Are you still interested in a PBEM game?
I am new to this, so I may need some help with the PBEM mechanics. I have downloaded tripleA and have played a number of games against myself in local mode. I will definitely commit to finish what I start and will not disappear on you. I believe I can do a turn or more/day skipping some weeknights as events dictate. I would prefer no tech (enough going on in the game without worrying about that complication). You can have choice of sides.
In a determined Sea Lion, the Japs do not attack the UK/Anzac until London is taken (in the meantime they work on China and Russian far east). So the US will not have any planes in London helping the UK defend London and the only way to attack the German navy in 110 after the landing is with carrier planes launched from 102 on US4 (bombers won’t be able to help because they will have no place to land - - Germans will hold Scotland and if necessary Erie). So the Germans do not usually need to build an additional carrier to defend the transports in 110. That said, Kruezfeld’s IPC analysis certainly demonstrates a downside to the G4 sea lion. The German player that uses it would argue that keeping the UK out of the game for a prolonged period, the extra income from London/Scotland and the ability to use the transports to drop 20+ units into Leningrad more than compensates for what you initially give the Russians. The best direct response that I have been able to come up with, is to try to have as many UK planes and ships available to destroy the German landing fleet in 111 on G3 when they make the Scotland landing so they cannot go back and get the 2nd wave of troops (while maintaining enough strength in London to prevent a direct assualt on G3) a tough balancing act for the UK.
The basic idea behind the determined Sea Lion is to drop 20+ units in Scotland on G3 and then hit London with those plus another 20+ drop so that London falls with Germany losing alot of infantry but retaining all his tanks and much of the arty depending on die rolls and only AA loses to the air units. Then take the 90+ ipc gain to buy a huge amount of land units to first defend Berlin, then take the offensive against Russia. With all the transports Germany can threaten to out flank the Russians by dropping 20+ units into Leningard. Because UK is so focused on London (as they should be) this also means the Italians are doing well in the Med. The opening can be done as shown above or with the more traditional first build of 1 carrier and 2 transports. The downside for the Axis is that Russia is building up and can get all the frontier territories when London falls. Also Japan cannot be unleached until J4 (assuming US has done a couple naval builds in the Atlantic).
Cow, I like your Japan Playbook, and I am curious to hear your thoughts (and those of any other experienced players) on the best way to play the US in Pacific (along with the obvious seize the island moves by UK and Anzac) given the delayed Japanese start. At the moment my plan is build 2 carriers and 1 battleship in the pacific on US1 and go to Queensland with the US fleet on US3. The US2 and US3 builds would be in the Atlantic.
Good ideas, thank you
On the question of the inside or outside the Denmark straits, he puts them inside the straights on G1, and if he is not landing them in Scotland on G2 he will move them outside the straits on G2 (along with the carrier, battleship, cruiser, and the 8 newly built transports). In terms of blocking the straits on UK1, he would use the Italian air force on Italian1 (1 bomber and 2 ftrs) to clear 112.
Thanks for your thoughts. The scramble is very tempting (probably trading 3 ftrs for 2 ftrs and 2 tac). If I keep the bomber in the UK and bring the fighter up from Gibraltar, it will stop him from landing the 10 units in Scotland on G2, but then with two less ftrs in the UK he is much more likely to just land 26 units on G3, particularly if he can pick up a bomber in the process (rather than land the 26 in Scotland and completing the job on G4, which is much better for the Pacific and the Russians, not to mention the better attacks that can be made in the Med). It is the Americans that I am still puzzling over. Should I make the 3+ Atlantic naval builds necessary to take London back without losing it again (meaning that the Pacific only gets one naval build) or should I just forget about London and focus on the Pacific and do enough in the Atlantic so the US can provide some assistance to the Med. Is there something that can be done with a US bomber build that would help London or sink his invasion fleet after the fact?
I am courious to get thoughts on the best response (particularly what the Americans should do) to the following Sea Lion approach:
G1 Build: 4 transports
G1: 2 subs, 2 ftr, and 2 tac to sz 111, 2 subs, 2 ftr, 2 tac and 2 bombers to 110, and 1 sub to 106, usual stuff in Europe
G2 Build: Carrier and 8 transports
If I scramble in 110, then he has automatic Sea Lion on G3 by landing 10 units in Scotland on G2 and 26 more on G3. If I do not scramble, then he will land 26 units in Scotland on G3 and bring everything else on G4. So on the UK side I plan to hold the 3 UK ftrs in London (along with everything else). Use the UK bomber, and Gibraltor cruiser and ftr in the attacks to take out the Italian navy in sz 96 and 97 (he uses the Italians very well so I want to cripple them as best I can). It is on the American side that I cannot really decide what to do.