France and Commonwealth declare war against Italy

[peskpesk]

A common move in many WIF games is that France and Commonwealth declare war against Italy and port strike the IT Navy. The goal is to sink/bottom both IT TRS . This move secures North Africa until the IT has rebuilt their TRS capacity.
But if you could only sink/bottom one IT TRS, is it worth the US entry cost?

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

A common move in many WIF games is that France and Commonwealth declare war against Italy and port strike the IT Navy. The goal is to sink/bottom both IT TRS . This move secures North Africa until the IT has rebuilt their TRS capacity.
But if you could only sink/bottom one IT TRS, is it worth the US entry cost?

This is a difficult one to answer. An admiral in World in Flames is just like an admiral in WW II itself. You don't know what is waiting for you. Naval warfare (and port attacks too) are totally unpredictable (which seems to be historically correct). To me, there are no good admirals, only lucky and unlucky ones.

If you go to war, you have to get some luck on your side to get the result you want. If the search die rolls are against you, the port is obscured and you don't get to bomb the precious TRS...

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

A common move in many WIF games is that France and Commonwealth declare war against Italy and port strike the IT Navy. The goal is to sink/bottom both IT TRS . This move secures North Africa until the IT has rebuilt their TRS capacity.
But if you could only sink/bottom one IT TRS, is it worth the US entry cost?

warspite1

Naval warfare is little different to land or air warfare. Luck plays a part in all aspects of every day life and warfare is no exception. But the better an admiral/general is, the better he trains his men, the more attention he pays to detail - logistics, the right men in the right places etc etc, the more chance of success he has. This is no different for generals, admirals or air marshals. To suggest naval warfare is just luck is simply astounding...

As just one example, Lord Nelson won the Battle of Trafalgar despite being out-numbered and out-gunned. How? Luck? Well no. Nelson made sure the officers of all ships in his fleet knew what was expected of each and every one, he employed the right tactics to surprise and off-balance his opponent, and the RN sailors were trained more extensively and were not only better sailors, but could fire their cannon significantly quicker than their adversaries. How can you dismiss this as simple luck?

In WIF/MWIF it is a little different and luck can play a much greater part in all aspects of warfare because it ultimately comes down to dice. No matter what forces one deploys or what tactics one chooses, one is subject to the vagaries of the dice god.

That being the case, to my mind if one chooses to attack the Italians ostensibly with the sole goal of destroying/damaging the TRS, then its a crap shoot - and one is gambling all on one throw. I would therefore suggest that there needs to be more to the plan. That way, if there is a duff throw and the TRS survives, the player has another way to hurt the Italians either that turn of soon after. So long as there is such a proper plan then (and accepting it still may not succeed) at least there is a better chance than a simple one shot failure that costs in terms of US Entry but gives no long term benefits.

[brian brian]

One thing the Allies have going for them on this decision, in a two player game, is that they know which chits the USA has. If there are all "1" chits in the pool it is a much different decision than if the USA is holding a "5" chit.

I like the move, sometimes. An upside unrelated to the success or failure against the TRS is that it takes away Italy's chance to land divisions on a surprise impulse in some Allied territory somewhere, which can be one of Italy's strongest cards to play in some Axis strategy lines.

I learned my Royal Navy strategy from a Joseph Conrad story...

[paulderynck]

I thought it was a good idea but you have to sail the CW fleet out to get in position to port strike, and thus risk a Surprise impulse if Italy DoWs first.

Tried it six times in a row and all six times the Ark Royal was sunk. I don't try it any longer.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


Tried it six times in a row and all six times the Ark Royal was sunk. I don't try it any longer.

You obviously haven't played against me. [:D] No way that I would find the CW fleet in a situation like this.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I thought it was a good idea but you have to sail the CW fleet out to get in position to port strike, and thus risk a Surprise impulse if Italy DoWs first.

Tried it six times in a row and all six times the Ark Royal was sunk. I don't try it any longer.

So you're an unlucky admiral too... [:D]

[peskpesk]

So basically what you all are saying it does not matter if IT has one or two TRS at risk for being sunk in an allied port strike.
What matters are:
• the current US entry and the value of the chits
• if you feel luck or not
• and the fun of robbing the IT surprise and there by stopping the irritating IT DIV invasion.

Correct?

[Mayhemizer_slith]

If Italy sends TRS to Red Sea and picks up supply unit during first impulse they can't DoW on CW if they want to return that TRS to Mediterranean.

So if CW loses the Ark Royal, Italy loses at least one TRS [:)]

[Orm]

That may indeed be what they are saying.

And I disagree somewhat with that. While sinking or damaging a Italian TRS is nice for CW it is not worth the cost. It certainly makes the situation easier for CW. But, in the end, it may be USSR that pays. Even the lousy US entry chits counts. And the cost for this, on average, is 2 chits (if you count that Italy would otherwise do the DOW). And a bottomed TRS is certainly not worth two US entry chits for USSR. Most times the war will not be settled in Egypt but on the plains in USSR.

Are you asking for helping the AIO?

