The METT Principle to killing Italy before it does anything

But that does weaken Calcutta. I guess you have to decide what is most important.

BTW, what if Germany attacks the cruiser in SZ91 as I would? Do you weaken the attack on SZ96 to 1ftr, take a cruiser out of Taranto, or something else?

To do the Tobruk crush you generally some help from somewhere. Otherwise 1x3, 4x2 + 2x1 attack 1x3 + 5x2. It’s an even power attack with only one more hit.

The Mech Inf in Egypt can be used for both Ethiopia and Tobruk. Doing both means you have to decide where to send them. Sending to Tobruk as you suggest means that 8 power is attacking 6 in Ethiopia, reducing to (probably) 2-4 attacking 2-4 on round 2.

I do either Taranto or Tobrok, but not both seeing as the Germans will and should put the Slovak fighter in Tobrok increasing that defence.

@simon33:

But that does weaken Calcutta. I guess you have to decide what is most important.

The Indian deployment to East Africa is always a feature in the games I play - regardless of who plays UK. It protects the UK Empire NO. Those forces can always go back next turn, but more usually they are committed to a swift victory in the ME, allowing UK factories that then reinforce India.

To my mind the METT concept is a good one (except perhaps Tobruk?) but success is not guaranteed. Also G2 air can then wipe out the UK fleet in the Med. These are risks worth taking.

The more important downside may be that Italy is not then distracted from the Russian front. Perhaps a cleverer player than I would allow Italy a scent of victory in the Med so as to draw its investment into a battle it will eventually lose?

The Taranto/Tobruk/Ethiopia combo attacks are fantastic. When they succeed. I’ve played games where every one of them turned out to be a disaster for the British and that caused a few headaches.

I think the attack which should be ditched is Tobruk. Nice to take down that force but it doesn’t really achieve anything unless Egypt isn’t properly defended.

One game I tried using the Malta fighter to support the Tobruk crush, with a bid artillery in Alexandria. So no transport needed. But the problem then is that you need to bring in two fighters from London for Taranto to achieve the same odds that one would otherwise achieve, and those London fighters are dead because they have to land on the carrier.

@Young:

I do either Taranto or Tobrok, but not both seeing as the Germans will and should put the Slovak fighter in Tobrok increasing that defence.

You don’t send the Slovak fighter to S. Italy?

A good plan. But as a matter of principle, and an in-joke with friends when playing, we say “go big or go home”. Spread out over too many targets and fail all of them.

@knp7765:

@Young:

I do either Taranto or Tobrok, but not both seeing as the Germans will and should put the Slovak fighter in Tobrok increasing that defence.

You don’t send the Slovak fighter to S. Italy?

I send the fighter to Tobrok and the Tac bomber from Poland to S.Italy… it gives me the defence on Tobrok and still brings the London fighter and bomber to Taranto.

@Juan_de_Marco:

A good plan. But as a matter of principle, and an in-joke with friends when playing, we say “go big or go home”. Spread out over too many targets and fail all of them.

UK can hit all the Italian targets in this discussion in UK1 with very high probability EXCEPT when that fighter comes down to Tobruk. If that fighter doesn’t come down, doing all the attacks is low risk/high reward and should at least be considered every game. Run the numbers on the dice calculator and tell me you wouldn’t do those attacks if it were midgame.

@SubmersedElk:

UK can hit all the Italian targets in this discussion in UK1 with very high probability EXCEPT when that fighter comes down to Tobruk.

Umm, no. Running the calculator:
M: 98% of killing the DD
E: 79% chance of killing everything with the Mec, or 61% without it
T(obruk): 69% chance of killing everything, while using the Egypt Mec
Taranto: 80-94% chance, well known.

Total: 98% x 61% x 69% x 94% = 39% chance of killing everything.

Perhaps you’re assuming a bid?

@Young:

@knp7765:

@Young:

I do either Taranto or Tobrok, but not both seeing as the Germans will and should put the Slovak fighter in Tobrok increasing that defence.

You don’t send the Slovak fighter to S. Italy?

I send the fighter to Tobrok and the Tac bomber from Poland to S.Italy… it gives me the defence on Tobrok and still brings the London fighter and bomber to Taranto.

Hadn’t thought of that before.  Next time I’m Germany, I might try that.  Might change things for Italy because in most of our games, the Tobruk force gets wiped out.

@simon33:

@SubmersedElk:

UK can hit all the Italian targets in this discussion in UK1 with very high probability EXCEPT when that fighter comes down to Tobruk.

Umm, no. Running the calculator:
M: 98% of killing the DD
E: 79% chance of killing everything with the Mec, or 61% without it
T(obruk): 69% chance of killing everything, while using the Egypt Mec
Taranto: 80-94% chance, well known.

Total: 98% x 61% x 69% x 94% = 39% chance of killing everything.

Perhaps you’re assuming a bid?

Okay, I think UK does have a very good chance on all fronts.  I’ve seen it happen for Tobruk, Taranto and the DD by Malta.  We usually use the Indian forces to take Sumatra.  Usually Ethiopia is left until round 2 or 3.

