How do you respond to Sea Lion threat as UK?

[Jennifer]

What’s the difference between 5 transports on G1 and 2 ACs and 1 Submarine on G1?

[newpaintbrush]

@Jennifer:

What’s the difference between 5 transports on G1 and 2 ACs and 1 Submarine on G1?

Is this a rhetorical question?

2 AC 1 sub is mostly useless.  5 transports are also mostly useless.

At least transports force the UK to defend London instead of instantly making purchases to start breaking down the German fleet / set up a transport chain from London.

[Jennifer]

I don’t see any of it as worthwhile.

Better is 8 armor on G1, and then steam roll Russia before England can get a fleet.

[newpaintbrush]

So it WAS a rhetorical question.

I don’t approve of 8 armor on G1.  It looks real hot up until G3, then you run into UK and USSR infantry.  UK attacks the Baltic fleet immediately with 2 fighters 1 bomber with moderately good chances of successfully eliminating the Baltic fleet (unless Germany submerges subs, which is still fine for UK).  UK can then start a shuttle to Norway/Karelia/E. Eur/Archangel on UK2 to bleed off the German strength, because there is no threat of a German suicidal Baltic fleet; the Germans can counter with mass air, but the Germans suffer without their fighters.

I think a mix of infantry and armor, or perhaps just infantry and a few artillery, offers the Germans a lot more staying power for that final push.

(edit) Hahaha fixed typo.  Crack pipe! (/edit)

[Jennifer]

But you see what I’m getting at.  IF you are going to spend your money unwisely, at least spend it on high value pieces, not units you plan to loose.

[Feds10]

smart G1 build is 1AC the rest infantry…everybody knows that infantry are the best pieces. they are cheap, decend defense…and are perfect fodder to protect our more valuable pieces (tanks, fighters, bombers). if your getting anything other then infantry, it’s to replace your lost units. Germany starts with more then enough firepower with their Tanks and Luftwaffe. Russia is forced to make infantry because of their obvious superiority to other units(and cuz russia is dirt cheap). but who said germany couldn’t follow suit? they get 14$ more (4 inf…save 2) so they can put even more units on the ground. so why would anybody want to build 5 tranny’s or anything else ubsurd like that to try and win the game? come on people lol infantry for germany us much smarter…yes germany could use a second tranny in the baltic on g3 or g4 (depending on how it’s oging) but the first thing in the germany player’s mind should be "ok…russia built __ infantry…so i gotta build at LEAST that amount to keep the war on an even playing field. staying toe to toe w/ russia in terms of production of troops to the east is key…remember, axis start off with the strategic advantage…so you still keep it vs russia b/c ur not losing troops that he isn’t losing. inevitably, germany is going to be outnumbered by the allies b/c of britain and the USA…but this is where the key "German strategy"comes into play, their plan when it comes down to it isn’t “how do we win the war?” its more along the lines of “how do we stop USA & Britain from interfering?”

Germany can and will take Russia.but they always lose to the other 2 it realy comes down to how long can u keep the other two out. as history shows, Germany cannot fight a 2 front war…they have to finish each opponent off one at a time.

wow…this has little to do w/ sea lion strat…let alone UK rele lmao

love to hear imput

feds 10

[Jennifer]

I don’t like the carrier.  I’d rather move the fleet out to SZ 7 or let the British throw their fighters away trying to kill it.  Meanwhile, I have 5 Infantry, 5 Armor or some other combination to make up the difference. (Kinda depends if I lost 2 fighters to russia or not.)

[Guest]

You mean like you threw away the RAF FIGs and did NOT kill the Baltic Fleet in our game Jen?  :evil:

[Jennifer]

Yup.  Exactly like that.

But then, Switch, people like you and me should never be allowed to have any assets, useful or not so useful.  Others, well some others I would let have their pretty little carrier and ignore them as I would in any game with a German carrier or lack thereof.

[ezto]

I dont see why you would build a carrier on G1. If you play low luck (realistic) your Z5 fleet will kill the RAF before they kill you.

[Guest]

A couple of reasons Ezto…

#1:  ADS.  The odds are that the Baltic Fleet is sunk w/ loss of 2 UK FIGs, leaving the BOM alive; and the Baltic open to the UK fleet in UK2 or 3
#2:  Attacks beyond UK1.  To do as much damage to the UK fleet and RAF as possible with the Baltic Fleet.  For an investment of only 16 IPC, you can double or triple the casualties inflicted against a UK strike into the Baltic, costing them all or most of the TRNs, and also possibly costing them much of their AF.  This leaves Germany secure for an additional 1-2 rounds while UK build sup their TRN forces, possibly longer if the surviving fleet can be destroyed by the Luftwaffe.
#3:  Ukraine.  So long as Eastenr is not directly threatened, Germany can pour additional forces at Ukraine agianst the Russians.  If Germany has to start defending Eastern against UK amphibs in Turn 2, then Russia is going to have increased income and position for several turns… long enough for the US to enter the War in Europe.

