German fleet in sz 110 after round 4. Land force to hit London = 45 vs 35 land in London Germany has 15+land left after battle.
Looks like UK is not hitting Scotland on its turn as outlined above. With only 10 TTs, Germany has in SCotland 10 inf, 9 tanks, 1 AA at best. Uk hits it with 23 inf, 1 art, 4 tanks, 5 fht, 1 tac.
I would hit it for sure.
Average surviving units after 2 rounds of battle (run 10 000 times):
UK - 20 units
Germany - 3 units
These numbers are assuming Germany lands with its best units possible in Scotland, so it will have had to have bought more for the invasion of London.
Remaining in UK is 19 inf, 4 tanks, 6 planes, 1 AA. You MUST hit and run on UK 3 as outlined. It is the best chance for UK to inflict damage, or even stop Sealion if there are not enough TTs.
Heh, I agree Jim! After running this little thought experiment I believe I can hold London through till G4, at which time I plan on making the fall of London as bloody as possible for Germany. I can’t wait till I get to play Axis again because I’m going to try the G2 Barbarossa invasion.
I think we need to have a collaboration on the summary. What does everyone think is the results of this test? Has a G3 Sealion been defeated? Also Jim could you post a bit more about the G3 Scotland/G4 london attack? If Germ lands with 13 trns in Scotland G3, what is UK’s response and average losses in 1 round of combat?
Personally I think we’ve cracked the Sealion, but I can’t seem to get any hands on experience because my opponent has been going early Barbarossa lately.
If UK is very thorough and pulls everything to London to defend, G3 is just about out of the question.
Germany could still pull it off, but it really won’t be close to worth it.
The G4 attack is unstoppable. Maybe Germany will lose more tanks than he’d like if UK attacks Scotland on UK3, but London will fall, just about guaranteed. And Germany will not lose nearly as much as he would during a G3 attack.
Of course, we ran through this whole thing assuming that the 106 transport survived. If it didn’t, UK will have 2 less Armor, and thus the Scotland attack by UK will be a bit less powerful.
I’d like to see if we could look at the G1 attack in which we hit 110 and not 111. I’m curious how UK could respond.
I was thinking:
2 Subs to 106
2 Subs to 110
1 Sub to 112
This ensures that 106 will fall (statistically), and the German Cruiser will be unscathed, even with crappy dice.
This does leave UK with another DD and BB, but from 111, what can they do?
No matter where they go, they will always be in range of at least 2 of the statistically 3 remaining German subs, along with the German bomber. Another benefit is that more ground forces (artillery mostly) will be preserved in Normandy and France.
Not to say that we should stop discussing our original run-through, but I think that this could use a little looking at.
I actually really like these moves for a G1. I prefer to do less risky attacks so that I have a better chance at preserving strength. I really like the sub to sz112. This gives you another die that the enemy won’t get to defend against and can help save the German fleet from a UK counter.
I think a lot of the template we set up can still be followed in this scenario, but I bet by leaving the UK capital ships alive it still gives Germ a better shot at London.
I think a lot of the template we set up can still be followed in this scenario,
Oh definitely, I agree with that.
The full G1 spread I had thought out was -
-1 Sub SZ 117, 1 Sub SZ 118 to SZ 106 (1 Destroyer, 1 Transport)
87% with 1 Sub remaining
-1 Sub SZ 108, 1 Sub SZ 103 to SZ 110 (1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser)
1 Fighter Norway to SZ 110
2 Fighters, 2 Tactical Bombers Western Germany to SZ 110
not sure on percentages here, but scrambling will make Sealion very easy.
