Does an A+3 Sealion = Axis victory?

@Cmdr:

@jim010:

So you conceed that if the axis are dedicated, London will fall.

I conceed nothing, as you have only demonstrated desparate tactics.  I will ignore future posts.
I hardly consider 70% “desperate” tactics.  It is very hard to get better odds given the revised situation on the ground.  I actually think it would be only slightly easier to get better odds given Alpha 2.

You did not say what UK would build?

9 inf, save $1
That’s what I figured for round 1. Round 2 was 34 IPC for 9 Infantry, 1 Armor, Save 1.  Round 3 was (34 - 5 IPC NO lost to Italy, -6 CRD SZ 109, -2 CRD SZ 106, assumed only Alexandria and/or Gibraltar was taken, +1 saved) 22 IPC for 6 Infantry, Artillery.  Coupled with 3 Infantry, 3 Fighters mainland + fighter Malta + fighter Gibraltar + tactical SZ 98 + Infantry, Armor from Canada that gives England AT MOST:
*27 Infantry

• 1 Artillery
• 2 Armor
• 5 Fighters
• 1 Tactical Bomber
  To use on attack. Where all these half dozen armors came from I have no idea.  It has not been detailed.  Now, it is possible someone would give up 12 infantry for 6 more armor, but I don’t see how that improves the attack on Scotland, but I do see how it decimates the defense of Lonond.

Would send 2 or 3 subs and planes sink the BB in 109, preferrably 3.

Did you mean DD?  Yes, 2 Submarines, 3 Fighters, 3 Tactical Bombers is what I typically send to kill the Destroyer/Transport in SZ 109 with 2 Submarines hitting the Destroyer/Transport in SZ 109.  I send my other equipment that can reach to hit SZ 110 (to get the last destroyer and liberate my submarines from the threat of detection) and of course, something to hit SZ 112.  But then, that’s when I am NOT planning on destroying any chance I have to win by conducting Operation Sea Lion.

How many subs will you have?  Maybe there should be a DD with the BB in sz109 and use the cruiser to block?  Or we could buy the DD?
No Sea Lion?  Start with 5 Submarines, build 2 or 3 a round.  Goal: Destroy England’s economy, Destroy America’s economy.  USA is harder, with potentially 1 destroyer and 6 aircraft to attack any submarines in SZ 101. (Building a complex in Mexico seems to be something people wont do, so 6 is usually about all you would normally see there.)

Would a destroyer and planes sink 104, that blocks the fleet on its way back to London.

Yes.  With the change to Italy, the Strategic Bomber alone could clear SZ 104 opening the road for Germany as well.  One of the many, MANY things I like about Alpha 3.

I would keep the rest of my fleet in 112 and add 3 subs to 110. I would not build many transports on G2, would probably add one plane and ground troops with my 70 IPCs.

Then the question is how many would you build?
2 For England, 1 for Canada, 1 for Africa, 10 for America, 5 in reserve off the coast of Gibraltar, 3 in SZ 105.  Total: 22 Submarines, I start with 5, in a perfect world, that means I need 17 more.  In a realistic world, I probably need 20 more due to casualties on Round 1.

Responses in red.

Not sure why I bother, if you didn’t read the other thread who’s to say you’ll read this.  I’ll detail where those UK armor came from.

1 is from Alexandria, came by trn from the med to UK.  1 is purchased UK2 because we invaded Iraq, giving UK enough money to purchase 9 inf 1 arm.  I think the one from Canada came on UK3?  Jim knows better because he was the one using that battlemap thingy, so half of us had no idea what his moves were.

As for the assertion that Sealion was not a requirement to win the game in Alpha2.  I totally agree with you.  I don’t understand why people were so against the option of invasion?  It meant taking a huge risk, a land campaign in Russia G2 has a better chance of victory on the continent.  Not sure why the simple fix wasn’t to just allow Russia to declare on Germany if London falls.

@JimmyHat:

Not sure why I bother, if you didn’t read the other thread who’s to say you’ll read this.  I’ll detail where those UK armor came from.

1 is from Alexandria, came by trn from the med to UK.  1 is purchased UK2 because we invaded Iraq, giving UK enough money to purchase 9 inf 1 arm.  I think the one from Canada came on UK3?  Jim knows better because he was the one using that battlemap thingy, so half of us had no idea what his moves were.

As for the assertion that Sealion was not a requirement to win the game in Alpha2.  I totally agree with you.  I don’t understand why people were so against the option of invasion?  It meant taking a huge risk, a land campaign in Russia G2 has a better chance of victory on the continent.  Not sure why the simple fix wasn’t to just allow Russia to declare on Germany if London falls.

