Does an A+3 Sealion = Axis victory?

[Peck]

You don’t really have enough to attack sz106, were I defending uk I would scramble all planes into 106 watch your subs die and maybe walk away with my destroyer and my transport alive.

[Jennifer]

@jim010:

You have a fht in sz111 that I can’t account for.  The one in Hun dosn’t make sz110 or sz111.

Makes it just fine to SZ 112.

[Jennifer]

@Peck:

You don’t really have enough to attack sz106, were I defending uk I would scramble all planes into 106 watch your subs die and maybe walk away with my destroyer and my transport alive.

What planes?  SZ 106 is off the coast of New Foundland, not England.

[Peck]

Doh :-o

[Jennifer]

@jim010:

As you pointed out, sz112 is very risky by not bringing a plane to assist there.  If you lose sz112, Sealion is done.  A tac needs to be put there to ensure it.
Right, but the two transports and the carrier are not wasted, they will just go in SZ 113 and I can switch over ot Barbarrossa.

France is weak.  The odds are ~68% because of the AA as a casualty.  You survive with 3 units on average.  1 in 3 games you lose Paris and Sealion is dead (and maybe worse)
I ran France as if the AA Gun was an infantry and got higher odds.  What calculator are you using?

You only have 1 sb, 1 fht, 1 tac and 1 bmb that legally make it to sz111 based on what you are attacking elsewhere.  Your odds of success with scrambling are 52% in sz111.  A loss of 3 planes to UK’s 1 plane.
Check again.  Fighter in Norway, Fighter in Holland, Tacticals from W. Germany, etc.  You have to count the Aircraft Carrier as a legal landing zone.

To ensure consistent success, Paris needs to be hit harder, so does sz112, and sz111 as well. 
Consistency is not relevant, realism is.  I’m not asking for 100% odds in every battle, I’m asking for 70% or better and all my attacks get 70% or better according to Frood. (Using AA Guns as defending infantry)

I’m sorry, but this opening relies too much on good dice.
By good, you mean better than 70%.  Yes it does.  However, 70% is perfectly acceptable given many of those attacks only drop down if you scramble which means I just ate British fighters for breakfast weakening London immensely.

Comments in red.

To clarify, again, I am not looking for 100% success rate EVERY TIME Sea Lion is attempted.  If Round 1 goes slightly below average or more (RNG-f’ed) then I can quick shift to Barbarrossa.  If Round 1 goes average or better, I am in supreme position to obliterate the British.  Therefore, I am stating that Sea Lion was not nerfed out of being a viable strategy, it is still viable, if not optimal.

My definition of Viable means each battle has at least 70% odds of success regardless of any scramble orders.

[Jennifer]

@Peck:

Doh :-o

I generally go 2 Submarines to SZ 106, 2 submarines, 3 fighters, 3 tactical bombers to SZ 109.  So I understand the confusion.

I, like, never go Sea Lion.  Even in Alpha 2 I thought it was a really bone-headed maneuver that cost way more than you got out of it.

[jim010]

@Cmdr:

@jim010:

As you pointed out, sz112 is very risky by not bringing a plane to assist there.  If you lose sz112, Sealion is done.  A tac needs to be put there to ensure it.
Right, but the two transports and the carrier are not wasted, they will just go in SZ 113 and I can switch over ot Barbarrossa.
Not if you have to build the CV there to land your tac from sz111.  You MUST build the CV in sz112.France is weak.  The odds are ~68% because of the AA as a casualty.  You survive with 3 units on average.  1 in 3 games you lose Paris and Sealion is dead (and maybe worse)
I ran France as if the AA Gun was an infantry and got higher odds.  What calculator are you using?
I ran France with 10@2 and with 9@2.  The difference between the 2 will be pretty close to what the odds should be.  This accounts for the extra soak, and for the fact the AA has no defense.
You only have 1 sb, 1 fht, 1 tac and 1 bmb that legally make it to sz111 based on what you are attacking elsewhere.  Your odds of success with scrambling are 52% in sz111.  A loss of 3 planes to UK’s 1 plane.
Check again.  Fighter in Norway, Fighter in Holland, Tacticals from W. Germany, etc.  You have to count the Aircraft Carrier as a legal landing zone.
I did.  You still illegally moved 1 fht from Hun.

To ensure consistent success, Paris needs to be hit harder, so does sz112, and sz111 as well.  
Consistency is not relevant, realism is.  I’m not asking for 100% odds in every battle, I’m asking for 70% or better and all my attacks get 70% or better according to Frood. (Using AA Guns as defending infantry)
Then you still need to figure out how to get sz111 to work and France, as both are under 70% (52% and 68%).  You are not playing realism, as you claim - you are hoping to keep luck on your side.