1 Tac can be pulled from elsewhere to this fight to make it overwhelming in Germany’s favor
-1 Sub SZ 124 to SZ 112 (2 Cruisers)
1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser SZ 113 to SZ 112
1 Fighter Hungary to SZ 112
100% with damage to Battleship
-3 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Armor, 1 Fighter Holland to Normandy (2 Infantry, 1 Armor, 1 Fighter)
1 Strategic Bomber Germany to Normandy
98% with 1 Artillery, 1 Armor, 1 Fighter, 1 Bomber remaining
-1 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 2 Armor Holland to France (7 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 2 Armor, 1 Fighter)
3 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 4 Mechanized Infantry, 1 Tactical Bomber Western Germany to France
2 Armor Greater Southern Germany to France
1 Tactical Bomber Germany to France
1 Tactical Bomber Poland to France
99% with 2 Artillery, 4 Armor, 3 Tactical Bombers remaining
1 Tac can be pulled from here to 110, but 1 Artillery will most likely be lost
-Regular Yugoslavia stuff (everything in range)
This leaves (probably) 1 damaged BB, 1 CA, 1 CV, 2 Fig, 1 SS in 112. Untouchable by the 111 force.
And 1 Sub 106, 1 Sub 110 in addition.
No matter where that UK Battleship flees, it will get hit by subs, as 1 is to the West already, and the other two are adjacent to Naval bases. Also, the Strategic bomber in Western Germany can hit any seazone that BB can get to. It may have to land in Norway or Holland, but no problem.
Upon reflection I think it was unwise to use that battlemap thingy. That’s great and all for playing games vs 1 or 2 people, but when discussing strategy moves it REALLY sucks. Check out how many times Jim’s posts got downloaded. So people were viewing the thread and potentially can later, and nobody can see what he’s writing other than 2 other people! Redonk!
for those that want to land in Scotland:
23 inf, 1 art, 4 tanks, 5 fht, 1 tac
vs
12 inf, 5 art, 8 tanks, 1 AA
for 3 rounds
UK loses 20 units
Germany loses 22 units(this would be better for UK if Germany lands with only inf)
UK will have in London 13 inf, 1 art 4 tanks, 6 fht, 1 tac
VERY expensive for Germany. They should still win it, but … wow.
This is from a few pages back, but I realized the numbers were wrong.
UK london forces can be the same, but Germ is using 13 trns in this scenario, and therefore its best defense for Scotland will be 13 inf, 4 art, 8 arm aa gun.
I think these end up with the same numbers, which look really rough for UK especially considering they should probably lose a plane to the aa gun. UK has to shoot through 13 inf before getting to offensive units, and because they are strafing we know Germ will be left with aa gun and 1+arm remaining.
The other thing is placement of the remaining UK naval assets. I think in retrospect it would be better to put the UK trns in 110 with the CV and CA. This gives UK the best chance of surviving a G3 attack on that fleet. I wonder should there be 2 ftrs on the carrier too?
If you go turn four, with 13 transports, you get many more units. 26 ground units in Scotland (England may attack, but I doubt they will) and 26 more from the mainland for a total of 52 ground forces, 11 aircraft and any shore bombardments . One might have less, especially if the British block the bombardments, maybe you dont want all the aircraft, or maybe you want less ground forces. 52 attaking units is quite a bit for England to eject.
I think we need to have a collaboration on the summary. What does everyone think is the results of this test? Has a G3 Sealion been defeated? Also Jim could you post a bit more about the G3 Scotland/G4 london attack? If Germ lands with 13 trns in Scotland G3, what is UK’s response and average losses in 1 round of combat?
Personally I think we’ve cracked the Sealion, but I can’t seem to get any hands on experience because my opponent has been going early Barbarossa lately.
No. It was not defeated, it was made more difficult. If England turtles, it has a better chance of beating Sea Lion than in Alpha 2, and that’s all I really wanted to see in regards to that situation. England has not been buffed offensively, they have perhaps been nerfed a little (since their AA Guns can only shoot at 3 aircraft now, unlike in Alpha 2 so 2 more German planes and suddenly one is immune to AA Gun fire, etc.)
