???????????? (Axis) vs Corriganhp (Allies)- Alpha3- no tech

[questioneer]

Gotta go for now- think about it.

Choices

A) Play on

B.) Start over

C.) Quit

Choose one

[corriganbp]

Do you get the fact that I can’t tell you whether I am going to scramble until I see what you are attacking with?

You decide when you are going to post, not me.
I don’t know how many planes you’ll be flying in 110, and I don’t want to advertise what I would do beforehand.
I am not used to people not asking me for my scramble decision, especially when the exact same thing happened the turn before, so the player should know to ask.

I am simply reflecting back a fraction of the attitude that you’re giving me.

In terms of what would be fair, I am not sure yet, I haven’t seen this happen before, believe it or not.

Ask yourself this, you re-rolled the battle in 110 and I didn’t object, but if you had received great rolls, would you really have re-rolled your attack?  of course, we can’t know the answer to that question.  if you only had hit once, that cv would still be in 110.

[corriganbp]

I agree that life is too busy to get drawn into axis and allies arguments; there is barely enough time to play let alone argue about playing.

[corriganbp]

if I did scramble, it would be to make you realize that a cv that can’t attack, a bb, and a ca may not be enough protection against 3 scrambling fighters.  I lost the cv because I would have assumed that you would fly 1 or 2 planes above 110 in any case.

[corriganbp]

here’s a question for you – you say that I could have stopped sea lion if I had let the cv survive, but if I had let it survive you would have taken out 1-3 fighters.  If you had reduced my scrambling force to 1 or 2 fighters, then I would have expected you to continue to attack with the bomber in order to take out 1 more fighter or to eliminate the carrier.

And so now I’m down 1-3 fighters from what would have been defending London.  Wouldn’t you simply have taken some planes that you didn’t need anymore and fly them over 110?  why would I assume that you would have made the exact same attack in that case?

[corriganbp]

I’m not sure whether I would have scrambled or not.  In a future game, I might scramble and I might have in this one.  It depends on whether or not I believe that I can hold London with what I have vs. whether I know that I am going to lose London and what to do as much damage as possible to the German fleet.

I was a bit surprised that you didn’t provide air cover for your fleet.  I am used to seeing that invasion with air cover, going in with the boats alone and all planes committed to the land is somewhat risky - even if you have better than 50% odds, it’s a high risk that your transport stack is going to be taken out with nothing to show for it, not even any material damage to London.

So even when it’s less than 50%, it’s worth it because the result is so lopsided to the allies.

[questioneer]

@corriganbp:

Ask yourself this, you re-rolled the battle in 110 and I didn’t object, but if you had received great rolls, would you really have re-rolled your attack?  of course, we can’t know the answer to that question.  if you only had hit once, that cv would still be in 110.

Problem is, you can have that same argument if you did or did not like the rolls already laid out- this is one of the problems you run into playing by forum.

[questioneer]

@corriganbp:

I agree that life is too busy to get drawn into axis and allies arguments; there is barely enough time to play let alone argue about playing.

Agreed, let’s move on.

[questioneer]

@corriganbp:

if I did scramble, it would be to make you realize that a cv that can’t attack, a bb, and a ca may not be enough protection against 3 scrambling fighters.  I lost the cv because I would have assumed that you would fly 1 or 2 planes above 110 in any case.

True but then those same fighters can’t be involved in the assault and of course I would have to declare escorts first.  If I declared 2-3 escorts to make sure I could make the invasion, you could easily declare nothing and still gain b/c then I have committed 2-3 escorts to the sea and now won’t have them for the invasion making the amphib very tough now.  That is why I was surprised you didn’t see that.  You continued on with ANZAC and France and moved on.  I shrugged my shoulders and continued to the next turn also.  Only when you realized that Sealion was going to suceed did you bring it up again- not really fair either.

[corriganbp]

By the time you had finished Italy it was too late for me to ask for the cv back.

yes, you would have to fly escorts for the flight to prevent a naval disaster, and that is actually pretty normal for a sea lion invasion, and yes, I would not have scrambled because you provided the escorts, however if you don’t provide escorts, I need to scramble once in a while to keep you honest.

[corriganbp]

I am looking at the odds now, I would have had a 30% chance to knock out the transports and fleet.  Given the fact that your odds of sea lion were greater than 70%, actually I probably would have scrambled . . . however, knowing that the aa guns all missed, I am not sure if I would have liked the new outcome in England, at least you lost some planes there.

[questioneer]

@corriganbp:

I’m not sure whether I would have scrambled or not.  In a future game, I might scramble and I might have in this one.  It depends on whether or not I believe that I can hold London with what I have vs. whether I know that I am going to lose London and what to do as much damage as possible to the German fleet.

I was a bit surprised that you didn’t provide air cover for your fleet.  I am used to seeing that invasion with air cover, going in with the boats alone and all planes committed to the land is somewhat risky - even if you have better than 50% odds, it’s a high risk that your transport stack is going to be taken out with nothing to show for it, not even any material damage to London.

So even when it’s less than 50%, it’s worth it because the result is so lopsided to the allies.

True, for some strange reason on the last combat move I didn’t leave my planes on the carrier- don’t know why I did that- I definitely slipped on that one.

