UK Med CV to the Pacific?


  • 2019 2017 2016

    I’ve been pondering about this as a move to give the UK a small navy to threaten Japan in the money islands. It’s been mentioned before that the consensus of opinion is that it is objectively wrong or something close to that.

    Why?

    You can still do a Taranto raid including one or perhaps two fighters from London, so long as they die in battle. Without a bid, I guess the one plane raid is behind against a 3 fighter scramble.

    Without that sub which is normally bid, I guess there is some trouble.

    Still, it’s a gamble that I will take to send 2 fighters from London without moving the CV against a possible 2 fighter 1 tac scramble. There’s a 19% chance of the BB surviving that, which is a little dangerous I guess. On that 19% possibility, you can move the CV to SZ99 to protect Egypt for a turn so long as the SZ96 battle killed the TT. On the further 8% chance that the BB is killed but the TT survives, with an inf blocker in Alexandria Egypt will fall 70% of the time to a maximum attack, assuming Ethiopia was it UK1. So you still have to think about throwing away the CV.



  • I can’t speak for anyone else. But I usually don’t use the CV in the pac for two reasons.

    1. Containing Italy is of huge importance; sending the CV into 97 ensures better odds of success and will save you some air.
    2. The Japanese fleet can easily crush the RN even if the entire Med fleet sailed towards India and consolidated with the Indian ships. And they’re usually in position to block thwart any attempts made to combine the USN and RN.

    Granted, it could pay off if you are doing a KJF. I’ve sailed the CV into the pacific a couple of times and it can definitely complicate Japan’s plans. I just feel like it’s probably sub optimal in most cases. But as a change of pace it can be fun and interesting.



  • You can’t get fighters from London into Taranto without the aircraft carrier, it provides the only legal landing spot for those planes. In other words, planes may not max out movement points just to die, you must declare where planes can legally land before the resolve combat phase can begin.


  • 2019 2017 2016

    @Young:

    You can’t get fighters from London into Taranto without the aircraft carrier, it provides the only legal landing spot for those planes. In other words, planes may not max out movement points just to die, you must declare where planes can legally land before the resolve combat phase can begin.

    But if the planes die in the attack you don’t have to move the CV.



  • @Young:

    You can’t get fighters from London into Taranto without the aircraft carrier, it provides the only legal landing spot for those planes. In other words, planes may not max out movement points just to die, you must declare where planes can legally land before the resolve combat phase can begin.

    You only have to declare you move it there, after combat those planes might be dead and then you have no legal requirement to go on with that attack.

    The odds are not that different with or without the CV and getting italy to scramble to lose both its planes VS the UK planes isnt that bad either.



  • @simon33:

    @Young:

    You can’t get fighters from London into Taranto without the aircraft carrier, it provides the only legal landing spot for those planes. In other words, planes may not max out movement points just to die, you must declare where planes can legally land before the resolve combat phase can begin.

    But if the planes die in the attack you don’t have to move the CV.

    You’re right, my apologies.


  • 2019 2017 2016

    @ShadowHAwk:

    The odds are not that different with or without the CV and getting italy to scramble to lose both its planes VS the UK planes isnt that bad either.

    Without the sub though if Italy has a 3 plane scramble you do need the second plane from London which will almost certainly survive if they don’t scramble. It’s roughly a coin toss with no CV no sub and one plane from London. The chance of that second plane dying with no scramble is around 1 in 3. So it’s a strat that can only be used if you get lucky in BM.


  • 2019 2018 2017

    If Germany has done the strafe on Yugoslavia to retreat into Romania (a common move on G1), then you don’t need the CV when the British planes survive, because they can land in Yugoslavia.


  • 2019 2017 2016

    True enough on I1 (assuming Italy doesn’t attack it strongly) but not on G2.


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    If you do take the carrier, then on UK1 you are sitting off the Middle East. On UK2 you make India or off in the Indian Ocean. On UK4 you can make New South Wales or Queensland or the Philippines. You could also sit off India and make a pain of yourself.

