Sealion vs. Barbarossa

I might have said this before, but most allied players might not be using the best strategies.  They typically take the allies at too low of a bid.  And then they win by either extremely good luck or they are playing a newer player who can’t take and hold the two key non-capital points on the map by round 4 or 5.  I’ve won probably 90%+ of my games as axis lately by a simple strategy:  use an odds calc to determine the ipc value gained by destroying allied units +2 *(times) territory value gained by these attacks + national objectives gained by axis + national objectives lost by allies.  If a player does this math for the first two rounds, they will have a very strong opening strat as axis.

The key map is number 4 where you see the German tanks make it back to Germany/Norway. Taking the transports out with planes to prevent this is the obvious solution but it may be more difficult if Italy has a navy. If you lose Gib on round 1 and Italy has a navy then you may not be able to defend seazone 102. Remember if the carriers take hits the planes sink. If USA Builds bombers instead then you make sure they cant land by taking Eire and consolidate the navy with the German navy.

There is obviously mistakes by both sides in this game but I’m just using it as an example. The best way to defeat Sealion is to avoid it all together by defending London and Gib on round 1.

If you pull off Sealion and the US isn’t in the war already or sitting on Gibraltar, they are at least 2 moves away from getting any kind of help to London. Italy should take Gibraltar if they can and block out the Mediterranean. Italy can move troops to the west coast and get into Syria and hopefully Iraq (if Russia hasn’t gotten their first) Then take over Africa. Build London up by 6-10 ipc’s per turn (now there are 6 of any kind of build you made, plus all your air units). US at that point needs to make a hard decision, liberate Europe or kill Japan.  Fact is they cant do both. Germany and Japan are making a combined 120-140 ipc’s at that point and Italy can make an easy 30+ with their NO’s running wild in Africa. $ wise, game over, and you didn’t even have to make a move on the US. Still a lot of factors have to be taken care of, like is there still an allied NAVY in the Mediterranean? Does Italy still have any NAVY left? What kind of landing force is left in London. And where is Russia? Can Japan put pressure on Russia? Is Japan bombing the heck out of Calcutta?

And it would be possible as well. Most times when Japan attacks round 1, it involves all the ships leaving SZ 6 and all the planes leaving Japan, so there would be nothing to defend those shiny new transports.

@Axisplaya:

@theROCmonster:

Possibly even T3 if mistakes were made.

Anything is possible with enough mistakes from one side…

@theROCmonster:

Japs only need Hawaii, hong kong, phillipines, and calcutta. I can see Japan taking all these by T4

I can’t….If Japan can get Hong Kong, Phi, Haw and Ind by T4 when Allies don’t commit huge mistakes, then the game is completely broken.

I’ve not only seen it, I’ve done it.  The game is not completely broken - however.  America just has to keep investing in the Pacific, the allies lose if there is not a HUGE investment by America in the Pacific EARLY.

@gsh34:

James,

Good thought experiment you have going on.  Most of the time doesn’t Germany fully commit to Sealion on G3 by either doing a direct G3 attack on London or landing is Scotland, right?  If that is the case, they can see that on R1 and R2 the Russians have only purchased naval units (meaning a theoretical 26 ground unit deficit vs. max defend build) why do Sealion?  On Italy round 2, you could use the Italian air force to clear the blocking Russian BB in the Baltic Sea and then amphibious assault Leningrad.  Without those R1 and R2 ground builds, I would think Russia would be relatively easier to take down.  Especially when done in conjunction with Japan doing a max push into Russia which is what I think I would be doing with them if I saw the Russian build naval forces en mass.

Just my thoughts on what I would do if Russia made the builds you describe.

I tend to agree, it would be easier to take Russia first, would that be dangerous leaving UK alive, if USSR provides them a fleet to protect their builds. That seems like it gives both US and UK quicker and stronger strikes against Europe then would otherwise occur. I suspect even with no real land unit builds until turn 3, that Moscow could hold until turn 6 or 7, maybe longer maybe not.

That gives the allies a 3 turn window of opportunity to get entrenched in Europe and put some heat on Berlin/Rome. Key to this opportunity will be whether USSR can knock down the German factory on W. Germany turn 4…That severely limits what the Germans can build in Europe for defense. I could see USA knocking it down turn 5 if recaptured, and UK grabbing it turn 6…etc. Keeping Germany with only 10 unit builds turns 5-8.

Oh well, its just a crazy Russian navy idea. Not sure I will ever try it. You are basically screaming, take me! take me!. Certainly a magnanimous move to spare the British player and allow him to play sea lion free. I’d like to be that nice guy.

@stormafro:

@seiger83

Can you explain how you obtained this figure of 70%.  From what I can tell, for a G2 sea lion Germany will have at most 5 tactical bombers, 5 fighters, 1 bomber, 1 inf, 1 art, 4 tanks.  That’s with a G1 build of 4 transports.  Ave. rolling for hits is around 8 - assuming 1 fighter and 1 tac bomber are killed through anti air.  Any return fire from uk troops can be allocated to the planes.  So, when pressing, Germany will have 1 inf, 1 art, and 4 tanks compared to 5 inf and 5 fighters.  I fail to see how Germany has a 70% chance of winning that battle.  Or am I missing something?

Germany has 5 Inf and 5 art or tanks and would take the inf/art/tank casulties first except for 1 tank and then figthers and bombers. Attacking round 2 is risky - you will likely lose about 3 fighters and 3 tacs depending how the rolls go and if UK dumps everything they can to defend - but you should win 70% of the time according to every odds calculator I have used. That being said, one thing I neglected to consider is if UK scrambles. To prevent a possible catastrophe, it would be best to keep 1 Fighter with your navy, which would drop your land battle odds down to 60% if they dont scramble, but a sure victory if they do scramble but fail to destroy your transports - keep in mind all you need is a draw.

@Variable:

It would last about as long as your post in this forum. Needs to go to Variants forum…

…um, yeah.