Guess yjay would be ok.
L21 #1 trulpen (X+12) vs ArtofWar1947 (A) P2V
-
Actually, I’ll take a fig as casualty instead of the sb. It can land in FIC.
-
Not at the computer, so can’t post until tomorrow.
-
When I read your post about the intercept, I was really confused. Initially, I used the battle calculator and saw that the attacker had only a 44% of winning with 4 or 5 plane loses and UK losing only 1 or 2 planes. So, no I did not want to take the UK planes out of action. Then I thought it was an SBR and you mistakenly used the term “scramble” instead of “intercept.” So I certainly did not want to intercept.
After reconstructing the battle, I understand better what should have been done. Not scrambling is a terrible option. With the Japanese inf, art, and marine, the bombardment, and air power, there was only a 2% - 4% chance the UK win and perhaps 1 or 2 UK fighters surviving.
With a full scramble, there is 10% - 14% chance of the the UK wins in SZ 40 and stops the inf, art and marine from landing.
Moreover, the Japanese cannot take a take hit on the CV without losing losing the fighter from SZ 55. If the Japanese avoid taking a hit on the CV, the chances of winning the battle of SZ 40 go up to 50% - 60%.
If the dice hold true and each side get 2 hits in round 1, then Japan is faced with the choice of
(a) tipping the CV and sinking CA to keep a 3 and 4 for Round 2 with the fighter ditching in the sea regardless of what happens in round 2, (b) sinking the CV and keeping two 3s and 4 and the fighter ditching in the sea regardless of what happens in round 2, or
© losing the fighter and CA in Round 1 and having only the tac (now a 3) for Round 2.
If the UK is lucky and gets 3 in Round 1 (be still my heart), then Japan will need to be lucky too.Rolling only 3 dice per side can have some really extreme outcomes.
In brief, the attack seems somewhat risky with a scramble. I’d be open to editing out the attack or, in fairness, redoing the battle with 3 scrambled UK fighters.
-
Ouch, sorry that my slip had that effect.
It was a tac that has no movement left, but makes not much difference.
We can redo the battle. Although I think it’s fair without the aa, since those dice are completely separate and already rolled.
The sea-battle is a new one and should definitely be rolled. As you say, there is some risk there, but I’m ok with sacrificing both the cv and air as long as the battle is won. There is some greater risk of total failure though, which might definitely be a better shot for UK.
In the land-battle however, dice have already been rolled and is easily separated. Without the air UK got 1 hit in the first battle-round, while J got 3, including the land. That is pretty much set, again since those dice where rolled.
Not putting this forth to get any extra advantage, but that’s how I would suggest to solve it also if I was on the other end, based on the principle that rolled dice should stay if possible.
I usually have one exception to that, which is if there is a potential scramble to a sea-battle and the assumption is no scramble, but the defender on the contrary wanted to scramble. Then I prefer to roll completely new dice for the specific sea-battle, since the scramble-choice should not be made with knowledge of rolled dice (i e no hits). It’s similar to this situation, but the difference is that without a scramble there was no sea-battle, so new dice will be rolled anyway.
Let me know how you find this reasoning. We’ll find a solution and the go back and redo stuff. I think that’s fair, since my slip gave you the wrong info at the start. Very sorry about that.
-
Actually, there are 2 tacs that’ll auto-die if the ac takes a hit. The one that attacks E India and the one that came from Australia. The fig however can be picked up by an ac that reaches Java.
-
Thanks for the clarification on from where the J. air came.
Keeping the original rolls makes sense if we keep them all. Two of the three UK fighters hit. These should be kept.
I made the decision to scramble based on re-rolling the whole battle, not the fact the UK fighter got 2 hits. That is, I was willing to toss 3 sure hits and gamble for more–though given UK’s propensities in the game–quite possibly fewer hits. Given the actual facts of the battle, scrambling gives the UK the best hope (by a large measure) of stopping the invasion altogether or at least inflicting a serious cost to the Japanese for invading homelands.
No need to apologize for the map mistake; it was not intentional and a mistake I seem to make all the time.
-
Ok, I’ll roll the sea-battle then, keeping the UK-roll, dividing land and air. J will have new dice though, so that one is clouded in mystery.
-
Solid analysis btw!
-
Another point is that if the cr is sunk, then the marine goes down with it.
-
Recreating the battle.
-
Good point; I had not thought of that.
If that comes to pass, let’s check the original rolls to see if a 2 got a hit. No issue if all the hits come from 3s.
