The Italian playbook

@colonel-ace said in The Italian playbook:

With the proper help from Germany it is very possible that you still have two transports with a German fighter in Rome Toronto is a 50/50 shot and if they they take out the cruiser in 91 it’s a good chance you keep that transport but I see your point and what I usually do in that case is attack Morocco so I can destroy Algeria second turn.

So, based on your reply, I assume you are playing with no Bid. As, if there was a Bid, there is usually an additional DD or SS in SZ91. Also, there is usually at least a SS in SZ98.

With no Bid, if the Germans send 2 submarines to SZ91 there is an 89% chance the UK cruiser dies. Of course, this weakens the ability of the Germans to hurt the UK fleet in 106, 110 and 111, but it helps the Italians in the Med.

With no additional sub in SZ98 the Taranto raid has an 83.5% chance of success with an average of 3 UK planes surviving. Normally, even without the SS it would be 93.5% but I assume the UK player would pull off a DD and send it to SZ96 with the Gibraltar fighter. Of course, without the SZ91 cruiser the UK player may just shift to Gibastion anyway; and many players do Gibastion as their default option.

Not sure why you are saying Taranto is 50-50?

There are multiple references and discussions to Gibastion on the Forum. You can search for it.

Basically, it is where the UK player ignores Taranto, attacks Malta SZ96 and moves their SZ98, SZ91 and SZ109 fleets to SZ92. If the SZ110 fleet survived, highly unlikely, it also joins. An airbase is bult on Gibraltar and there are enough ships and planes to easily withstand an Italian attack. Algeria is stacked with additional UK units to make sure Italy can’t take it thus creating a landing zone for German short range aircraft.

The idea being twofold. 1) There is no Taranto counterattack by Italy, or most likely Germany, into SZ98 and killing the UK fleet. Thus, a stronger UK fleet is available to knock out the Italian fleet going forward. The premise being while Italy collects more monies to begin with the Italian fleet dies a cheaper death to compensate for that. 2) This maneuver protects London from a possible Sealion strategy. This is actually the main reason most people perform this tactical option in my opinion.

@colonel-ace said in The Italian playbook:

Also I ran the simulation and it is a 75% chance of Torontos success and that is only if they do some maneuvering with their carrier and I just play casually so without that 2 extra aircraft it is 75% favorable to me thus why I said 50-50

Not sure what you mean by “some maneuvering with the carrier”. Sans the destroyer and sub a Taranto attack is 83.5%, with an average of 2-3 UK planes surviving, assuming a full 3 fighter scramble.

UK: CA, AC, 3 Ftr, Tac, Bmb vs Axis: CA, BB, 3 Ftr

@colonel-ace said in The Italian playbook:

how do you counter it?

You don’t. Not unless you are willing to sacrifice a ton of German resources; which most players are not willing to do.

As I said there is a tradeoff. Italy collects for SZ97 for 2 full Turns; thus gaining about $18 more in income versus a Taranto option before the UK shuts them down. This can be prolonged by sacrificing ships to block out to 3 rounds for $28. That extra money is used for ground troops to provide for defense of Italy and the continent freeing up German troops to head towards Moscow. In essence, the fight for the Med strategy is removed and replaced by a defend Europe strategy.

Since any competent Allied player is going to knock Italy out of the game anyway the real test for Italy is to keep the United Kingdom occupied as long as possible while Germany takes Moscow and to use Italian ground forces to counter any Allied landings so, again, German troops can focus on Moscow.

The one thing, as the Italian player, you DO NOT want to do is try to build ships to combat the UK fleet. That is just throwing the extra money you collected away.

@colonel-ace said in The Italian playbook:

Huh my simulation told me that it was 75%

@colonel-ace said in The Italian playbook:

Would it be viable to buy fighters to protect your Mediterranean fleet while you start using your transports to pump troops into Syria in order to take Iraq and put a complex there so you could still be able to do stuff

I see nothing wrong with buying a fighter on I2 to help protect your fleet and provide more counter attacking power. I would not do it on I1 as that $10 should be used for fast movers to assist Germany in taking Moscow as can-openers.

Regarding Syria and then Iraq. There is no way you can take and hold Iraq against any competent player. At best, you can take it.

Taking Syria you would need to block the UK SZ92 fleet with a single DD; otherwise they will just retake Syria. Since Trans-Jordon was not taken UK will move their SZ92 and SZ76 fleets to SZ98 plus adding their Egypt build to it. If UK did not take Persia on UK1, many people do, then they certainly will on UK2.

Thus, on I2 there will be, at most, 7 ground units in Iraq. UK can counter with, at least, 7 ground units plus 4-6 planes and that is all she wrote.

Benefits:
Italy collects Syria for probably 2 Turns, maybe only 1, and Iraq for 1 Turn. +4
Iraq goes British and thus Russia does not get to take this territory. (Most important benefit)

Detriments:
Italy is out 4 ground troops that could have been used in defense of Europe.
Syria will be collected by UK for the rest of the game. (Most important detriment)

@colonel-ace said in The Italian playbook:

you can scramble up to 3 fighter’s or tacs FROM EACH TERRITORY which means Germany could send more fighters to northern Italy to help against Toronto

Northern Italy does not have an airbase to scramble from.

@colonel-ace Nope…