Germany is punished a little bit more if they go Sea Lion now. Before Sea Lion punished Japan, now it punishes both Japan and Germany/Italy. But even there, it is very modest. Russia’s not going to suddenly blitz into France and take over all of Europe just because Germany took London on G3 or G4. What will happen is that Russia will get Poland, Hungary and Romania and have significantly more resources for the first part of the game, until Germany can recover and drive into Russia harder.
AA Gun changes really help the Germans a lot more than anyone else on the game board, as far as I can tell. They can use them to stack smaller units in Russia severly punishing them for attacking them and punishing them for not attacking them. I am wondering if I’ll need more than 1 or 2 German aircraft on the Eastern front before I attack Moscow due to diversifying my forces. 6-8 units in Arkhangelsk, Smolensk, Bryansk and Rostov with an AA Gun in each and a modest stack in either Belarus or N. Ukraine. Russia would be hard pressed to do anything as they only have 3 planes, thus any attack would risk each plane to AA Gun fire, or they would have to bring tanks - either way would be more devastating to Russia than to Germany.
This last bit is why I think the Axis got a significant boon in Alpha 3 and maybe enough to balance the game. The jury is still out, however. Perhaps the axis are too strong now. Perhaps the allies were not nerfed enough. Only time will tell.
I don’t want to start another rant about the Alpha2/3 changes on another thread, could u please move these posts to one of those threads?
It is not relevant, you would not need 52 ground units to take England, but you COULD get them there if you needed. So Sea Lion is possible, and that’s all the discussion was asking for. I still hold to my claim that 2 submarines > Sea Lion. You negate their income and you lose nothing for Germany. (Loss of 8 IPC a round for Scotland/England is far less than spending 84 IPC on ships, losing 2 or 3 planes to AA Gun fire and losing all those ground units in the attack.)
Didn’t we go through this with odds and all? Why are we here again? G3 with this defense is dumb, and G4’s counter is a UK3 hit and fade attack. Both G3 and G4 are now worse off. And that is probably a good thing.
This has been discussed ad nauseum.
I know, I merely made an observation based on rereading this thread and our moderator Jenn comes on here with some nonsense about Alpha3. Hence why I then posted a ‘please’ remove your posts because they are irrelavant, and now we have an extra page of posts about nothing. I do wish we had written out the moves for those people without that application.
Didn’t we go through this with odds and all? Why are we here again? G3 with this defense is dumb, and G4’s counter is a UK3 hit and fade attack. Both G3 and G4 are now worse off. And that is probably a good thing.
This has been discussed ad nauseum.
Correct it has, and it has been determined by a few games on the matter that a hit and fade attack by London saps London of it’s strength making an attack on London more profitable. So a G4 attack on London is not assured, but it has far superior odds of success than a G3 attack, given the new situation on the board.
Then again, I always though Sea Lion was stupid early in the game and I continue to think as such. It saps too much from the Germans making Russia nearly impossible to beat. If Germany, Italy and Japan focus on Russia, they almost certainly have better odds than an Alpha 3 Sea Lion attempt prior to the start of Round 5. (Round 5 to include a G4 attempt.)
Great work guys. I can tell you guys love to strategize and run the numbers. I am new to G40 and was somewhat surprised to see how likely a Sea Lion is in the Alpha +2 set-up. However, I noticed you guys making mention of how it is not the end of the game but just the beginning. Also, someone posted a comment about how they sometimes bait the Axis into a Sea Lion because of how far it sets them back on the Eastern Front….
What is the best way to counter/deal with a Sea Lion on G3 when the UK does not turtle on UK1, but gets a little aggressive with their fighters (going after the Italians)? Do they build all in England still on a UK2 or do they build units in S Af and/or Quebec?
Take a look at the map attached as an example. What are you collective opinions on how the UK should spend their money on UK2 when a G3 take on London is certain?
