@krieghund Your answer and the FAQ are super helpful – thank you!
Countering Operation Sea Lion
-
Maybe its time all the major forums have a sticky to list out the issues.
So new players don’t travel back and fourth between OOB and LHTR.Excellent idea!
-
I’ve always wondered just how beneficial an all out attack on England on Germany 1 is.
A) It requires you to spend all your money on Long Range Fighters, that means NO BUILDs for Germany
B) It pretty much destroys your air force and kills a lot of your counter attacks on Russia for two full rounds (the first one where you don’t have fighters to help and the second because you have to rebuild.)
C) America and England can easily liberate and reinforce England on Turn 1 since you probably took it with only a tank left. (England can hit it with an armor from E. Canada giving it a 50/50 shot, America can hit with 2 infantry, artillery, armor with a much better shot.)
D) Russia’s still taking out Ukraine and W. Russia regardless. So you’re still down one fighter, how does that effect Sea Lion?If England uses the following OOL:
Bomber
Infantry
Infantry
Artillery
Armor
Fighter
FighterAnd you attack with Infantry, Armor, 5 Fighters and a Bomber (assuming Armor dies last)
Then you only have a 70% chance to win with a 30% chance of being wiped out.
You lose 73 IPC on the attack to get 30 IPC and you’ll probably not hold anyway since England’s attack with armor/battleship will probably win. (67% of the time it wins without even allowing you to shoot back!)
Dunno, seems to me like this is not the greatest attack plan for the Axis. Sure, it gives you a big boost right off, but you have no air force left and Russia’s probably taking Balkans and/or E. Europe and Norway that round. That means the Russians, most likely, will be making 30+.
-
I agree with you Jen at the most. Three things to add:
-
If germans attack with z8 sub to z1 tra and win, UK cannot retake England, only USA (if sub to z9, UK can counter with bbs and free the path for USA). So it’s a bit riskiers for allies than you say
-
However, still have a chance to fail. And, as you say, the price is big. Even in the slim case Germany consolidates her position, it’s a boring game winnied by pure dice at Ger1. The player who make and success Sea Lion too much surely would have a difficult time to find opponents.
-
I played 2 years with OOB rules, all knowing the Sea Lion stuff and no one tired ever one time. Zero times in two years. Sometimes, germans rolled and managed long range, but only with a couple of dices and for long term use, no for Sea Lion
My question is:
- Techs are not a very good purchase usually
- Sea Lion G1 rarely happens … too rarely …
- Why delay and make the techs even worse only because a slim chance of germans even trying Sea Lion and even then maybe not winning?
-
-
@Cmdr:
A) It requires you to spend all your money on Long Range Fighters, that means NO BUILDs for Germany
No it doesn’t.
I can try for long range with only $5… If I get it, I take UK, or $10, or $15. That will not kill Germany.
And yes, it’s expensive to your German air force, but it REALLY is worth the cost, ESPECIALLY if UK can not take london back UK1 (as Fucioneta points out, sink that UK tpt and no UK1 retake).
Even on a failed sea lion, UK has no ground units, and maybe 1 ftr left.
A failed sea lion does not lose the game for germany.
however, IMHO, a successful sea lion at a cost of $5-$15 for Germany is a rather large hole for the Allies to climb out of.
Germany can make a purchase to retake UK AGAIN G2 as well, when only rolling 1-3 tech dice (read 2 tpts with no UK airforce to attack)
-
@Cmdr:
A) It requires you to spend all your money on Long Range Fighters, that means NO BUILDs for Germany
No it doesn’t.
I can try for long range with only $5… If I get it, I take UK, or $10, or $15. That will not kill Germany.
Yes it will.
If Germany rolls one 1 die and gets tech big deal the Allies lose, but if you keep playing that style the Allies will win ~80% of the games.With no bid and the loss of 5 ipc on G1 the Allies should easily stack up an 80% win ratio (regardless of ruleset).
Sealion is only an annoyance if Germany is willing to spend at least 20 ipc on dice where I think the probability of getting your tech is close to 50%.
And to make it worth while Germany has to spend 25-30 to get to 60-65% to get tech. Then, even if you do get Tech you still need to take the UK. I don’t know the odds off hand of taking UK but even if it is a 90% battle for Germany you are looking at (.65 - for tech * .9 - for battle) which is a 58% win percent for Germany if you are buying 6 dice and go max for London.