-
TripleA Manual Gamesave Post: Japanese round 9
TripleA Manual Gamesave Post for game: WW2 Path to Victory, version: 5.1.0
Game History
Round: 9 Purchase Units - Japanese Japanese buy nothing; Remaining resources: 91 PUs; 6 SuicideAttackTokens; Combat Move - Japanese 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 1 marine moved from Java to 43 Sea Zone 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 1 transport moved from 43 Sea Zone to 40 Sea Zone 1 artillery and 1 infantry moved from 40 Sea Zone to Eastern India 1 cruiser and 1 marine moved from 43 Sea Zone to 40 Sea Zone 1 marine moved from 40 Sea Zone to Eastern India 1 tactical_bomber moved from 43 Sea Zone to Eastern India 1 fighter moved from 43 Sea Zone to 40 Sea Zone 1 tactical_bomber moved from 55 Sea Zone to 40 Sea Zone 1 carrier moved from 43 Sea Zone to 40 Sea Zone 2 bombers, 2 fighters and 1 tactical_bomber moved from French Indo China to Eastern India 1 destroyer moved from 50 Sea Zone to 32 Sea Zone Combat - Japanese UK_Pacific scrambles 3 units out of Eastern India to defend against the attack in 40 Sea Zone UK_Pacific scrambles to create a battle in territory 40 Sea Zone Battle in 40 Sea Zone Japanese attack with 1 carrier, 1 cruiser, 1 fighter, 1 submarine, 1 tactical_bomber and 1 transport British defend with 2 fighters; ANZAC defend with 1 fighter 1 submarine owned by the Japanese submerged Japanese roll dice for 1 carrier, 1 cruiser, 1 fighter, 1 tactical_bomber and 1 transport in 40 Sea Zone, round 2 : 1/3 hits, 1,67 expected hits British roll dice for 3 fighters in 40 Sea Zone, round 2 : 2/3 hits, 2,00 expected hits 1 fighter owned by the ANZAC and 1 carrier owned by the Japanese lost in 40 Sea Zone Japanese roll dice for 1 cruiser, 1 fighter, 1 tactical_bomber and 1 transport in 40 Sea Zone, round 3 : 2/3 hits, 1,67 expected hits British roll dice for 2 fighters in 40 Sea Zone, round 3 : 0/2 hits, 1,33 expected hits 2 fighters owned by the British lost in 40 Sea Zone Japanese win, taking 40 Sea Zone from Neutral with 1 cruiser, 1 fighter, 1 tactical_bomber and 1 transport remaining. Battle score for attacker is 14 Casualties for Japanese: 1 carrier Casualties for ANZAC: 1 fighter Casualties for British: 2 fightersCombat Hit Differential Summary :
Japanese regular : -0,33 British regular : -1,33 -
2 hits for UK in round 1 (would’ve adjusted if other number), but none in round 2. Have to check the original battle, since I think there were hits from your air in round 2. If there were 2 hits there, I’ll roll 1d2 for if the second hit. Would be a hit on 1 and miss on 2. 1 hit wouldn’t have mattered, since I sank the ac and the tac will die anyway.
-
I redid the battle already and don’t seem to have the information left from battle-round 1, but I’m fairly certain that there were 1 hit from land and 2 hits from air there.
What we see in the saved file is actually battle-round 2, although it says 1 because of the correction.
Hmm, I’m a bit uncertain now however. Before I roll for the second air, I’d like to clarify if I should roll that or not. Like there are two principles in conflict here, a) keep rolled dice and b) choice of scramble should not be made with information about dice.
Since I made the screw-up, I’m prepared to let go of b) if you prefer that. I know you didn’t base your decision on rolls, but rather the strategical finess of the situation.
-
The amphi is on no matter what, but the fig is at stake. I’ll go on and make the roll, and then you may decide how it should be treated if it’s a 1.
[dice 1d2<=1]
-
1d2<=1: 2; Hits: 0
-
Ok, it was a miss anyway. 1 hit for UK in round 2.
-
Yes, 2 of 3 UK fighters hit in the second round of the original battle. So 1 of the 2 surviving fighters should definitely get credit for a hit, which goes on the doomed Tac any way. What we don’t know is if the second surviving UK fighter was responsible for the second original hit. So you suggestion of another UK roll is justified.
-
The probability of the second surviving fighter gettin g the original hit is 50%. The dice roll should have <=3. So 2 is a hit. The J. fighter should die for the sake of saving the CA and maine.
-
@artofwar1947 said in L21 #1 trulpen (X+12) vs ArtofWar1947 (A) P2V:
The probability of the second surviving fighter gettin g the original hit is 50%. The dice roll should have <=3. So 2 is a hit. The J. fighter should die for the sake of saving the CA and maine.
You have to look closely. I rolled a 2-sided die. :)
Suggested Topics
