Here’s the scenario…G1 attacks GB sz 109 with 1 fighter & 2 subs against GB destroyer & xport. GB scrambles 2 fighter.
R1 Germany scores 1 hit. GB scores no hits.
As GB, what do you remove as the casualty? And why?
The destroyer.
If it was one of the German subs that hit, GB has no choice and must remove the destroyer because subs can’t hit planes. If it was the German fighter that scored the hit, I’d also lose the destroyer because Germany has a 2/3 chance of killing it next round anyway, and once teh destroyer is gone and GB hits round 2, Germany must lose the plane.
Not sure I’d have srambled that way, but it depends on the other fights of course. With two German subs in SZ109, at least one of the other attacks (106, 109, 111) has at most one sub.
@Herr:
The destroyer.
If it was one of the German subs that hit,
I should have clarified that….it was indeed one of the subs that scored a hit. The fighter rolled a 5.
@Herr:
Not sure I’d have srambled that way, but it depends on the other fights of course. With two German subs in SZ109, at least one of the other attacks (106, 109, 111) has at most one sub.
Interesting. For the sake of discussion, here’s how Germany set up the other navel battle attacks.
SZ110
Germany attacks with
2 fighters
3 TAC’s
1 Bomber
1 BB
GB defends with
1 BB
2 Cruisers (one from France)
SZ111
Germany attacks with
1 fighter
1 TAC
1 Bomber
2 subs
GB defends with
1 destroyer
1 BB
1 Cruiser
SZ91
Germany attacks with
1 sub
GB defends with
1 cruiser
Why didn’t UK scramble 4 fighters to SZ 109 (French from London and one from Scotland)?
Why didn’t UK scramble 4 fighters to SZ 109 (French from London and one from Scotland)?
My point exactly, and that was why I asked about the other battles. As the UK didn’t use the other two fighters in either SZ110 or SZ111, there would have been no reason not to use them in SZ109. Doing so would have almost guaranteed a British victory there.
Alternatively, the UK could have used the Scottish fighter to scramble in SZ111, where the German attack seems a bit underpowered, and still have 3 fighters for SZ109.
Here’s the scenario…G1 attacks GB sz 109 with 1 fighter & 2 subs against GB destroyer & xport. GB scrambles 2 fighter.
R1 Germany scores 1 hit. GB scores no hits.
As GB, what do you remove as the casualty? And why?
You actually have to decide the casualty before you know how many hits GB will score, so I reckon I’d lose the destroyer and cross my fingers for 2 hits. Although if I had the 3rd fighter, I’d lose a fighter to protect the transport.
Sounds like a new player that didn’t know he could scramble the French fighter. Only real reason not to scramble the Scottish fighter to SZ111 is that would make Taranto difficult.
I also reckon with those other attacks, I’d allow the SZ109 attack to proceed. So much meat in scrambling 3ftrs to SZ110!
That transport is fairly critical in London’s defense against a full sea lion.
Seeing at the sub hit, there are no choices. But assuming the fighter hit, I might consider the loss of a fighter; depending on if I am playing regular or balanced mod, and depending what other attacks have already been completed (are there loose subs or convoy zones I can kill/clear? like off canada?)
Worse, if you leave a sub alive in the london sz, you could get convoyed up to 6 (or 8 if he has more than one).
We all have different opinions, i would not scramble 110 in this senarion as you would only kill the BB, and i can do that on my turn. But scrambling in SZ 109 with 3 air gives me a good chance of killing 2 subs and a fighter. and 111 will give me 1 or 2 more kills.
Actually, you will kill 1 2/3 planes in the first round and more in the second, most likely. You are ignoring damage from the fleet which is not being absorbed into subs.
I think, that I would have scrambled with 3 fighters to SZ110 because of the lack of sub fodder and 1 fighter to SZ109.
In my turn I would have attacked the remaining sub(s) in SZ109 with SZ106 destroyer and air to prevent convoying.