IMO, this process is a waste just to try and come up with a 60% win ratio.
There are far better strats where you should be able to win around 70% of your games without relying on dice or a G1 crap shoot.
Unless you’re playing no bid and the Sea Lion thing is only there to try and level the playing field. But that just seems like a boring game to me with very little strategy.
-
That being said with no bid and immediate Tech, just land 1 Rus ftr in London and Attack Wrus only.
If Germany still trys Tech/Sea Lion then by all means let them.
-
A few things to add to Jen analysis above…
Germany loses a lot of units, true.
But, they gain $38 not $30 for taking UK ($30 from the bank, plus paid the $8 for UK territory)
They also REMOVE $30 IPC of UK units that will not be built on UK1.That is a net shift of $68 units just from the land/cash transfer.
Now, let’s say that Germany DID get wiped out and BARELY succeeded (odds are better than that, but let’s say that UK rolled up).
Germany loses $68 of units (a wash for cash and land transfer)
UK loses $50 of units.So even if Germany BARELY wins, it is still a net $50+ gain to the Axis (in reality is is more often a $75 IPC shift once you add units, cash and land).
Then, if Germany blocks a UK liberation (SZ8 SUB to SZ1), then UK is not building for TWO turns, adding another $28 or so to the Axis side of the equation.
It also LOCKS USA into liberating London. That means Germany is going to gain additional cash and land in Africa; meaning when UK is finally liberated and can collect cash again, they are only going to collect about $20.
USA can;t do a KJF with London falling on G1, so Japan is able to just UNLOAD on Asia with no thought to the Pacific (except grabbing UK income).
And I am sorry, with Germany doing a G2 build of about $90 IPC’s, I don’t care WHAT Russia did on R1, they are still SCREWED. That is a 16 ARM build for Germany with lots of cash left over… Moscow falls G4…
And that my friends is why LHTR corrected an obvious problem with the rules.
-
@ncscswitch:
A few things to add to Jen analysis above…
Germany loses a lot of units, true.
But, they gain $38 not $30 for taking UK ($30 from the bank, plus paid the $8 for UK territory)
They also REMOVE $30 IPC of UK units that will not be built on UK1.That is a net shift of $68 units just from the land/cash transfer.
Now, let’s say that Germany DID get wiped out and BARELY succeeded (odds are better than that, but let’s say that UK rolled up).
Germany loses $68 of units (a wash for cash and land transfer)
UK loses $50 of units.So even if Germany BARELY wins, it is still a net $50+ gain to the Axis (in reality is is more often a $75 IPC shift once you add units, cash and land).
Then, if Germany blocks a UK liberation (SZ8 SUB to SZ1), then UK is not building for TWO turns, adding another $28 or so to the Axis side of the equation.
It also LOCKS USA into liberating London. That means Germany is going to gain additional cash and land in Africa; meaning when UK is finally liberated and can collect cash again, they are only going to collect about $20.
USA can;t do a KJF with London falling on G1, so Japan is able to just UNLOAD on Asia with no thought to the Pacific (except grabbing UK income).
And I am sorry, with Germany doing a G2 build of about $90 IPC’s, I don’t care WHAT Russia did on R1, they are still SCREWED. That is a 16 ARM build for Germany with lots of cash left over… Moscow falls G4…
And that my friends is why LHTR corrected an obvious problem with the rules.
If you’re feeling daring, you can move the SZ 8 sub to SZ 9, and cross your fingers that the British retake attempt fails. After that, it’s just a matter of holding off Russia while Japan and Germany go full bore for America. :-D
-
I’ve never actually seen an LRA G1 Sea Lion, but I thought it involved retaking UK and more or less sewing up the game. It was only a 50/50 shot of winning the game right there because you had to multiply the UK attack by the odds of getting LRA with 8 dice. But if the strategy has been outlined correctly in the previous posts, then I definitely am not as afraid of it as I used to be.
Very often the G sub will kill the sz1 trn and UK won’t be putting units on the board until the end of UK3. That in itself is rather huge, but it has to stack up against a lot.
