Sealion? Is there a perfict set up?

@Nubnumber1

Great! I played a few games recently on TripleA too.

Anyways, for some help on detailed Sealion, these game principles should help:

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/35286/warfare-principles-of-axis-allies-by-andrewaagamer?_=1677726422604

not many folks playing alpha 2 anymore.

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

@Spendo02:

I don’t see much value in the 70 IPC of Trn once you take London and get your offensive units back on mainland Europe.Â

Spending resources to address their protection seems less efficient than boots on the ground pushing back the Russian advance.

5 Transports and the fleet stay in the Baltic Sea - now you can ferry your infantry/artillery builds directly into Novgorod each round (+13 units a round in Novgorod - there’s not a snowball’s chance in hell Russia is getting it back - ever.)
5 Transports go down to Gibraltar - land in Morocco and join with large Italian fleet - which will probably exist unless England went no defense for England - and take Brazil, Africa, W. Indies and then slide the rest down around the Cape for Madagascar.

There’s a lot of things you can use the transports for.  You could use them to set up a train service to Arkhangelsk through the Arctic Ocean and the other half to shuttle troops from Berlin.

@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.

@Omega1759:

That’s what I would do, but his move was to bring the destroyer in 104 to block the German fleet and prevent boxing the med fleet in the Med.

Strategic Bomber from N. Italy to SZ 104.

85.49% chance of clearing the destroyer. (Slightly better than 50% chance to survive.)

The 2010 era  Ruleset was called Alpha, for “First Edition Global 1940”.  Extensive revisions to the setup were then made, through multiple iterations (Alpha +1, +2, +3) and the final version was then slightly modified into “Second Edition Global 1940” which was published and circulated a few years later…2012-3 I think.

Anyway, Alpha +3 was a playtest version that was circulated on the internet for improved play and was then published, so that’s what we recognize today as “G40”.  Only a few other minor map changes and rule wordings were changed.    Piece sculpts are different, artillery is very confusingly similar to flak guns, the smaller teams didn’t have their own molds just copies of the other molds.  Second Edition is far superior as a purchase, since First is obsolete.

That means that there are 3 official Rulesets (Alpha, Alpha +3 G40, G42).  You could go back and play the first edition (alpha 1), I bought in after that, so I’ve only seen the boxes, never played.  its radically different starting pieces for all teams.

I am currently in the middle of my first game of Global using Alpha. It is going really well actually. We have played 6 games of global in our group (this alpha game is our 7th). Initially we certainly believed that there is a distinct allied advantage, and I still do. I believe that only very skilled players playing as the Axis have a chance of winning with them, and that is if they play against mistake prone allied players. If you have skilled allied players against equally or even more skilled Axis players, the Allies seem unbeatable barring extreme luck or blunders going in Axis favor.

We have 1 victory for the Axis, and that actually came down to our two best players who are much better than the rest of the group playing Axis, and the allies were made up of our third best player and two totally new players. America’s player was playing for the first time ever. And the Axis just barely won due to a 1/36 tech miracle and botched allied play (poor use of transports).

There were also 3 allied victories, and 2 games we called draws, but the allies would have won if we decided to play for weeks longer…

We are currently on J3 in our latest game with our first go at the Alpha setup. We also have the same two players as Axis, only this time switching powers. I have to admit that I think I like this setup better as Germany because our UK player is infamous for bringing the whole british empire into Egypt and holding Africa with overwhelming force while threatening Italy all game long. Less planes and ships and initial transports makes this harder for him and makes Italy more viable. Also we started with a G2 DoW on USSR. Things are going very well for them with the USSR’s hardware in dead zones, so by R4 they will be down to only Inf.

Japan is doing very well also in China and with the sizeable Manchurian land force nipping at the retreating Russian’s heels in Siberia. The lack of planes certainly is putting a cramp in Japan’s game play in the Pacific itself, and in its Caroline/Hawaiian posturing against the Angloish-Allies, but they are still in a solid position. I the new naval base in NSW is a very interesting double edged sword. It makes Australia very happy that they can move around a bit easier, and can claim DNG on ANZAC1, but they have to be careful because it no longer is a dead end for the IJN, which makes ANZAC a viable target for Japan.