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: Orm

That may indeed be what they are saying.

And I disagree somewhat with that. While sinking or damaging a Italian TRS is nice for CW it is not worth the cost. It certainly makes the situation easier for CW. But, in the end, it may be USSR that pays. Even the lousy US entry chits counts. And the cost for this, on average, is 2 chits (if you count that Italy would otherwise do the DOW). And a bottomed TRS is certainly not worth two US entry chits for USSR. Most times the war will not be settled in Egypt but on the plains in USSR.

Are you asking for helping the AIO?

Well, I don't agree totally with this. If Italy has one TRS in the Red Sea and one sitting around in port in Italy I will surely sail very agressively with the CW towards that port where the TRS is, giving Italy a choice here. DoW me or don't DoW me.
If the Italians lose both their TRS, the CW is suddenly able to free up units for defense of French possessions in the Med, freeing French units for the fight there. Also Wavell gets into France too and the CW might be able to get 5 corps into France, making it more stronger against the onslaught there.

Someone said that the defense of Moscow starts on the battlefield in Flanders. He is correct...

[Orm]

The original premise here was "But if you could only sink/bottom one IT TRS, is it worth the US entry cost?". And that was what I was answering on. So what if the other Italian TRS is considered safe and not in the Red Sea.

[AlbertN]

Now that is very relative.

ITA can just DoW France and sail off with his whole fleet AND bring back the TRS from the Red Sea to a safe port as well - that in case where the CW plays overly aggressive (and is usually seen if they deploy massively in Gibraltar or so with their CV fleet).

If it's worth the shot to have a surprise port strike against the Italian Navy, on top of a TRS? Yes definitely so as long as you invest into it. If the CW plans that way, they best go there with as many carriers they can ready to strike if that's the case. It's not only the matter of 1 TRS, but also an amount of other ships that Italian economy will struggle to repair (not to speak of rebuilding even!).
The Allies have to play aggressively to a good degree to keep pressure on the Axis and not letting the Axis play as they desire and want dictating entirely the pace of the game. The Royal Navy is a tool for that.

[Jagdtiger14]

I don't get the calculation of some players who think its a good idea to risk a TRS to get the supply unit home.

I agree with Centuur in post #11...dow me or don't dow me...the US chits are extremely valuable.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: Cohen

Now that is very relative.

ITA can just DoW France and sail off with his whole fleet AND bring back the TRS from the Red Sea to a safe port as well - that in case where the CW plays overly aggressive (and is usually seen if they deploy massively in Gibraltar or so with their CV fleet).

True. But at that moment, I might consider the fact that there are now more US entry chits in the pool and be content with this outcome. After all: the French BB's are only there to battle the Italian ones...

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


Tried it six times in a row and all six times the Ark Royal was sunk. I don't try it any longer.

You obviously haven't played against me. [:D] No way that I would find the CW fleet in a situation like this.

You can miss and still do well. The CW wants to be in a high box for the port attack, so if the Italians miss, the CW can still blunder into finding them. Italy will be in the 4-box with a NAV. Let's say the CW search number is 4. This means there will be combat 70% of the time and the very least number of surprise points that Italy will have is 6.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


Tried it six times in a row and all six times the Ark Royal was sunk. I don't try it any longer.

You obviously haven't played against me. [:D] No way that I would find the CW fleet in a situation like this.

You can miss and still do well. The CW wants to be in a high box for the port attack, so if the Italians miss, the CW can still blunder into finding them. Italy will be in the 4-box with a NAV. Let's say the CW search number is 4. This means there will be combat 70% of the time and the very least number of surprise points that Italy will have is 6.

That's indeed the risk you are taking with this strategy. But on the other end: is the addition of 1939 US entry chits not worth this chance. Let's face it: the Ark Royal is indeed the best carrier of the Royal Navy. But is it that important that the CW cannot handle the loss of her? I believe she is expendable...

[Grotius]

What if Italy refuses to DOW the CW, even after the fall of France? And what if the CW doesn't want to take the US Entry hit for DOW'ing Italy? Does this happen often?

Even if it does, I imagine peace won't reign forever: once Japan starts its rampage, the US will enter, and the CW will join suit and DOW Italy.

[paulderynck]

Italy will get theirs eventually - no later than right after the US is in the war. The Western Allies need the Italian objectives to win.

A US surprise impulse against such a passive Italy followed by a CW surprise impulse -- priceless!

Edit: ...but I have never seen it happen.

[Grotius]

Thanks. In my ongoing solitaire-learning game, it's J/A 41, Italy has not DOW'd the CW, and it's deploying some aircraft, an HQ, and even a couple land units to Russia to help with Barbarossa. The CW is very tempted to DOW Italy and do some serious damage in a surprise impulse -- but the US entry situation isn't brilliant, so it might be better to wait until Japan starts its rampage and (I hope) brings the US into the war.

Japan, though, is thinking about DOWing the CW but not the USA, and landing in the NEI, Rabaul, Malaya -- but obviously not the Philippines. I'm not sure this approach will deter US entry. I guess I'll find out.