Matrix Games Forums

The link is not working correctly.

The link has just a 'l' missing :
http://www.exordio.com/1939-1945/militaris/batallas/felix.html

I think the taking of Gibraltar could be seen as roughly analogous to the taking of a much stronger Iwo Jima.  The US had utter control of the sea and air and pulverized the island for weeks before the invasion and still lost heavily when they landed.  Its tough to picture the Italians and Germans having that much control of the sea or the air on a purely amphibious invasion so the idea that they could take Gib through that route is ridiculous.
 
In the case of a land side invasion the results would likely match the US's success.  The German air domination would have kept the British fleet at bay and they could have kept throwing troops at the rock using massed artillery and bombs until they were able to raise their flag on the top.

But at Iwo Jima, the USA wanted to use the air-strip as it was one of the few flat spaces within range of Japan, so they could hardly leave Japanese forces on adjacent high-ground. At Gibraltar, if the Germans controlled much of the nearby Spanish territory and Cadiz harbor, they would have little use for also controlling the few square miles of Gibraltar via a very costly assault. I like the analogy though and agree that an amphibious assault on Gibraltar just wasn't a very real possibility unless the CW was simultaneously being severely pressed on land in the UK itself, and only then.

I just read a book on Trafalgar, and it really makes Cadiz out to be a poor harbor. Was that only true in the days of sail? iirc, it is a major port in WiF?

warspite1: You got the info I didn't have. Good post. [:)]

The Italian subs weren't very effective against the major capital ships but they did get several British light cruisers. And the German subs took out two carriers in the West Med that could be considered Force H losses perhaps. But I don't think capital ships stationed at Gibraltar kept the Italians in the Med. I think their spies ( including a squad of Frogmen based inside a Spanish freighter that just weren't as lucky as the ones who struck in Alexandria) probably kept them well informed of the Royal Navy heavy assets in the port. There just wasn't any compelling reason (or enough fuel perhaps) to try and move ships in to the Atlantic.

While reading through the British capital ship losses just now I learned that the Fiji was actually sunk by an Me-109, of all planes, with a single lucky 500 pound bomb hit. I did not know that. Also looking at the total list of British cruiser losses makes me appreciate the new optional to double the combat results on cruisers (when you add the light cruisers) seem like a wise one.

ORIGINAL: brian brian

The Italian subs weren't very effective against the major capital ships but they did get several British light cruisers. And the German subs took out two carriers in the West Med that could be considered Force H losses perhaps. But I don't think capital ships stationed at Gibraltar kept the Italians in the Med. I think their spies ( including a squad of Frogmen based inside a Spanish freighter that just weren't as lucky as the ones who struck in Alexandria) probably kept them well informed of the Royal Navy heavy assets in the port. There just wasn't any compelling reason (or enough fuel perhaps) to try and move ships in to the Atlantic.

While reading through the British capital ship losses just now I learned that the Fiji was actually sunk by an Me-109, of all planes, with a single lucky 500 pound bomb hit. I did not know that. Also looking at the total list of British cruiser losses makes me appreciate the new optional to double the combat results on cruisers (when you add the light cruisers) seem like a wise one.

Warspite1

Brian Brian, Ullern`s query I was answering was specifically to do with Force H and Gibraltar. When I said the Italian subs were ineffective against Force H, that was because...... they were. Yes, Italian subs in the wider Med had their successes, and this included a number of RN light cruisers, but that`s nothing to do with their efforts to stop Force H. German subs were a different kettle of fish and of course it was a U-boat that sank the Ark Royal. The reason the U-boats came into the Mediterranean was (surprise suprise) to assist the Italians who were struggling to cope. Their effectiveness is why I suggested in my earlier post that had the Germans captured the rock, a few U-boats supported by E-boats and aircraft would deny the Straits to the enemy (another argument in support of ADG`s rule).

When you say it was not capital ships at Gibraltar that kept the Italians in the Med, I don`t think anyone, least of all me, was suggesting that (see below). Keeping watch on the Italian Fleet in the Western Med was a role performed by the French who had a coastline to protect as well as three colonies in North Africa. For the British, when they took over from the French, they had to keep the supply route to Malta open as well as help defend the Rock from attack, and support convoys in the Atlantic.

The purpose of my original post was to give my 2 cents as to the question - Is the WIF treatment of who holds Gib (and the fact that the Straits are blocked to the other side) a sensible one or too simple? In support of my argument that for a Strategic level game, ADG`s rule is a sensible compromise , I made the point that the Italians themselves would have no wish, reason, desire to force the Straits. In the event that they did however, I think to say that the presence of Ark Royal would not be a reason for not doing so, is completely wrong. How many times did the Italians have the upper hand in naval battles, only to turn tail because of the presence of a carrier? Spartivento (Ark Royal), Matapan (Formidable) to name just two high profile examples.

On the wider Mediterranean point, Warspite was very badly damaged by an attack by three Me-109`s in the fighter-bomber role off Crete.

Long ago at conventions it was discussed that Gibraltar was the most important hex in the entire game. I suppose this is still true if you had to pick just 1 hex. It would still get my vote. Its the gateway to the Med. and the Atlantic. Its one of the few places that deserves a fortress hex-side or 2 as the CW. It depends on the loving care a CW player can afford.

Game wise, If Gibraltar is taken it doesn't end there. Its just another beginning.