Well Ranor, then what is the problem with just attacking Ukraine and W. Russia and leaving Belo alone?
The problem with attacking Ukraine and West Russia is that you typically need fighters to swing the Ukraine battle, and if you use fighters on R1 at Ukraine, they cannot reach London.
@ncscswitch:
1. The SZ2 fleet is of no benefit to liberating London on UK1 if there is a German SUB in SZ1. No way to load the ARM from ECan to even make the attempt.
True, and this is something I had forgotten. However, you must still win the sub vs transport battle, which is just another battle that the Germans have to win.
not true.
The only thing you have to WIN in SZ1 is to avoid being hit by the tpt on round1 of the battle. Then the sub dives and there is no way for UK to take back London (can not pick up units in a contested sea zone)
@ncscswitch:
1. The SZ2 fleet is of no benefit to liberating London on UK1 if there is a German SUB in SZ1. No way to load the ARM from ECan to even make the attempt.
True, and this is something I had forgotten. However, you must still win the sub vs transport battle, which is just another battle that the Germans have to win.
not true.
The only thing you have to WIN in SZ1 is to avoid being hit by the tpt on round1 of the battle. Then the sub dives and there is no way for UK to take back London (can not pick up units in a contested sea zone)
My point is that you have to succeed on LRA research, succeed on London, and succeed at the German W. Canada attack. Each of those individual rolls is favorable, but the overall odds are unfavorable, as ALL must succeed to leave the Germans with a good position.
Work it out. You’ll see. Don’t forget Russian fighter(s).
@the:
@ncscswitch:
1. The SZ2 fleet is of no benefit to liberating London on UK1 if there is a German SUB in SZ1. No way to load the ARM from ECan to even make the attempt.
True, and this is something I had forgotten. However, you must still win the sub vs transport battle, which is just another battle that the Germans have to win.
not true.
The only thing you have to WIN in SZ1 is to avoid being hit by the tpt on round1 of the battle. Then the sub dives and there is no way for UK to take back London (can not pick up units in a contested sea zone)
My point is that you have to succeed on LRA research, succeed on London, and succeed at the German W. Canada attack. Each of those individual rolls is favorable, but the overall odds are unfavorable, as ALL must succeed to leave the Germans with a good position.
Work it out. You’ll see. Don’t forget Russian fighter(s).
I think you miss the point from NPB
If the Russian ftrs always move to London, I would be estatic as Germany.
Before that even happened though, Russia risks a only 64% chance at taking Ukraine without their planes.
I like those odds as Germany.
You also then can run a strong push on Russia, specifically Caucasus because… guess what? NO ftrs from London can support caucasus against a G2 assault. Germany can mount a pretty damn strong push there if they want to for G2, and the entire Japanese air force can be in position to back up Germany conquering Caucasus if it does happen G2.
Work it out. You’ll see.
@the:
@ncscswitch:
1. The SZ2 fleet is of no benefit to liberating London on UK1 if there is a German SUB in SZ1. No way to load the ARM from ECan to even make the attempt.
True, and this is something I had forgotten. However, you must still win the sub vs transport battle, which is just another battle that the Germans have to win.
not true.
The only thing you have to WIN in SZ1 is to avoid being hit by the tpt on round1 of the battle. Then the sub dives and there is no way for UK to take back London (can not pick up units in a contested sea zone)
My point is that you have to succeed on LRA research, succeed on London, and succeed at the German W. Canada attack. Each of those individual rolls is favorable, but the overall odds are unfavorable, as ALL must succeed to leave the Germans with a good position.
Work it out. You’ll see. Don’t forget Russian fighter(s).
I think you miss the point from NPB
If the Russian ftrs always move to London, I would be estatic as Germany.
Before that even happened though, Russia risks a only 64% chance at taking Ukraine without their planes.I like those odds as Germany.
You also then can run a strong push on Russia, specifically Caucasus because… guess what? NO ftrs from London can support caucasus against a G2 assault. Germany can mount a pretty damn strong push there if they want to for G2, and the entire Japanese air force can be in position to back up Germany conquering Caucasus if it does happen G2.
Work it out. You’ll see.