Germany loses basically all of its airforce, right? New ftrs could be purchased, but I don’t think Germany could afford to build too many. So trading territories would become much more costly for Germany. 80+ ipcs for G2 is scary, but, no, Moscow would not fall on G4. I’m guessing that would mean 20 some arm (and maybe more from a G3 build) just come storming across Europe. First, they would go to Kar/Belo/Ukr and then Arc/WRus/Cau and then Mos. That’s G5 at the earliest. Second, those armor wouldn’t make it. I mean, maybe I’m wrong, but I think Russia would build enough units during those turns to be able to either kill the arm or keep them at bay. Meanwhile, Germany would be having a jolly old time trading territories on the eastern front.
I mean, look at it. Germany’s G2 build of 80 IPCs is almost exactly what Germany’s normal G1 and G2 builds would add up to. Build 8arm on G1, G2 and G3 and see how often that works for you.
I’m pretty sure the G1 UK attack requires all of Germany’s airforce, so most of the time the AE attack would be 2inf 2arm vs 1inf 1arm 2ftr. Not too hot for Germany. Without running any numbers, it looks like whatever survives AE would be wiped out by 3inf 1ftr on the following round. Some more UK inf eventually find their way to Africa, and the two US trns could swing down and drop 2inf 1art 1arm into FEq. Germany would not be making much in Africa at all. Some money, yeah, but you’re not gonna see a gray continent.
-
@ncscswitch:
A few things to add to Jen analysis above…
Germany loses a lot of units, true.
But, they gain $38 not $30 for taking UK ($30 from the bank, plus paid the $8 for UK territory)
They also REMOVE $30 IPC of UK units that will not be built on UK1.That is a net shift of $68 units just from the land/cash transfer.
And you spent how much on tech dice? And you lost how many fighters? And you realize that Russia landed at least one fighter in London, maybe two, so there’s a fair chance you didn’t even win the battle on London, meaning UK builds its $30 of units, you blew $20+ on tech, and you lost a ton of air force. Good times. Well . . . if you like English cooking, anyways, augh. Personally, I prefer a nice German chocolate cake . . .
Now, let’s say that Germany DID get wiped out and BARELY succeeded (odds are better than that, but let’s say that UK rolled up).
Odds suck with Russian fighters, and if you are playing with a ruleset that allows German invasion of London on G1, the Russians SHOULD fly 1-2 fighters to London.
Germany loses $68 of units (a wash for cash and land transfer)
UK loses $50 of units.Germany loses the air it needs to fight the Allied navy and trade with Russia. UK lost a few infantry and its air force - bad, but not fatal. You need to think about the position, not the simple IPC value of the units. But again, you’re not accounting for the Russian fighters. You really should, because if you’re not thinking about a Russian fighter, you’re assuming the Allied player is an idiot.
Sounds familiar, doesn’t it - the battle plan of “I will just make sure my opponent is an idiot, then I take his/her capital and it’s fun fun happy happy good times.” Unfortunately, making sure your opponent is an idiot is difficult, or at least, I’ve never managed to force it to happen.
So remember. Russian fighters.
So even if Germany BARELY wins, it is still a net $50+ gain to the Axis (in reality is is more often a $75 IPC shift once you add units, cash and land).
It’s kewl how you don’t count the cost of tech dice. Because it is funny.
Then, if Germany blocks a UK liberation (SZ8 SUB to SZ1), then UK is not building for TWO turns, adding another $28 or so to the Axis side of the equation.
It doesn’t add to the Axis side, it subtracts from the Allied side. Honestly!
It also LOCKS USA into liberating London. That means Germany is going to gain additional cash and land in Africa; meaning when UK is finally liberated and can collect cash again, they are only going to collect about $20.
UK doesn’t need a load of IPCs to start dumping units into Norway or Algeria. It already has two transports and a battleship, and the German air is depleted. An underproducing UK is not good for the Allies, true.
But consider the fact that Germany risked shooting itself in the ass two times to get to that point. First, Germany had to sink IPCs on tech. Second, Germany had to invade London and win (remember the Russian fighter(s)). A little tweak on that UK AA gun can leave the Germans reeling. If the Germans fail to capture London, they will probably lose, and there’s a GOOD chance that the Germans will FAIL one or the other crucial dice outcomes. Figure it out. It’s no joke, it really is an ugly long shot for the Germans.
And don’t forget you need ALL your air to hit London. What does that mean for Anglo-Egypt? What does that mean for the UK battleship at Gibraltar? Probably you will unite the German battleship and sub and transport at Gibraltar, leaving Anglo-Egypt with only a moderately decent attack (WITH a German bid, I might add); the UK can easily recapture. German progress in Africa will be slow.
