I tried to point earlier back in the thread for the answer, but the short answer is you cannot put your Germ fleet in 113 because UK can block you, now you can’t invade london. If wondering the particulars, please go a few pages back in the thread and see them.
Personally I think we are making a mistake on G1, but not a big enough deal to mean recalibrating the whole exercise. I just think Sealion is too dependent on that darn trn off Canada and we should be killing it 95% of the time! CA off Gib be damned, it helps UK but not as much as that trn to defend Sealion. It also helps Germ a bit to have subs remain in the Atlantic instead of dolling them out in 1’s and 2’s.
However, based on the results so far, I stick by my earlier comment that UK is safe G3 provided Germany has suffered any air casualties throughout.
Maybe I’m missing something… Where are the 4 fighters coming from?
Yes, we’re assuming that UK purchases a CV.
With this attack, UK is putting all its eggs into one basket - if it works, Sealion is no longer an option at all and therefore the sacrifice of those unpurchased Inf and the Fighters that die are more than worth it.
If it doesn’t, then UK’s screwed. But the odds say that it will work with all 4 fighters.
Are we talking about a UK attack on sz113? UK doesn’t need to attack, if Germ splits their fleet to hit Scotland G2 then UK puts their fleet in sz 110. Now Italy cannot clear the blockers thanks to UK scramblers, and Germ trns in 113 cannot reach 109, therefore now the only invasion point is English Channel and that’s going to involve Some German aircraft that won’t be used on London and London is safe….so no uk attack on sz113.
Maybe I’m missing something… Where are the 4 fighters coming from?
Yes, we’re assuming that UK purchases a CV.
With this attack, UK is putting all its eggs into one basket - if it works, Sealion is no longer an option at all and therefore the sacrifice of those unpurchased Inf and the Fighters that die are more than worth it.If it doesn’t, then UK’s screwed. But the odds say that it will work with all 4 fighters.
Yeah, I wasn’t sure. But Jim’s build on LH said 9 infantry and no mention of a UK carrier, then it went ahead with a 4 fighter attack.
UK
Buys
9 inf, save $1If the CA survived in sz91 (50% of the time it will), then you can hit sz112 with 4 fht, 1 DD, 1 CA vs 1 dmg BB, 1 CA, 3 fht
Wins 57% with 1 plane
if TT in sz106 survived, bring it to sz109 to drop off the inf and tank.
All planes back to UK
If the CA didn’t survive, you can’t hit sz112.
Germany then hits London on G 2 with 5 inf, 2 art, 3 tanks, 5 fht, 5 tac, 1 bmb, 1 CA, 1 BB
Sealion succeeds 68%
If UK scrambled, then Sealion succeeds 75%
Seems risky to try and set up, but there it is.
Enjoy.
I guess he just didn’t mention the CV. but that makes sense now.
Jimmy -
We were discussing how to properly stop a 5 TT G2 Sealion as suggested by James - if UK survives G1 with both the 109 DD and the 91 CA.
And Jim, are we going to re-examine I1 or go ahead with I2 following the UK2 you suggested? Your UK2 looks fine to me.
Give me until tomorrow. I’m going to bed.
And as for the 4 fht, yes, I assumed buying a CV, which means that the 9 inf can’t be bought.
Need to look at this again.
Jimmy -
We were discussing how to properly stop a 5 TT G2 Sealion as suggested by James - if UK survives G1 with both the 109 DD and the 91 CA.
And Jim, are we going to re-examine I1 or go ahead with I2 following the UK2 you suggested? Your UK2 looks fine to me.
Sorry for inserting the confusing to this UK defense thread.
Actually, I drafted a proposal, see above that permits only a CA not the DD in 109 because 3 subs should hit 1st combat round.
If the counter is a proposed UK build a CV and scramble to protect from Sea Lion, then that leaves 5 UK defenders vs 10 German land, I send 5 planes at the sea battle and 6 at the land battle in case they choose not to scramble.
5 planes (2 fighters,2 tac,1 bmb) and a BB with a carrier for 3 soak offs, vs a carrier, 5 planes and a cruiser.
2@3 4@4 vs with 9 hits to destroy vs 1@2 1@3 5@4 with 8 hits to sink I think the Germans have this battle barely.
Lets assume that UK decides not to scramble…thing is, in order to have 5 air units as a potential navy defense, 2 planes had to land on the carrier. So UK defends London with 3 planes.