:roll: What makes you think I haven’t already worked it out? Idiot.
The point is that you MUST fly at least 1 Russian fighter to London to prevent G1 LRA Sea Lion. You can prattle all you like about how great it is for the Germans for 1-2 Russian fighters to be in London, but think how stupid the Allies would have to be to NOT fly at least one Russian fighter to London under conditions that allow G1 LRA Sea Lion.
I don’t miss the point at all. I think SOMEONE missed the point, though.
man you are cracking me up :lol:
@the:
:roll: What makes you think I haven’t already worked it out? Idiot.
WTF is your problem buddy?
It’s ok to tell someone ELSE to “work it out, you’ll see.”
But if someone says the same to you, they’re an idiot.
jackass.
NPB, NPB (or is it), Mojo II, the original Mojo - lets not call people idiots.
Lets keep the name calling out of it.
On an unrelated note, the jenforces term still cracks me up every time I read it.
On topic,
I think it is pretty much agreed if Russia lands a ftr on London then there are no worries about Sealion and Germany isn’t locked into anything and can do what they want to.
I also don’t think this is that big of an advantage for Ger (if Rus lands a ftr in UK). I still often play Russia with a Wrus attack only and do very well as the Allies. The loss of 1 ftr does not hurt this attack and isn’t really an inconvience since you can still use ftr in Kar (london), ftr in Ukr (cauc) and an rt or just inf in Belo on R2.
Switch:
16 Armor on Germany 2 is not that bad. For one, Russia will have E. Europe, Norway, Balkans, Ukraine, Belorussia and W. Russia before Germany’s second turn since you will have nothing built on Germany 1 to stop them. Okay, E. Europe may be pushing it. Still, you are 16 tanks, no infantry, no fighters and no bombers. (Of course, teh dice sim do show Germany winning 70% of the time with armor, fighter, bomber, so let’s just give you the fighter and bomber.)
Meanwhile, Russia has closed the gap significantly with a round of 29 IPC income, a round of 31 IPC income and a round of 35 IPC income. And don’t tell me Russia cannot do it, because I’ll post the map we had (when I get my notebook back) showing my Russia doing exactly that and you did not even have a Sea Lion attempt where you wasted all of Germany’s first round of dice on tech. And yes, you will need 8 rolls, IMHO, to be relatively sure to get the tech on the first attempt.
So, assuming you bought all tech on round 1, and Russia won with normal results in Ukraine and W. Russia on round 1, Germany will have 128 IPC in Ground and Air Units at the start of Germany 2. Russia will have 145 IPC in ground units at the start of Russia 2. + 30 IPC more coming the next round and each round therafter.
You can build all the tanks your heart desires. My Infantry waves will eventually over power you and push you back resulting in a Russian win. Even if England is NEVER liberated. (I don;t have to liberate it. I can send America to africa and clean house and geta ll that cash for America instead.)
I welcome Sea Lion. America + 11 for Africa and Russia + 13-16 for most of Europe. Who needs England!?!?
I won’t waste a fighter landing on England. Why? It doesn’t help me. It helps me more to lose England, IMHO.
@the:
:roll: What makes you think I haven’t already worked it out? Idiot.
WTF is your problem buddy?
It’s ok to tell someone ELSE to “work it out, you’ll see.”
But if someone says the same to you, they’re an idiot.
jackass.
When I said “work it out”, I meant “work it out”. I really believe the figures support my position, and I believe that players have to think critically and see this for themselves, or nothing will be learned.
When you said “work it out”, you’re just an imitator that’s snapping back. I still haven’t seen you come up with any sort of real response to a G1 Sea Lion threat.
Do you say that G1 Sea Lion is inherently unstable? No. So apparently you think G1 Sea Lion IS a threat. But you say R1 fighter(s) to London is too “scripted”? So in short, you think that the Allies can’t do a damn thing against G1 Sea Lion, and that the Axis should automatically win. Sure, you didn’t say that in so many words, but how else do you interpret your position as put forth in posts in this thread?