USA can;t do a KJF with London falling on G1, so Japan is able to just UNLOAD on Asia with no thought to the Pacific (except grabbing UK income).
So bloody what, that happens every KGF. And this UNLOADING doesn’t happen as fast as you seem to think it does. UK can still shoot the Kwangtung transport, Japan still needs to build transports to move units over from Japan. It is not a fast process.
And I am sorry, with Germany doing a G2 build of about $90 IPC’s, I don’t care WHAT Russia did on R1, they are still SCREWED. That is a 16 ARM build for Germany with lots of cash left over… Moscow falls G4…
You are sorry. :roll:
Tell me again with this mystical build . . . just what did you do on G1? Spent a good bit on tech? Okay, you didn’t buy tanks, Russia expanded on R2, you start to push back on G3 (first turn you can even use your big G2 tank build), and somehow you capture Moscow G4 because somehow Russia abandoned both West Russia and Caucasus and let German tanks blitz through to capture Moscow.
JENFORCES!
G5 at least. And remember, critical readers - to get to this point, Germany has to take some balls-to-the-wall chances.
And that my friends is why LHTR corrected an obvious problem with the rules.
Orly.
Two Russian fighters to London isn’t great for the Allies considering the difficulty in trading territories on R1, but it is an acceptable sacrifice considering the Allies superior general position, and the fact that Russia can either hit WRus alone, or WRus/Norway R1, and use the Russian fighters in London to trade Karelia R2. Clearly not optimal, but acceptable.
You want to try G1 LRA Sea Lion on me? Hell, I WROTE G1 LRA Sea Lion, son! Don’t tell me about how it’s a pie-in-the-sky scenario, because it just plain ain’t.
Some notes -
1. German sub can’t stop retake of London alone. UK battleship/transport pick up from ECan, drop off in sea zone northwest of London - how do you stop this again? Let me guess, you bid a second sub in sea zone 8 and killed the Russian sub/UK transport/UK battleship. Awesome, especially since all your German air attacked London. :roll: I SMACK THE FOOL!
2. Russian fighter. I know I’ve beat you guys over the head with this. Guess what. Here it comes again. I SMACK THE FOOL!
3. 40 IPC on tech and 30-40 IPC in fighters is a nasty cost for Germany; Russia expands early (nothing to stop them), the Allies retake London, and the Allies have a game that often has a UK build of 30 IPC on UK2 (it is likely the Germans cannot hold Anglo-Egypt). Not an EASY game, but a game, and considering the multiple chances of total failure that the Germans took to get to that point, it’s more than an acceptable tradeoff for the Allies.
Now think, if someone said “OK, we’re going to fight, and I’m going to shoot myself in the ass 50% of the time before we start. The other 50% of the time, I’m going to roll up my sleeves before we start”, wouldn’t YOU like those odds? 50% of the time, your opponent hands you the game. 50% of the time, you can still fight, just at some disadvantage. That’s about the same as succeeding on tech rolls AND invading London - figure it out. (If anything, that’s generous.)
4. The correct German play is, in my opinion, is to roll for tech dice and go for transports. If the Germans have 3 transports in the Baltic, they have a good chance of securing London for at least one turn, after which they can put 8 infantry in and land surviving fighters for a probable lock (along with various G1-3 naval maneuvers). If US builds in the Atlantic to race Germany, Japan expands, and it’s a 45 IPC Germany and 35 IPC Japan fighting a 30 IPC Russia and a 40 IPC US, with the positional advantage to the Axis as Germany defensively trades with Russia and secures London while the US is forced to attempt attacking, and Japan is unopposed in the Pacific. If the US builds in the Pacific, Germany grabs Africa and ramps to 50+ IPC quickly. Either way is a win for the Axis.
-
I’ve never actually seen an LRA G1 Sea Lion, but I thought it involved retaking UK and more or less sewing up the game. It was only a 50/50 shot of winning the game right there because you had to multiply the UK attack by the odds of getting LRA with 8 dice. But if the strategy has been outlined correctly in the previous posts, then I definitely am not as afraid of it as I used to be.
The CORRECT G1 Sea Lion in my opinion requires securing of London (note that with a G1 two transport build, a UK recapture of London actually HELPS Germany in most cases, two transport build typically means that the Germans need a bid for max tech dice). There’s another version that basically trades German fighters for German ground units, but that allows a lot of Allied counterplay.