I’m sorry, but this opening relies too much on good dice.
By good, you mean better than 70%.  Yes it does.  However, 70% is perfectly acceptable given many of those attacks only drop down if you scramble which means I just ate British fighters for breakfast weakening London immensely.
In sz111, I excahnged 1 fht for 1 german tac, and fht, and maybe even the bmb.  I’ll take that trade any day.

Comments in red.

To clarify, again, I am not looking for 100% success rate EVERY TIME Sea Lion is attempted.  If Round 1 goes slightly below average or more (RNG-f’ed) then I can quick shift to Barbarrossa.  If Round 1 goes average or better, I am in supreme position to obliterate the British.  Therefore, I am stating that Sea Lion was not nerfed out of being a viable strategy, it is still viable, if not optimal.

My definition of Viable means each battle has at least 70% odds of success regardless of any scramble orders.
See my above comment.

[Jennifer]

I am starting to wonder if your odds calculator flunked statistics.  I wouldnt want to hand calculate it all, but I have faith in my calculators and they’re consistently higher than the numbers you report.

Maybe you’re using that screwed up one at http://www.dskelly.com/misc/aa/aasim.html.  If so, that thing has never predicted a battle of mine anywhere near where the actual results came in.  It’s notoriously aweful at naval engagements and if you try to run more than 1000 simulations it freezes up.

Dunno.  I, obviously, dont know your calculator, but mine are giving me consistent 80% or better except for France itself,which is 75.6% and if you use mathematical rounding, that goes to 80% as well. (rounded to the nearest ten, and only being referenced for the sillyness of it.)

[jim010]

Fine. :roll:

I am using Frood’s.  Run it WITH 7 inf, and then with 8 inf in France.  Split the difference between the 2.  You get ~60% assuming the AA as in inf, and 75% with no soak.  That makes 68% success for Paris.

And you still moved a fht illegally.

[Jennifer]

Figure out the fighter deal later.  There are 5 figs, 5 tacs and a strat.  I’m almost positive they all went somewhere legally, but maybe one has to come off SZ 111 and back to SZ 112, who knows.  Filmatleven.

France was higher for me with Frood…did you run the tacticals as bombers?  I added 1 infantry to France (8 Inf, 2 Art, 2 Arm, 1 Fig) and just assumed that as what it would be and came out higher than you did.  As a counter to the extra infantry, I did not flag AA Gun. (Also makes the results more stable.)  Figured 33% hit chance in one round should be negated by an extra 3 rounds of 33% hit chance from the infantry.

7 Inf, 2 Art, 3 Arm, 2 Bmb
vs
8 Inf, 2 Art, 2 Arm, 1 Fig

71% Germany
26% France
3% Everyone loses

[jim010]

@Cmdr:

Figure out the fighter deal later.  There are 5 figs, 5 tacs and a strat.  I’m almost positive they all went somewhere legally, but maybe one has to come off SZ 111 and back to SZ 112, who knows.  Filmatleven. This is quite important

France was higher for me with Frood…did you run the tacticals as bombers?  I added 1 infantry to France (8 Inf, 2 Art, 2 Arm, 1 Fig) and just assumed that as what it would be and came out higher than you did.  As a counter to the extra infantry, I did not flag AA Gun. (Also makes the results more stable.)  Figured 33% hit chance in one round should be negated by an extra 3 rounds of 33% hit chance from the infantry.

7 Inf, 2 Art, 3 Arm, 2 Bmb
vs
8 Inf, 2 Art, 2 Arm, 1 Fig

71% Germany
26% France
3% Everyone loses

This is faulty, as you have now removed the possibility of losing a plane (which will occur 1/3 games) - which is important.  After running the math manually, splitting the difference between 7 inf and 8 inf the result comes out closer to the actual odds.

71% is pretty close to my 68% anyway.  You are accepting a ~30% that your Sealion falls apart?  1 in 3 games?  Not sound.  I realize that you are now just out to prove you can do it, but this is not a battle you can afford to lose.  Without France, you are not buying the TTs and Sealion is dead.

[JimmyHat]

@jim010:

I could be off on your assumptions, it’s been a while since I was in your thread with the calculations, but I remember there were significant differences between your assumptions and the reality of my games. (Due in part to different attacks and changed attacks, not because you are wrong for your games, just for mine.)

I’ve seen your games, and you had not faced a proper UK defense.  I base my numbers on odds that were exhaustively looked at, not assumptions.  They are LIKELY outcomes.  If you run slim 50% battles and they work, good for you, but they will not work consistently over time, and are not sound tactics.  they are risks.

Theres even a whole long thread on this subject, with the actual numbers used.  Over the course of the 3-4 rounds UK has they were able to amass a pretty decent max defense.

