Does this work? and it is worth the spending of a minor, carrier and transport?
yes, it might work somehow.
And No, it is miles away from being worth those 35 IPCs. Against a good Allies player that move brings Axis to the certain road of defeat.
killed 106 +1
They did taranto or the planes cannot return +2
you killed both their fleets and the only ship left they have is a dd and or ca +2
they bought fewer than 6 infantry +1
they bought fewer than 4 pieces on london +2
you stratbombed them and were successful (15+ damage) +1
if you do not scale at least 5 on this matrix I would decline the SL. I scored a 7 and was still at risk of losing UK the entire rest of the game.
Buying ships telegraphs the sea lion. save your money instead. Buy the entire stack as a surprise on the second turn and only if thing are favorable.
I saw that pocket square early on, but the problem with it is that you may still need every guy on London to make sure its safe, even 1 mech. Sometimes I cant even attack Scotland, if they stacked it, because you cant take Scotland and still ensure they can’t destroy London…that’s where SL gets tricky.
To call Ireland Pro-Allied, that’s the historical inaccuracy…
The carrier is simply something to help give your fleet a backbone and protects everything in 112 and means you don’t have to land a t bomber in Holland (from Germany). It protects your transports if you are threatening sea lion and can be used to protect sea units at Gibraltar or 127 (Archangel). If you can get it to the Mediterranean Sea it can really help Italy too. The only con is that it does virtually nothing against Russia.
So basically, do you think being in 112 is useful? Do you like to threaten (not take) Sea Lion to help Itake? Do you like hoping Italy in the Med? Do you like taking Gibraltar? Maybe getting South Africa every ten games? Do you like feigning Sea Lion then hitting Leningrad? If you answered yes to any of these, a carrier can be useful.
You do not need to clear a seazone before an amphibious assault if the seazone you are unloading into has only enemy transports or submarines. In the case of submarines you must have a warship (Carrier, Destroyer, Battleship or Cruiser) escorting the transport so you can IGNORE the submarine before the amphibious assault begins.
Just played a game of Global A&A today. I played Japan and Italy, and a friend of mine played germany. I (being used to europe 1940 A&A) said sea lion is a money trap. Now in my opinion sea-lion is twice as effective as a Russian attack, this is because it can eliminate a major allied power very soon in the game. On the other hand if Russia is invaded, than it can offer two quick VCs to the axis cause where a sea-lion would only offer one. So my opinion is split. The one thing I can agree with is that Sea-lion is very viable plan to destroy the allies unlike the lack of time in Europe because of the undivided american attention.
The only way that a plane can be stuck on a carrier is if it goes into battle as cargo on an ally’s carrier (attacking only) and the carrier becomes damaged in the battle.
Planes always being in the air is realistic because planes fly patrols all the time, looking for the enemy.