On land: Germany 5 inf, 4 artillery(Germany artillery moved to W.Germany turn1) 1 arm (from Poland to w.Germ g1) 3 fighters, 3 tacticals.
vs 4 infantry 1 armor, 3 planes.
assume tactical bomber gets shot by aa as that hurts more:
1@1 8@2 4@3 2@4 16 hits needed to lose vs 4@2 1@3 3@4 8 hits needed to lose force.
Uk falls…
Risky strat as:
sz 109 may not be cleared of the DD if all 3 subs fail to hit
Germany could lose 2 aircraft if the UK fails to miss in 110 and 111 or 1 battle goes 2 rounds
Uk could build 9 land units and leave only 1 DD, 3 planes to get through (I would send 3 Italians after this aiming for UK planes since odds favor 2 itlalian hits round 1)
worse case scenario:
Germany uses 1 fighter 1 tactical 1 BB 1 carrier to fight 3 fighters 1 DD (assumes Italians missed)
that leaves 10 land, 11-2(killed round 1) - 2 (naval battle) = 7 air units (lose 1 to aa) so 6 air 10 land vs 14 land 5 air (no scramble) UK holds…it all hinges on Italy and Germany not losing any air!! ouch.
Best case:
Germany could hit London with 4 more air if Italiy clears the DD that makes it 20 pieces (1lost to aa) vs 19. A nail biter.
Maybe it is better to sink the transport in 106 and ignore 109, thus saving the German air, reducing UK land defense. Or try a G3 assault using the BB (+scramble) and no carrier build to protect 113 on round 2. If Sea lion potential fails, you now have 5 transports to use against Russia.
And Jim, are we going to re-examine I1 or go ahead with I2 following the UK2 you suggested? Your UK2 looks fine to me.
Let’s hold that thought, and see if we can nip this G 2 Sealion in the bud.
Is this how you’re hitting James?
5 planes (2 fighters,2 tac,1 bmb) and a BB with a carrier for 3 soak offs, vs a carrier, 5 planes and a cruiser.
2@3 4@4 vs with 9 hits to destroy vs 1@2 1@3 5@4 with 8 hits to sink I think the Germans have this battle barely.
Germany has a Cruiser, not a Carrier. So the offense is 3@3 4@4 with only 8 hits. That’s awfully close.
On land: Germany 5 inf, 4 artillery(Germany artillery moved to W.Germany turn1) 1 arm (from Poland to w.Germ g1) 3 fighters, 3 tacticals.
vs 4 infantry 1 armor, 3 planes.
assume tactical bomber gets shot by aa as that hurts more:
1@1 8@2 4@3 2@4 16 hits needed to lose vs 4@2 1@3 3@4 8 hits needed to lose force.
Uk only spent 16 on the carrier, and had 12 left to buy 4 Infantry. Also, you forgot the infantry being brought from Canada.
The defense is then
9@2 1@3 3@4 with 13 hits.
A bit stiffer than previously.
I don’t quite think this is the ideal UK defense, and we’re assuming that absolutely no planes died G1 (unlikely), but I just wanted to point out these couple small things.
Edit:
The channel battle is around 55% for Germany, I’m getting. That’s awwwfully tight.
With a cruiser instead of the carrier you mentioned, I’m actually getting this as perfectly even.
5 planes (2 fighters,2 tac,1 bmb) and a BB with a carrier for 3 soak offs, vs a carrier, 5 planes and a cruiser.
2@3 4@4 vs with 9 hits to destroy vs 1@2 1@3 5@4 with 8 hits to sink I think the Germans have this battle barely.Germany has a Cruiser, not a Carrier. So the offense is 3@3 4@4 with only 8 hits. That’s awfully close.
True, as I was typing this from a mental image, I accidentally inserted the carrier out of habit, the cruiser is assumed lost. This point is no longer valid the battle becomes a coin toss with a slight advantage for Germany’s BB extra hit.On land: Germany 5 inf, 4 artillery(Germany artillery moved to W.Germany turn1) 1 arm (from Poland to w.Germ g1) 3 fighters, 3 tacticals.
vs 4 infantry 1 armor, 3 planes.
assume tactical bomber gets shot by aa as that hurts more:
1@1 8@2 4@3 2@4 16 hits needed to lose vs 4@2 1@3 3@4 8 hits needed to lose force.Uk only spent 16 on the carrier, and had 12 left to buy 4 Infantry. Also, you forgot the infantry being brought from Canada.