Very often the G sub will kill the sz1 trn and UK won’t be putting units on the board until the end of UK3. That in itself is rather huge, but it has to stack up against a lot.
UK has another transport in sea zone 2 with the UK battleship. In most cases, this means either the Germans have to kill another German fighter early on to keep a German infantry and a German tank in London, which decreases the overall odds of success, or this means that the Germans leave one tank in London, vulnerable to a UK2 battleship bombard then tank attack meaning a 2/3 chance of the UK collecting income at the end of UK1. With the non-transport G1 Sea Lion version, the best you can do (for aggro) is to kill the 2 US transports plus the UK battleship and transport, but London cannot be recaptured leaving lines of Allied play.
Of course, with the German transport buy, UK isn’t going to be putting units on the board until the end of UK3, if only for safety reasons, and there’s a fair chance UK will never put any units on the board ever again.
Germany loses basically all of its airforce, right? New ftrs could be purchased, but I don’t think Germany could afford to build too many. So trading territories would become much more costly for Germany. 80+ ipcs for G2 is scary, but, no, Moscow would not fall on G4. I’m guessing that would mean 20 some arm (and maybe more from a G3 build) just come storming across Europe. First, they would go to Kar/Belo/Ukr and then Arc/WRus/Cau and then Mos. That’s G5 at the earliest. Second, those armor wouldn’t make it. I mean, maybe I’m wrong, but I think Russia would build enough units during those turns to be able to either kill the arm or keep them at bay. Meanwhile, Germany would be having a jolly old time trading territories on the eastern front.
Quite right on most counts. Against a G1 8 tech dice LRA Sea Lion, Russia does expand early. Germany’s G2 build is pretty sizable, but no larger than a combined G1 and G2 build would normally be, and the German air is mostly dead. The Allies have a tough time getting things going again in the Atlantic with the German fleet roaming around, but it’s acceptable considering the horrible risks Germany took to get to that point.
I mean, look at it. Germany’s G2 build of 80 IPCs is almost exactly what Germany’s normal G1 and G2 builds would add up to. Build 8arm on G1, G2 and G3 and see how often that works for you.
Yeah, see, that’s what I mean. Of course, the Allies have a harder time in the Atlantic, but it’s still playable, that’s my point.
I’m pretty sure the G1 UK attack requires all of Germany’s airforce, so most of the time the AE attack would be 2inf 2arm vs 1inf 1arm 2ftr. Not too hot for Germany. Without running any numbers, it looks like whatever survives AE would be wiped out by 3inf 1ftr on the following round. Some more UK inf eventually find their way to Africa, and the two US trns could swing down and drop 2inf 1art 1arm into FEq. Germany would not be making much in Africa at all. Some money, yeah, but you’re not gonna see a gray continent.
Hold on there tiger. First, there should be 1 UK fighter at Anglo-Egypt and that’s it, because first, Russian fighter(s) should be flown to London to prevent G1 Sea Lion, second, Germany often has a bid, third, if Germany does have a bid in Africa, it’s more like 3 inf 3 armor 1 fighter 1 bomber against Anglo-Egypt without Sea Lion (killing the Russian fighter easily, making Sea Lion unnecessary given the consequent German advantage).
Also, if Germany successfully Sea Lions on G1, US has to recapture London, not move units into Algeria. True, in that case it WILL be 2 inf 2 armor even with a German bid (since the German Med fleet should probably go west to help threaten a G2 re-recapture of London after an Allied recapture)
-
Are we talking about different things? If Russia lands 2 fighters in London on R1, of course Sealion is bad.
Otherwise, Germany can spend $5 on 1 die ad 17% of the time the game is screwed.
Or $10 on 2 dice and 33% of the time the game is screwed.So playing OOB, if Russia does not land fighters in London on R1, and the game ends up screwed…both Russia and Germany players should be smacked. :wink:
-
1. The SZ2 fleet is of no benefit to liberating London on UK1 if there is a German SUB in SZ1. No way to load the ARM from ECan to even make the attempt.
2. 2 USSR FIGs to London on R1? COOL! Then I have 6 FIGs as Germany, not 5, because without that airpower, USSR is likely to NOT take or clear Ukraine on R1.And guess what? If USSR flies 2 FIGs to London, THEN I NEVER ROLL THE TECH DICE AND I JUST SLAM THE RUSSIANS! Hell with Ukraine still being German controlled and with no FIGs in Caucuses, I just might be able to have the Germans in control of Karelia, Archangel, West Russia and CAUCUSES after G1 (as well as Egypt, depending on the bid placement).
