Caspian Sea

@rforelli
From the “Air Base”-unit characteristics, Rulebook Pacific 1940.2, page 25:

Increased Air Unit Range: When taking off from a friendly territory that has an operative air base, air units gain 1 additional point of movement range. At that point fighters and tactical bombers can move 5 spaces, and strategic bombers can move 7spaces. Note: Air units on carriers in a sea zone adjacent to a territory containing an air base don’t benefit from this additional movement range.

Must you send a lone sub against a huge fleet that is blocking the way that is preventing you from bringing a carrier into position (say during NCM) to pick up planes that could potentially survive and need a landing space from some other battle, even though you “know” that you cannot win this battle in any event and that the planes will end up ditching?

Yes in low luck, and yes without.  The only hitch here is that you MUST send the sub to make this attack.  You cannot win a battle you do not attempt to fight.

I do see what you are saying, that in low luck, there are no “hits and misses” and therefore, since the attack could never be won without immense luck, that it doesn’t meet the summary judgment rule (all attacker hits and all defender misses).  But as you also mention, low luck is a tacked-on rule, so we just go back to what it says in the main rulebook;  if there is any chance no matter how slight of you winning, you can bring the fighters as long as you make some attempt with at least 1 unit to clear the crucial zone.  The sub still meets the test of the rule even though low luck makes its odds go from 1% to 0%.

What if we attack the blocking fleet with a (damaged?) aircraft carrier, alone, which has no combat rating and therefore, can never “inevitably” hit?  Maybe this is an even gameyer test of this rule (though we may find some other rule that states that you have to bring at least 1 attacker with attack value into a combat…)

One thing the Germans can do is hit the UK Cruiser in SZ91 which I used to do but stopped because those two subs are better used hitting SZ110 and therefore preserving more of the Luftwaffe.

Taranto is a pretty much all or nothing option for the UK but assuming it happens and succeeds the UK fleet is generally toast anyway. Is it really worth going to much length to stop?

@oysteilo:

Does this work? and it is worth the spending of a minor, carrier and transport?

yes, it might work somehow.
And No, it is miles away from being worth those 35 IPCs. Against a good Allies player that move brings Axis to the certain road of defeat.

The allies can always make sealion next to impossible if they really set their mind to it (UK build infantry, no Taranto, bring ships home, get Canadians, prepare US airstrike).  If they do everything in their power to make it costly and Germany still goes for it, then Germany will be in bad shape after the sealion “victory”.  In that case, losing London is bad but not necessarily a total disaster.  Suppose the opponents don’t really like playing Japan and they’re not very good at it.  As long as USA, USSR and remnant of UK can hold the line against germany, the axis are placed in the crummy position of having to win as Japan.  In that case, it might actually be preferable to intentionally allow a (costly) sealion in order to put the onus on Japan.  If its a team game and the guy playing Germany is more skilled than the guy playing Japan, then coaxing them into a costly sealion might work out OK for the allies.

Pack the UK with Inf, move the Indian fleet towards the Med and start being very aggressive with the Soviet Union.

@Vance:

or take carolines.

Right, that’s the best place to stage the USN . . . but there’s already a naval base there silly.  :wink:

As Japan I like to stage the IJN off of phil, put a blocker to prevent Korea/Japan invasion, and stack the carolines with as many ftr/tac as I need or can spare. Usually US doesn’t have more then 1-2 transports, so it should be safe from an amphib assault with 3-4+ air there.  Keep the mainland air on kwansi/FIC to land on carriers and you’re set up for a very heavy counter to any US moves in that direction.

I don’t like to trade ships with US when I can help it and if I have to fight a naval battle I’d rather be set up to hit him as hard as I can with the strength of my powerful airforce. Most of the times the threat is enough and the USN stays away.

I agree with Frank T and Brado… but I build 7 more transport during G2 (which brings them to a total of 10). Italy must focus on Egypt at first (taken at I2) and then hold strong Gibraltar to sceal Med Sea and US footstep to Europe.

Battle for Russia will be long and with a slow start, but will succeed. You have to cause many frontline… and Japan should attack Russia the very first turn.

@ Rock’n Roll : Yes, I won 4 times here…