Sealion Version 1.0

There’s a 40% chance that you will lose or draw one or more of the following battles: France, Z110, 111, 112

Thats really high!

@Imperious:

Thats really high!

40% chance you’ll lose or 60% chance you’ll win?

If either Brit BB survives, it can kill the German fleet. If Z112 goes badly, Germany can’t sealion until g3. If France doesn’t fall, Germany builds 3 less transports G2

40% chance you’ll lose or 60% chance you’ll win?

Yea. If you combine all these 90% attacks and assign a 40% cumulative to them, its the best you can hope for.

Now many attacks can get you 85%+

The 40% chance is one battle goes wrong. This plan can survive one miss and will win

It cant survive not killing one of the Uk BB’s. That causes uk to have enough on UK1 to kill SZ 112 fleet.

Well please do it quick. This strategy is the holy grail of AAE40.

Post the blocks on UK1 and UK 2

And always use low luck because nobody can make claims about statistical variations or %.

@jim010:

I may alter this a bit.

It occured to me to change a couple details (b/c of bugaboo!)

But as IL said - I can buy the CV and watch what happens.

Only da wife is allowed to call me that Jim!  :evil:

But I guess that just means I have to find more ways to counter.  I don’t see this ever becoming like the India crush, maybe the turn 1 pearl, but never the India crush.

I see the concept of forced buys a very poor design feature. The whole idea is to allow many ways to get the job done without risking your entire game if you don’t do a certain thing because play-test didn’t have time to see all the angles.

The other thing is this constant “nuclear navy” feature that most navy’s are sunk on the first turn. Thats a terrible set up to even allow that.

@Imperious:

11 Inf, 8 tanks and 3 artillery 4 fighters, 3 tactical bombers, 1 bomber and 1 BB, 1 CA
Against:
23 UK infantry 3 fighters, 1 tactical bomber, 1 tank
Germany wins 85.7 to 13.3%
If i made a mistake and UK has 24 infantry, then the odds are 78% to 20%

Although you have posted UK forces as if the transport in lab survives you have also posted the maximum nr of attacking planes, whereas this number is likely to be lower with the disposed attacks. You have yourself stated that 2 planes is likely to be lost.

One flaw with the way you are posting probabilities is the concept of winning a battle. In particular you are posting the odds of killing all the enemies in a grid block while having 1 or more unit alive. For instance; if you are left with 1 bomber in 111 and 1 tac in 110 thats a win by this definition, whereas its really not, it will break sealion.

As I got the battle calculator I’ve programmed at work I’m unable to back this up by quantitative numbers, but I’ll get back to this tomorrow.

After seeing this tactic in play I have a few questions for the doubters:

1.  Even if Jim’s math is slightly out - which depending on the methods used I agree with you can vary. 
I think it is crystal clear that the tactic provides for a better then 60% chance of capturing UK on turn 3, do you agree?

2. What would you do if you went with Jim’s tactic and it failed to capture UK on turn 3?

I know what I would do.  load the transports again and hit turn 4, which given the Uk’s very limited resources has got to be a much higher probabilty, then the 78% on turn 3.

3. Your assuming a perfect defence with the UK, which I might add total screws the UK in the med and the atlantic even if they manage to hold (which requires luck) do you think any player that hadn’t seen it would stand a chance against it?

4. Do any of you  think for a second that the game designers, really desgined a game “on purpose”, in which in MOST games played with the out of the box rules allows for the capture of UK on turn 3 and at worst turn 4?

It seems clear to me that Jim broke the game, good job with the math and great job with the overall tactic. It is clear we need to be discussing a fix, not if the tactcic works or not… It works, and what is more clear is that the math supports it working just about every game.

Actually yes, I do believe it was designed for sea lion to be a possibility, maybe not this high in odds but yes.  And no, I don’t think it breaks the game yet.

Remember all the Gencon posts of UK falling and Russia liberating it?  I have no clue how on earth that would work, but it seems likely that it was expected to happen.

4. Do any of you  think for a second that the game designers, really desgined a game “on purpose”, in which in MOST games played with the out of the box rules allows for the capture of UK on turn 3 and at worst turn 4?

No they didn’t play-test enough times ( 3 times total in some cases). So they made a mistake.

Sea Lion is possibly, but only just.

It isn’t like its a surprise if Germany is gearing up for an attack, so, if your worth anything as a serious player, you counter it.  Keep your fighters there, build UK infantry, block with Destroyers, fly in United States Airpower (including bombers, they can take a hit instead of a fighter).  If Germany shows their hand, then don’t be afraid to fight it!  It isn’t like its gonna be a surprise.  Besides, if Germany is dumb enough to attempt a Sealion, then let them waste their money, it only helps out Russia. 
If the dice work out for Germany, then its possible that they take UK via Sealion, but think of the risks, I will never attempt it as Germany.  You waste your money on ships that are just gonna die, you are force to scuttle your Luftwaffe, its strategically stupid to even attempt it.  I play against an Axis lover who also happens to be a Sealion lover and I enjoyed watching him murder himself twice now, so as UK, I say Bring it, I will take you down with me.

taking UK is not an auto-win for Germany–its far from it actually… Germany has to reverse strategy. now it has to prevent he US from liberating UK and Russia grows…this Sealion attack isnt special, dude…its isnt some game ender like you want to believe. :cry:

@jim,

I apologize, I am really commenting on a Global game scenario, where it is assumed that USA is already at war with Germany after J1 attack (which I have always found works best, at least for me)

If Sea Lion works for you, then more power to you.  I just don’t favor the tactic.

I will give it too you, Yes, in a Europe game, assuming the US is not at war yet, then London is very Vulnerable, and I am sure it could easily fall.

So, I didn’t mean any offense or unfair criticism of your strategy.

When you say fire up a game, It’ll have to wait on the folks at Sourceforge, I just can’t do the PBF games, too much margin of error for cheating.