With the USSR FIGs visiting Piccadilly, they can at most be used for a counter attack on Archangel, but cannot reach West Russia or Caucuses. Most of the USSR ARM dead, FIGs out of position, loss of 1/3 of their starting income, Germany collecting $48… things do not look good for the Soviets…
Oh, and that is the final point… $8 bid placed as 1 TRN SZ5…
Even with the 2 USSR FIGs flown to Moscow, Sea Lion would be slightly better than a 50/50 proposition in the above scenario IF you choose to try it. Germany just decides if they want to gamble on 55% SeaLion, or if they just want to play a KRF with an extra German FIG, and the USSR FIGs out of the game for 2 turns… -
ncscswitch,
You seem to think that if the Russian Fighters fly to England, that it gives Germany a large advantage. If you believe that, then why should players even bid for the Axis? It seems that the OOB game is actually fair except for the SBR problem. Also, even without the Fighters fighting, Russia should still be able to take out W. Russia and Ukraine no problem, and possibly take Belorussia as well.
-
Even with the 2 fighters the Russian Tripple is chancy at best. Without them it becomes horrible.
30% belo fails (+19% just 1 tnk survives)
35% Ukr fails (+10% just 1 tnk survives)
37% Wrus fails (+8% just 1 art survives)This means 0.7x0.65x0.63=0.29, so you have a 29% chance to suceed in all your attacks. More than 2 out of 3 times you will fail to take at least one of these lands.
But even if the battles goes average then you will have:
1inf, 1art in Wrus
1inf, 1tnk in Belo
2tnk in UkrGermany can now move in force to Belo (2inf, 4tnk) taking the land with 1inf and 4 tnk.
Will destroy the remainig tnks in Ukr with 2inf 2fig, most likely taking the land with 1 inf.
And will bring its norwegian inf to Arch. Then it is still possible to take Egy with the Lybian units (+ bid) together with 1fig (balk) and 1 bom resulting in probably 2inf, 1art, 1tnk,1fig and 1bom taking the land with 1art and 1 tnk. And the UK battleship will be destroyed by BB+2fig+SS.Russia will most likely not be in the condition to retake belo (even with 3inf 3tnk bought by Russia only 50% to retake belo). And if Germany bought somewhat heavy on tnks (maybe 5inf, 5 tnk) on G2 Germany will be able to stack in Ukr.
So Russia has lost 9inf, 1art and 1tnk on R1 and will loose 1inf, 3tnk on G1, this is almost everything they had in their western territories at start of the game.
I guess the situation would be pretty grim for Russia let alone 1 of the R1 attacks goes bad.
-
Exactly. USSR landing 2 fighters at London in not a solution. It really is bordering on what you call a setup change.
Regarding bid, is the apparently typical ~8 IPC bid for LHTR games? Due to the seemingly rarity is there a statistically reliable figure of what the usual bid is for OOB?
-
OOB don’t use bids. If you use bids, is not OOB, is a mod :-D
So no sense on playing about bids with G1 Sea Lion.
-
Well Ranor, then what is the problem with just attacking Ukraine and W. Russia and leaving Belo alone?
-
@ncscswitch:
1. The SZ2 fleet is of no benefit to liberating London on UK1 if there is a German SUB in SZ1. No way to load the ARM from ECan to even make the attempt.
True, and this is something I had forgotten. However, you must still win the sub vs transport battle, which is just another battle that the Germans have to win.
2. 2 USSR FIGs to London on R1? COOL! Then I have 6 FIGs as Germany, not 5, because without that airpower, USSR is likely to NOT take or clear Ukraine on R1.
Russians can still hit Norway with 3 inf 1 tank 1 fighter with moderate chance of success. “Success” being defined as a dead German fighter.
And guess what? If USSR flies 2 FIGs to London, THEN I NEVER ROLL THE TECH DICE AND I JUST SLAM THE RUSSIANS!
You “slam” the Russians, riiight. So you take Karelia? Okay, then Russia can use those two fighters from London to hit Karelia and land in W. Russia on R2. Geez, it’s like you think somehow that the Russians suddenly vomit blood and spontaneously explode if they fly fighters to London. It’s a temporary inconvenience is all.
