May I ask how that plays out? Has that meant Italy gets Cairo early while UK pressures Germany?
Does an A+3 Sealion = Axis victory?
-
I want to say yes, but I think my first few Axis games in Alpha 3 are going to be the old tried and true assault on Moscow plan. Sealion was too risky for my blood in Alpha2, but until my opponent figured out how to stop it…well…
-
Klop is not a dog. bbbbbbbbbbbbbbooooooooooooommmmmmmmmmm!!!
-
Klop is not a dog. bbbbbbbbbbbbbbooooooooooooommmmmmmmmmm!!!
-
Klop is not a dog. bbbbbbbbbbbbbbooooooooooooommmmmmmmmmm!!!
-
@mantlefan:
What’s the point of a thread that determines whether or not a strat is possible? EVERY strat is possible with good dice/ big gap in player skill.
Here’s the difference in the thread development, regardless of what it’s titled:
- Is Sealion possible anymore?
Answer: Well, obviously yes, since Germany could send 1 inf against 20 units and still POSSIBLY win. - Is Sealion a good idea anymore?
Answer: Well, there are numerous answers, viewpoints, considerations, and tactics that go into answering this question. Plenty of food for fruitful conversation.
So really if the thread is to progress according to how you set it out, everyone should only be allowed to post Yes (or, if they feel like being a stick-in-the-mud, they can say no)
So what’s better, discussion about whether or not sealion is a good idea, or one word answer that is objectively “yes”?
My intentions for this topic was to determine weather or not a successful Sealion operation would eventually contribute to an axis victory.
- Is Sealion possible anymore?
-
I am playing an Alpha+3 game as the Axis this Saturday against a very capable opponent. I want to plan a Sealion strategy for a G4 landing, however, my experience is 100% in G3 landings. I am also contemplating the possibility of supporting both strategies (Sealion and Barbarossa) and landing on London eventually in say G5 or G6. I don’t want to abandon Sealion all together and focus only on Moscow (regardless of Alpha +3 and Larry I still believe that losing London really hurts the Allies, maybe if I lose a few games, I will convert). As for Japan, I am still going to Attack Amur with all I got and allow Russia the 6 new infantry. However, I may need to commit more troops from the south and evacuate China before my drive to Calcutta. I guess my question is, does anyone think I can win an A3 game this way?
-
You may be right about G4 being the absolute dead line for Sealion. I’m going to attack the crap out of Amur J1 and push further into Mongolia and far east Russia J2 and J3 regardless of where the Russian player stacks their infantry R1 or R2. It’s purpose will be to deal with the Russian units while taking a few territories, but without the expectation of threatening Moscow. My Japan strategy demands that I eventually take Malaya and hammer Calcutta, probably J5.
-
Is Sea Lion reasonably possible? Yes.
On G3? Maybe.
On G4? Definitely
Is it impossible to get Sea Lion (with reasonable results?) No.
Is it smart to do Sea Lion? Depends on what your opponent does, if he turtles, probably not, if he focuses on fleet/S. Africa, probably yes.
-
@Cmdr:
Is Sea Lion reasonably possible? Yes.
On G3? Maybe.
On G4? Definitely
Is it impossible to get Sea Lion (with reasonable results?) No.
Is it smart to do Sea Lion? Depends on what your opponent does, if he turtles, probably not, if he focuses on fleet/S. Africa, probably yes.
So if you were going to wait and find out what the UK does before committing to Sealion, what would your G1 purchase be? (I’m guessing an aircraft carrier, a fighter, and an artillery).
-
@Cmdr:
Is Sea Lion reasonably possible? Yes.
On G3? Maybe.
On G4? Definitely
Is it impossible to get Sea Lion (with reasonable results?) No.
Is it smart to do Sea Lion? Depends on what your opponent does, if he turtles, probably not, if he focuses on fleet/S. Africa, probably yes.
I repeat, as I have run the odds for you.
G3 is less than 40% with a proper defense.
G4 is vulnerable to a hit and fade attack on Scotland.
-
@Young:
So if you were going to wait and find out what the UK does before committing to Sealion, what would your G1 purchase be? (I’m guessing an aircraft carrier, a fighter, and an artillery).
Submarine, Fighter, Infantry, Artillery, Transport
or
Aircraft Carrier, 2 Transports (If I want England to get paranoid)Jim, I think a hit and run attack by England would be in Germany’s favor. You can blow a lot of infantry killing my infantry (and maybe Artillery) and I can just pull out my tanks if the battle went bad for me. However, if the battle goes bad for England, it’s game over London. I say pull out tanks because I doubt any hit and run will kill any of the defending tanks and might quit before hitting the Artillery for fear of leaving London open.
