranto. Send everything else there, and now Italy needs to decide whether to scramble. If they scramble and lose their planes, they can no longer land them in Western Germany to protect the German transports…. so Italy is facing a tough choice. You’d do Taranto first of course and SZ 113 afterwards.

A completely different approach would be, to try and keep the Royal Navy afloat in SZ 110. If that works, Sea Lion is just about dead. In that case, buy a CV for the UK and attack the German BB with everything (CC, DD, all planes). If Germany scrambles, the fight is still good for the UK, but the remaining fleet and planes would be too weak against the Luftwaffe G2, so I’d lose the CC and DD in that case, build the CV in SZ 106 (did anything happen there, by the way?) and send the SZ 109 transport that way as well. If Germany doesn’t scramble, put the CV in SZ 110 and the RN is alive.
In the Mediterranean, you could just kill SZ 96 with planes, and then sail the SZ 98 fleet to SZ 93, to team up with the French. And just leave that fleet there for a few turns: Italy won’t like to lose ships destroying it’ and Germany won’t like to lose planes. In the mean time, the fleet eats one of Italy’s NO’s, and convoys Southern France.

Anyway, just a few thoughts… there are various possibilities I’d say.

Nice pick-up Herr KaLeun, about no scramblers on W Germany (big German boo-boo). You got to roll the dice on that one (Bmr vz cruiser). Taking Norway or Denmark (landing spot) as a back-up plan for the French fighter to do second run on the transports is awesome, but the Italians could fly a fighter to W Germany to scramble (if they see it).

Could also buy a carrier for the UK with intentions of mobilizing it in sz 110. This would allow for 1-2 more air units to hit sz113 w/bmr, and land on the new carrier. I might go with just the bmr, and 1 fighter though, because if he hits w/cruiser you could take the hit on the fighter, then you’re not obligated to drop the carrier in sz110 (could drop it in sz109, off Canada or S Africa). I think if you kill the transports the Sea lion threat would be over, but he could still drop more transports G2, so inf and/or ftr for UK may still be needed (but his attack is getting weaker).

If you mobilize the carrier in sz110 (w/2 ftrs), and NCM other ships to sz110 the Germans may feel they have to fight you (you would also have scramblers from UK). If you have also moved the Med navy to sz92 (like I describe above)  or placed it w/French in sz93 (like Herr KaLeun suggested), then they will have to deal with both UK navies, or maybe you get the chance to merge them into one large Royal Navy if the Germans take a pass on it.

Anyway you have set them back by killing his cruiser and transports (sz113), and either inflicted enough damage to the Luftwaffe (if he hits you), or you have a sizable navy that the Germans can’t deal with (or the Italians if you go Med). There is a growing contingent that says if you are more patient with the Italian navy, they will give you the opportunity to destroy them away from their air base (they have to come out and play sometime LOL)

Seems like India might be in a bit of trouble if you really pulled the indian airforce off.

So Germany faked Sea lion, and went full tilt Med. Hmm, sounds like you have done a great job in distracting him from either of his top priorities (taking Moscow, or taking London). When the US comes over the Germans won’t have the Med either lol

You may want to be careful of an Axis economic victory.
I don’t know the US’ status in your game, but I had major problems in 2 recent games because the USA could only start fighting US4.

If this is the case in your game, there are numerous dangers for the allies with this axis one. I speak from unpleasant exerience ;-). Since I don’t know your exact situation, I’ll just sum a few:

• Loosing Gibraltar which is turned into an unconquerable axis fortress.
  Unconquerable as in too much investments from the USA required to take it back=> Axis win a 6VC victory in the Pacific. Personally, I don’t see any allied offensive operations in Europe with an axis fortress Gibraltar (strong navy, 4-6 transports, strong airforce, lots of troops). Over time, due to the lack of a ‘second front’,  Germany can focus its IPCs east, potentially still birdcage Russia without conquering Moscow=> economic victory.

• Loosing Egypt and subsequently all of the ME with it. Be aware of Germans who advance all the way onto Moscow and then turn south.

• Egypt changing hands every turn, with Germany securing Caucasus + Stalingrad.
  Should only be a problem if the USA doesn’t spend enough IPCs in Europe to gain some permanent footholds there. UK defending ME and fighting both ME and Western Europe alone is too much for it. Maybe an alternative is if the USA can get some valuable Islands in the Pacific, but I don’t have much experience with that: requires a pure KJF.