    In any point here you can rendezvous with the cruiser, destroyer, and some planes from India. So far so good. If Japan waits, you may even get to put the battleship into your task force. But, you’re still a puny fleet compared to Japan. You can’t really give battle unless Japan has violated Mahan and divided its fleet.

    You could argue that Japan loses resources killing this mini-fleet, and that would be true – probably four units would go. I guess it’s a question of whether or not you consider those losses valuable. You could also argue that you are forcing Japan to commit more fleet, which leaves it weaker against the US, and that also is true. I guess the question is about how much positional advantage the US is getting from your sacrifice.

    You could do additional naval builds with India if you like, to make this mini fleet stronger. Of course, that means you are weakening India’s overland defenses, but given that Japan may not build ICs on the mainland (preferring a naval kill) that might be a great idea.

    So I guess it depends on what the person playing Japan prefers. If you force them off your script, you erase a big part of their advantage.

    Has anyone had good results with this approach?

    Marsh


  • 2019 2017 2016

    The point would be more of a fleet-at-anchor deterrent to Japan splitting up its fleets into 3. Generally, the IJN will need some of its fleet to hold off the USA. The rest of its fleet concentrates on the money islands. This mini fleet would be powerful enough to force the IJN to keep its fleet in one SZ at a time while being protected by a scramble from India. Providing that you still have the UK BB of course.

    I’m trying it out in one or two games I have going.


  • 2019 2018 2017

    @simon33:

    True enough on I1 (assuming Italy doesn’t attack it strongly) but not on G2.

    It’s relevant only on UK1. My point here is, that it’s entirely legal to use two planes from the UK and one plane from Scotland to attack SZ97 in a situation where Germany has strafed but not taken Yugoslavia. The CV would only need to move into SZ97 during non-combat if all planes survive. You could even toss in the Gibraltar plane as well, and the CV is still safe as long as the Scottish and Gibraltar plane both die.
    Of course Italy will kill any surviving planes in Yugoslavia.

    Whether it’s a good idea to that from a tactical point-of-view, is very circumstantial of course, and I can think of quite a few variants of this alternative way of doing Taranto. Strategically, while I think Marsh is right in stating that the mini-fleet won’t accomplish much for at least several rounds and is no match for Japan anyway, I can also see your point in forcing Japan to keep an eye on that fleet. So I’d say it’s definitely worth a try, provided that the BB is indeed alive. Always good to explore new ideas.


  • 2019 2017 2016

    Actually planes from Britain cannot land on Yugoslavia after fighting in SZ97. They have no movement left.


  • 2015 '14

    @Young:

    @simon33:

    @Young:

    You can’t get fighters from London into Taranto without the aircraft carrier, it provides the only legal landing spot for those planes. In other words, planes may not max out movement points just to die, you must declare where planes can legally land before the resolve combat phase can begin.

    But if the planes die in the attack you don’t have to move the CV.

    You’re right, my apologies.

    But without the AC the Taranto is just reckless against a 3 fighter scramble and thus a bad idea!


  • 2019 2018 2017

    @simon33:

    Actually planes from Britain cannot land on Yugoslavia after fighting in SZ97. They have no movement left.

    You’re right. I miscounted that one, based on the assumption that Scotland would be more remote than England, but looking at the map, I now see that there’s no difference.



  • @simon33:

    @ShadowHAwk:

    The odds are not that different with or without the CV and getting italy to scramble to lose both its planes VS the UK planes isnt that bad either.

    Without the sub though if Italy has a 3 plane scramble you do need the second plane from London which will almost certainly survive if they don’t scramble. It’s roughly a coin toss with no CV no sub and one plane from London. The chance of that second plane dying with no scramble is around 1 in 3. So it’s a strat that can only be used if you get lucky in BM.

    If they dont scramble you basicaly have a full fleet there, now italy cannot really hit you full carrier + destroyer + cruiser + 2 fighters.