Great work guys. I can tell you guys love to strategize and run the numbers. I am new to G40 and was somewhat surprised to see how likely a Sea Lion is in the Alpha +2 set-up. However, I noticed you guys making mention of how it is not the end of the game but just the beginning. Also, someone posted a comment about how they sometimes bait the Axis into a Sea Lion because of how far it sets them back on the Eastern Front….
What is the best way to counter/deal with a Sea Lion on G3 when the UK does not turtle on UK1, but gets a little aggressive with their fighters (going after the Italians)? Do they build all in England still on a UK2 or do they build units in S Af and/or Quebec?
Take a look at the map attached as an example. What are you collective opinions on how the UK should spend their money on UK2 when a G3 take on London is certain?
Even if you build all infantry, UK should fall in that map. I would therefor pull my air units out of UK. One could clear that Italian transport and land with the 3 French in Algeria. Have the French fighter land on a newly built carrier and transport in z106(Canada) to meet up with the UK fighter,DD,BB, and CA. This makes the 3 sub attack not worth it for Germany. That fleet will reduce the IPCs the US will have to spend on that board. I’d set up the US for going to war once UK falls. They will want some navy in the Atlantic to help UK deploy forward to harass with its 2 transports. In south Africa: 33-23=10 IPcs for 2 inf and an artillery, or a Mech and Armor.
Since taking UK will cause war, Japan can hit the US: (You can also clear UK and Anzac units as well and deny them their war NOs if able)
I don’t think Japan should have moved its carriers off of a naval base, to recover (since they didn’t leave 2 blocking DDs in z6) I’d build 1 DD and 2 carriers in z6-bait an attack and use your Kamikazes-you’ll need them to replace those lost at Hawaii if they hit there instead , move the z36 fleet to Philippines, take with 3 transports. Move the carrier fleet and Caroline fleets to Hawaii as bate, take with 1 transport. Redeploy air force for a counter attack on a US fleet in z6 if they ignore Hawaii. Its not where I would want Japan, but its not bad.
Just my early thoughts.
Keep in mind, they have determined you can prevent England from falling (in Alpha 2) with a full turtle option. That is almost as good as winning against England in my book. (Fine, in my book it is better than winning because I think Sea Lion is probably the least productive strat for the axis…)
Great work guys. I can tell you guys love to strategize and run the numbers. I am new to G40 and was somewhat surprised to see how likely a Sea Lion is in the Alpha +2 set-up. However, I noticed you guys making mention of how it is not the end of the game but just the beginning. Also, someone posted a comment about how they sometimes bait the Axis into a Sea Lion because of how far it sets them back on the Eastern Front….
What is the best way to counter/deal with a Sea Lion on G3 when the UK does not turtle on UK1, but gets a little aggressive with their fighters (going after the Italians)? Do they build all in England still on a UK2 or do they build units in S Af and/or Quebec?
Take a look at the map attached as an example. What are you collective opinions on how the UK should spend their money on UK2 when a G3 take on London is certain?
I agree with James. If UK cannot be held then why try. Another option might be to build 3 units in Saf. 3 expensive units that will help hold India and then can be used in the defense of Russia. I am thinking 3 ftrs.
It appears that you’re UK turtle was compromised by the Taranto raid. Is it better to kill half the Italian navy or save your capital? Also the only way to properly turtle means bringing ships/aircraft/ and troops from Egypt back to London.
I agree with all those comments. The UK cannot turtle if it pull units off. However, I guess I’m looking for a consensus on how best to spend the UK $ in a non turtle. Dump all $ in UK to make it painful for the Germans, or just build off-site. Sounds like you guys believe building out of one of the other factories is better.
There is no clever way to sink all the German tnps that I see… that would be nice.
It’s not my map, but I think it is representative of a game where the UK gets very agressive (Taranto & Trobruk) and does not turtle. I hate the fact that UK has to turtle at the beginning of the game and let the pastaheads run rampant.
Any other feedback on the UK2 options?
