I wrote something on Sealion tactics, and as I said there, Sealion isn’t worth it. If you’re going for London on G2, then UK will have lots of men in Egypt to crush Libya left over, and that’s always a hard battle for Italy. Plus, you’ve probably been neglecting the East, so a better-prepared Russia can slam into you. Then, there’s the US, which can now strike in either London or France, so you’ve got to protect both.
Sealion Version 1.0
-
@Imperious:
11 Inf, 8 tanks and 3 artillery 4 fighters, 3 tactical bombers, 1 bomber and 1 BB, 1 CA
Against:
23 UK infantry 3 fighters, 1 tactical bomber, 1 tank
Germany wins 85.7 to 13.3%
If i made a mistake and UK has 24 infantry, then the odds are 78% to 20%Although you have posted UK forces as if the transport in lab survives you have also posted the maximum nr of attacking planes, whereas this number is likely to be lower with the disposed attacks. You have yourself stated that 2 planes is likely to be lost.
One flaw with the way you are posting probabilities is the concept of winning a battle. In particular you are posting the odds of killing all the enemies in a grid block while having 1 or more unit alive. For instance; if you are left with 1 bomber in 111 and 1 tac in 110 thats a win by this definition, whereas its really not, it will break sealion.
As I got the battle calculator I’ve programmed at work I’m unable to back this up by quantitative numbers, but I’ll get back to this tomorrow.
-
After seeing this tactic in play I have a few questions for the doubters:
1. Even if Jim’s math is slightly out - which depending on the methods used I agree with you can vary.
I think it is crystal clear that the tactic provides for a better then 60% chance of capturing UK on turn 3, do you agree?2. What would you do if you went with Jim’s tactic and it failed to capture UK on turn 3?
I know what I would do. load the transports again and hit turn 4, which given the Uk’s very limited resources has got to be a much higher probabilty, then the 78% on turn 3.
3. Your assuming a perfect defence with the UK, which I might add total screws the UK in the med and the atlantic even if they manage to hold (which requires luck) do you think any player that hadn’t seen it would stand a chance against it?
4. Do any of you think for a second that the game designers, really desgined a game “on purpose”, in which in MOST games played with the out of the box rules allows for the capture of UK on turn 3 and at worst turn 4?
It seems clear to me that Jim broke the game, good job with the math and great job with the overall tactic. It is clear we need to be discussing a fix, not if the tactcic works or not… It works, and what is more clear is that the math supports it working just about every game.
-
Actually yes, I do believe it was designed for sea lion to be a possibility, maybe not this high in odds but yes. And no, I don’t think it breaks the game yet.
Remember all the Gencon posts of UK falling and Russia liberating it? I have no clue how on earth that would work, but it seems likely that it was expected to happen.
-
4. Do any of you think for a second that the game designers, really desgined a game “on purpose”, in which in MOST games played with the out of the box rules allows for the capture of UK on turn 3 and at worst turn 4?
No they didn’t play-test enough times ( 3 times total in some cases). So they made a mistake.
-
Sea Lion is possibly, but only just.
It isn’t like its a surprise if Germany is gearing up for an attack, so, if your worth anything as a serious player, you counter it. Keep your fighters there, build UK infantry, block with Destroyers, fly in United States Airpower (including bombers, they can take a hit instead of a fighter). If Germany shows their hand, then don’t be afraid to fight it! It isn’t like its gonna be a surprise. Besides, if Germany is dumb enough to attempt a Sealion, then let them waste their money, it only helps out Russia.
If the dice work out for Germany, then its possible that they take UK via Sealion, but think of the risks, I will never attempt it as Germany. You waste your money on ships that are just gonna die, you are force to scuttle your Luftwaffe, its strategically stupid to even attempt it. I play against an Axis lover who also happens to be a Sealion lover and I enjoyed watching him murder himself twice now, so as UK, I say Bring it, I will take you down with me. -
Sea Lion is possibly, but only just.