[newpaintbrush]

@ezto:

I dont see why you would build a carrier on G1. If you play low luck (realistic) your Z5 fleet will kill the RAF before they kill you.

First, I must refute the outrageous implication that low luck is realistic!  Low luck may give you the single most common outcome in some cases (even low luck doesn’t eliminate dice), BUT if there is a 12% of a single outcome happening, and a 88% cumulative chance of SOMETHING ELSE happening (say single outcomes of 9%, 9%, 8%, 8%, 7%, 7%, 6%, 6%, 5%, 5%, 4%, 4%, 3%, 3%, 2%, and 2%), can you REALLY say that the 12% outcome is the REALISTIC outcome?  If you have ten thousand dollars, and I have none, is it accurate to say that I have five thousand dollars?  Clearly there are lies, damned lies, and statistics!

Second, there are lots of reasons to build a carrier on G1.  1) It defends the Baltic fleet with more surety, protecting your existing 36 IPC of units already there.  2a) It prevents the UK from having the chance of destroying the Baltic fleet and making an immediate move on Norway (actually too aggressive, I think), but a 2b) threatened UK/US navy in the north Atlantic by UK2 is almost impossible to stop unless you have a Baltic navy.  (Essentially, 2) means you protect Norway a bit longer, and prevent the UK from setting up reinforcements from Norway/Karelia/Eastern Europe while threatening Berlin and Western Europe at the same time).  3) A carrier gives your fighters more effective range, allowing more fighters to attack London on G2, which is not a SERIOUS threat to London, but one the Allies must take into account, 4) A Baltic carrier allows the Germans to unite the Mediterranean and Baltic fleets if they had an African bid which in turn would allow the Germans to take Anglo-Egypt without the need for the Baltic transport.  Those are just some of the more prominent reasons that come to mind.

I am not saying that a carrier SHOULD be built on G1.  I am just saying that there are reasons to do it.  There are perfectly sound reasons not to build a German carrier on G1.

[jsp4563]

My personal preference is for the UK to buy 1AC, 1DD placed in sz6 along with the fighters, the BB & Tp from sz2, and the russian sub. Land the Canadian tank in UK.  Follow that up with US reinforcements (2inf, 1art, 1tnk, 1fgt, 1bmb).  If Germany has his BB & TP in sz13 move the US DD to sz12. In order for germany to carry out “Operation Sea Lion” he has to destroy the sz6 fleet.  To fight through that fleet he will have to divert air units he was going to use during the landing and will probably loose some of the transports.  If he does still attack UK he will be opposed by the combined UK/US ground & air forces.  Doubtful he will prevail.

[newpaintbrush]

@jsp4563:

My personal preference is for the UK to buy 1AC, 1DD placed in sz6 along with the fighters, the BB & Tp from sz2, and the russian sub. Land the Canadian tank in UK.  Follow that up with US reinforcements (2inf, 1art, 1tnk, 1fgt, 1bmb).  If Germany has his BB & TP in sz13 move the US DD to sz12. In order for germany to carry out “Operation Sea Lion” he has to destroy the sz6 fleet.  To fight through that fleet he will have to divert air units he was going to use during the landing and will probably loose some of the transports.  If he does still attack UK he will be opposed by the combined UK/US ground & air forces.  Doubtful he will prevail.

It’s not just a question of preventing Sea Lion, it’s a question of preventing Sea Lion while maintaining a good position, yes?

Given those moves, the Germans can then attack using Baltic navy and air to wipe out the UK fleet without losing most of its air force in the process.  If the Germans can neutralize the Allies in the Atlantic until they take Moscow, Sea Lion is not so important.  And if the Germans keep most of their air while killing the Allied Atlantic fleet early, the Germans can build even more fighters to threaten the Atlantic.  The Allies have to build new escorts and new transports, which all takes time.  Plus, if the Germans kill a couple of UK fighters, that is going to make a difference in the Indian and Norway fronts.

I assume that the Germans built navy (transports or carrier) and that the UK did not attack, as 1) a carrier build supposes fighters, 2) the battle outcome is not favorable for the UK if Germany builds 3 transports.  Even 2 transports, maybe, 3) this thread is about Sea Lion anyways.

Transport, 2 sub, destroyer, carrier, 5 fighter, 1 bomber, attack 27, count 11.  Or perhaps more, depending on what Germany built; perhaps it built no carrier, but built two-three transports.  I think 5 German transports is a very BAD move, but given those moves you listed, it could actually turn out quite well for Germany given the naval battle.  Even this assumes that the Germans lost a fighter by the end of the turn, which is by NO MEANS CERTAIN without very risky play by Russia or lucky play by Russia.  The attack force is much more powerful with

3-4 transport, 2 sub, destroyer, 6 fighter, 1 bomber, attack 29, count 13-14

vs

1 transport, 1 sub, 1 destroyer, 1 carrier, 1 battleship, 2 fighters, defense 21, count 8.

The German Mediterranean fleet retreats to support shot against Caucasus and/or Africa, and the US DD can only unite with a new UK build.