The transports are not wasted, they can land 26 units in Arkhangelsk, or Novgorod or a mixture really which is what would probably happen, or Russia would have to open a front in the North to prevent it, leaving the south vulnerable to a complex in Romania and transorts in the Black Sea.
-
I’ve never been a big fan of Sealion anyway, so this new version isn’t a change for me. I’m quite skilled at keeping UK down with Subs and other tactics. Spread your subs out, make UK hunt them down individually - UK hates chasing subs down the coasts of Africa. What is a change is the Mongolia rules for Japan to have to navigate. I am used be Japan being able to take 5+ IPCs away from Russia each round making Russia easier for Germany to crack.
-
Here’s how I see it. England has 2 rounds to build before it can attack on England 3 (prior to Germany 4) with their 3rd round being placed after their combat moves.
England starts with: 3 Infantry, 3 Fighters on itself.
England CAN get 2 more fighters and 1 tactical bomber from the Med bringing it to 3 Infantry, 5 fighters, 1 tactical bomber.
Assumptions:
Germany destroyed the British fighter in Normandy on round 1.
Germany sank the destroyer in SZ 109 with 3 fighters, 3 tactical bombers, 2 submarines and a strategic bomber
Germany sank the destroyer in SZ 106 with 2 submarines
Both British transports are sunk, no Canadian units are brought to England for defense/offense.
London is a higher priority than France for Germany. (France might be allowed to fall to Italy, if necessary.)England starts with 28 IPC, that’s 9 Infantry Save 1 on Round 1.
Round 2: England has 34 IPC (28 + 5 original territories NO + 1 saved) assume +9 Infantry, +1 Armor, save 1.
England has, on round 3:
Infantry: +3 + 9 +9 = 21
Artillery: +1= 0
Armor: +1 = 1
Fighters: +3 +2 = 5
Tactial Bombers: +1 = 1
Strategic Bombers: 0 = 0
AA Guns: +4 = 4(AA Guns cannot be used to attack, so they are not relevant to a British hit and run on Scotland.)
Germany brought 13 Infantry, 7 Artillery, 5 Armor, and 1 AA Gun to Scotland.
I will use Frood’s calculator. If we change the parameters and state that at least 1 defending unit must be alive at the end of the battle we get:
Attacker: 30%
Defender: 70%Average units left for the Attacker: 2
Average units left for the Defender: 6
Average number of rounds: 4.6If we alter it so that at least 7 Attacking Units survive (theoretically that would give England 10 Infantry, 1 Armor, 1 Tactical Bomber, 5 Fighters and 4 AA Guns to defend London with) we get:
Attacker: 100%
Defender: 90%Average units left for the Attacker: 9
Average units left for the Defender: 11
Average number of rounds: 2.5
Therefore, I really do not see Strafing as an option, Jim. Then again, I believe you originally ran your numbers assuming you could get the 4 ground units from Canada and had the fighter in Normandy. I am assuming those units do not exist (but the Battleships do exist.)
-
Oh, more assumptions:
Germany built 2 transports on G1, 10 on G2
Germany got France R1 and Normandy R1
England built as many infantry and armor as possible (up to 10 units maximum capacity, converting extra “infantry” into Armored units until cap was reached)
England built nothing in S. Africa or Canada
England lost objective for all original territories on Italy 1
England got C. Persia on England 1 -
This is what I don’t understand about the 2 TT purchase G1. If I’m England and I have my warships in SZ#110, I’m going to attack the German navy in SZ#112 with everything I can, even with the scrambling tac bombers defending at 3 ( the german fighters are on the carrier or in S. Italy and the Battleship is likely damaged) that’s why I purchase 1 Carrier/ 1 sub/1 destroyer G1. Does everyones UK opponent turtle on that battle, or is it a bad fight? Because I think I would hit that.
-
Eh, to be honest, I’ve only started hitting the Destroyer in SZ 109. My normal start up used to be to take out the double battleships near England. Granted, I dont normally go after London anymore, it’s not worth it when 2 submarines can take out all of their income and I have objective there anymore.
Even if you assume England has the extra transport in SZ 109 it shouldn’t skew the numbers too much and England is not attacking: Battleship, Cruiser, 3 Fighters with 3 Fighters it would be suicide.