See, I do read and think, despite being a “jackass”. Your position is just untenable, handicapping Germany more than 50% of games with failed tech rolls, and not responding to the Russian fighter defense. Call it jenforces, call it rose-colored glasses, call it what you will.
You got something to say, then say it. You got some badass way of defending against G1 Sea Lion that doesn’t involve R1 fighters, let’s hear it. But I got nothing from you so far. NOTHING.
Jackass? I don’t deny it. But you’re hardly playing with kid gloves yourself, axis_roll.
Let’s play like men and smash each other with the fists of truth and logic! A real argument requires a fight! Hit me with your best analytical shot! I’m not afraid!
(Maybe I SHOULD be afraid, but that’s part of my charm . . . no fear. Or sense of responsibility! :-D)
@the:
Let’s play like men and smash each other with the fists of truth and logic! A real argument requires a fight! Hit me with your best analytical shot! I’m not afraid!
I’d rather play like a woman and win with something you did not see or expect through sheer intelligence and beauty then use brute force in a scripted, unimaginative manner like you men. :P
Back on topic, I still say that a fighter to England to prevent a Sea Lion costs you MORE then just ignoring it. You put the fighter in England, you do NOT take out the German fighter and you’ve just allowed Germany another advantage. Now I CAN see a tank push strategy working for Germany.
Under Switch’s scenario, Germany takes England on Round 1. Loses 40 IPC to tech, gets 38 IPC, loses 48 IPC in units (assuming Armor, Fighter, Bomber lives). End of Germany 1, you are talking 38+38 captured = 76 IPC.
And, let’s pretend the submarine in SZ 1 was not killed by the transport, and everyone out there knows that those pesky transports seem to have sharpshooters on board that can take out entire squadrons of fighters without so much as scratching the paint on the transports.
England retreats from Egypt. Lands everything it can in India, builds a wall. Unites the fleet in SZ 30 to entice Japan into suicide against it and if they do not, then they can land in E. Indies or India with more equipment.
Meanwhile, America lets Germany take Africa so that America can take it back and collect for it themselves. Who needs England? America’s earning 50+, Russia’s earning 35+ and Germany’s begging for mercy because they built all tanks which die fast when attacked without infantry support. (Remember, you bought tech rolls on G1, so no new infantry. You probably only have about a dozen infantry on the entire map at this point and no real air power to support them with since Switch wants a full armor build on G2, taht means you are trading territories iwth tanks and Russia’s taking them out with infantry.)
I do not favor the sea lion, it actually is not a topic for me, because I do not play OOB. But I have to ask why do you think Germany buys only tnks with his cash if he succeeded in England (you say yourself this is not good - and it’s not).
Furthermore I don’t see germany spending 40 ipc on tech. Because I’m not commited to Sealion. If I would try it, then I would probably only role 1 die max. 2. If it works fine, then I have the tech and can still buy a lot of equipment. If not OK, I can still play a normal game from here on, just 1 tnk less bought on G1 doesn’t ruin the game for him.
And with a russian fig in London I wouldn’t even try.
Do you disagree?
@Cmdr:
Back on topic, I still say that a fighter to England to prevent a Sea Lion costs you MORE then just ignoring it. You put the fighter in England, you do NOT take out the German fighter and you’ve just allowed Germany another advantage. Now I CAN see a tank push strategy working for Germany.
This is my TENET, one and only mojo. I agree with Jen
Sorry you could not see that.
The very second post of this thread was that it hurts the Russians to have to put a ftr or two in london against a REALISTIC OOB G1 Sea Lion threat.
When did I ever say that I " ……think that the Allies can’t do a damn thing against G1 Sea Lion, and that the Axis should automatically win. Sure, you didn’t say that in so many words, but how else do you interpret your position as put forth in posts in this thread?"
You have not read my posts close enough then.
please QUOTE the thread where I said such, even insinuated what you say I say. I do not see that anywhere.
What I DID say was you could still do G1 sea lion with a mere $5-$15 being spent on LRA tech tries and still play a good German game if these fail. Now I would not roll for LRA if you put 2 ftrs in London, that would not be the wisest move. You need to take advantage of the game position, and Russian ftr(s) in London is sub optimal.
