Did think of stripping the Malta garrison, because the island itself is virtually useless.
Germany probably doesn’t need aircraft to attack Greece.
Sealion Version 1.0
-
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!
-
Thx. Were was the rule clarfífication made?
When I was playing a game of Pacific about a month ago, my friend (Japan) pulled this one on me. He attacked my fleet at Midway, which I thought was safe, with a bunch of Airpower I thought was out of range from the Carolines. It turns out he bought 3 carriers in the sea of Japan and landed them there, I didn’t know about that, I disputed it, we looked in the Pacific 1940 Rulebook and its all there. You can buy a new carrier, end the fighters movement (combat or non combat) on a sea zone adjacent to the factory where you buy the carrier, and land the fighters on the newly built carrier. Essentially this gives you 1 more space of range on your fighters and Tacs, and allows you to pull a bit of a K4-2 square trick on your enemy. Deception is part of the battle, I know better now.
-
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.Yes, its not an enemy fleet and does not affect your actions while they are neutral.
cheers!
-
Ok played 2 more games.
First one I played the allies. Sealion such an abysmal failure that the Axis resigned and we immediately started another game. In a nutshell, Germany did not exclusively buy transports and stuff to put on them. He also did not attack G3, instead invading Scotland (intending to have a dble attack on London next turn.) I strafed Scotland, eliminating two thirds of German force plus built 10 more inf on London.
2nd game I played the Axis.
I took France but crapped out on one of the sea battles. 2 fighters, 1 Tac, 2 subs vs 1 BB, 1 CA. Both UK ships survived. UK chose not to destroy German fleet (G1 buy: CV, DD, SS). Instead he used Gibral fleet to sink half the Italian navy.
He did Infantry stack buy in part because I warned him about my intention to Sealion.
Surviving Royal Navy linked up with Canadian DD and TT in the sea zone between Ireland and uk. (These ships sunk on G2 with minimal loss for Germans)
UK2 saw another 10 inf built in London.
Set up interesting situation G3. I judged the G3 Sealion attack about a 50-50 chance. I set up to repeat an almost identical attack G4 so I proceeded, retreating 2 planes after final round of combat. Eliminated 75% of UK defense.
G4 Sealion (Porky’s 2, the next day) was no contest. USA was not in the war so could not reinforce London US3 with planes. UK falls.Meanwhile, USSR had a considerable stack in East Poland and waltzed into Poland on R4.
G5 saw Germany mounting a hasty defense in Berlin (bringing back all surviving Armor from London). Germany upgraded Berlin IC to major AND had the money to buy 23 inf (10 in London, 10 in West Germany, 3 in Berlin.)
Cairo had also fallen so Axis needed only 2 more cities. UK had no more builds in South Africa so the Italians were mopping up. Also Italy build IC on Iraq to help threaten Russia.Americans were off the coast of Europe in force by US6 with an unassailable fleet (8 loaded TTs)-they were intimidated by German fleet and had delayed coming over for a turn.
G6 Germany used TT’s to move Infantry stack to Poland (together with everything in Berlin) and USSR was on the defensive.
At that point we had to call the Game because of time but I feel the Axis had the win: US takes 2 turns to ferry stuff to the front while Germany can build directly on London (or Paris) as needed.
Sealion was not a sure fire strategy for Axis win. Pushing Russians back on broad front starting G4 seems safer (putting IC in Romania instead of TT build).
but -
but?
-
…but (last post was done late at night) concentrating on Russia and not taking London gives the Americans time to effectively “Torch” Africa. Not clear that Axis can hold Cairo if USA makes it a priority. UK can build stuff in South Africa to hold off Italians until USA arrives.
American fleet having the run of the Med causes all kinds of defensive problems for the Axis, landing forces behind the lines, etc…
Italy will be back down to 10 IPC production before you know it. Axis could be at 7 victory cities for a loooong time.In this extremely long game scenario it may be necessary for the Axis to take Turkey to give themselves a short cut to Africa.
-
I have thought about the Turkey idea, but I still haven’t had a chance to pull it off.
Van Trump, had an interesting time reading about your game.
However:Germany upgraded Berlin IC to major AND had the money to buy 23 inf (10 in London,
How were you able to buy 10 INF in London? Did you upgrade to a Major IC in London, because when you take a major IC, it immediately becomes a minor IC as stated in the rulebook.
-
I have thought about the Turkey idea, but I still haven’t had a chance to pull it off.
Van Trump, had an interesting time reading about your game.
However:Germany upgraded Berlin IC to major AND had the money to buy 23 inf (10 in London,
How were you able to buy 10 INF in London? Did you upgrade to a Major IC in London, because when you take a major IC, it immediately becomes a minor IC as stated in the rulebook.
This is the E40 thread, and in E40, the major stays a major
-
Whoa, did not know about reduction of captured IC.
Have to read Global rules carefully before trying it.
To be frank, people I am playing against are not strong players.
The only game balance I give them is I play my turns extremely quickly, making the odd mistake from time to time. Also try to give them advice about my intentions. -
Well Van, you can always declare war on the USA on Germany1 and Italy1 to give em more cash!!!
-
It is also possible for a British opening that doesn’t involve a Taranto attack, as it almost certainly opens up a German Sealion.
A tactic I’m working up involves placing the British CV/DD SZ91 to SZ92, replacing the tac with 2 fig from Eng/Alx. CA from SZ98 to SZ92 makes it difficult for Italian naval attack, who would prob solidify in SZ95 or attack French fleet. A purchase of nothing might tempt a G2 sealion, so perhaps some infantry would mark for a standard buy.
Gbr 2 sees 2 CV’s (2 DD’s built on top of that, preferably) built, fleet in SZ92 moved to SZ110 ensures that no Sealion can happen Turn 3. Should the Germans have taken the precaution to building a larger fleet on G2 instead of transports, they’ll still need those planes to take out your fleet, so build land units instead.
Not that they’d prep for that anyways.
-
It is also possible for a British opening that doesn’t involve a Taranto attack, as it almost certainly opens up a German Sealion.
A tactic I’m working up involves placing the British CV/DD SZ91 to SZ92, replacing the tac with 2 fig from Eng/Alx. CA from SZ98 to SZ92 makes it difficult for Italian naval attack, who would prob solidify in SZ95 or attack French fleet. A purchase of nothing might tempt a G2 sealion, so perhaps some infantry would mark for a standard buy.
Gbr 2 sees 2 CV’s (2 DD’s built on top of that, preferably) built, fleet in SZ92 moved to SZ110 ensures that no Sealion can happen Turn 3. Should the Germans have taken the precaution to building a larger fleet on G2 instead of transports, they’ll still need those planes to take out your fleet, so build land units instead.
Not that they’d prep for that anyways.
A few problems:
UK can’t build 2 CV 2 DD on UK2 unless they save some money from UK1(is this what you’re doing)?If Germany’s fleet is in Z112, it goes around the island and invades from Z109
-
I still think an infantry/armor build, and moving the Canadian forces to the home islands is the better deterrent to Sea lion. I also try and reinforce Gibraltar as fast as I can and pull the fleets back. I don’t enjoy playing so defensively, believe me, but The Luftwaffe will smash your fleet if you don’t get it somewhere safe (like Newfoundland) and build it up first(that is if Germany is going for Sea Lion Strategy). This is especially hard if they (GER) builds heavily on subs and airpower. I think it is actually better for the German player to hit the Soviets and not get involved int he pipe dream that is sea lion.
Suggested Topics