Regardless what you do, you must force Germany to send (almost) all of its initial Luftwaffe into Russia. If they cannot Birdcage Russia they cannot win.
Key for this is building (just) enough fast units early on so the Red Army can defend at Belarus if Germany has no TAC + FTR around. Belarus and later on Bryansk. Possibly with some RAF help. The UK should have some ready @ Persia to send over to Bryansk, after the Germans bounced off Belarus and turned south. With that AB in Egypt, the RAF can also fly from Egypt to Bryansk (one of the reasons why I build an AB in Egypt if I do).
Second very important thing: a second front must be opened in West Europe. If Germany can focus all of its income Southeast, they have an easy game. Preferably you bomb German factories every turn as well…

@WILD:

So Germany faked Sea lion, and went full tilt Med. Hmm, sounds like you have done a great job in distracting him from either of his top priorities (taking Moscow, or taking London). When the US comes over the Germans won’t have the Med either lol

Exactly!

What’s the situation on the eastern front? I see a lot of German money flowing towards the Kriegsmarine here: a CV, 2 DD, 2 TR. Plus that airbase in Holland/Belgium. If Russia bought land units only, which they normally would, then I don’t see Germany doing well in the east.

The situation reminds me of one of my rare over-the-board games, when I played Russia, and Germany focused on fighting the UK a bit, ruling the Med, trying to help Italy take Egypt…. all very wonderful, but I DOW’d him R4 and stomped into Scandinavia with my Novgorod stack. Russia normally can’t afford to do that, because those units are needed to defend Moscow, but Germany had just failed to build the land units to take Moscow anyway. Finland and Norway in Russian hands meant +11 for Russia (income + NO) and -10 for Germany (income + NO). He still marched into Novgorod, but with Russian income well above 50, the Red army ruled.
And of course at that very moment, the US was eying Gibraltar. The Axis didn’t last long.

@Herr:

(…)
The situation reminds me of one of my rare over-the-board games, when I played Russia, and Germany focused on fighting the UK a bit, ruling the Med, trying to help Italy take Egypt… all very wonderful, but I DOW’d him R4 and stomped into Scandinavia with my Novgorod stack. Russia normally can’t afford to do that, because those units are needed to defend Moscow, but Germany had just failed to build the land units to take Moscow anyway. Finland and Norway in Russian hands meant +11 for Russia (income + NO) and -10 for Germany (income + NO). He still marched into Novgorod, but with Russian income well above 50, the Red army ruled.
And of course at that very moment, the US was eying Gibraltar. The Axis didn’t last long.

It looks your opponent really sent a lot of IPCs into the med. As much as he would throw against London during a True Sea Lion.
By comparison, that would roughly be 30 + 98 (two turns worth of buying ships) + 115 (TUV of forces sent to London that won’t return to fight against Russia) = 243 IPCs sent elsewhere.

But maybe we should forget about mathematical IPC-comparisons :P.
From a strategical point of view, I think Russia is in the position of attacking Scandinavia if they can defend @ Belarus (or even at East Poland!) after sending in units into Scandinavia.
Maybe there is still a margin for Russia to attack Scandinavia even if they can’t hold @ Belarus, but I often wondered where the breaking point lies.

@leontini,
you really should include information about the USA.
There is no way the UK can get a TRS-fleet in the Atlantic ready in time without the help from the USA to protect it. You need to cooperate very closely with Roosevelt!
It usually takes 2-3 CV + 4-6 FTR + 2 DD + 3FTR (scramblers) at minimum to protect your transports from a combined strike of the Luftwaffe and the kriegsmarine (subs also kriegsmarine) and this is something the UK cannot produce on its own, not even if it’s not fighting for its life in Africa…
Well, they can (in Canada), but that will just take too long, roughly 4 turns, and will drain all IPCs into Canada. So no more spending anywhere else. 4 turns of producing means that you can start threatening Western Europe from turn 9 and that is way too late. You need the USA, so what is their status?

I’m not sure if you are actually looking for help to proceed beyond this point so I’ll remain silent about that for now ;-).
Shouldn’t be too much of a problem in this situation to cooperate with the USA and build a combined fleet in the Atlantic.

The US Pac fleet should go to hawaii or Queens asap.

@ItIsILeClerc:

@Herr:

(…)
The situation reminds me of one of my rare over-the-board games, when I played Russia, and Germany focused on fighting the UK a bit, ruling the Med, trying to help Italy take Egypt… all very wonderful, but I DOW’d him R4 and stomped into Scandinavia with my Novgorod stack. Russia normally can’t afford to do that, because those units are needed to defend Moscow, but Germany had just failed to build the land units to take Moscow anyway. Finland and Norway in Russian hands meant +11 for Russia (income + NO) and -10 for Germany (income + NO). He still marched into Novgorod, but with Russian income well above 50, the Red army ruled.
And of course at that very moment, the US was eying Gibraltar. The Axis didn’t last long.