1 Russian ftr in London is necessary in OOB. However, this is still harmful to Russia.
@Cmdr:
Back on topic, I still say that a fighter to England to prevent a Sea Lion costs you MORE then just ignoring it. You put the fighter in England, you do NOT take out the German fighter and you’ve just allowed Germany another advantage. Now I CAN see a tank push strategy working for Germany.
This is my TENET, one and only mojo. I agree with Jen
Sorry you could not see that.
The very second post of this thread was that it hurts the Russians to have to put a ftr or two in london against a REALISTIC OOB G1 Sea Lion threat.
When did I ever say that I " ……think that the Allies can’t do a damn thing against G1 Sea Lion, and that the Axis should automatically win. Sure, you didn’t say that in so many words, but how else do you interpret your position as put forth in posts in this thread?"
You have not read my posts close enough then.
please QUOTE the thread where I said such, even insinuated what you say I say. I do not see that anywhere.
What I DID say was you could still do G1 sea lion with a mere $5-$15 being spent on LRA tech tries and still play a good German game if these fail. Now I would not roll for LRA if you put 2 ftrs in London, that would not be the wisest move. You need to take advantage of the game position, and Russian ftr(s) in London is sub optimal.
1 Russian ftr in London is necessary in OOB. However, this is still harmful to Russia.
Your statements are a matter of record. I will not shame myself by repeating your lies. :lol: Okay, maybe I’m enjoying this too much . . . but seriously, your position UNTIL NOW can hardly be interpreted otherwise.
Suffice it to say that your position is currently that the Russians should fly a fighter to London. I think this is reasonable.
I will still poke fun at you, though, for saying that the Russian fighter to London is “necessary” but “suboptimal”. :wink:
@the:
I will still poke fun at you, though, for saying that the Russian fighter to London is “necessary” but “suboptimal”. :wink:
You’re more poking fun at the OOB rules, not me, because I am sure there are others who would agree with this sentiment.
You shouldn’t HAVE to make a move to keep the game from becoming Yahtzee!
It’s Revised damn it.
We already have Yahtzee A&A in classic (a.k.a second edition):
Can you say “Win the game with Heavy Bombers?”
:wink:
@ncscswitch:
1. The SZ2 fleet is of no benefit to liberating London on UK1 if there is a German SUB in SZ1. No way to load the ARM from ECan to even make the attempt.
True, and this is something I had forgotten. However, you must still win the sub vs transport battle, which is just another battle that the Germans have to win.
not true.
The only thing you have to WIN in SZ1 is to avoid being hit by the tpt on round1 of the battle. Then the sub dives and there is no way for UK to take back London (can not pick up units in a contested sea zone)
Thanks for pointing that out.
However, the USA can take a swipe at it with their AF, so it is still an imperfect solution.
Jen,
How do you think Germany is “out of INF” on G2?
You do a modified retreat of surviving units, stack out of range of the Russians, and on G3 you unload against them with about 20 divisions, most of it ARM.
With ANY Japan pressure at all… TOAST!
@ncscswitch:
Jen,
How do you think Germany is “out of INF” on G2?
You do a modified retreat of surviving units, stack out of range of the Russians, and on G3 you unload against them with about 20 divisions, most of it ARM.
With ANY Japan pressure at all… TOAST!
With a Sea Lion, the UK’s heavy landings are delayed by 1-3 turns, but an UnBaltic counterattack in sz7 also delays the UK by about the same amount. And in UnBaltic games, Germany can’t just send less than 10inf and whatever arm it can muster at Russia. That stack won’t make it.
It does look like Sea Lion sabotages the UK a bit more than other strategies, but it also means basically no German airforce. That’s a few or several 3s that Russia won’t have to defend against.
I still don’t see how a Sea Lion gives Germany that much of an edge.
The difference Hyog is that in an unBaltic strat, Germany does not have an extra $38 to spend on G2, and UK is not only delayed, but is incapable of building at all.
In this version, it is not “10 INF and whatever ARM it can muster” It would be more like 10 INF and 20+ ARM. Big difference between 20+ ARM compared to cobbling together the remnants of Germany’s starting ARM (6-8 ARM).
