Sealion? Is there a perfict set up?

@dazedwit my point is that if you can’t win 110, you can’t win sea lion. If Britain wants to stop sea lion they are much better off scrambling in G1 rather than conserving air for the land invasion. Typically in the game german air are more valuable than UK air. I would always scramble in that situation because its very likely that I am trading 1-2 planes against 6.

If Germany uses 9 transports and loses those 6 planes and the British lose 2, the UK doesn’t need to build more than 6 inf before G3 to have a better than 50% chance of denying sea lion. I’m assuming here no J1 or J2 which would make stopping sea lion easier. And I’m calculating with British going with a 92 stack (which would add 2 figs, a tac, an inf and a AA) although I’m sure that won’t strictly be necessary. Obviously even with the bombing and convoying, they should manage more than 6 inf. And they may not need land units at all since they might be able to stop it at sea.

Axis have a significant advantage in the OOB game (absent a bid) and it looks to me that in taking risky combats that you will likely lose, you are trading that away. Of course, the dice can help you out here, but usually they won’t.

But the best way to test strategies will always be against actual competition. At some point I’m sure you will get a chance to test this against other opponents.

Thanks for the report. Sounds like Dave got scared of your strategy and missed some initiatives in the Pacific. Did the allies nullify the Mongolian rule? Or did Japan activate it early? The latter sounds like a mistake with a J1. Did they buy the 3 TTs and then not get any use out of them, or build an IC? I can’t fathom this J1 DOW and giving up on India. Something isn’t right.

Moscow can fall and still see an allied victory although the earlier this occurs then less likely the allied victory.

You can reach Moscow from Persia also going over the Caspian Sea.

@simon33:

Why don’t you just build a third fighter in Calcutta to defend against sbr? It is well spent.

Because I am worrying about a quick J3 Indian Crunch.  I am preparing for the following Japanese movement:
J1 move 1(2) inf from Kiangsi to Borneo, move 3 inf, 1 art from Japan/Korea/Manchuria to Philippines; J1 build 3 transports
J2 move 3 inf, 2 art, 1 tank from Japan/Korea/Manchuria to sz36; J2 build naval base in FIC; concentrate all carrier groups in sz36 (each with 1 tact, 1 fighter), bombers in Siam, block sz38 with some fleet
J3 attack India with 6-8 inf, 3 art, 1 tank, 3 tact, 3 fighters, 2 bombers (can have offshore bombardments)

According to the build & movement below (no Russian fighter to India), I will have
16 inf, 1 art, 3 AA, 1 fighter in India for defense.
This should just be enough to defend India.  If I build a UK fighter in India, then I don’t have enough infantry to defend India.

Middle East-Indian Wall strategy
[[to counter J1 attack, no matter Germany goes for sealion or barbarossa]]
Turn 1
C1: take Yunnan with minimal force, build 4 inf in Szechwan

UK1:
India 1 tack+fighter to Middle East (Middle Earth strategy)
Sz39 transport 1 inf to Persia
India 5 inf, 1 art=> Burma
Burma fighter=> India
Malaya 3 inf => Shan state
India build 5 inf

ANZAC1: Malaya inf => Shan state

Turn 2
C2: take Yunnan with minimal force, build 5 inf in Szechwan

UK2: (consider the case J1 take Borneo, build 3 transports; J2 build MIC and NB in FIC; move 3 transports to sz36)
Burma 7 inf, 1 art => India
Shan state 3 inf => Burma
India build 4 inf
(if no Sealion, build Persia factory)

ANZAC2: Shan state inf => Burma

Turn 3:
China: aim at taking Yunnan

@simon33:

I haven’t had much success with strategies like the one proposed except when Germany spends some of its money on fleet. That gives ussr a bit ight breathing room to do something.

But I agree with you, in case Germany goes for barbarossa, Russia should focus on wars in Eastern Front.  Again Yunnan and India worries me.  The above implies that China should defend J3 take and hold Yunnan by itself…

I have to think that much focus on Russia would leave Japan too exposed in the water and on the coast.

I like it!  Its crazy but again this game is based upon dice in the end. If it was a low luck game then I would have to reconsider.

FAQ (Bottom of page 2, top of 3) is pretty clear on this http://www.wizards.com/AvalonHill/rules/AAEurope1940_2ndEdition_FAQ.pdf

@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.

See the thing is it still doesn’t matter Germany is crushed and the game is all but over as Italy falls soon after. Then Japan can be ganged up on no matter how many ipc’s they have.