Sealion? Is there a perfict set up?

I rolled two games where Germany buys a Major IC on turn one.

First game, UK bought an IC in Egypt and a fighter for London, and US spent in the Pacific. Sealion G3 was a rout.

Second game, UK played conservative/defensively and aggressively with scrambles, and piled on the troops. US still spent in the Pacific because they’re not stacking 3 fully loaded AC’s in SZ 102 when Germany purchases a Major on turn one. This battle was a lot closer but Germany still sacked London with 4 tanks left and it’s entire air force (what was left of it - lost over half on G1 and G2. 1 SB, 3 Tac, 1 Ftr)

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLC5zN4iV9YdGilBNXv91hgvUn99pR70xu

Very good points ItIsILeClerc, although I don’t think its wise to ever do a Sealion and a J1-DOW.  The plan above which I stated is very situational would be very risky with a J1-DOW.

i would also rather fight on his turf where i get income generating for as long as possible. once you have to back down that’s when you are basically saying, “I lose moscow sooner or later.”

Never was so much owed by so many to so few
  He also said that another 2 weeks and they would had nothing to send up to counter the German Air force. Hitler also ordered the operation “SEA LION”
I think you should always go for the sea lion look, and when they think they have the ultimate defense throw a lug wrench in their cog wheel and do a Barbarossa
all this took place before  Hitler decided to turn his attack on Russia

@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.

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.

@cminke:

i`l get pics as soon as i can! :evil:

Can’t wait to see the pics. It sounds awesome!  :-)

@Peck:

How does the fighter in Malta get too London in time, is it not attacking with the UK fleet on Italy

You have two rounds to move a fighter from Malta to England.  That’s only 7 Territories, realistically 8 (since you have to land enroute) but that is perfectly within the limits.

Yes, I count the Inf, Arm in Quebec because its the worst case for Germany.  I always judge from worst case scenarios for an overall opinion. When playing a game, I look at realistic and worst case, but this isnt a real game, its a theoretical one.

Anyway, one could run the odds without the inf, arm from Quebec to see what would happen.  I doubt it would be much different, but it may be, it’s 2 units that you can lose and 5 defensive punch, so it may shift things 7% (just a mental guess).

And yes, you give up the Med to Italy, but you keep London so you can continue to fight.  Right or wrong move, I don’t know.  All I know is if England doesn’t go “balls to the walls” defending England on round 1, I assume it will fall on Germany 3, in which case, I use Japan 1 to cripple the American fleet, sink the British transport and stage an invasion of Australia to press the advantage.