Does an A+3 Sealion = Axis victory?

I am not the only person who pointed out your numbers were flawed in your original discussion on the defense of London.  I am a few pages in and I already see 7 people who say you are miscounting.

Myself
KillOFreeze
Commander Bravo
TheWarNoob
Stalingradski
sargon
gsh34

You started to adjust on page 5 to acknowedge the huge shift of numbers between what you were assuming and what was really happening.  (England down 3 units, Germany up 6 units a 9 unit shift in power.)

Of course, there are more AA Guns in England now, but even that pales in comparison to what Germany can bring.  (Note, I am not saying that they SHOULD bring it, I still contend 2 submarines and cutting off England’s testicles is far superior to Sea Lion in Alpha 3).

Things are even better now that I draw the submarine off SZ 91 to go after the Destroyer/Transport in SZ 106, vastly improving German odds in that field and virtually assuring that the transport in SZ 106 is transporting nothing but sailors to their firey deaths.

There were some wild assumptions that were made starting around page 6, which is why I stopped participating. Stuff like putting huge British fleets in SZ 110 (not going to happen) moving French infantry from N. Africa (not going to happen) etc.  And magical ships started appearing, destroyers that can sink 2 or 3 attacking submarines without dying themselves, etc.  Not claiming you made these, just saying that they appeared by various people.  It was very “switchish” in that things magically got to do two actions or survive insurmountable odds on routine basises etc.  The term heralds back from KAF discussion about AAR where I thoroughly trounced his butt because he suddenly realized that if the attacker had 80% odds in a battle, he was going to win most of the time, and that his fighters from germany couldnt both sink British ships around England AND go fight in Africa in the same round, etc.

So the theory is hardly “settled” in that England can thwart Germany.  What is settled is if Germany does not build appropriately, then England will win.  However, it is also settled that if England does not build properly, than Germany can win better.  In fact, I wouldn’t even bother with Sea Lion unless England did not build properly, as the cost/reward balance is extremely askew in the Allies’ favor.  Not that it is impossible, nor is it improbable, that England will fall on G4.

Then you should keep reading, as the thread goes 13 pages and we went through all possibilties and selected the best.

Tell you what, I won’t bother ‘discussing’ with you  as you ignore likely outcomes.  If you choose to not hit the sz110 and sz111 fleets in favour of the 2 TTs, your call (but not a good one).

Jim,

When, since Alpha 3 came out, have I declared 1 Submarine vs 1 Destroyer?  If you can point one out, I’ll conceed I made the statement, but I honestly believe I have never made that declaration about Sea Lion in Alpha 3.  In Alpha 3, I believe, I have always said 2 Submarines to SZ 106.  Sometimes i waffle between hitting SZ 111/SZ 110 or SZ 109, but I’ve settled on 110/111 in the past 24ish hours.

I dont have to take W. France, I only have to kill the British fighter.  That gives me a lot more leeway in what I have to hit W. France with to “succeed”.  It would be better to hit it, but given the extra round between G3 and G4, I can make up the difference of 1 transport by purchasing it on G3 instead.

G1
Purchase $30
1CV, 2 TRN

DOW: Yugoslavia

CM:

SZ106 (1DD, 1TP)
2 Submarines
Odds:
A-87.4%
D-8.2%

SZ110 (1CA)
2 Submarines, 3 Fighters, 2 Tactical Bombers
Odds:
A-99.2%
D-0.4%
Odds(Scrambling):
A-73.6%
D-20.7%

SZ111 (1DD, 1BB)
Submarine, 2 Fighters, Tactical Bomber, Strategic Bomber
Odds:
A-100%
D-0%
Odds(Scrambling):
A-85.8%
D-9.1%

SZ112 (2CA)
Battleship, Cruiser
Odds:
A-82.2%
D-9.6%

Wfr (2inf, 1tnk, 1fgt)
4 Infantry, Artillery, 2 Armor
Odds:
A-77.3%
D-19%

France (7inf, 2art, 2tnk, 1fgt, 1 AA Gun)
3 Infantry, 4 Mech, 2 Artillery, 3 Armor, 2 Tactical Bombers
2 Tac
Odds:
A-75.5%
D-22.4%

Yugoslavia (5inf)
9 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 3 Armor
Odds:
A-100%
D-0%

Note:  If any of the attacks go badly for Germany, it is not too late to switch over to Barbarrosa.  Germany would, naturally, invite scrambling.  Sure, the Germans might lose planes, but it’s almost certain England does.

Trickiest battles:
France - due to the AA Gun and shear number of units
SZ 112 - due to ease of RNG screwing you over (for either side)

All the rest are firmly in Germany’s favor.

Yes, I realize that I declared you do not need aircraft to win in France.  That is still true.  In fact, you could switch the two tactical bombers in France to the W. France attack, but I wanted them there because of the Sea Lion attempt, they hit on a 4 if coupled with a tank, so it gives me 2 more punch in France.

If I was going to just castrate the British, I wouldnt even bother with W. France, instead, I would hit SZ 106, SZ 109 and stack my aircraft in Holland.

