The confusion seems to be in you’re holding back naval ships for naval bombardment. The advantage about scrambling planes is that it forces the attacker to commit all their naval ships regardless if they want to or not. That’s why it is sometimes wise to scramble in a losing battle if the enemy is relying on bombardment for victory. The easiest situation would be when Japan invades the Philippine islands. If Japan was so aggressive that all they brought was two infantry with two cruisers as example. I would scramble the fighter in that situation because while I will lose the sea battle, if you choose to invade the island after the battle, you’re doing it without naval support which gives my defending infantry a better chance at winning.
Amphibious Assault question
-
Situation: Italy holds Gibralter with ground forces and a couple fighters – they have no navy. The US has a navy in the adjacent sea zone following a botched amphibious assault.
Question: If UK attempts an amphibious assault through the sea zone with the US navy, and Italy scrambles the fighters to force a sea battle, does the US navy participate in the pre-assault sea battle, or is it just the Italian fighters vs the UK navy?
-
Just Italy vs UK.