[GoSanchez6]

Hey Guys explain to me why Sealion got so much tougher. I believe the rules say the AAgun still only fires once at each aircraft. Is it the extra four hits England take or am I reading something wrong.

[Jennifer]

Decent, but not enough defense.  That is, if I am willing to sacrifice everything I have for the chance of getting 1 Armor to survive and take London, I have better odds than England does.  Maybe not MUCH better, but better.

Yes, I am willing to have 30% of my games fail if I want Sea Lion.  Keep in mind, I don’t WANT Sea Lion.  70% or better odds of losing a capitol regardless of what you do is still darn good for the person taking that capitol.

As I was walking, I was contemplating and I think you can give up the SZ 111 battle to get better odds in SZ 110, and France and make it better.  Leave England with 3 aircraft, 2 cruisers and a battleship to attack 5 fighters, carrier, cruiser, dmg battleship which is in Germany’s favor as well.

Not really sure, I’d seriously have to play the numbers some more.  Maybe keep the cruiser out of the fight, hit SZ 110 and use the cruiser to block the British cruiser.

Anyway, even as is, there’s a very strong chance that England will fall. (70%.)  Yes, without France Germany is not getting the transports, but Italy’s getting a “thumb your nose at the Royal Navy” fleet when they get it.

[Jennifer]

@GoSanchez6:

Hey Guys explain to me why Sealion got so much tougher. I believe the rules say the AAgun still only fires once at each aircraft. Is it the extra four hits England take or am I reading something wrong.

This all started when Mantlefan lamented that Sea Lion was impossible now.  The reason he stated this was because of the four extra hits on England.  Those hits were called for by a few people when Larry considered releasing another set of rules and many of us are happy they are there mainly because we felt it was ridiculous that Germany could take out England and have a full round to get into position to fight Russia, and when taking England, they had a stellar chance of having mulitple units left on the ground and air.

All I am attempting to do now is prove Sea Lion is still viable.  I have not, nor will I in the forseeable future, declare Sea Lion as a good idea.  That does not mean it is a bad idea or that it is not possible.

[JimmyHat]

@Cmdr:

2 Submarines SZ 106
1 Submarine SZ 111
2 Submaines SZ 110

Perhaps I typoed the SZ 111 battle.  Habbit of mine to bring 2 submarines there, it’s taking some time getting used to the shift. (New habbit should be 2 submarines to SZ 106, 2 to SZ 109 and lots of planes to SZ 109…dont really WANT London, but I want to show it is not only possible, but probable to win.  Not necessarily a GOOD idea, but it is AN idea.)

Keep in mind, Jim, I for the sake of this argument, I don’t care if I lose every blasted German unit on the board and Russia can blitz into Berlin unopposed, all I care about is the theoretical and probablity of Germany actually getting England on round 3 or 4 (and I feel more chance of that on round 4, which is why I am arguing that one.)  I dont even care if England can liberate it the next round.

Good, that was the whole point of the exercise in the first place.  And Jim was right, we were soliciting any wild idea to see if it was the best Sealion approach, go all 15 pages to see the results.

[Jennifer]

Yes, but the wild ideas your respondants had may not coincide with mine.

There are some significant changes too, for instance, having extremely good chances of destroying the transport in SZ 106 removes 2 units from England and delays the other 2 from getting there.  Now, they might be in range to Liberate, but as I said, I dont care if it can be liberated or if it is economically in my best interests.

The strafe is patently really bad for England.  I’ve demonstrated that.  13 Infantry, 7 Artillery, 5 Armor, AA Gun gives me a 50% chance to kill 20% of England’s airforce and England is going to lose no less than a dozen infantry in the first couple of rounds.  Even if we pretend they got average to slightly above average dice, they take more damage than the Germans do and leave Germany with 3 or 4 artillery and 5 armor after they’re done.  Those artillery still support the landing infantry from Europe, so each one is worth it’s weight in Gold Pressed Latinum.

Now, as I said, it is perfectly reasonable to assume the dice go badly for Germany, but other than the actual invasion of England, no set of bad dice are devastating to Germany, they can always switch back to Russian-Centric vision.  So France petered out, okay, retreat, let the Italians get it.  So the British ships got 100% accuracy, set up Russia and go for the throat with Submarines.  Hell, I have said on MANY an occasion that submarines > sea lion, if I could put in more greater than signs, I would.

[JimmyHat]

@Cmdr:

Yes, but the wild ideas your respondants had may not coincide with mine.
***I bet one of them did, that is the advantage of taking in so many claims, one of them will eventually be right.

There are some significant changes too, for instance, having extremely good chances of destroying the transport in SZ 106 removes 2 units from England and delays the other 2 from getting there.  Now, they might be in range to Liberate, but as I said, I dont care if it can be liberated or if it is economically in my best interests.
***yes, in my games I skip sz111 and send 1 sub to 112, and 2 subs to 106.  I don’t want those ships to live!  I’d also like to convoy raid or bait UK ships towards Canada.