How are you getting the Alexandria one out without being murdered by the German fleet before you get there?
You can get one from Canada to England, I detailed that one already.  Transport from SZ 109 to SZ 106.  Next round, Transport from SZ 106 to SZ 109 land Infantry, Armor in England.
So you are bringing the Transport from SZ 39 to SZ 80 to land troops in Iraq and C. Persia to get a few more IPC out of England?  Doesn’t that leave India too weak to stop Japan?  Figured you needed those IPC from the  DEI. (I assume the transport hits C. Persia first, then helps to get Iraq the next round, because I think you said the SZ 98 transport books it for Gibraltar and hopes the Germans dont crush it and anything it comes with, right?)

I am not against allowing people to do Sea Lion.  I actually dont mind if my opponents do it to me (win or lose the defense) because I feel, (in my opinion, I think, etc) that it is a bad move, it costs too much than you get for it in Alpha 2.  In Alpha 3 it’s just worse for Germany, no objective, more defending units, etc.

I just wanted to demonstrate it was possible even with the changes to the rules.  Hell, people are now talking about not even bothering to defend England at all and going for a complex in Egypt.  That should make it easier to take England out.

I would rather lose India than London, but yes that armor comes via the Med.  If you want to see how that fleet survives the Germ/Italian response, READ THE THREAD.

Also I don’t buy a CV for India, I build ground troops their first 2 rounds before even thinking of other builds.

@mantlefan:

@Cmdr:

So you conceed that if the axis are dedicated, London will fall.  That’s all I have been saying this whole time.  I never claimed it was a good idea.

As I have asked before, what is the point of doing that?

How exactly is proving that Sealion is possible (while ignoring whether or not it is a good idea if Germany wants to WIN)  NOT a waste of time?

1)  It was claimed that sea lion was not possible anymore.  Not necessarily by you or not by you, but it has been claimed.

2)  It was stated that the aa guns in England were too powerful.

3)  No one really asked if it was a GOOD idea, they only asked if it was possible.

Debating the possibility is not the same as endorsing something as a good idea.  I can debate the merits of polygamy and not endorse the practice myself. (In fact, I did debate it in my ethics class.)

Showing that Sea Lion is still possible also debunks the statement that the axis only have one path now and that choices were removed. (Which is nonsense really, there’s still KAF, KAnF, KInF, KRF and KukF).

Jimmy,

I dont buy a CV for India either, but I do move the one from SZ 98.  And I buy ground troops for like the first 3 rounds, probably 4…depending on how many destroyers I need to block the Japanese…

14 BAT-BUGGERING PAGES LATER!!!  :-D

Anyone playing the game to achieve one sole objective, Like getting a German sub to circumnavigate the board to the detriment to EVERYTHING else is not seriously trying playing the game, or really trying to do anything of mention. Taking London to the detrimente of everything else Germany has the option to is a waste of a game and is certianly not worth reading theough 14 PAGES of (seriously Jen you would owe me like 2 hours of time if I wasnt at work right now) There are two many consideration in this game, and claiming to ignore all of them to achieve a taking of London, you might as well not even be playing the game. I think it all depends on the players choice, which option suits them more, and buying transports and a AC arent bad moves, as you can turn thoes things on Russia just as easily.

Jim010, thank you  :-)

You’re welcome.

I am willing to examine realistic tactics (something you would actually play) but think it would now need a new thread.  And we would need to look at only 1 opening at a time.

@Young:

One of my favorite strategies is in danger of becoming extinct. Never in the history of all the world stage A&A games has Germany even considered, let alone attempted capturing London until Global 1940 came around.

I would just like to say that this statement is extremely silly.

@jim010:

You’re welcome.
I am willing to examine realistic tactics (something you would actually play) but think it would now need a new thread.  And we would need to look at only 1 opening at a time.

I have noted a number of inconsistencies with alot of proposed battles, mainly that the margin of victory is very small, Thank you for detailing the math behind all of your moves. I really dont usually buy into these all or nothing gambits, atleast not in the opening turns. I was wondering if you could tell me how your statistics would change if the UK fighter in Normandy began the game in London instead. I ask because that is how I usually set-up the board as I play more to history and historically the RAF had been completely pulled out of France after Dunkirk (atleast to a degree that wouldnt warrent a playing piece).

Grasshopper, dont be so hard on yourself, I really dont think the title was badly worded, all that has happened is what normally happens when one perosn makes claims and another demands clarification, who knew how good some members of this community are at the ol’ flim-flam  :wink:

It’d be nice if people stopped attacking each other in this thread.  It’s probably against forum rules or something.  At the very least, it’s bad manners.

@Young:

Does anyone else other than me, feel like they need a university degree to post on this thread?

Yes, sometimes you feel like you need a degree in history.

Okay for the 9 infantry…

At the end of UK1, should assume that UK collects:

28 + 5 - 3 (Canada convoy) +  2 (Persia) + 1 Ethiopia = 33

To answer the question on subs:

Germany starts with 5 subs.

2 should be in 106 (expected value) and our out of reach of 109.

1 sub participates to the 112 battle and should most likely survive

2 subs participate in the 110 battle, one of them should survive, unless both the battleship and cruiser hit. 33% of time both subs are gone.

