Global 1940 Wittman and Private Panic vs Credulous and Elrood

[Witt]

I prefer a hard ride. An easy ride is for girls.
Mark said he thought his side was in labour.
You having a good day?

[Credulous]

I can’t believe how the dice are panning out in this game. As it we weren’t up against it enough through taking on the seasoned pros!

[Witt]

Has been excessively bad for you; SZ97 was the worst reverse I have ever seen.

[Elrood]

It was a battle that I would not haven taken in this situation. I dont know if you used Battle Calculator, but in this case it would show you a wrong number… as you had the AC in the combat which should not be used as casualty, else you would not be able to land the 2 fighters from London…

So you would have to take it out, bringing the battle to a mere 50% … and that can swing heavy in either direction.

Sure Axis were excessively lucky in that battle which was forced on them, but if the cheapest casualty you can choose is a 10 IPC fighter, you should make sure you can survive such bad luck.

Even at average rolls the losses for UK would have been profound. Even if Uk had survived with an AC and 2 planes, then still Italy could haven taken deadly revenge suddenly no more allied forces in MED…

It was mistake to choose that battle. The dice are not the ones to blame here.  :|

[Witt]

I always did Taranto, before the bid addition.

[Elrood]

@wittmann:

I always did Taranto, before the bid addition.

But this was taranto against an additional tactical in rome and missing a DD from SZ98. (Since it had to be used against SZ95, because the Cruise at SZ91 got sunk).

So Germany did a LOT to discourage a Taranto move I daresay. If Allies still go for it… Then they must be able to take the blame…

Not like… I dont know… what comes to mind… Nigal Farage or Boris Johnson pulling UK into the dirt and then saying: “Good bye and good luck with all that!”  :evil:

[Witt]

I forgot you sank the Cruiser, you evil man! One fewer unit does make a difference. I blame Adam; he should have noticed and persuaded you against it, Cred.

Nigel has done the right thing; we are out and he has no purpose now. Also, he is despised by more that half the populace. I like how Teresa is talking, in her bid for the leadership.

[Private-Panic]

@wittmann:

I prefer a hard ride. An easy ride is for girls.
Mark said he thought his side was in labour.
You having a good day?

I have heard you are an easy ride :-P

I am having a good day thanks! You?

Please do blame me for Taranto and anything else you wish. Global warming? ISIS? Yesterday’s weather? Happy to take the blame! :-D

[Elrood]

@Private:

Please do blame me for Taranto and anything else you wish. Global warming? ISIS? Yesterday’s weather? Happy to take the blame! :-D

I knew it!!!  8-)

[Private-Panic]

So I have now looked at that Taranto attack and think Seb and Leo are being wise after the event. How very dare you! :-P

Mark had an 8 vs 6 HP, 20 vs 18 power advantage = 86% vs 11% chance. Whether or not you would have made the attack does not negate the awful luck he had. Unless those UK fighters lead to avoiding early hits on the AC? If so they will have contributed to the defeat. They should have been committed to the battle only if prepared to lose them into the sea.

Fighters from the UK are not usually a feature of Taranto in my limited experience and I am not sure why the loss of one cruiser necessitated 2 UK fighters. One fighter would have given the more typical 60% ish odds for the UK (am I right? - that is from memory). Taranto is always a risk. Then only 1 fighter would have been lost into the sea.

Did

[Elrood]

I checked a few Tournament Games Nerquen and I had. Always a UK Sub was placed as a bid into SZ98. Further increasing the chances of a successful Taranto for Britain, but not one opponent went for it…

It is way to risky at the given stage of the game… The first turns are the ones where Axis have all this potential and can strike in any direction, while Allies need to bolster their defenses and build up armies of their own.

[Private-Panic]

Certainly one lesson I have learned is not to chase the game as the allies, at least until the axis have eroded your initial ipc advantage.

[Private-Panic]

I have been taught by “The Master” aka wittmann. And as he said a few posts ago:

@wittmann:

I always did Taranto, before the bid addition.

Next game as allies I’ll see ……

[Witt]

I would still have done the attack. Seb is a cautious German. I am an aggressive Italian. And, since Medieval times, the Med has always been English!

[Credulous]

Taranto result was desperately unlucky.

All talk of fighters being stranded etc was essentially moot when the first round combat result was 1 hit (from 7 or 8 if I recollect correctly) vs 4 hits for Axis. As PP points out I sent in the extra fighter to make sure and still lost. Crazy.

When we eventually lose as a result of this deeply unbalancing event in turn 1 I will of course make repeated reference to it.

:-D

[Witt]

I should hope so too!

[Elrood]

We are waiting for UKs move…  (Like we wait for official brexit statement)…

and wonder if it will ever come (that too)

:mrgreen: :mrgreen:

[Elrood]

Sorry for the repeatiness of my jokes, but you surely took the blue pill and now must pay the music.  :roll:

Elrood

Post Scriptum: for the ignorant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_pill_and_blue_pill

[Private-Panic]

Without looking at the link Seb, I am guessing this is a reference to The Matrix?

Now that I know that you inhabit a digitally created parallel universe you are beginning to make much more sense …… :lol:

[Elrood]

regardless the level of reality of the current universe… I am still eager to move and want to see UK mooooooove.  :wink: