Sea Lion - my experiences and relfections so far…

[zooooma]

Germany buys two transports and one air craft carrier.

Attack sz109 w 1bmb & 1sub
Attack sz 110 w 1ftr 1tac & 2sub
Attack sz 111 w  1ftr 1tac & 2sub
Attack sz 112 w 1sub 1crs 1tac 1ftr & 1bb
Attack Normandy w 1inf & 1tnk
Attack France w everything else.

• Build your fleet in  sz 112 with your existing navy (this battle is overkilled because you can’t afford any loss of navy - not even a wounded BB - you need the fleet intact to protect your builds). Edit - lose sub first.

• build your fleet in sz 114 if combat is is disastrous.  To Russia with love!

• Non combat into Finland and pull your tanks back from the eastern front

On turn two:

• Move your bonus infantry from Finland back to Norway and move all available continental infantry, armour, and artillery into West Germany

• Build mostly transports - make matching loads with existing infantry and artillery (see above).

• Attack England (to soften) with 3inf 3tnk & (probably) air

Edit - use artillery, save tanks

• If your navy was threatened, more warships can be built in sz110 with the IC in Normandy

Turn three attack England with everything for the finishing blow.  Russia and USA are not yet at war.

I have only played four games of Global 1940 (four solid days) so far, only thrice as the Axis, and had terrible starts with Germany all three games (though I took England in one game).  I have not analysed England’s possible responses given various results.  I don’t see Sea Lion being talked about much here (and I think it’s all we should be talking about), so 'm starting this with less theory and practice than I’d like…

The time I took England It seemed like a liability.  U$A had built 100% in Atlantic, and it cost more to protect England than I ever got out of it.  Of course England is a bigger liability when it’s active, and it’s in theory worth some investment to shut it off and keep it off.  But retaining it takes a lot away from the Russian front, Meanwhile I’ve spent two full build with no new ground forces, and all but evacuated the force that did start in Europe.  Russia and U$A were both huge and surrounding me.

I did get an unlucky start that game (I lost four subs and five planes and UK kept a battleship  :(), so maybe I could have come out stronger.  It was difficult as it happened.  I wasn’t sure whether to forsake the UK to US liberation having stalled the UK significantly, or to invest in holding the UK and hoping Japan gets big fast enough.  But Japan (in Keeping USA away from Germany) didn’t even Get India till turn four.  It didn’t seem good at all; then again I really was roasted G1.

In the Game where I abandoned Sea Lion and built in sz114 I did quite well.  The navy helped against Russia, and I’m inclined to think this is a safe enough build.  Japan got to wipe out India and get big fast.  Japan assured the Axis conquest of Africa, which hurt UK’s economy.  I wondered if it was worth forcing Sea Lion If it depletes Europe and stunts Japan who would soon devastate the UK economy anyway.

I’ve got lots to think about and lots to test.  I haven’t been so excited about A&A for a long time!  But I’d like to hear from anyone else with more (or even different) experience or analysis.

• Can Germany Force Sea Lion?

• If not, can Germany threaten Sea Lion but still viably target Russia (such as with a navy build or no build G1)?

• If Germany can force Sea Lion, is it worth the cost to the campaign in Europe and the delays to Japan?
  Could it really be that Germany can force Sea Lion but shouldn’t?

[eudemonist]

We’ve played two games, both Axis wins, but the Axis actually did better in the game where Sealion failed.  Not enough to go on yet, but it’s looking like they might be better off turning east sooner.  Of course, not taking London means you have to eventually get Moscow, but that actually might be easier than taking and holding The Rock.

[Funcioneta]

@eudemonist:

not taking London means you have to eventually get Moscow, but that actually might be easier than taking and holding The Rock.

The Rock? Gibraltar?  :lol:

[Funcioneta]

If London falls, it can save Italy, and also UK will need rebuild the IC at England. An all Atlantic buy for USA can work to retake London, but Japan could attack USA J4, not J3. This way you could, say, buy 2 dd at London’s coast and then block the USA’s landings or update the IC and try holding it … of course, Germany would not attack USSR until round 4

I don’t know … if Sea Lion is a viable strat, then we’ll need delete the rule that says that countries without a capital cannot buy, or at least make Ottawa UK’s second capital

[eudemonist]

then we’ll need delete the rule that says that countries without a capital cannot buy, or at least make Ottawa UK’s second capital

Nah, they have a Pacific capital–they’ll be fine.

[Funcioneta]

No, India cannot colect income for european territories, even if London has fallen

[zooooma]

Upon more reflection, Germany can force Sea Lion in this manner. The most UK can muster for round two defense is:

• 12inf

• 1tnk

• 3ftr

• 1tac

They’ll lose about seven units that turn (depending o your air losses), leaving:

• 12inf

• 4tnk

• 3ftr

• 1tac

Against ten or more loaded transports plus air and offshore bombardments in the round three defense.  Brittan falls unless they catch a lucky break somewhere.

to refine the strategy, wave one should be artillery and not tanks, or two artillery and one tank.  This saves the cannon fodder for the battle which actually has a second round.  Also, lose the sub before the plane in sz112.

@Funcioneta:

I don’t know … if Sea Lion is a viable strat, then we’ll need delete the rule that says that countries without a capital cannot buy, or at least make Ottawa UK’s second capital

Sea Lion is viable as it’s own end, but USA can take it back.  So is the massive set back to UK plus the bounty plus maybe saving Italy plus tying America’s hand worth the two builds blown on boats, the over-one-hundred IPCs worth of ground units sent at UK, the flack, and the restraining of Japan?

I don’t see why you’d want an artificial rule to prevent this strategy - if Axis can win this way, it’s still a good fight.  It’s historic too.  In real life Sea Lion was viable and almost happened.

[AdmiralNagano]

I’m glad that this is an option in the game, and I think that even if Germany can guarantee the capture that is not game-breaking at all - people are so quick to make house rules!

That said, sealion was not viable in real life. One British destroyer could sink every single one of those river barges with its wake alone!

[eudemonist]

@Funcioneta:

No, India cannot colect income for european territories, even if London has fallen

I know.  I just thought you meant it would be no fun to be “out of the game” or something.