@jim010:

Then you should keep reading, as the thread goes 13 pages and we went through all possibilties and selected the best.

Tell you what, I won’t bother ‘discussing’ with you  as you ignore likely outcomes.  If you choose to not hit the sz110 and sz111 fleets in favour of the 2 TTs, your call (but not a good one).

Feel free to rack-n-stack the board.  But I think you’ll see it differently when you see the moves and the odds.

1 Less aircraft for England significantly impacts your ability to both strafe, and defend London, while 1 less for Germany has some impact, but minimal.  I doubt England would scramble for any of the above mentioned battles, rather, staying home to preserve their strength.

Also, with a G4 hit, it is possible to build more fleet on G3 to counter any “aircraft” threat.  Actually, it’s theoretically possible to have even more transports for London, if you built some on G3, but I am not holding my breath, there are units that have to be replaced from taking Paris, it’s only after you have all the ones you need that you have time to build more fleet.  So I am going to rest on 13 transports attacking and 1 transport for England (which requires 2 rounds to bring anyone to England).

Give me a moment while I look at this.

Right off the bat, you are using too many sbs.  You have 5, not 6.  You need to chose what battle you are removing it from.

Feel free to rack-n-stack the board.  But I think you’ll see it differently when you see the moves and the odds.

I’ve challenged you on a number of occasions and was ignored.

2 Submarines SZ 106
1 Submarine SZ 111
2 Submaines SZ 110

Perhaps I typoed the SZ 111 battle.  Habbit of mine to bring 2 submarines there, it’s taking some time getting used to the shift. (New habbit should be 2 submarines to SZ 106, 2 to SZ 109 and lots of planes to SZ 109…dont really WANT London, but I want to show it is not only possible, but probable to win.  Not necessarily a GOOD idea, but it is AN idea.)

Keep in mind, Jim, I for the sake of this argument, I don’t care if I lose every blasted German unit on the board and Russia can blitz into Berlin unopposed, all I care about is the theoretical and probablity of Germany actually getting England on round 3 or 4 (and I feel more chance of that on round 4, which is why I am arguing that one.)  I dont even care if England can liberate it the next round.

@jim010:

Feel free to rack-n-stack the board.  But I think you’ll see it differently when you see the moves and the odds.

I’ve challenged you on a number of occasions and was ignored.

A number of occasions I was extremely busy.  I had two games end abruptly (allegedly they surrendered, but it was early in the game and there was no significant traction for either side, they were just too busy and quit) so I only have 3 games and the tournament right now.  Not my typical stack of 6+ games, if you catch my meaning.

For the sake of argument, I am going to modify the combat movement post to remove the error, there is only 1 submarine going to SZ 111 and that’s how I ran the calculator. (some will selectively quote that over and over again completely disregarding the fact I amended my statement and corrected the error.)

Should mention, I did run the numbers as if England scrambled every plane it could (it would result in 4 less fighters, so I doubt they would) but I don’t believe they would scramble in any battle.

You have a fht in sz111 that I can’t account for.  The one in Hun dosn’t make sz110 or sz111.

As you pointed out, sz112 is very risky by not bringing a plane to assist there.  If you lose sz112, Sealion is done.  A tac needs to be put there to ensure it.

France is weak.  The odds are ~68% because of the AA as a casualty.  You survive with 3 units on average.  1 in 3 games you lose Paris and Sealion is dead (and maybe worse)

You only have 1 sb, 1 fht, 1 tac and 1 bmb that legally make it to sz111 based on what you are attacking elsewhere.  Your odds of success with scrambling are 52% in sz111.  A loss of 3 planes to UK’s 1 plane.

To ensure consistent success, Paris needs to be hit harder, so does sz112, and sz111 as well.

I’m sorry, but this opening relies too much on good dice.

If you want to tighten this up, you will need that 2nd sub from sz106 on sz111, bringin us back to 1 sb vs 1 DD in sz106.  Paris needs 1 more unit to get teh odds up to ~79%.  I’d still be uncomfortable with this, as there is still 30% that Sealion is a bust (more, actually, as losing planes and tanks will impact Sealion as well) so 2 more inf, but then the attack on Normandy is out.

You don’t really have enough to attack sz106, were I defending uk I would scramble all planes into 106 watch your subs die and maybe walk away with my destroyer and my transport alive.

@jim010:

You have a fht in sz111 that I can’t account for.  The one in Hun dosn’t make sz110 or sz111.

Makes it just fine to SZ 112.

@Peck:

You don’t really have enough to attack sz106, were I defending uk I would scramble all planes into 106 watch your subs die and maybe walk away with my destroyer and my transport alive.

What planes?  SZ 106 is off the coast of New Foundland, not England.

Doh :-o

@jim010:

As you pointed out, sz112 is very risky by not bringing a plane to assist there.  If you lose sz112, Sealion is done.  A tac needs to be put there to ensure it.
Right, but the two transports and the carrier are not wasted, they will just go in SZ 113 and I can switch over ot Barbarrossa.

France is weak.  The odds are ~68% because of the AA as a casualty.  You survive with 3 units on average.  1 in 3 games you lose Paris and Sealion is dead (and maybe worse)
I ran France as if the AA Gun was an infantry and got higher odds.  What calculator are you using?

