You may well be right, sea lion might not be a game winner. But it still warrants discussion and refining. Here are reasons to study and refine sea lion:
-
If UK under prepares, in the face of a CV & 2TT build, they may allow Germany to beat them too efficiently. If the costs are reduced, post sea lion is looking much better for the Axis.
-
Japans role has not been refined. Japan is very powerful, and can still get India (and very big) by turn four at latest. They can be well into Northern Russia and mostly through China, with a major IC churning out mechs in Manchuria. Perhaps Japan can pressure US enough to force them West? This is rough for Japan but the Germany holds UK and i kicking can. This deserves more thought and testing in so new and so huge a game I think.
-
Do we know that Barbarossa can win the game? If the axis are at a disadvantage, then the problem might be imbalance - not sea lion being wrong. If a balancer is needed, post sea lion is obviously looking better; perhaps even best.
The first reason is the perhaps most significant. I played the other day and my opponent under defended UK. He spent 7 IPCs turn one and two in South Africa, and he pulled his tactical bomber into the Mediterranean. I was able to take UK too easily and with less naval building. I also declared war J3 (and collected sixty some Yen) because USA was not in position to retake UK that turn (and I’m not sure that they could be).
So yeah, sea lion might not win global, but we shouldn’t rule it out just yet. Also, a good player needs to decide how much (if any) they can skimp on homeland defense before they offer too good a deal.
@MikeMasino:
As a few posts have said, a G2 sealion is, in my opinion, a better bet (if it can be done).
Without a G1 cv build, you can’t protect a fleet in sz112, and if you stay in sz113, sea lion is blocked. If you do buy the cv, you don’t have enough transports.