The defense is then
9@2 1@3 3@4 with 13 hits.
A bit stiffer than previously. True, although I think its 8 infantry since the transport brought the tank.I don’t quite think this is the ideal UK defense, and we’re assuming that absolutely no planes died G1 (unlikely), but I just wanted to point out these couple small things.
Edit:
The channel battle is around 55% for Germany, I’m getting. That’s awwwfully tight.
With a cruiser instead of the carrier you mentioned, I’m actually getting this as perfectly even.
2 great points(see red responses above), I will try not to rush my responses. This is interesting enough to tweak to see it if provides another issue to defend against. Otherwise, it may present more merit for a turn 3 invasion of UK using the German BB and scramble to protect ships in sz113.
I am struggling to open Jim’s map, just got Abattlemap yesterday. Two ideas: clear 109,110,111,112 as I suggested above (use the bomber on 111), or clear 106,110,111,112 to risk fewer planes and reduce bodies on London by 2. Alsch91 comment’s show a strong possibility of preventing a G2. This G1 build has not been tested, its just some of my theory craft for now. It seems too soft on providing predictable results, and is not likely to be relied upon. It does present a good method for mixing up play, start it as Sea Lion, then revert to Russia turn2 if outcomes don’t permit Sea Lion. I might prefer a new German standard build of 3 transports and 1 Destroyer for Russia first with a UK scare option (keeps them honest).
*There is merit to forcing the UK to build a CV and land planes on it(if this is the only defense for a G2 assault), then sink it with your German air on turn 2 while going Russia first, this clears a bit of the UK navy and air as they will likely not scramble if you place all the air against the sea and send the transports towards Russia with the BB as escort, and a Finish airbase(surprise carrier that is stationary and holds 3 planes) built upon arrival to scramble from the Russian air when you land in sz115.
Too review and stray from this topic, UK puts its eggs in one basket, they do not reinforce Africa and you then sink their navy and destroy 2 air leaving them with infantry and a couple planes while you put the hurt on Russia unexpectedly(perhaps). I like strategies that apply dual threat our gaming group uses the term implied threat for locking down multiple targets with one force. The only drawback is when they force you to pull the trigger and deploy :(
Edit: If stacking in the sea is forced UK1 and you clear the sea on turn 2 and delay/prepare, does this make a G3 capture harder or easier?
Can’t UK just put 1 ship in the english channel? Now you’ll only be able to bring the units in Germany proper, not any of your tanks and artillery that are in France. I might be reading those loading in hostile territories rules wrong though.
Another great response to a G2 move on London is to prepare as the US. If you see 3+trns go down in the baltic then I think US should go 100% atlantic those first 2 rounds to build a counter invasion fleet that can recapture UK. Germ won’t be able to take with much, and I think it helps the allies to keep Germany focused on the Atlantic during Barbarossa.
True, although I think its 8 infantry since the transport brought the tank.
4 Inf initially, 1 from Canada, 4 purchased.
I am struggling to open Jim’s map, just got Abattlemap yesterday. Two ideas: clear 109,110,111,112 as I suggested above (use the bomber on 111), or clear 106,110,111,112 to risk fewer planes and reduce bodies on London by 2.
I will hit your damaged BB and CA (with scrambles) with 1 DD, 1 CA, 4 Fig if you do that. And UK will most likely win.
If stacking in the sea is forced UK1 and you clear the sea on turn 2 and delay/prepare, does this make a G3 capture harder or easier?
As UK I’d probably just bring over my Canadians and buy 9 Inf. I’m not convinced placing on a new Carrier would be beneficial to me. Turtling in London and putting obligitory blockers in 110 and 119 would force you to devote air to destroying the 110 blocker, assuming Italy doesn’t sacrifice its air force for that one blocker. If they do, okay. If they don’t, you have to devote air to 110. (and probably even if they do, considering your only naval power is 1 BB and 1 CA - 1 BB, 1 CA vs 3 Fig is advantage to me)
With max German air (probably will never be this ideal, but just hypothetically):
5 Inf, 4 Art, 1 Arm, 5 Fig, 5 Tac, 1 Strat vs 14 Inf, 1 Arm, 5 Fig w/AA gun
is 42% Germany, 44% UK.
Regardless of how much air you devote to London, the battle is in my favor.
G2 Sealion stopped.
And if you try to pull into 113 for a G3 Sealion, sure, I can’t even come close to touching your Transports.