Funny thing is that you didn’t catch it til later on G3- 2 turns later.  You could have left the carrier and force me to bring in escorts to ensure I land.  I declare escorts (2-3 planes to ensure my troops land) then you declare nothing, let me take out the AC and now I would have less fighters to use on the land assault- makes a very dicey success rate now -like 55% or below versus 77% according to the AABattleCalc.

[corriganbp]

I am not sure why leaving planes on the carrier are relevant or not, you can fly planes to 110 in anticipation of a possible scramble even if those planes weren’t stationed on a carrier to begin with.

The problem with the cv, dmg or undmg’d is that you an then use the sub as cannon fodder, and that pretty much wipes out the usefulness of leaving it in tact.

Plus if I had kept the cv, the Italians would have shot down at least 1 ftr, and more likely 2 or more.

[corriganbp]

given that you can use your sub as cannon fodder against the cv, 1 bmb would be all that you would have needed to protect the fleet.

And if you had shot down 2 fighters, sea lion odds are at 77%, for a net improvment over what actually happened.  Even if you had only shot down 1 (assuming that you had retreated your italian bomber) and I damaged the cv, then the odds are just slightly improved for you, but now with 1 bomber flying over the fleet and the ability to lose the sub as cannon fodder, your fleet is guaranteed protection against the scramble.

[questioneer]

@corriganbp:

By the time you had finished Italy it was too late for me to ask for the cv back.

yes, you would have to fly escorts for the flight to prevent a naval disaster, and that is actually pretty normal for a sea lion invasion, and yes, I would not have scrambled because you provided the escorts, however if you don’t provide escorts, I need to scramble once in a while to keep you honest.

Actually after Italy’s turn is the right time to point out the mistakes- but hey, I’ve done that a couple of times.  One time I caught something a whole round later.  I was playing too many games at the same time so I didn’t catch it fast enough.  Now I only play 3-4 at a time at most.  A lot of times when you play by forum there is “trust” factor otherwise you have to list out all the NCMs and crap and get anal to ensure everything is right.  Tournaments are pretty competitive here and everyone really has to dot their i’s and cross their t’s.  It can get chippy at times- still fun though.

[corriganbp]

I want to get this issue of whether or not keeping the cv was the “right” move.

Let’s walk thru it step by step (one or both of us may walk away learning something by this exercise),

if we turned the tables and you were the allies, if you had to assign 2 hits, would you have lost 2 ftrs, or dmg the cv and lost 1 ftr?

[questioneer]

@corriganbp:

I am not sure why leaving planes on the carrier are relevant or not, you can fly planes to 110 in anticipation of a possible scramble even if those planes weren’t stationed on a carrier to begin with.

The problem with the cv, dmg or undmg’d is that you an then use the sub as cannon fodder, and that pretty much wipes out the usefulness of leaving it in tact.

Plus if I had kept the cv, the Italians would have shot down at least 1 ftr, and more likely 2 or more.

Ah right on planes on CV.  Maybe I would have shot down at least one ftr but the fact that you keep the CV…

1BB, 1SS, 1CV (no fire)
vs
1CV, 6ftrs, 1tac

I wasn’t even planning on using the CZ b/c I needed it to block the US from reaching Gibr- this was hinted in the Italian DD moving out to the Atlantic to block.  The fact is that you can force me to think and "commit " planes to the sea battle that would then not be used for the land battle then bettering your odds for survival greatly.

[corriganbp]

you would definitely have shot down 1 ftr, you rolled 2 hits!  I couldn’t avoid that!  me personally, if my objective is sea lion, my italian bomber would be worth sacrificing to take a shot at shooting down at least 1 more fighter.

[corriganbp]

the usa isn’t going to gib, it’s going to canada to stage a liberation effort - so I would not have predicted that the cruiser wouldn’t be used, and wait a minute, if the cruiser was going to 104, then it should not have been allowed to bombard.

[questioneer]

@corriganbp:

I want to get this issue of whether or not keeping the cv was the “right” move.

Let’s walk thru it step by step (one or both of us may walk away learning something by this exercise),

if we turned the tables and you were the allies, if you had to assign 2 hits, would you have lost 2 ftrs, or dmg the cv and lost 1 ftr?

1. Ok if I were you I would have taken out a French fighter and damaged the CV

2. Then as Germany you would have come in with 1BB, 1SS, 1CV.  You would NOT come in with the cruiser (which I believe I indicated that in the combat move list- this is why it is important to list out the combat moves but no necessarily the NCMs) b/c that was going to be non-combated into z103 later to block US ships from Gibr for a round.

3. As Germany you would see that in order to make a safe landing you need to overcome 1AC and possibly 5ftrs and a tac (crazy as that scramble sounds) which could destroy your invading fleet- according to the AABattleCalc that nearly a 100% win for UK.

4. Germany would have to declare at least 2,3 maybe 4 escorts to the naval battle to ensure your troops get to the coast.

5. When you declare them, as UK I declare none, forcing you to now commit those planes to take out the CV.  Those same aircraft now can’t help in the invasion- making Sealion very hard for Germany now- probably near 55% or below versus 77% depending how many aircraft they committed.

Germany would have had to do the same thing in z109 with the DD there.  Now I kinda see why some people take out those transports so land units don’t get to UK to beef it up.