2020 BM3 - Oystello (allies +6) v 666

[oysteilo]

@666 said in 2020 BM3 - Oystello (allies +6) v 666:

@666 said in 2020 BM3 - Oystello (allies +6) v 666:

@oysteilo said in 2020 BM3 - Oystello (allies +6) v 666:

@666 full scramble. Looks like i messed this up :(

the dice gods get their say first…I decided to be more aggressive this game.

and the dice gods say FU to me…LOL, couldn’t hit with a 3 or a 4…well my 90% wasn’t so good now was it…I think I may resign and not carry this dicing into next year…stay tuned. Office party today.

All right. At least enjoy your office party. I must admit i had overlooked/not really considered this an option. I will put this on hold for now

[JDOW]

@666 said in 2020 BM3 - Oystello (allies +6) v 666:

@oysteilo said in 2020 BM3 - Oystello (allies +6) v 666:

@666 full scramble. Looks like i messed this up :(

the dice gods get their say first…I decided to be more aggressive this game.

Hi Jim,

I took a look at the map and I can tell you, this kind of aggressiveness is not beneficial for the Axis for 2 reasons:

1. 90% odds is a deceptive number. I would see the battle outcome as follows
   From bottom to top percentiles:
   1-10: Total fail, Allies win
   11-30: Phyrric victory. Axis may have won this battle but the Luftwaffe is crippled. This causes way more trouble than the fleet in 92 could have caused.
   31-70: Well, not sure who is better now. You may have eliminated a threat but lost plenty of planes. You were supposed to by 15+ fast movers that march towards Moscow and you bought zero.
   71-100: That went well, the Axis are ahead now.

If you look at the outcomes like this, you are a 2 to 1 underdog to come out ahead after this attack. In addition, the top and bottom 30% are not equal. Top 30 give you an edge but there is LOTS to do still, bottom 30% and you are wrecked.

2. The battle did not give you major strategic gains even if you won. You always have to consider the strategic implications this battle could have. You can take a look at my 2nd game I played vs Simon this year. I made the same attack at 92, too but with the following differences.

• I had 2 subs in 91 that could attack
• Odds were 100%
• Winning the battle would give my Gib AND Egypt.
  –> I went for it, lost 1 plane more than I should have, got Gib AND Egypt and Simon resigned in turn 2

The problem here, in your game, was: There weren’t any major strategic gains on the table.
You would have neither gotten Gob nor Egypt with that move and that makes a HUGE difference.
IF you go for such a risky battle, the reward must be more than just killing the fleet. If it is not, the attack is not a good idea.

Bottom line: I would say you can be happy that MARTI made it easy for you. Axis are screwed now and you can resign. Worse outcome would have been if you would have hit in round 3 in that battle. Then you would have won with lousy bomber remaining and would have fought a long uphill battle that would have ended in defeat after a long misery.

[JDOW]

And btw: DON’T put your boats in 114 after G1 but in 113. In this case, UK would not have been in the position to make such a greedy move in UK1, as a G2 sea lion with 1 TT would be on the table in that case, plus a G3 sealion would have become a bigger threat, too.

[simon33]

@JDOW said in 2020 BM3 - Oystello (allies +6) v 666:

And btw: DON’T put your boats in 114 after G1 but in 113. In this case, UK would not have been in the position to make such a greedy move in UK1, as a G2 sea lion with 1 TT would be on the table in that case, plus a G3 sealion would have become a bigger threat, too.

What about if you’re intending a G2 DOW on USSR? 114 prevents blockers in the Baltic. I personally like 112 if at all possible because you can also go over the top.

I will correct one minor point. I conceded our game after G3. So not a turn 2 concede. Thankfully.

[oysteilo]

@simon33 i think @JDOW s point is, look how aggressive the british are when you put your boats in 112. No units bought for London and no planes in london either on british 1. If you are worried about the USSR cruiser blocking you, i think in this situation you have to commit italian planes

[oysteilo]

114, sorry

[simon33]

Hmm, Italian planes are always an option I suppose but I don’t like it much when a BB can absorb the potential hit.