:?
I thought it was shown to be more than that.
If Germany shows their hand, then don’t be afraid to fight it! It isn’t like its gonna be a surprise. Besides, if Germany is dumb enough to attempt a Sealion, then let them waste their money, it only helps out Russia.
All I have to do is buy 1 CV, and UK MUST counter it. No units in South Africa - no navy - just inf. UK fleet avoids Italy to protect availabe units to get to UK.
And I accomplished that w/ 1 CV. If you don’t do any of that, I WILL take UK.
You waste your money on ships that are just gonna die, you are force to scuttle your Luftwaffe, its strategically stupid to even attempt it. I play against an Axis lover who also happens to be a Sealion lover and I enjoyed watching him murder himself twice now, so as UK, I say Bring it, I will take you down with me.
After I take UK, what do you see me doing that wastes the TTs?
Put the money where the mouth is and fire up a game.
-
taking UK is not an auto-win for Germany–its far from it actually… Germany has to reverse strategy. now it has to prevent he US from liberating UK and Russia grows…this Sealion attack isnt special, dude…its isnt some game ender like you want to believe. :cry:
-
this Sealion attack isnt special, dude…its isnt some game ender like you want to believe.
You’re not reading the posts, are you?
-
@jim,
I apologize, I am really commenting on a Global game scenario, where it is assumed that USA is already at war with Germany after J1 attack (which I have always found works best, at least for me)
If Sea Lion works for you, then more power to you. I just don’t favor the tactic.
I will give it too you, Yes, in a Europe game, assuming the US is not at war yet, then London is very Vulnerable, and I am sure it could easily fall.
So, I didn’t mean any offense or unfair criticism of your strategy.
When you say fire up a game, It’ll have to wait on the folks at Sourceforge, I just can’t do the PBF games, too much margin of error for cheating.
-
this Sealion attack isnt special, dude…its isnt some game ender like you want to believe.
You’re not reading the posts, are you?
Hey Jim,
I would like to fire up a game with you. You can be Axis and I will be Allies. I downloaded Func’s map so I’m ready. I’ve played here with AA50 many times but its been several months since then (PBF that is).
Give me your best Axis moves with your Sealion 1.0, however, I want to play Global. Since Sealion requires a G3 take, I assume you would wait as Japan to attack on round 3 also right??? Also, I want to play with Larry’s latest Pac 40 setup, which sounds like the one he wants to settle with (below in color). I’d like to playtest Global with Scenario Alpha and your Sealion 1.0 at the same time with this game…maybe a couple games. So would you like to play???
***note: the changes to the national objectives apply to the Pacific game only, use the global national objectives as is for the global game.
Quote as per LH:
Scenario Alpha
I think the following setup is where I’d like to end up. If this is moving a bit too fast for some of you I apologize.
Below is the Scenario Alpha’s setup
I recommend you test this setup and give me some feed back. Let me know how you like it. What you don’t like about it. Barring any great balance issues or other unforeseen goodies, this will be the core of the new Pacific '40 recommended setup.
I call this setup “Scenario Alpha”.
All the National Objectives and bonus incomes remain as they are in the present Pacific40 rule book, with the exception of the following two NOs:Note: The UK will gain 5 IPCs for controlling Kwangtung and Malaya at the same time but only if at war.
Note: The United States will collect 5 IPCs per round for controlling the Philippines but only if at war.China
Szechwan 5 Infantry and one fighter
Hunan 2 Infantry
Yunnan 4 Infantry
Kweichow 2 Infantry
Shensi 1 Infantry
Suiyuyan 2 InfantryANZAC
Malaya 1 Infantry
New South Wales - 1 Infantry, 1 Minor IC, 1 Naval Base.
New Zealand - 1 Infantry, 1 Fighter, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base.
Queensland - 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Fighter, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base.
