Sealion sucess and still lose to allies

Notes on the Europe 1940 2nd rules, mainly highlights of the most important rules as they appear in the rulebook along with some additional comments and explanations and some helpful tables:
Europe 1940 2nd - Setup Charts:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/m8t34moclkiy0ai/Setup Charts for A%26A E40 SE.pdf?dl=0
Europe 1940 2nd - Basic Rules Guide:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/nkmtfl3tblfhyd5/Important Notes for A%26A E40 SE.pdf?dl=0
Some pages as a sample of these Notes below:
0d441e40-8415-45da-b642-2483ff53fbd5-image.png

7e8a94cf-de2e-45c2-a44e-cfd2cb5a7a4b-image.png

See also the posts for Pacific and Global 1940 SE versions:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/post/1623789
and
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/post/1630786

@EnoughSaid:

@Field:

Now with an Industrial zone of 10 the USA would put 5 fighters and 5 tanks in each buy thus obliterating Germany.

Whenever you capture a Major Industrial Complex, it turns into a Minor Complex. Additionally, only the original power can restore it back to a Major Industrial Complex.

Just so you know, that shouldn’t have been possible - unless you were playing with house rules that say otherwise.

Our house rules state if you lose a Major Industrial Complex you pay the consequences.

@theROCmonster:

Honestly I think if anything the allies are advantaged in this one. US is just so powerful. Russia will always fall no matter what the allies do, but it then becomes a struggle for the axis to take Egypt. Normally a game will come down to the US having factories in finland/Norway, and possibly southern france and Normandy. While Germany has a ton of money, and Italy is making under 10 because of convoy raids. Germany has a ton of money that it tries to use to in both defense against a monstrous US, and a pretty powerful UK, while also trying to take Egypt. As long as allied players don’t freak out when Moscow falls then they have a good shot at victory.

The allies have to play very smart, and not rush into things if they are to keep germany from getting the final VC.

@Frontovik:

@special:

@Frontovik:

So US is down for 4 rounds. afterwards, what territory should be their main goal? i used to assault normandy or south-france, because of the IC’s. Also thought of aiming at italians, who can break through egypt now. But then russians are hard pressed.
perhaps they should land together with british in norway?

the turn sequence of Alpha 3 is ideal for attacking with USA and reinforcing with UK INFs and FIGs

edit: for me Africa is first priority (UK IPC’s + securing a front and Egypt, a VC), when that is settled i prefer to aim at Norway (NO bonus for Germany and a relatively safe spot to land, AND of course a place where USA can build an IC)

by the time africa is decently secured, russia has fallen…
(atleast alpha 2)

That can happen, but even so, as long as Axis don’t capture either Cairo or London they haven’t won.

Also i said first priority, not only priority ;)

Of course Allies need to be turning the tide by now on the other side of the map.

NEVER use that retarded 2 letter system.

It’s for bonehead’s who don’t know how to play Axis and Allies.  (Yes that’s an open challenge to ANYONE, who’ll wager a game on using 2 letter acronymns over 3)

SUB - Submarine
TRN - Transport
DST - Destroyer
CRU - Cruiser
ACC - Aircraft Carrier
BAT - Battleship
FGT - Fighter (or FIG or FTR)
TAC - Tactical Bomber
BMB - Bomber

etc

Don’t get caught looking like a FOOL, for listening to the 2 letter baboons around here.

@SAS:

I wasn’t referring specifically to you, Dany, I just don’t understand why everyone thinks this is such a big mistake.  Someone earlier referred to Crete being part of Greece just like Hawaii is part of the US.  However, if Japan invades Hawaii, they don’t receive control of the Eastern US; and even if they invade the Eastern US and take the capital but don’t invade Hawaii, they don’t automatically get control of Hawaii.

That was my quote - but again - I wasnt referring to issues regarding “control” or occupation, merely when and where related forces are activated.  For sake of clarification, I was looking at the issue from the perspective of an Axis attack on Crete - not from the perspective of an Allied player sending forces to Crete in order to bring Greece into the war.

The analogy was simply intended to illustrate that when Japan attacks Hawaii on J1,2, or 3 - Japan and the US (i.e. ALL territories of the US) are at war.  In my mind it seems to follow that if the Axis attack a portion of Greece (be it Greece proper or Crete) then all territories part of the Greek state are at war - and so any troops so designated on the board are activated.  I certainly wasn’t getting “bent out of shape” - I was simply offering what I thought was a plausible explanation of what happens - understanding official clarifications will eventually come from those positioned to do so.

But I also understand (based on the earlier poster’s Mongolia clarification offered by Krieg) the idea that Crete and Greece are treated as separate and distinct tt - and not part of the same greek  nation-state so to speak.

I agree. It’s funny because the game is not that hard to comprehend. I started playing A&A at 12, and while my first few games I was playing wrong, that was mainly because I never really read the rule book. Once you sit down and read it once, the only time you have to use it again is if you are doing something like an amphibious assault or shore bombardment, something that maybe only comes up once or twice in a game. Other than that the basic premise is really easy to understand.

Stalin also allowed German destroyers to sail around northern Russia to attack Allied shipping in the Pacific.

I personally believe that if the US/UK can drop land units off into Archangel/Karelia the game is essentially broken.  By all means allow them to send IPC aid to Russia, but historically Stalin did not want to share the glory of victory in Russia with foreign troops.

There must be a handicap to doing this; at the very least the turn it takes for Russia to convert this income into units and get them into action.

In a sense, the eastern and western fronts are depicted in different scales, certainly in regard to the numbers of units represented by infantry and Armoured pieces.  If it were accurate, the IPC income and starting units for Russia relative to the other Allies would be significantly bigger, perhaps 50%+.  That’s why introducing US/UK units into Russia can be so imbalancing.