-
Jim, I think a hit and run attack by England would be in Germany’s favor. You can blow a lot of infantry killing my infantry (and maybe Artillery) and I can just pull out my tanks if the battle went bad for me. However, if the battle goes bad for England, it’s game over London. I say pull out tanks because I doubt any hit and run will kill any of the defending tanks and might quit before hitting the Artillery for fear of leaving London open.
UK hitting the Germans in Scotland on UK3 will on average kill 21 German units and 15 UK units over 3 rounds, leaving just a few Germans in Scotland. The battle is in UK’s favour, no question. The only thing is teh casualties on both sides can be quite varialbe, and there is a risk that UK does too well and ends up wiping out the Germans in Scotland and being forced to remain there, rather than retreat back to London as planned.
-
Jim, I think a hit and run attack by England would be in Germany’s favor. You can blow a lot of infantry killing my infantry (and maybe Artillery) and I can just pull out my tanks if the battle went bad for me. However, if the battle goes bad for England, it’s game over London. I say pull out tanks because I doubt any hit and run will kill any of the defending tanks and might quit before hitting the Artillery for fear of leaving London open.
UK hitting the Germans in Scotland on UK3 will on average kill 21 German units and 15 UK units over 3 rounds, leaving just a few Germans in Scotland. The battle is in UK’s favour, no question. The only thing is teh casualties on both sides can be quite varialbe, and there is a risk that UK does too well and ends up wiping out the Germans in Scotland and being forced to remain there, rather than retreat back to London as planned.
I think you need to check your calculator. Mine is showing a blow out in Germany’s favor, big time. That should go down slightly given +1 Infantry, +1 Armor from Canada, but not that big of a change.
Change to: 22 Infantry, 2 Armor, 5 Fighters, 1 Tactical Bomber vs 13 Infantry, 7 Artillery, 5 Armor, 1 AA Gun (and Frood cannot count AA Guns as casualties, so the odds will go up for Germany, it will also count the Tactical Bomber as a real bomber each time.)
8 British Units must survive is the setting I used. (2 Tanks, 5 Fighters, 1 Tactical Bomber, is what I suspect England would attempt to avoid losing.)
Rounds: 3.0 Rounds
Attacker Odds of Survival: 100%
Defender Odds of Survival: 70.9%
Attacker Units Lost: 19 Infantry, 1 Aircraft (to the AA Gun)
Defender Units Lost: 13 Infantry, 3 Artillery, 1 AA Gun
Attacker Units Remaining: 13 Infantry, 2 Armor, 5 Fighters, 1 Tactical Bomber, 4 AA Guns (including built units 10 infantry)
Defender Units Remaining: 13 Infantry, 12 Artillery, 10 Armor, 5 Fighters, 5 Tactical Bombers, Strategic Bomber (including transported units)Odds for Sea Lion: (counting 3 AA Guns as extra defending infantry for the sake of argument)
Rounds: 1.9 Rounds
Attacker Odds of Survival: 100%
Defender Odds of Survival: 0%
Attacker Units Lost: 13 Infantry, 2 Fighters
Defender Units Lost: 13 Infantry, 2 Armor, 5 Fighters, Tactical Bomber, 4 AA Guns
Attacker Units Remaining: 12 Artillery, 10 Armor, 3 Fighters, 5 Tactical Bombers, Strategic Bomber Defender Units Remaining: None -
I see no option possible for the attack on Scotland to be in England’s favor except on the off case where the RNG screws up the results in their favor. (Random Number Generators - AKA Dice).
I believe there are some differences in our assumptions:
1) You assume both British transports are alive
2) You count the Normandy fighter as alive
3) You count Germany with 10 transports (maybe 11)A) I assume one British transport is lost.
B) I assume Normandy was cleared or taken on Germany 1
C) I count Germany with 13 transportsI 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.)
Honestly, I see Sea Lion is exceptionally valid, only delayed by a round, so you can spend round 3 getting enough artilly/armor in position to do the landings. Either England attacks Scotland depleting their defenders, or leaves Scotland alone boosting your attackers. Either way, the calculator says England dies and Germany wins and there’s no significant RNG effect (we’re talking Germany winning by at least a dozen units in 2 rounds of play, or 4 rounds of play with dozens of units left.)
-
Germany can have a MAX of 12 inf, 4 art, 8 tanks now in Scotland on G3. It is no longer favourable to hit Normandy, Paris and sz106, 111, 112, and 110. 1 battle has to be given up. That would likely be Normandy, so only 9 TTs bought turn 2 for a total of 12 TTs.
UK can have 23 inf, 4 tanks, 6 fht, 1 tac to hit 22 German units onm UK3. Germany has NO HOPE of winning that.
Suggested Topics