The strafe is patently really bad for England.  I’ve demonstrated that.  13 Infantry, 7 Artillery, 5 Armor, AA Gun gives me a 50% chance to kill 20% of England’s airforce and England is going to lose no less than a dozen infantry in the first couple of rounds.  Even if we pretend they got average to slightly above average dice, they take more damage than the Germans do and leave Germany with 3 or 4 artillery and 5 armor after they’re done.  Those artillery still support the landing infantry from Europe, so each one is worth it’s weight in Gold Pressed Latinum.
***Really aught to read that thread then.  You were not accounting for max defense in London.  UK had 4 or 5 armor, I can’t remember, also they could bombard that stack in Scotland too from off Gibraltar…

Now, as I said, it is perfectly reasonable to assume the dice go badly for Germany, but other than the actual invasion of England, no set of bad dice are devastating to Germany, they can always switch back to Russian-Centric vision.  So France petered out, okay, retreat, let the Italians get it.  So the British ships got 100% accuracy, set up Russia and go for the throat with Submarines.  Hell, I have said on MANY an occasion that submarines > sea lion, if I could put in more greater than signs, I would.
***a decent reason to use lower odds attacks, if things go bad there’s already a backup plan.  However we were trying to find the best Sealion, so Germany was trying to reduce losses G1 in order to have the most forces to attack with G3.

[Jennifer]

@JimmyHat:

@Cmdr:

Yes, but the wild ideas your respondants had may not coincide with mine.
***I bet one of them did, that is the advantage of taking in so many claims, one of them will eventually be right.
Probably, but maybe not.

There are some significant changes too, for instance, having extremely good chances of destroying the transport in SZ 106 removes 2 units from England and delays the other 2 from getting there.  Now, they might be in range to Liberate, but as I said, I dont care if it can be liberated or if it is economically in my best interests.
***yes, in my games I skip sz111 and send 1 sub to 112, and 2 subs to 106.  I don’t want those ships to live!  I’d also like to convoy raid or bait UK ships towards Canada.
2 Submarines to SZ 106, 2 Submarines to SZ 110 and 1 Submarine to SZ 112 if I was skipping SZ 111.

The strafe is patently really bad for England.  I’ve demonstrated that.  13 Infantry, 7 Artillery, 5 Armor, AA Gun gives me a 50% chance to kill 20% of England’s airforce and England is going to lose no less than a dozen infantry in the first couple of rounds.  Even if we pretend they got average to slightly above average dice, they take more damage than the Germans do and leave Germany with 3 or 4 artillery and 5 armor after they’re done.  Those artillery still support the landing infantry from Europe, so each one is worth it’s weight in Gold Pressed Latinum.
***Really aught to read that thread then.  You were not accounting for max defense in London.  UK had 4 or 5 armor, I can’t remember, also they could bombard that stack in Scotland too from off Gibraltar…
Could you sum it up?  Because I don’t see that much equipment in England and I did sum up how I came to that earlier in this thread.  I only have 2 armor there, one built and 1 from Canada.  The rest are all infantry to get up to peak performance of the complex.
Also, bombard with what from Gibraltar?

Now, as I said, it is perfectly reasonable to assume the dice go badly for Germany, but other than the actual invasion of England, no set of bad dice are devastating to Germany, they can always switch back to Russian-Centric vision.  So France petered out, okay, retreat, let the Italians get it.  So the British ships got 100% accuracy, set up Russia and go for the throat with Submarines.  Hell, I have said on MANY an occasion that submarines > sea lion, if I could put in more greater than signs, I would.
***a decent reason to use lower odds attacks, if things go bad there’s already a backup plan.  However we were trying to find the best Sealion, so Germany was trying to reduce losses G1 in order to have the most forces to attack with G3.
Yea, well, considering I am not really advocating the attack, I think 70% is a good cutoff and would probably, for proof of concept, go as low as 65% for one battle (out of like 5 or 6 battles declared).  I used to do that Russian triple everytime in AAR as well. Sometimes it backfired and I got smashed, but 70% of the time (ballpark figure) it worked out for me and Germany was on the ropes from day 1.

[suprise attack]

I say buy into the sea lion look and if the opportunity presents itself then go for it!!! if not then use the Navy to hammer the crap out of the Royal Navy and keep control of the Atlantic, use the Transports to go after Russia and Africa keep plenty of Sub’s on the board, get their money(U.S.A. & U.K.) and force them into buying Destroyers
  Hit France harder (Paris)  so that the odds are more in your favor of having more pieces survive
  Land in Scotland and make U.K. fight for it and keep them on the ropes