I usually threaten to make Britain spend at least some money on land units rather than air or units in Africa.
I like to buy a carrier G1, and sometimes a bmr or 2nd tpt. If UK doesn’t max protect London I would probably flip a coin to see if I should go for Sea Lion or not because Sea Lion can be a kiss of death to the axis. If they bought an IC for Egypt, and sent the UK frt to do Taranto and the coin flip said no Sea Lion I would probably try 2 out of 3 lol.
As Germany I am a firm believer in 1 transport and rest artillery. This still threatens Sea Lion without tying up as many IPCs plus this trans helps take leningrad so still has some use. To me the carrier is just a waste of resources unless I FULLY intend to actually perform sea lion regardless of UK buys.
I don’t believe Sea Lion can work unless the UK player is asleep, but have tried a G1 fleet purchase to delay a North Sea allied threat. Ended up feeling that those G resources should have been directed towards victory in R. G air power can deliver on both objectives.
@Private:
I don’t believe Sea Lion can work unless the UK player is asleep, but have tried a G1 fleet purchase to delay a North Sea allied threat. Ended up feeling that those G resources should have been directed towards victory in R. G air power can deliver on both objectives.
Excellent point a purchase of 1 bomber and and perhaps some land units is an excellent opening buy.
I like to threaten Sea Lion by simply saving Germany’s first turn income. If the UK doesn’t then build substantial land forces on UK1 in response, then a G2 buy of up to 14 transports will all but guarantee a successful Sea Lion, regardless of the UK2 build. If the UK makes Sea Lion too costly at this point, Germany can simply do an infantry and armour built on G2.
I find that a couple bombers can be a good build for G1. They can be used to bomb London on G2 if I am going to do a Sea Lion attack, or clean up the Med and Atlantic in most games. I rarely opt to do Sea Lion unless the German attacks on G1 proceeded flawlessly and the UK decides to minimally defend London.
If you don’t go Sealion G2, bombers in West Germany can be used to sink the Royal Navy in SZ76 and land in Italian Somaliland. This attack would greatly help Italy to dominate the Mediterenean Sea and threaten Egypt. It’s a good response to a UK1 all men London buy.
I don’t think Germany should do Sea Lion for a few reasons.
You spend a lot of resources taking London and eventually America will liberate London because if you try defend it that takes a good amount of ipcs. Another reason is Russia can get strong and since you spent lots of ipcs on Sea Lion you don’t have enough to go take Moscow or even threaten it. Which takes a long time for you to do that which gives time for UK to rebuild once liberated and the US would threaten to land forcing troops to protect which again makes it harder for you to take Moscow and eventually the allies gain the advantage and so on unless Japan does really well. So in the end I think Sea Lion isn’t worth it but I think you can do a Sea Lion bluff and do Barbarossa. Now there could be a strategy which Sea Lion is played.
Having tried to make Sea Lion work in a way which doesn’t weaken Barbarossa too much, I don’t think it can be done.
@Sire:
If you don’t go Sealion G2, bombers in West Germany can be used to sink the Royal Navy in SZ76 and land in Italian Somaliland. This attack would greatly help Italy to dominate the Mediterenean Sea and threaten Egypt. It’s a good response to a UK1 all men London buy.
Sacrificing the bombers? Interesting idea. Of course, the RN can go beyond SZ76 and out of range of this attack and would if they want to reinforce the Pacific. Of course, going that far puts them out of range of the Med UK2. Normally wouldn’t they sit in SZ81 in the Red Sea so they can dent the CV and have it repaired immediately.
@Arthur:
I find that a couple bombers can be a good build for G1. They can be used to bomb London on G2 if I am going to do a Sea Lion attack, or clean up the Med and Atlantic in most games. I rarely opt to do Sea Lion unless the German attacks on G1 proceeded flawlessly and the UK decides to minimally defend London.
You’re probably right. Some extra bombers really help with Barbarossa. This build does preclude a DD G1 though, which likely means you can’t occupy SZ112 and you’re probably giving up the BB, which most people do I guess.
Sea Lion is best used as a “projected threat” to keep England honest, whislt still pounding the Russians!
Honestly, I’m confused by the question.
The choice of Sea Lion is one the Allied player makes. If she chooses to not buy much in the UK, and moves the planes off, then she invites sealion. If she builds heavily in the UK, then sealion will definitively not happen.
If she does something in the middle, she’s playing poker with sealion. Maybe her opponent will go for it, maybe she won’t.
But Germany buying a few extra bombers in round 1 isn’t going to make the difference one way or another as a general rule.
Lots of good options for G1 builds, but here are my personal thoughts. Two bombers can help Sea Lion in the following way:
Additionally the two bombers are quite useful to bomb Moscow and support a Barbarosa if Sea Lion is not an option. It is not as optimal of a build of 6 art + 2 inf for marching into Russia, but still is very beneficial.
:-D
