Sealion Stats- Cliff Notes

@dazedwit my point is that if you can’t win 110, you can’t win sea lion. If Britain wants to stop sea lion they are much better off scrambling in G1 rather than conserving air for the land invasion. Typically in the game german air are more valuable than UK air. I would always scramble in that situation because its very likely that I am trading 1-2 planes against 6.

If Germany uses 9 transports and loses those 6 planes and the British lose 2, the UK doesn’t need to build more than 6 inf before G3 to have a better than 50% chance of denying sea lion. I’m assuming here no J1 or J2 which would make stopping sea lion easier. And I’m calculating with British going with a 92 stack (which would add 2 figs, a tac, an inf and a AA) although I’m sure that won’t strictly be necessary. Obviously even with the bombing and convoying, they should manage more than 6 inf. And they may not need land units at all since they might be able to stop it at sea.

Axis have a significant advantage in the OOB game (absent a bid) and it looks to me that in taking risky combats that you will likely lose, you are trading that away. Of course, the dice can help you out here, but usually they won’t.

But the best way to test strategies will always be against actual competition. At some point I’m sure you will get a chance to test this against other opponents.

Going that hard with the Luftwaffe to SZ110 cuts down on other things it wants to do though, like supporting amphibious assaults in the Gulf of Finland and supporting the Paris attack without the 3 tanks from Gr Sth Germany.

You’ll need a dd G1 or G2 if you want to attack G3.

Normandy G1 is not part of my Sealion plan, especially when you won’t be able to swing the 10 tt cause you’ll need to buy a dd.

Think about Scotland landings on G2 and G3.  To do this safely, occasionally additional AC or dd purchases are necessary.

Don’t stake everything on a G3 landing with less than 90% odds.  You can land Scotland and take it G4.

The only time it didn’t work for me was when my dice went sour on G5 & G6 going into Russia, But the following week it worked and everybody was rolling better, I have yet to try it with the latest 3.9 rules. So much depends on good rolls at key battles and being able to work as an Axis team.

@DutchmanD:

Oh, this is no more ahistoric than Italy being able to take Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt and the rest of the Mediteranean when they could even beat the Greek army with their entire military. Not to mention one of the most significant ahistorical flaws of G40, which is that the French troops in Aremain loyal to the Allies for some reason, not Axis Vichy…  and, if they are not at war, why are they killing Brits mercilessly on Italy 1? Don’t get me started on the whole “orginally owned” territory nonesense either, the Germans can buld a major IC in Norway and the UK can build one in Malaya, but the Japanses cannot build one in Shanghai; the Japanese were the first to build factories in Shanghai around 1900 after the First Sino-Japanese War, and by 1937, when they fully officially occupied the city, it had more manufacturing power than the rest of Southeast Asia combined!  Dice Gods forbid the Japs actually being able to make a major IC in an actual manufacturing center that they originally created        :wink:

Ahistoric… hmpf!  Nothing like an instant 10 tnps build by the Germans and the dissappearance of essentially the entire Royal Navy in the Spring of 1940 to make you give up on all the historical aspects of the game we love…
 
All good points, but directed more at game mechanics than historical accuracy.  I agree that the production cycle is not accurate to real life, it should take 3-4 turns for a BB to be built, but the game is not made for that scale.  All units you can build are placed almost immediately.  Both the US and UK fleets are severely nerfed, most likely in order to give the axis a chance that they didn’t have in RL.

As for the other issues, I understand why Vichy is not in the game, you have to draw the line somewhere and Larry choose to add France but have them be inert, while China is also hamstrung.  Otherwise you get a community of people clamoring on the BBS from Bulgaria wanting special Bulgarian rules or some other nonsense.

I have played a game where Japan could build a major in China and it did seem overpowered.  It was maxed on production and China was quickly swallowed up.  It took massive US naval builds and tenuous fighting from India to stall the Japs.  Japan was also able to not build many trns in that game and still concentrate on the Pacific islands.

Thanks for going over the Abandon London moves again James.  One would assume they became even more potent in A3, have you had the opportunity to try it yet?  It’s playing the allies like the Axis, creating the initiative and then keeping it long enough to sack Italy…hopefully.

Historical Sealion or in game Sealion? If it’s the latter I should say it’s already been explained.

@Peck:

How does the fighter in Malta get too London in time, is it not attacking with the UK fleet on Italy

You have two rounds to move a fighter from Malta to England.  That’s only 7 Territories, realistically 8 (since you have to land enroute) but that is perfectly within the limits.

Yes, I count the Inf, Arm in Quebec because its the worst case for Germany.  I always judge from worst case scenarios for an overall opinion. When playing a game, I look at realistic and worst case, but this isnt a real game, its a theoretical one.

Anyway, one could run the odds without the inf, arm from Quebec to see what would happen.  I doubt it would be much different, but it may be, it’s 2 units that you can lose and 5 defensive punch, so it may shift things 7% (just a mental guess).

And yes, you give up the Med to Italy, but you keep London so you can continue to fight.  Right or wrong move, I don’t know.  All I know is if England doesn’t go “balls to the walls” defending England on round 1, I assume it will fall on Germany 3, in which case, I use Japan 1 to cripple the American fleet, sink the British transport and stage an invasion of Australia to press the advantage.

I think the best bet for Sealion would be to risk it by attacking both BB fleets(since the UK will also lose massive air) and building a CV, which adds 2 planes to coastal defense. However, the extra infantry makes it more costly than it was OOB.