R1 usually moves its SZ4 Sub to SZ2. If G1 wants to sink the UK BB, the best it can make is to bring SZ8 sub, Norway ftr and Germany bom (R1 did not take the Norway Gambit). The combat would be bom+ftr+sub v.s. BB+sub+trn. The odds to win is less than 75% if the R sub do not submerge. So the trn will survive 1/4 of the time and UK1 begins with 2 trns which means either Alg or Nor will suffer more. Even G wins the combat, it usually will loss the sub and the ftr. Besides, losing the bom could be a disaster since G could not efficiently threat the Allies navy built unless G1 begins with 2 bom buy. But aggresive R player could simply take advantage of the G1 2 bom openning. I really think SZ2 is a must attack if Norway is not conqured in R1, but I’m very unconfortable with the odds and the possible disastrous outcome. Given SZ2 combat could go to mess easily for G, will Norway Gambit still worth a shot?
Besides, I think the winning probability itself does tell the whole story because you’ll redo the math after very cycle of the combat and probably you could change your strategy according to the new situation. For example. 2 infs v.s. 1 inf. Numbers tell you that 2 infs have more change to win. But you should think about it carefully. Roughly speaking, there is 1/4 chance that the attacking 2 infs fire 0 and the defender fires 1. So the combat becomes 1inf vs 1inf. What would you do? Probably retreat if you are not in an amphibous assault. Theoretically, you’ll still have 25% chance to win a 1inf vs 1inf battle, but you just throw this 25% away because you retreat.