Taranto Fail… What next in the Med?

@hengst

This only works if there are only Italian aricraft scrambling. I usually use two fighters from the United Kingdom terirtory, and the fighter from Malta-the fighter from Girbraltar should be used along with the cruiser off of Girbraltar (it takes three submarines to have more than an 80% chance to kill it, my normal standard to win a battle, so the submarines are usually used for easier prey in the north, especially if Germany attacks the Soviet Union in the first turn, which will nessecitate one submarine in sea zone 125) to destroy the Italian navy off of Malta. If a German aircraft lands in Southern Italy, I usually will call of the attack, as there is a less than 80% chance to win. All of this assumes Germany invades the Soviet Union in the first turn.

@flyingbadger

Absolutely badger.

While we may see the fight in the Mediterranean from different perspectives, what we inevitably all agree on is that it’s one of the more significant fronts that can easily sway the game for one side or the other all down to the results of a simple raid on Italy.

For me I stick by my philosophy that every Axis piece on the board should be doing something, or playing some sort of role. Which is why I’m a firm believer that scrambling the fighters into the Taranto Raid as the Axis should be done every single time because fact of the matter is, a lot of people tend to say that it’s better to save those fighters for something new but in the end nobody really knows what they’re saving them for, and that’s what causes Axis players to lose. I mean granted Squire had previously said earlier to save those fighters against the French ships or the remaining British ships in the Med but for me the Taranto Raid is the only time I’ll really be able to take of British Planes if I scramble these fighters and when they’re throwing this many planes at me then that’s my objective. Obviously you won’t be able to have absolutely every unit doing something and playing some sort of genuine authentic role but you can get very close to having every single unit active on the board, which is what wins you games.

@ShadowHAwk:

Well since you have to take odds a 75% odds is pretty decent though.

The 25% when you lose is more devastating, cumulatively, than the 75% when you win.  In the 75% when Allies win, Axis usually does well enough that Italy can easily mop up in 97 and avoid getting convoyed.  The tuv loss to Axis can be small to none when we take the counter into account, although a successful 97 attack constrains Italy strategically.  But in the 25% when Allies lose, that’s a devastating defeat for Allies and hard to recover from.

It’s hard for Allies to bring enough material that there isn’t a good argument for an Axis scramble.  Still, if you bring 8-9 units (including the ac) then that might be scary enough that Axis won’t want to take the risk and prefer to wait till G2 for a (comparatively) low-risk counter.

If germany does 110 without the BB but with 1 sub 3 figs 3 tacticals 1 bomber they also got 80% of winning if the UK scrambles. Would you take the 20% odds as allies? Why would the axis take 20% odds and be considered smart.

Mostly yes, because the tuv exchange would be more favorable to Allies.  But in some cases UK might need to hold back (especially if 111 is a better scramble option).   There’s more upside to the 97 scramble with those odds because Axis wants to prevent the Allied convoy.

I feel like the “3rd” option is stacking UK navy in 92 and building an air base in Gibraltar UK1.  Same risk of Sea Lion as building the IC in Egypt UK1 tho.  This requires “breaking out” by attacking the Italian Destroyer in 96 with air power (bomber from London and Fighter from Malta).  I would also recommend an attack on Ethiopia via India support combined with the Tac and TT with 2 units from egypt, then consolidating Alex/Egypt forces in Egypt.  If, for whatever reason, UK navy in 110 was avoided, send them to 92 as well.

Just another option to consider with lots of “ifs”.  Germany’s opening move should dictate your options rather than have a hard and fast “this is what the UK MUST DO”.

True, I did not mean to say that one bad-luck battle increases your odds of a future good-luck battle. What I meant is that Global 1940 is a much bigger game than, say, Revised. Global has more units involved and more battles that matter. The effect of having more units and more battles is to soften the effect of any one unit missing or of any one battle going poorly. In other words, as you broaden your sample size, you get closer to achieving average results in the aggregate.

@variance:

UK may strafe Northern Italy with 6 planes and land all remaining plus Gibraltar fighter in Paris.

Sorry guys for being out of commission all summer.

Welcome back my friend!

To be clear, you only have to start the battle with all aircraft having a possible landing location, correct?

Thanks for the quick reply Cavin……