Sea Zone 62 -1 Destroyer, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 63 – 1 CruiserUnited Kingdom (India)
Sea Zone 37 - 1 Battleship
Sea Zone 39 - 1 Destroyer, 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
Kwangtung - 2 Infantry, 1 Naval Base
Burma - 1 Infantry, 1 Fighter
Malaya - 3 Infantry, 1 Naval Base
India - 6 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AA Gun, 1 Fighter, 1 Tac Bomber, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base, 1 Major ICUnited States
Western US - 3 Infantry, 1 Mech Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Tank, 1 Bomber, 1 AA Gun, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base, 1 Major IC
Hawaiian Islands - 2 Infantry, 2 fighters, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base.
Philippines - 2 Infantry, 1 fighter, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base.
Midway - 1 Airbase
Wake Island - 1 Airbase
Guam - 1 Airbase
Sea Zone 26 - 1 Sub, 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 10 - Battleship, Cruiser, Transport, Carrier w/Tac & Ftr
Sea Zone 35 - 1 Destroyer and 1 TransportJapan
Japan - 6 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 1 Tank, 2 Fighters, 2 Tac Bombers, 1 Bomber, 1 AA Gun, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base, 1 Major IC
Manchuria - 6 Infantry, 1 Mech Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AA Gun, 2 Fighters, 2 Tac Bombers, 1 Bomber
Palau Island - 1 Infantry
Kiangsi - 3 Infantry, 1 Artillery
Formosa - 1 Fighter
Shantung - 2 Infantry
Kwangsi - 3 Infantry, 1 Artillery
Iwo Jima - 1 Infantry
Jehol - 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery
Caroline Islands - 1 AA gun, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base, 1 Infantry
Siam - 2 Infantry
Okinawa - 1 Infantry, 1 Fighter
Kiangsu - 2 Infantry, 1 Fighter, 1 Tac Bomber.
Korea - 3 Infantry
Sea Zone 6 - 1 Sub, 2 Destroyers, 2 Carriers each with 2 Tac & 2 Ftrs., 1 Cruiser, 1 Battleship, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 19 - 1 Sub, 1 Battleship, 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 33 - 1 Destroyer, 1 Carrier w/ 1 Tac & 1 Ftrs.
Sea Zone 20 - 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport -
Best laid plans…
I had every intention of Sealion. Only hitch on G1 was phenomenal dice by the French.
Suffice to say Paris held against the Germans and fell to the Italians later round 1.My Italian ally was overjoyed with this unexpected bounty.
I used all air on Royal Navy with the exception of one Tac Bomber which I sent into France to its death. Sent all ground units into Paris that could reach with the exception of Inf + Art which invaded Normandy.
I had bought CV, DD, SS. Needless to say, G2 did not see a huge TT build.
Unfortunately for the allies, less than sterling play led to their defeat.
To counter Italy in Africa, UK built quite a lot of materiel in South Africa.In spite of ridiculously bad dice by Germany in battle after battle, Russia still fell on turn 8. (Moscow could have fallen on turn 7 but I judged the odds at only about 65-70% in German’s favor. WAY too low for my dice rolling to succeed.)
I remember in one Russian counter attack final 2 rounds were Rus fighter, 2 Tanks, 1 Art vs 6 German Panzers defending. Russian won with fighter and tank surviving. Typical German dice. at the start of that battle Germany outnumbered Russians 3 to 2 in terms of pips. Absolutely idiotic attack by USSR that succeeded.Final Moscow battle the dice finally deserted the Russians. Left with 14 surviving Panzers in Moscow.
Thanks dice gods. No really, perfect timing.Americans stationed out of Gibraltar made a last ditch effort to recapture Cairo but the 3 fighter build by Italy in Egypt was too much to overcome.
-
Indeed, if France doesn’t fall, Sealion HAS to be called off.
Good show on your win.
When I didn’t get France, I just never got my second wind and ended up losing.
-
You should play it again to get the a G3 with Sealion. its not a fair test if Germany sucks out on battle that was a gimme.
