Why is Taranto raid so popular?

@ShadowHAwk said in The Taranto Raid Fighter/Carrier Question:

Ofcourse if you take less then 2 hits in that combat its not the worst thing.

certainly not!

I suppose if you want to find some middle ground between G40.2 and BM, you could give the bombers a first strike like in 1942.2 but also have the fighters A2 D2 but without first strike attacks.

Seems a bit unnecessarily complicated and fixes something which is not broken to my way of thinking. The BM rules are the ones which aren’t broken. Another possibility is to remove or reduce the first strike of the AA gun.

I find Taranto to be a great way to slow down Italy and pick off some German planes, which is critical. You can also land in Greece with the Malta troops and leave the transport in 99. That way you can lose the carrier first against a German counterattack, and you offer an extra target to hit.

Example in this game in which a Taranto was done, and Greece held until I3:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=39603.0

I actually find it more devastating when the SZ96 battle fails.

One thing worth mentioning here is that Africa is essentially a trap for the Axis.   Whether the Italian fleet survives or not, it is very hard to make much of an income difference or gain any NOs before America enters the war and takes it back, or without compromising some other more critical front. Â

Italy only risks 2 IPCs by losing Africa.   In our Game 92 on Saturday, I had the entire Italian navy survive because my opponent did exactly what you suggested, and attacked Tobruk rather than Taranto.   The counter is quite favorable to the Italians, to send in their entire fleet on the attack and clear the med for your NO.   Even with the gigantic navy, I was still boxed in as I couldn’t control either Gibraltar or Egypt in the long term though I took both of them once.   Â

Buying more ships is a trap, and you can’t really hold Gibraltar.   I spent all my $$ on strategic bombers and mechs to help Germany on the eastern front and using Italy to protect the Atlantic Wall or help leapfrog Germany in the East is stronger than trying to take the Maghreb or the Levant.  If you keep any transports, the most effective thing to do with those is threaten/cover/block/rush out of Gibraltar but its going to be hard…

One of my buddies said that far from wanting to reinforce the Italian stack on Tobruk, he wanted to evacuate it from Africa.  Its ineffective and trapped on a good day and easy to annihilate on a bad one.

AA is unique to the extent it fits in between light “war games” like the ones these guys like and the real mind buster/hex and counter games.  People who want more realism etc go for the latter while lighter players go the former, leaving us who want something in the middle with AA.  It’s hard to convince either type to go in for middle when they want something really complicated or easy.

@Dijitz:

G1 I SBR Britain with everything that can reach to open her up for a G2 Sealion. After that, I rarely SBR.

On G1 I prefer to sink SZ 106, SZ 110 and SZ 111 instead of hitting complexes.  When you hit complexes, you might lose aircraft, when you hit the sea zones, you probably won’t lose aircraft.  This is very beneficial, I feel, when attempting Sea Lion, as you need every plane you can get, in my opinion.

However, if I am NOT going Sea Lion, then starting on G2, I like to pummel England and build up some strat bombers. (I like to have 3, that means I should be doing 12 dmg if I dont lose any bombers, 8 with losing one.  Give or take.)

If I go Sea Lion, I still like to have 3 strategic bombers, but I pummel Russia with them instead.  Those pesky Russian’s can easily out number you, if you are not careful!

@marechallannes:

Q1: A battleship enters a seazone with a hostile submarine. The sub submerges.

Following the rules, the sub emerges after the combat (that doesn’t take place)

Who controlls the seazone after the battleship owners turn?

Is the sub able to raid the convoy zone in that seazone, or is it impossible, cause the battleship owner “won” the battle and controls the sea zone?

Q2: Does the sub emerges before the collect income phase of the battleship owner and is it able to raid the sea-zone of the battleship-owner?

Q3: A submarine enters a seazone with a hostile submarine. Both sub submerges before any round of combat.

Are both submarines are able to make convoy raids? (For example a UK-sub and a Jap-sub in SZ 37)

1:  No power can “control” a seazone.  That’s why you don’t mark it.  The sub is able to raid, because it remains in the seazone during the collect income phase.  Powers occupy a seazone, and a seazone can be hostile, but it’s never really “controlled”.  A power can still place units in a seazone adjacent to its factory, regardless of how many enemy units might remain in that seazone (that may even be disrupting a convoy).
2:  Yes.
3: Yes,  assuming each is present during their respective enemy’s collect income phase (when the disruption occurs).

“Submerging” is simply a term for the option to retreat but remain in the same seazone.  It serves no other function, and it does not have any impact on any other phases of a turn.  After combat, all subs are effectively no longer submerged.