    This really screws over italy, so if they scamble you basicaly have a good time if they dont scramble you got a huge battlefleet in the med still.


  • 2019

    I do not usually do Taranto and instead converge the UK navy in sz 92 after round 1.  This navy usually consists of the CV, 1 destroyer and 2 Cruisers.  During round 2, this navy then meets up with the destroyer that starts off South Africa and the destroyer & Cruiser that start off India in sz 93.  If Japan does not delcare war R1 this means the BB is still alive parked just off Ethiopia.

    Now most of the time I need this navy to clear the Italian navy but lets say they leave sz 97. Then I might have to use the RAF to  kill the Italians.  This would leave the UK with 2-3 destroyers, 2-3 Cruisers,  1 BB and one CR.  If a MIC was purchased for Persia R2 then I have been tempted to buy a another CR to add to this fleet.  This gives a very respectable fleet that if it does nothing else could just park off India.  This would make an amphibious assault on India after R5 or R6 very costly and it is unlikely India falls early with out some amphibious assault.

    Obviously there are a lot of if’s in this plan but I have played many games where I have had 3 destroyers, 3 cruisers, 1 BB and 1 CR off sz 93 by R4.  I usually use this fleet to then protect the US invasion force but I have often thought about bringing it to the Pacific.  It is just that the 21 air units Japan starts with scare the shit out me so I have never done it.


  • 2019 2017 2016

    @JDOW:

    But without the AC the Taranto is just reckless against a 3 fighter scramble and thus a bad idea!

    It’s 73% of killing the TT. Does that fit your criteria of reckless? A bit chancey I would say.

    In probability there will be a 2ftr 1tac scramble though. This assumes no bid. If there’s a bid I would put a sub in SZ98 and hit it with only one plane from London. That is still 73%.


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    I think if you’re going to do Taranto or Taranto-West then you commit to success rather than rolling the dice with a 25% chance of failure.

    Marsh


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    @ShadowHAwk:

    If they dont scramble you basicaly have a full fleet there, now italy cannot really hit you full carrier + destroyer + cruiser + 2 fighters.

    This really screws over italy, so if they scamble you basicaly have a good time if they dont scramble you got a huge battlefleet in the med still.

    I think this position is short-sighted. Yes, if there is no scramble you handily win the battle. However, on G2, the Luftwaffe annihilates your fleet and doesn’t even break a sweat doing it. Now Italy will have its NO until the UK and/or US can build new units for and get them to the Mediterranean.

    Marsh


  • 2019 2017 2016

    @Marshmallow:

    I think if you’re going to do Taranto or Taranto-West then you commit to success rather than rolling the dice with a 25% chance of failure.

    I would count it as a success if you kill the BB. That’s about 80%. But doubtless you’ve got the same answer.


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    Isn’t killing the BB the point of the whole attack? Or do you think Italy would take the BB as a casualty before losing aircraft?

    Marsh



  • @Marshmallow:

    Isn’t killing the BB the point of the whole attack? Or do you think Italy would take the BB as a casualty before losing aircraft?

    Marsh

    I take the BB before Aircraft, as Italy, because Air dominates this game. Saving the Italian fighters is much better, because they can Can-Open for Germ or can be used if you build a carrier.  I thought the whole reason of doing Taranto was to kill 2 Italian Trans, and that taking out the BB was just a nice side affect, right?


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    Agree with you that air should not be taken as loss before BB in this scenario.

    I don’t think you can kill the transport before the BB thought.

    Marsh



  • @Marshmallow:

    Agree with you that air should not be taken as loss before BB in this scenario.

    I don’t think you can kill the transport before the BB thought.

    Marsh

    Well no you can’t, however the reason I do the Taranto raid is to deny Italy of transports, not a Battleship


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 7
  • 5
  • 18
  • 9
  • 40
  • 9
  • 5
  • 15
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

42
Online

13.7k
Users

34.1k
Topics

1.3m
Posts