Alpha setup ?

Yep. Global has issues.

I wish the allies had more NOs and japan too, but it would make things more complicated. Maybe just nix a germany or italy NO.

@Vance:

I always SBR London if I am planning or pretending sea lion.  That turn 1 SBR is a critical piece of sea lion and the threat is not serious without it.  Two Bombers target the IC and two tacticals target the airbase.  They do not intercept because a) the fighters scramble in z110 or z109, or b) if they are taking the sea lion threat seriously they do not want to risk losing a fighter.  About half the time I lose a plane to AA, but its worth it because the sea lion threat forces UK to spend its entire first turn income on repairs and infantry, leaving the med and Africa open for Italy.  Italy’s NO income soon pays for any losses you may have had (unless you get diced and lose 3 or 4 of them).  If both sides have normal losses (i.e. germany loses 1 plane or none; the airbase is inoperable and the IC has something like 10 damage), and they spend in South Africa or Egypt, do a Taranto raid, etc., well then sea lion is on.

Yeah, I didn’t even think of bombing the airbases too. Of course that means that they won’t scramble into an adjacent sea zone, but then they can still intercept the strategic and tactical bombers attacking the IC and airbase, right? If I know that that’s what my opponent intends to do, then I’d use all my fighters exactly for that as they won’t be of any use in an adjacent sz. But yes, you have a point too that if Germany really wants to go for sea lio, the UK will need all the fighters it can get!

theRocmonster,

You are correct that if Germany builds a carrier, destroyer and submarine on G1 and brings in some planes to scramble from Western Germany it is very hard for the British navy to drive them from the sea on UK1.

The German assault on England via Sea Lion on G3 is not automatic. They have to successfully complete two strategic bombing raids and repel the British navy on Uk1 with little or no loss to their air force. But you are right, if they do, they only face 16 Infantry (on average), 1 Artillery, 6 Fighters (assuming they lost none in interceptor duty), 1 Tactical Bomber, 1 Bomber, and 4 Anti-Aircraft Guns. The Germans will bring 22 ground troops, 5 Fighters, 5 Tactical Bombers and 2 Strategic Bombers. Even with the Anti-Aircraft Guns the Germans should roll over the British.

But I don’t see any way to stop Sea Lion. Unless the game designer intended for Sea Lion to be a weak strategy because of the removal of the German NO for London and the new rule allowing Russia to invade if London falls.

I just have not played any games where London fell under the new rules so I don’t know how the Russian offensive strategy will play out vs Germany and the Balkans on R3. As soon as I do, I will let you know.

@Alsch91:

Normally I think UK could take back both Shan State and Yunnan on UK 3 before pulling back to Calcutta.
Thus your planes have no landing spot.

Might be costly, but also might be worth it for the reasons you suggested.

@urmomsmom7:

I think they are trying to say that since England doesn’t get an NO for no German subs on the board it doesn’t give Germany the need to build subs and in general building units towards England

That makes partial sense.  I still think you need submarines for Germany, but a lot less.  Before you needed 4 in SZ 109, 2 in SZ 106, 2 in SZ 82.  Now you need 2 in SZ 109, 1 in SZ 106 and 1 in SZ 82 to get almost the same results as before.

What the change does, however, is weaken England to the tune of 5 IPC a round.  There’s not a bat’s chance in hades that England and America are putting units in Paris until the game is already over (but the axis won’t concede).  Essentially, what Larry did, was to remove 10 IPC a round from the Allies give the Axis a significant boost in buying power in relation to the what the Allies used to get.

It also means that the Allies dont ahve to go beserk trying to kill every submarine on the board too.

I do not like the idea of having Japan need all those territories for an NO.  There are so many avenues of attack, it seems hard to imagine Japan getting the NO for more than a round and if they did, then they would be in a position that they would not need it.

I feel it may be a better solution if Japan were to have an NO for Hong Kong (Kwangtung), Manilla (Philippines) and Kiangsu (Beijing).  The problem is, those are all victory cities, so wouldn’t Japan already be going for those?

Maybe Alaska would be better, since Japan actually did invade Alaska (Aluetian Islands) historically.

Ghr2 is right mantle, you need a turn before russia attacks!  Use the london money to prep for russia or the american fleet… whichever is more threatening!  Like I said earilier, have Italy set it up so it’s appealing to attack them (aka keep the UK fleet in the Med).

Hopefully you understand a little bit better Zcion.  The Sealion is different in all the games of Global.  One time I was Germany, and was prepping for a Sealion and I failed my France attack!  Italy had to pick it up!  I was so mad, but went for the Sealion anyway, my UK player thought that since I didn’t have enough cash for a Sealion… he thought I was going for Russia.  Boy was he surprised lol.

Ok, my bad, Germany and UK Europe are ok because thay start at war…