As for the battle dice calculator, I just want to say it SUCKS!
I’m not saying it’s wrong, just that it sucks.
Using a battle dice calculator I think is just like using Low Luck for battles.  Takes the risk and therefore the fun out of the game.  If you want to attack a territory or sea zone and you have good forces available, then just GO FOR IT!  Don’t sit around using a calculator to figure out the odds of every single battle or scenario.  That’s not any fun.  Besides, remember, it’s just a game.  If you figured wrong, you lose that battle and maybe the game.  So you set up and try again.

Okay, enough bitching.  That’s just my opinion.  If you want to use calculators and low luck, go for it.  I just don’t like them myself.

Are you arguing with the calculated odds in your comment " I think UK does have a very good chance on all fronts"

If you don’t attack Ethiopia, that does remove the thinnest attack though. Without that, you have a 63% chance of killing everything with a roll.

@Young:

I do either Taranto or Tobrok, but not both seeing as the Germans will and should put the Slovak fighter in Tobrok increasing that defence.

This does seem to deter arguably the lowest added value attack though.

I disagree with taranto on a different level: positioning and denial of objectives. It’s worth a lot more for the british to keep a larger fleet alive in the med than to kill the battleship of the Italians. And if you get all the good defensive units together at Malta seazone, the Italians have to split up their fleet if they wish to clear it. Now if you can make sure you keep some air units around, the transports will sink too.

Really? I’ve always seen that without Taranto the UK fleet sits in the Red Sea and accomplishes nothing. What do you do with it?

@knp7765:

As for the battle dice calculator, I just want to say it SUCKS!
I’m not saying it’s wrong, just that it sucks.
Using a battle dice calculator I think is just like using Low Luck for battles.  Takes the risk and therefore the fun out of the game.  If you want to attack a territory or sea zone and you have good forces available, then just GO FOR IT!  Don’t sit around using a calculator to figure out the odds of every single battle or scenario.  That’s not any fun.  Besides, remember, it’s just a game.  If you figured wrong, you lose that battle and maybe the game.  So you set up and try again.

Okay, enough bitching.  That’s just my opinion.  If you want to use calculators and low luck, go for it.  I just don’t like them myself.

Battle calc and low risk are worlds apart. Battle calc doesn’t remove the risk at all, you can still get very poor results when the odds are good. Last few games I played I ended up on the wrong side of several key battles that had 1000-1 odds against the actual result.

What battle calc does do is help players become better players through supplying important information. The information doesn’t change if you don’t use the calc and helps to bridge the gap between newer and more experienced players (who will be able to eyeball the odds with reasonable accuracy).

@Juan_de_Marco:

I disagree with taranto on a different level: positioning and denial of objectives. It’s worth a lot more for the british to keep a larger fleet alive in the med than to kill the battleship of the Italians. And if you get all the good defensive units together at Malta seazone, the Italians have to split up their fleet if they wish to clear it. Now if you can make sure you keep some air units around, the transports will sink too.

That is interesting.  I’m the same way with Taranto, I don’t like seeing the UK Med fleet get wiped out which usually happens just about every time unless they get really lucky dice.
I don’t understand putting them by Malta. Doesn’t that make it easier for Italy to attack it with both naval and air?  I would think keeping them in SZ 98 and putting an air base in Egypt.  Even if Italy has their whole starting navy, they won’t have enough to kill the UK fleet without wiping themselves out in the process.

:?

An airbase on Egypt can only land one plane that can’t land on the carrier, and the SZ91 cruiser can’t reach if it’s still alive. That fleet could be hammered by 1dd, 1sub, 2cruisers, 1bb, 1sb, 2ftrs (land in N Africa) I1. Power: 24 vs 18. Perhaps you could put it in Transjordan and fly the India air there, but that weakens India.

It’s because a move to Egypt’s seazone just paints a big target there. Yes the British face a long shot on the defensive at Malta, but now the Italians have to move troops into either Tripoli or Tobruk with their transports or take the danger of having their transports be unguarded, and those troops to Italian africa are not used to take down Greece, Jordan or Syria from the Egypt seazone, or Gibraltar. Also the Italians will have to choose between taking down the French fleet or the British, and if the Italians roll bad enough, you could see if the french fleet can kill it, or soften it up. The French units are dead in the water otherwise, but can hamper the Italian expansion a lot. Why not an airbase? I feel Britain usually has better buys available; lots of infs in turn 1 to deter Sea Lion, an extra transport in south africa, a destroyer near britain or canada to try to clear sealanes. You can sacrifice some units as the allies if you can get a definitive advantage; Limiting or severly delaying Italian influence in Africa, rebuilding the atlantic fleet for the inevitable return to the continent: You can also start that in canada!.

@simon33:

:?

An airbase on Egypt can only land one plane that can’t land on the carrier, and the SZ91 cruiser can’t reach if it’s still alive. That fleet could be hammered by 1dd, 1sub, 2cruisers, 1bb, 1sb, 2ftrs (land in N Africa) I1. Power: 24 vs 18. Perhaps you could put it in Transjordan and fly the India air there, but that weakens India.

It can’t be hammered like that if you put a DD blocker in sz94.
You nail the Ita TT and DD via Air and move your UK fleet up to 92.

BUT:
It only makes sense if you have Surviving UK ships that can reach sz92 from 110 and German Luftwaffe (GL) took a beating and was not reenforced with a G1  purchase (2xBmbrs or Ftrs).
Beacause Ita is able to Canopen Algeria and GL sinks UK Fleet and kills RAF.