1 sub is built in 112.

At UK 2, all destroyers will be gone, so convoy interdiction / income situation will look like:

So 3 subs directed at 109 in G2 against the battleship with planes, 1 sub dies and 6 of convoy damage is made + the 3 off Canada. Total damage of 9.

With these UK1 moves, the Italians should capture and hold one of the UK territories (e.g., egypt) and prevent the NO from being achieved.

The new UK income at end of turn 2 is : 28 - 9 + 2 -2 + 1 = 20.

So then, UK would buy 10 infantry on UK2 (save 3) and 7 infantry on UK3.

Total infantry = 3 + 9 + 10 + 7 = 29 at G4, or 22 at G3. That’s a lot of infantry!

Fighters = 4 (initial on islands), + Tac + Malta fighter + Gibraltar Fighter (total of 7 planes, all there on UK3).

So there is no way I would build many transports in these conditions. I would focus on sinking the remaining UK fleet, taking Gibraltar, interdicting convoys, growing with Italy to diminish UK’s economic relevance as quickly as possible.

In 112 at end of G2 I should have 1 BB, 1 CA, 1 CV, 2 Fighters, 1 TRN.

At G3 would make sure to interdict maximum, 13 total of damage against UK…

While the UK will be well defended, the US will be forced to spend in Atlantic with significant amounts to deal with all those subs.

@jim010:

So you conceed that if the axis are dedicated, London will fall.

I conceed nothing, as you have only demonstrated desparate tactics.  I will ignore future posts.

You did not say what UK would build?

9 inf, save $1

Would send 2 or 3 subs and planes sink the BB in 109, preferrably 3.

How many subs will you have?  Maybe there should be a DD with the BB in sz109 and use the cruiser to block?  Or we could buy the DD?

Would a destroyer and planes sink 104, that blocks the fleet on its way back to London.

That was my idea.

I would keep the rest of my fleet in 112 and add 3 subs to 110. I would not build many transports on G2, would probably add one plane and ground troops with my 70 IPCs.

Then the question is how many would you build?

I think I see what you’re saying Jim, but if we do another study on the moves, we need to decide before hand what are Germany’s objectives.  I would suggest they be: G1 reduce casualties in order to husband forces for upcoming attacks. G2 fleet build and stage on the coast.  G3 invasion of Scotland.  G4 invasion of London.  Remaining troops are parceled out to prevent Russian blitzing but are not concerned with holding balkans/poland.

The amount we can devote to the Russian front is really going to decide our invasion strategy.  Should it be to stop the Russians from invading past the border areas or are we willing to give up everything shy of Berlin and NItaly?

Omega,

I think England might have a good shot at not taking Convoy damage in Canada.  The SZ 109 destroyer can probably sink the remaining Submarine in SZ 106.

Jimmy,

I don’t see how Germany can both stop Russia from invading heavily and take England.  Perhaps leaving a picket infantry in each border territory, but that doesn’t stop Russia nor does it allow Germany to repell Russia.  It’s why I gave the disclaimer that I didn’t care about the overall strategic situation when plotting my destruction of England.

@JimmyHat:

I think I see what you’re saying Jim, but if we do another study on the moves, we need to decide before hand what are Germany’s objectives.  I would suggest they be: G1 reduce casualties in order to husband forces for upcoming attacks. G2 fleet build and stage on the coast.  G3 invasion of Scotland.  G4 invasion of London.  Remaining troops are parceled out to prevent Russian blitzing but are not concerned with holding balkans/poland.

Agreed

The amount we can devote to the Russian front is really going to decide our invasion strategy.  Should it be to stop the Russians from invading past the border areas or are we willing to give up everything shy of Berlin and NItaly?
There really isn’t any way for preventing Russia from taking a couple of forward zones, I would say, but we will see.

Omega,  are you not pursuing Sealion then?  If you don’t buy the TTs on G2, I don’t see Sealion as possible.

If you are going to do a realism study, then figure on stacking counter attack units in Yugoslavia, Germany.  That allows you to retake Romania, Poland and Hungary.

Now keep in mind, those three territories are worth 18 IPC to Russia and only 9 to Germany.  You might not want to allow them to take them and instead focus on Russia instead of England which I have, and probably will for the foreseeable future, figure Sea Lion to be unproductive.  (Unless they really under protect it or something.)

That’s what I would do, but his move was to bring the destroyer in 104 to block the German fleet and prevent boxing the med fleet in the Med.

@Cmdr:

Omega,

I think England might have a good shot at not taking Convoy damage in Canada.  The SZ 109 destroyer can probably sink the remaining Submarine in SZ 106.

---

Jimmy,

I don’t see how Germany can both stop Russia from invading heavily and take England.  Perhaps leaving a picket infantry in each border territory, but that doesn’t stop Russia nor does it allow Germany to repell Russia.  It’s why I gave the disclaimer that I didn’t care about the overall strategic situation when plotting my destruction of England.