Hell with Ukraine still being German controlled and with no FIGs in Caucuses, I just might be able to have the Germans in control of Karelia, Archangel, West Russia and CAUCUSES after G1 (as well as Egypt, depending on the bid placement).
Trying to outrank me in the jenforces, ncsswitch? With a Norway-WRus attack, you still have around eleven units in WRus and six infantry in Caucasus at the least (although I personally favor the 4 inf 2 art in Caucasus and 2 inf 2 armor in Russia at end of R1 in most cases). Both WRus and Caucasus should have AA guns, meaning any German strat bombing is no more favorable unless you are playing that AA guns fire in noncombat (note this is LHTR variant, not OOB/FAQ, and G1 Sea Lion already assumes LHTR is not used as LHTR delays tech!). Combine this with the fact that you’re saying Egypt is probably taken as well, and you’re stretching those German forces rather horribly thin in any event. At the least, then, two UK battleships surviving G1 sounds pretty damn decent to me. This is NO BETTER than the traditional German G1 kitchen sink attack.
With the USSR FIGs visiting Piccadilly, they can at most be used for a counter attack on Archangel, but cannot reach West Russia or Caucuses. Most of the USSR ARM dead, FIGs out of position, loss of 1/3 of their starting income, Germany collecting $48… things do not look good for the Soviets…
They can hit Karelia and land in West Russia. Of course, in YOUR scenario somehow the Germans just took West Russia and Caucasus and whatever with your jenforces. :roll:
I defy you to outline the specific German attack plan that ends with this supposedly rosy scenario. It isn’t as easy as you seem to think.
Oh, and that is the final point… $8 bid placed as 1 TRN SZ5…
LOOK, MORE JENFORCES! Not only do you have an African bid, you ALSO have a Baltic transport! (shakes head in wonderment) - you’re not really ncsswitch at all, are you? Might as well just admit it, Jen.
Only a Baltic transport bid allows a high-probability G1 LRA Sea Lion, but given that fact, the bid should damn well stay below 8. Change the game conditions, change the bid. I don’t think anyone’s stupid enough to give the Axis an 8 bid under game conditions that allow G1 LRA Sea Lion, but frankly if they do, they deserve whatever they get. :roll:
Once again, your strategy of “I will only play against retards” trumps all strategies. Mommy would be so proud. :wink:
Even with the 2 USSR FIGs flown to Moscow, Sea Lion would be slightly better than a 50/50 proposition in the above scenario IF you choose to try it. Germany just decides if they want to gamble on 55% SeaLion, or if they just want to play a KRF with an extra German FIG, and the USSR FIGs out of the game for 2 turns…
Look, JEN, stop trying to tweak the conditions to favor G1 LRA Sea Lion. You want to come up with real game conditions, you can talk about things seriously.
When you start moving things around and tweaking the game conditions after the fact, what it comes down to is jenforces, pure and simple.
For those unacquainted with the jenforces, here’s the gist. You can NEVER beat the jenforces. Ever.
Because let’s say you did a move during your turn. Turns out that the jenforces did something on THEIR turn - which came BEFORE your turn - that made your move a bad move. So let’s say instead that you saw the jenforces do that move that would make your move a bad move, so you made a different move. After all, the jenforces went BEFORE you, you can respond to them, right? But then the jenforces would just have done something different on THEIR turn (which, let me emphasize, came BEFORE your turn). So no matter WHAT you did, the JENFORCES got you beat on position, because they already did the perfect counter, never mind that they went before you and couldn’t know what you were going to do, and never mind that you could see what they did and act accordingly.
One of the tenets of the jenforces is that you’re retarded, and that you will always do something stupid. Since that’s a given, the jenforces always win. Always.
And just when you are about to march into the jenforces’ capital in victory - let’s say that although you are paralyzingly stupid, you are also unbelievably lucky, suddenly three hundred infantry appear in our capital. Because frankly, this is the jenforces, and even your luck cannot save you.
Face it. G1 Sea Lion has only moderate chances of success, and even then only under particular conditions.
-
Well Ranor, then what is the problem with just attacking Ukraine and W. Russia and leaving Belo alone?
The problem with attacking Ukraine and West Russia is that you typically need fighters to swing the Ukraine battle, and if you use fighters on R1 at Ukraine, they cannot reach London.
Suggested Topics