You only have 1 sb, 1 fht, 1 tac and 1 bmb that legally make it to sz111 based on what you are attacking elsewhere.  Your odds of success with scrambling are 52% in sz111.  A loss of 3 planes to UK’s 1 plane.
Check again.  Fighter in Norway, Fighter in Holland, Tacticals from W. Germany, etc.  You have to count the Aircraft Carrier as a legal landing zone.

To ensure consistent success, Paris needs to be hit harder, so does sz112, and sz111 as well. 
Consistency is not relevant, realism is.  I’m not asking for 100% odds in every battle, I’m asking for 70% or better and all my attacks get 70% or better according to Frood. (Using AA Guns as defending infantry)

I’m sorry, but this opening relies too much on good dice.
By good, you mean better than 70%.  Yes it does.  However, 70% is perfectly acceptable given many of those attacks only drop down if you scramble which means I just ate British fighters for breakfast weakening London immensely.

Comments in red.

To clarify, again, I am not looking for 100% success rate EVERY TIME Sea Lion is attempted.  If Round 1 goes slightly below average or more (RNG-f’ed) then I can quick shift to Barbarrossa.  If Round 1 goes average or better, I am in supreme position to obliterate the British.  Therefore, I am stating that Sea Lion was not nerfed out of being a viable strategy, it is still viable, if not optimal.

My definition of Viable means each battle has at least 70% odds of success regardless of any scramble orders.

@Peck:

Doh :-o

I generally go 2 Submarines to SZ 106, 2 submarines, 3 fighters, 3 tactical bombers to SZ 109.  So I understand the confusion.

I, like, never go Sea Lion.  Even in Alpha 2 I thought it was a really bone-headed maneuver that cost way more than you got out of it.

@Cmdr:

@jim010:

As you pointed out, sz112 is very risky by not bringing a plane to assist there.  If you lose sz112, Sealion is done.  A tac needs to be put there to ensure it.
Right, but the two transports and the carrier are not wasted, they will just go in SZ 113 and I can switch over ot Barbarrossa.
Not if you have to build the CV there to land your tac from sz111.  You MUST build the CV in sz112.France is weak.  The odds are ~68% because of the AA as a casualty.  You survive with 3 units on average.  1 in 3 games you lose Paris and Sealion is dead (and maybe worse)
I ran France as if the AA Gun was an infantry and got higher odds.  What calculator are you using?
I ran France with 10@2 and with 9@2.  The difference between the 2 will be pretty close to what the odds should be.  This accounts for the extra soak, and for the fact the AA has no defense.
You only have 1 sb, 1 fht, 1 tac and 1 bmb that legally make it to sz111 based on what you are attacking elsewhere.  Your odds of success with scrambling are 52% in sz111.  A loss of 3 planes to UK’s 1 plane.
Check again.  Fighter in Norway, Fighter in Holland, Tacticals from W. Germany, etc.  You have to count the Aircraft Carrier as a legal landing zone.
I did.  You still illegally moved 1 fht from Hun.

To ensure consistent success, Paris needs to be hit harder, so does sz112, and sz111 as well.  
Consistency is not relevant, realism is.  I’m not asking for 100% odds in every battle, I’m asking for 70% or better and all my attacks get 70% or better according to Frood. (Using AA Guns as defending infantry)
Then you still need to figure out how to get sz111 to work and France, as both are under 70% (52% and 68%).  You are not playing realism, as you claim - you are hoping to keep luck on your side.

I’m sorry, but this opening relies too much on good dice.
By good, you mean better than 70%.  Yes it does.  However, 70% is perfectly acceptable given many of those attacks only drop down if you scramble which means I just ate British fighters for breakfast weakening London immensely.
In sz111, I excahnged 1 fht for 1 german tac, and fht, and maybe even the bmb.  I’ll take that trade any day.

Comments in red.

To clarify, again, I am not looking for 100% success rate EVERY TIME Sea Lion is attempted.  If Round 1 goes slightly below average or more (RNG-f’ed) then I can quick shift to Barbarrossa.  If Round 1 goes average or better, I am in supreme position to obliterate the British.  Therefore, I am stating that Sea Lion was not nerfed out of being a viable strategy, it is still viable, if not optimal.

My definition of Viable means each battle has at least 70% odds of success regardless of any scramble orders.
See my above comment.

I am starting to wonder if your odds calculator flunked statistics.  I wouldnt want to hand calculate it all, but I have faith in my calculators and they’re consistently higher than the numbers you report.

Maybe you’re using that screwed up one at http://www.dskelly.com/misc/aa/aasim.html.  If so, that thing has never predicted a battle of mine anywhere near where the actual results came in.  It’s notoriously aweful at naval engagements and if you try to run more than 1000 simulations it freezes up.

Dunno.  I, obviously, dont know your calculator, but mine are giving me consistent 80% or better except for France itself,which is 75.6% and if you use mathematical rounding, that goes to 80% as well. (rounded to the nearest ten, and only being referenced for the sillyness of it.)