Taranto, Tobruk, or Both?

With most things in this game, it’s situational and not exactly suited to all styles of play.  For example, is there German air support (in the form of a fighter) in Tobruk? If there is, you would certainly not have the odds to do Tobruk AND Taranto, as you would need the tactical bomber or the Malta fighter in both fights to have a decent chance at winning, which is obviously not possible.  But if the Germans don’t send a fighter to Tobruk, both attacks are certainly doable.  A sub bid in SZ 98 will certainly help the UK’s odds in Taranto, possibly allowing them to use one fighter from London to clear out the German battleship instead of sending it to die in the Adriatic.

The odds are in your favor to do both these battles, and if they go right, you are correct that Italy will be substantially weakened.   If you have the bid of 10, you can make them even more likely to succeed.     Both are odds battles though, not sure things and most or all of your UK stuff will be dead even if you are sucessful, which means that the UK has to start from scratch in that region.     Losing specifically the carrier and the protection/versatility of the planes from London is the biggest drawback; a lot of stronger players have many plans for those pieces later in the game.

The Tobruk pieces are a threat to UK, but they are also a liability for Italy;  they are stuck in north Africa and so they either need rescue or reinforcement.  Depending on how much navy Italy retains, they can be tempted to send good units after bad and try for Egypt.   In most bid games (the ones where allies do T+T also), Egypt wont be easy for Italy to capture, it might be able to if it sends everything.

That’s a good sort of trap to lay for most players.    If you neuter Italy with T+T turn 1, their best role changes to the can-opener/infantry build, even though its an involuntary assignment of this role, its a good role for Italy to have, and the optimal one if they get smacked turn 1.     If you don’t do (both), they may be tempted to try for a North Africa game which can be a gigantic waste of resources if they don’t get the oil.   Â

Italy’s bonuses and money don’t rely that much on Egypt itself.    The 6 Allied North Africa territories are only worth $5 total (1x3, 1x0, 1x2), and taking the French ones has the consequence that the allies can take them back.   Gibraltar is also worth $0.    The Italian bonus money comes from the 1) clear med 2) holding the 3 of 4 but Egypt is the hardest 3) grabbing that oil but you’ll need a navy and 2 transports and a commit of most of your resources that remain after T+T.

I would recommend doing Taranto every time, the reduction in Italy power is well worth it.    Doing tobruk alone is foolhardy in comparison, killing 6 trapped land units is not worth leaving a BB CA TT and the air force alone.    Doing both has risks

1. UK left with little or nothing after Italy’s turn
2. UK loses key naval pieces
3. Italy is no longer tempted to engage in a deadzone
4. you are doing two odds battles on the first turn which can go south and affect the long game
5. if you blow it and have to retreat then Italy can choose to kill the landed planes (if any), the remaining ships or kill the men trapped in Alexandria, or both (reversing the situation), leaving you with nothing and Italy with the control of the med until turn 5.

Good luck have fun!

I was trying it in TripleA and it didn’t let me, so I assume it’s not legal

Guys: You cannot load from Malta , because the IT DD is in the SZ. Has to be from Egypt.

@wittmann:

Guys: You cannot load from Malta , because the IT DD is in the SZ. Has to be from Egypt.

Quite right. Needs to be a friendly sea zone.

@taamvan:

Both are odds battles though, not sure things and most or all of your UK stuff will be dead even if you are sucessful, which means that the UK has to start from scratch in that region…If you don’t do (both), they may be tempted to try for a North Africa game which can be a gigantic waste of resources if they don’t get the oil.

In a Bid game that I lost, I was able to do Taranto, Tobruk, and Ethiopia all at once. But as the UK, I still lost most of my stuff (odds battles). I felt like it was kind of pyrrhic and since I lost so much stuff, I had to work on beefing up Cairo for critical turns. In another words, the UK’s primary role (IMHO), when the US is focusing on Japan in the beginning, is to churn out fighters from Persia for Moscow support. The UK’s roll was stalled, and instead of trying for Russia to stack Bryansk with UK fighters, Germany was able to drive to Stalingrad. I still managed to get enough UK/ANZAC fighters to Moscow to prevent an early capture, but Germany was firmly entrenched on their Supply Depot of Stalingrad (which by the way was the historical original purpose of that campaign, to become a forward supply depot for future Caucasus Ops).

If the US is not going Europe Board first, on triplea at least (where the Battle Calc is “King”), Moscow is often sacked on turn 6 or 7 if the UK doesn’t send up lots of fighters. On a table top game I’ve done it 2x and I think the Russian player was as good as me or better. That’s why I think Ethiopia is the better option over Tobruk (of course do SZ 97); it helps to keep/secure the UK’s NO objective quicker and it doesn’t take much off the board. It’s easy to defend Cairo with minimal stuff so the Persia factory can churn out lots of fighters, and ground units (however which way you do it) while Italy either tries to evacuate their marooned forces or adds more stuff, which I think is usually a waste.

I think Italy doing the can opener role is the best role for it. If Tobruk is done to me…Italy fully and completely does the can opener role. (Historically speaking, Italy did have a sizeable contribution on the E. Front). The reason it’s important is that it can assist Germany make the drive to Stalingrad and sit there even though the Russian stack might be more powerful because Italy could can open for German Mechs/Tanks to hit Moscow. This in turn lets Germany continue to collect lots of NOs.

GHG: Your original question of the thread: “The only question I have is it a good idea?” IMHO, it’s not a good idea to both, but always do Taranto (SZ97).

@GeneralHandGrenade
What if Germany sends a fighter to tobruk and Tac Bomb to southern Italy.
In OOB without Bid, would you do it? The odds are very slightly in your favor so it´s a 60-40 shot to win.

@Cornwallis

For me, probably not. I don’t tend to take such high risk battles. Taranto is a much better move.

Unless the fighter from Slovakia Hungary can fly to Tobruk via Yugoslavia on the first turn (can’t remember the rules), I’ll be playing happily as that fighter couldn’t participate in the British fleet attacks.

@SuperbattleshipYamato
Doing all 3 might be risky but the risk might be worth it.
Taranto is a given if you send the carrier chances of Italy scrambling are low anyway.

Toburk is also pretty easy just the naval battle before it might be tricky. You could remove the destroyer from the taranto raid to make that combat even more safe.
Or the cruiser from gibraltar if you still have it.

Dont think you need the tactical for the taranto raid, you could swap the figher for the tactical to make tobruk safer

Its 1 cruiser + 1 BB + 3 fighters ( 19attach. 6 hitpoints ) vs 1 destroyer 1 cruiser 3 fighters 1 bomber 1 carrier 18attack/ 8 hitpoints ) your first 2 hitpoints dont cost you a single die as well.