It looks your opponent really sent a lot of IPCs into the med. As much as he would throw against London during a True Sea Lion.
By comparison, that would roughly be 30 + 98 (two turns worth of buying ships) + 115 (TUV of forces sent to London that won’t return to fight against Russia) = 243 IPCs sent elsewhere.

But maybe we should forget about mathematical IPC-comparisons :P.
From a strategical point of view, I think Russia is in the position of attacking Scandinavia if they can defend @ Belarus (or even at East Poland!) after sending in units into Scandinavia.
Maybe there is still a margin for Russia to attack Scandinavia even if they can’t hold @ Belarus, but I often wondered where the breaking point lies.

He didn’t quite make it that bad - he did spent money building German land units, but just not enough to worry Russia. I basically gave up on Belarus and Novgorod, but my Moscow stack was quite big, and I was doing very well in the south too. He wasn’t strong enough to take Moscow anyway, especially with Russian production well above 50. He could have taken Scandinavia back from Novgorod, but that would have slowed him down even more. But I don’t remember the details, it’s been a while.
I’m not sure that you can generally say that as Russia, you need to make a stand at a specific location (other than Moscow of course) to be able to afford capturing Scandinavia. With Norway and Finland in Russian hands, Germany will have a hard time outproducing Russia anyway.

@leontini:
If Germany moves his big stack into Belorussia next round, that implies that your Novgorod troops are too late to reach Moscow anyway. So in that case, I’d say, go for Scandinavia. Alternatively, if Germany goes into Western Ukraine (why leave 4 inf there?), you’re still strong enough to block him by pulling everything together in Bryansk, including anything that’s in Russia (was nothing produced there last round?). As for the Novgorod units - they can either go south towards Belarus and Bryansk, or attack Scandinavia even in that case. I’m not sure which option is better, but both seem alright for Russia to me.

As for Egypt, even if you build there and troops from South Africa arrive at the same time, that’s probably just enough to keep either Germany or Italy away, but not both. In other words: Italy could sacrifice its land units to soften Egypt up for Germany to take it. I don’t think you can stop that by just sitting in Egypt, so you need to do something… strafing Alexandria would help, but only if it works out really well and deters Italy from making an attack at all.

When it comes to the US, I totally agree with what LeClerc and ghr2 said.

I must admit I am having trouble with this axis strategy myself lately. Haven’t found the ‘correct’ allied answer yet.
For the first time in my ‘allied career’ I have a puzzle that I could’t solve within a couple of days, and I am still looking for an answer to this axis ‘slow delay strategy’.
Then again, my opponent (the one that uses this strategy) is very strong with the axis and I don’t know the level of your opponent ofc, but if he makes no mistakes…

The way I am thinking about it now, may already be too late for you but I 'll share it anyway:

• Russia must force Germany somehow to use its Luftwaffe in the east by blocking off the path into Caucasus/Stalingrad, OR by doing what Herr Kaleun suggested. Just don’t overdo an attack on Scandinavia because the German Luftwaffe always has the flexibility to just abandon the west/south and fly east, taking Moscow hard. Recent calculations suggest Russia should not send >20 units away into (for example) Scandinavia and that is with a mild RAF assistance in Moscow (4 units).

• The USA must get ~14 (!) fully loaded TRS into Western Europe US5, accompanied by 3 UK TRS. UK should slowly increase its TRS to 5-10 units once the fleet is at the channel to increase pressure on Berlin itself and start flooding 8-10 units into Europe per turn. 10 units should always threaten Berlin, slowly increasing to 25 (USA takes Denmark + Norway, UK kills Berlin is the threat).

• UK must abandon Egypt and build an IC in Persia to compensate. 3 to 6 units should be placed in SA + Persia. Maybe not every turn, but as often as possible/needed. Alternatively, Egypt is held, but this may require a bid.

• A Russian alternative might be to retake the North + Scandinavia AFTER Germany dived into Caucasus/Stalingrad while moving away from Moscow.

I know these things will greatly help the allies fighting this strategy, but I am still working out if this doesn’t leave the USA with too few IPCs for the Pacific, as the Atlantic fleet also needs proper protection.
Obviously, the allies lose the game if they lose ~24 TRS and their escorts, even if this takes down all the German + Italian air.
Fortunately, the USA has a little room for loosing Hawaii, because in this axis strategy (delaying both the USA and Russia into the war untill round4), Calcutta should have 30-40 units and will not fall before J10. And the more IPCs Japan spends on Hawaii/Sydney, the longer Calcutta will remain free.

But as said, I am still puzzling on this axis strategy myself ;-)!

Thanks, LeClerc, for your insightful comments on this type of Axis strategy. I’ll certainly consider it if it’s ever played against me in a better way than my opponent did.