But I can -
-Block 112, sure, Italy can take it out no problem
-Stack 110, forcing a lot of German air to have to go there, considering you have no Carrier fodder
-Take Denmark, stopping your scramble by putting 1 CA, 5 Fig, 1 Tac in SZ 112
Again, you can stop this by stacking up a significant force in Denmark, but… don’t forget! :lol:
Can’t UK just put 1 ship in the english channel? Now you’ll only be able to bring the units in Germany proper, not any of your tanks and artillery that are in France. I might be reading those loading in hostile territories rules wrong though.
James’s idea is to use 3 Art from Germany and 1 Arm from Poland - he doesn’t use it against Yugo.
You maybe he could do the same thing with a Hungarian Arm, not too relevant, because -
Italy just knocks out the 110 Cruiser (taking its lumps), and Germany’s Normandy forces are free to go.
One way or another, Germany will get those units.
Edit:
Looking at Germany potentially making their G2 Sealion force more Armor heavy rather than so Artillery heavy (by using those Armor in Normandy), an absolutely ideal - again, impossible realistically - G2 Sealion breaks down like this:
5 Inf, 1 Art, 4 Arm, 5 Fig, 5 Tac, 1 Strat vs 14 Inf, 1 Arm, 5 Fig w/AA gun
is about 45% Germany, 42% UK.
Still a flop.
I only see 2 inf in Denmark G2. All units in WGerm are usually used in invading France. This leaves 2 inf via trn to land in Denmark. I just don’t see the offensive punch for Germany. I suppose you could retreat the 3 armor off Russias border, so you could trn 5 inf 3 arm via 4 trns.
I don’t know if Italy will take out that blocker, also is there anyway to make it 2 ships? UK can still scramble 3 ftrs, but again most of this depends on Italian air movements, and if they bought a ftr I1 that will increase their odds.
I don’t think I completely understand what you’re saying.
Are you talking about finding the forces for a G2 Sealion?
Yes, I see that James proposes not hitting Yugo and bringing those forces to Wgerm. Giving him 4 trns, he can bring 4 inf/1 art/3 arm. I didn’t realize this meant skipping Yugo at first. I would probably hit Yugo as Germ with just the inf and the 2 remaining artillery for a 1 round strafe to make it easier for the Italians.
Somehow I missed the impetus to buy a CV for UK on UK1. Why was that being done? one assumes it was to give scrambling ftrs a chance to shoot down any incoming Italians, preventing the block. But Germ can go around to sz 109 from 112 anyways.
We should be chiefly concerned with a turtled UK, survival is the key here so being able to kill the Germ fleet is not as important as being able to hold your capital. We might need more bodies, going with the seemingly standard 9 inf build for UK1 instead of the CV.
Yes, the CV buy at first was to force Germany to devote significant air power to 110 and prevent any Italian opening, but it seems now that just going for the 9 Inf is the better buy.
Also, this potential G2 Sealion goes along with a G1 buy of 4 Transports, to give a total of 5 TT.
Even with 4 Tanks, 1 Artillery (the best possible offense with 5 TT), Sealion really isn’t possible on G2.
Germany risks a lot of the Luftwaffe with James’s opening -
and must devote air power to 110 during the Sealion invasion, as 3 scrambled fighters will beat 1 BB, 1 CA.
And even if Germany through some miralce got the full power of the Luftwaffe to London, Sealion is still not very plausible.
Interesting, so what we are seeing here is that if Germany losses any aircraft, either through attrition or the need to clear a sz, they are exponentially increasing the risk to themselves that their strategy will fail. A G2 and G3 sealion will require everything Germany can throw at London for a 50%+ chance to win. I don’t think we should ‘pull the trigger’ on london unless Germany can get above 80%.
Does this mean we need to move to a G3- Scotland G4-London strategy for Germany? We’ve debunked the G2 moves with the Max Protect, but I think we’re going to have trouble with that combo.
I looked at buying a CV with UK only to get the fht from Gib into sz112, but that would only ever be done with UK has the DD from sz109 and the CA form sz91
Hitting sz109 with 3 sb removes that as a problem, as UK can no longer hit sz112 on its turn.
But …
sz111 now worries me. 1 sb, 1 fht, 1 tac, 1 bmb vs 1 DD, 1 BB and 1 scrambled fht. Leaves that now a very iffy battle for the Germans. UK would lose only 1 plane to Germany’s 2 - 3 planes. That would make a G2 Sealion undoable?