-
Also remember though guys,
Assuming your playing the Global Game to test Sea Lion: It sounds to me like G3 is the best (earliest or only?) time for Sealion to go down. In that case, like was mentioned, A J3 attack might be best to keep US out of the war and avoid them landing men and more importantly fighters there. That being said, I am more familiar with Pacific 1940, as most of you are, and we all know that the longer Japan waits, the more it helps the allies (in both Global and Pacific). If Japan doesn’t sink that British battleship and transports, then they can build a carrier in India and have quite a little fleet, not to mention the USA having enough time to successfully evacuate the Philippine aircraft (which have always helped me when I could get them saved and utilize them later).
I guess in short I am just throwing it out there that if a delayed Japanese attack is required for a better Sealion outcome for the axis in Global, don’t forget about the repercussions that waiting for a J3 attack will cause to Japan in the East.
-
Rule question:
Is it possible to, when you place (PT round) an AC that you bought, also place fighters who are stationed on an adjacent territory on that AC? I.e. fighters that you did NOT buy that turn.
If not, the G1 buy for sealion (1 AC, 1 SS, 1 TT), placed in SZ112 will be at risk for anihiliation by UK 3 fighters combined with possible survivors in SZ109 (destroyer) and AC plus tactical (ftr?) and DD from SZ91. It seems like a risky G1 buy to me.
The most probable scenario (I guess) is that Germany has 1 BB (with one hit), 1 CA, 1 SS and 1 AC (plus 2 x TT) vs. 3 ftrs, 1 tactical, and AC (to take hits) and 1 DD. Don’t have an odds calculator (where can I find one for free?), but if anything goes wrong on G1 the german fleet will be anihilated on U1 (probably even if everything goes accordning to plan). Leaves the med. wide open for Mussolini but it’s still a good bargain for the UK, especially since UK also sinks 2 x TT (68 IPC loss for Germany). Maybe Germany could spare his CA from the attack on SZ112 in G1 to block the UK AC on SZ104?
Odds
Germany vs. UK
1x4 (BB damaged) - 1x4 (tactical)
1x3 (CA) - 3x3 (ftrs)
1x2 (AC*) - 1x2 (DD)
1x1 (SS) - 1x0 (AC*)- both UK and Germany has 1 extra hit for their AC
R1
G 9 - 2 hits
UK 15 - 3 hitsR2
G 7 - 1 hit
UK 13 - 2 hitsR3
G 4 - 1 hit
UK 10 - 2 hits }}} Germany annihilated and UK has 1 x tactical and 2 x fighters left.Pls correct me on the math if Im wrong here.
-
There was a rule clarification on newly built aircraft carriers (CV).
If you end fighter movement in the sea zone the CV is being built, the fighters can land on the newly built CV.
-
You could use your cruiser as a speed bump in the seas zone to the left/west of your main fleet behind Denmark (sorry, don’t have the map in front of me), couldn’t you? This would only allow British aircraft to hit you that turn, which they probably wouldn’t, if they couldn’t throw in any ships to also take hits, ie the carrier=2. I think it would be a worthy sacrifice of the cruiser.
-
I also suppose you could use that cruiser as an attaker/casualty in attacking the British and French Cruisers in that sea zone as well, might save you a plane.
-
I also suppose you could use that cruiser as an attaker/casualty in attacking the British and French Cruisers in that sea zone as well, might save you a plane.
But I need to attack the french and UK cruisers on G1, then I cant hide behind Denmark, and I canät use my newly bought CV in any attack…
-
There was a rule clarification on newly built aircraft carriers (CV).
If you end fighter movement in the sea zone the CV is being built, the fighters can land on the newly built CV.
Thx. Were was the rule clarfífication made? Is there an authority to ask or are we just interpreting the rulebook?
Another rule question for you. Can you ship troops to Finland in G1 without declaring war on Russia? i.e. acting as if there was no russian fleet.cheers!
Suggested Topics