[JDOW]

I prefer a g2 Dow against Russia but I don‘t mind blockers. Russia can defend Novo anyway against a possible amphibious invasion so the Russian boats don‘t bother me.

In fact, I used to put the tt in 114, too back then just to bring to extra inf to Poland.

In general, this is not too crucial. Uk can have. Greedy UK1 if they like. Not the end of the world.

And sorry re turn 2/3 Simon: but the game was basically over after turn 2 as losing both, Gib and Egypt was inevitable.

[simon33]

@JDOW said in 2020 BM3 - Oystello (allies +6) v 666:

And sorry re turn 2/3 Simon: but the game was basically over after turn 2 as losing both, Gib and Egypt was inevitable.

True enough.

[666]

@JDOW said in 2020 BM3 - Oystello (allies +6) v 666:

@666 said in 2020 BM3 - Oystello (allies +6) v 666:

@oysteilo said in 2020 BM3 - Oystello (allies +6) v 666:

@666 full scramble. Looks like i messed this up :(

the dice gods get their say first…I decided to be more aggressive this game.

Hi Jim,

I took a look at the map and I can tell you, this kind of aggressiveness is not beneficial for the Axis for 2 reasons:

1. 90% odds is a deceptive number. I would see the battle outcome as follows
   From bottom to top percentiles:
   1-10: Total fail, Allies win
   11-30: Phyrric victory. Axis may have won this battle but the Luftwaffe is crippled. This causes way more trouble than the fleet in 92 could have caused.
   31-70: Well, not sure who is better now. You may have eliminated a threat but lost plenty of planes. You were supposed to by 15+ fast movers that march towards Moscow and you bought zero.
   71-100: That went well, the Axis are ahead now.

If you look at the outcomes like this, you are a 2 to 1 underdog to come out ahead after this attack. In addition, the top and bottom 30% are not equal. Top 30 give you an edge but there is LOTS to do still, bottom 30% and you are wrecked.

2. The battle did not give you major strategic gains even if you won. You always have to consider the strategic implications this battle could have. You can take a look at my 2nd game I played vs Simon this year. I made the same attack at 92, too but with the following differences.

• I had 2 subs in 91 that could attack
• Odds were 100%
• Winning the battle would give my Gib AND Egypt.
  –> I went for it, lost 1 plane more than I should have, got Gib AND Egypt and Simon resigned in turn 2

The problem here, in your game, was: There weren’t any major strategic gains on the table.
You would have neither gotten Gob nor Egypt with that move and that makes a HUGE difference.
IF you go for such a risky battle, the reward must be more than just killing the fleet. If it is not, the attack is not a good idea.

Bottom line: I would say you can be happy that MARTI made it easy for you. Axis are screwed now and you can resign. Worse outcome would have been if you would have hit in round 3 in that battle. Then you would have won with lousy bomber remaining and would have fought a long uphill battle that would have ended in defeat after a long misery.

good analysis…you take this way deeper and with much more thought than I do and this is why you have such a consistently strong record…You are right. I would have been happy with killing his fleet for the loss of 6 fighters which I purchased to replace the ones I expected to lose. losing all aircraft and not even taking out the Brit trn was more than I could bare…appreciate your analysis

[666]

@JDOW said in 2020 BM3 - Oystello (allies +6) v 666:

And btw: DON’T put your boats in 114 after G1 but in 113. In this case, UK would not have been in the position to make such a greedy move in UK1, as a G2 sea lion with 1 TT would be on the table in that case, plus a G3 sealion would have become a bigger threat, too.

this makes sense as well, recently I have been bringing two extra G inf onto the R border for a G2 attack into Russia but the G2/G3 sea lion threat might be better at keeping the UK spread out.