The basic idea behind the determined Sea Lion is to drop 20+ units in Scotland on G3 and then hit London with those plus another 20+ drop so that London falls with Germany losing alot of infantry but retaining all his tanks and much of the arty depending on die rolls and only AA loses to the air units. Then take the 90+ ipc gain to buy a huge amount of land units to first defend Berlin, then take the offensive against Russia. With all the transports Germany can threaten to out flank the Russians by dropping 20+ units into Leningard. Because UK is so focused on London (as they should be) this also means the Italians are doing well in the Med. The opening can be done as shown above or with the more traditional first build of 1 carrier and 2 transports. The downside for the Axis is that Russia is building up and can get all the frontier territories when London falls. Also Japan cannot be unleached until J4 (assuming US has done a couple naval builds in the Atlantic).
Cow, I like your Japan Playbook, and I am curious to hear your thoughts (and those of any other experienced players) on the best way to play the US in Pacific (along with the obvious seize the island moves by UK and Anzac) given the delayed Japanese start. At the moment my plan is build 2 carriers and 1 battleship in the pacific on US1 and go to Queensland with the US fleet on US3. The US2 and US3 builds would be in the Atlantic.
what you put in so far, 40+ units + 10 new trannies = 130+70 IPC = 200 IPC
you take 2 ftrs as loss in london, before combat = 20
also add the extra ships you built; 30 IPC
total nonlandunits = 250
so from you start you gotten 30+75+50 = 150.
so total you are down 100 IPC from your start landunits army 383 IPC value + minors = 407.
minus whatever you have taken in losses, lets say that is 40 IPC when taking france and yugo and uk fleet.
then you should be at about 260 IPC landarmy, then you buy 90 ipc worth in G4.
lets see what ussr has;
start 164 IPC (exluding far east)
USSR has collected and built for 111 IPC, and have an army of 275 IPC, they declare on USSR4 and hit finland, rumania yugoslavia and west poland, hopefully being strong enough to hold one of them. they then can collect 37 + 22 for europe, and if they get iraq with british help, they get +5 there, collecting a total of 64 IPC.
at the same time US has built a transport fleet ready to hit uk, it is difficult to say how much has survived the the battle in london.
since you didn’t hit until turn 4, usa is probably at war, and might have landed fighters there, or at least put a fleet strong enough to kill your fleet, so you have to spend on 2 carriers to make it survive.
this is not good, and a reason why sealion is for turn 3, not for turn 4 :) IMO
In a determined Sea Lion, the Japs do not attack the UK/Anzac until London is taken (in the meantime they work on China and Russian far east). So the US will not have any planes in London helping the UK defend London and the only way to attack the German navy in 110 after the landing is with carrier planes launched from 102 on US4 (bombers won’t be able to help because they will have no place to land - - Germans will hold Scotland and if necessary Erie). So the Germans do not usually need to build an additional carrier to defend the transports in 110. That said, Kruezfeld’s IPC analysis certainly demonstrates a downside to the G4 sea lion. The German player that uses it would argue that keeping the UK out of the game for a prolonged period, the extra income from London/Scotland and the ability to use the transports to drop 20+ units into Leningrad more than compensates for what you initially give the Russians. The best direct response that I have been able to come up with, is to try to have as many UK planes and ships available to destroy the German landing fleet in 111 on G3 when they make the Scotland landing so they cannot go back and get the 2nd wave of troops (while maintaining enough strength in London to prevent a direct assualt on G3) a tough balancing act for the UK.
I would like to add that I underestimated in terms of losses, and how much your landingunits cost, probably, send in the 9 tanks you start with and the 8 arts, bringing the grand total of 23 inf, 9 tanks 8 art = 155 IPC sent in. so the value of your units after landing is probably down to 230. Since germany have more more planes that ussr, their effective combatvalue drops futher.
but you said you where NOT attacking with japan until J4. lets assume you hit china, then turn 1 you build 26 IPC, collect 30+10, turn 2 you attack russia and collect 34 + 10, turn 3 you fight and collect 38+10. your total collected in the first 3 turns is then; 132 IPC.
anzak + ukp takes java and sumatra the first turn, collecting; 10+4 and 17+4. turn 2, since they expect sealion, they dare japan to attack and takes celebs and papua. collecting 14 and 21+3.
japan does not attack, so they declare war on turn3, collecting NOs, 14+10 and 24+5, they will probably hit a terr or two, taking 2 ipc more. giving them the grand total of 129 IPC collected in the first 3 turns.
at this point US almost does not even have to participate in the pacific. or, US can afford to use 150 of its first 4 turns production against germany. I dont see how germany are ever going to hold london longer than US5, while simultaniously trying to fend of russia.
well I don’t like giving up 10+transports just to have a sea lion success… holding london against usa is not exactly a problem. whatever is left on it is not coming back to europe. 3 inf a turn on london can be a huge problem for usa (consider it takes 7 ipcs per 2 units usa wants to ship over, 14 ipc to match 6 ipc).
The nice thing about being USA is that you can go liberate london, take italy, or screw up norway/finland (russians usually end up getting this).
I find that after a sea lion… I usually want to still do enough in the pacific to assure a downhill game for Japan. 3 subs a round from usa can be fun. to sprinkle all over the place.
I think what you actually do with US is to base your fleet in 109, taking ireland, then making an infbridge from 106, while building a fleetbase in ireland.
that way you can prolly land 14 (7 trannies) units on the 1st turn, and 10 (5 trannies) more on the second, and alot of planes, maybe even build an airbase if your fleet is in danger.
then 10 units each turn until you are strong enough to go to scotland, and then london. (I think those first 20-30 should be enough with airsupport)
maybe it takes too long time, and is too much of an commitment, landing units in northafrica while building 15ish trannies, can probably take rome with all the preassure russia is excerting.
See you really don’t need much europe presence.
As long as the 10 undefended transports, die you are good. Germany you don’t have to worry about his VC win until he can somehow push on 2 of russia, volgograd, and egypt. Also germany don’t have any naval to threaten you.
You should take care of japan. I mean you just want naval in the europe half to keep Italy from growing big, that is it.
liberating uk is kinda pointless if it is a broke back country. I rather shut japan down permanently so I don’t have to worry about it, ever.
So yeah round 2 and 3 you should produce 3 naval on west usa. Get a grab bag of stuff for atlantic (anything but cruisers and battleships).
~
After I see sea lion on G2. I like to get 3 subs on west usa until at war. Then I shut down pacific first. The naval in the atlantic is just to keep germany from messing with you.
The 50/50 split is also a good option as well. You technically just have to match Japan’s income and add a sub, eventually you screw japan over.
The allies can always make sealion next to impossible if they really set their mind to it (UK build infantry, no Taranto, bring ships home, get Canadians, prepare US airstrike). If they do everything in their power to make it costly and Germany still goes for it, then Germany will be in bad shape after the sealion “victory”. In that case, losing London is bad but not necessarily a total disaster. Suppose the opponents don’t really like playing Japan and they’re not very good at it. As long as USA, USSR and remnant of UK can hold the line against germany, the axis are placed in the crummy position of having to win as Japan. In that case, it might actually be preferable to intentionally allow a (costly) sealion in order to put the onus on Japan. If its a team game and the guy playing Germany is more skilled than the guy playing Japan, then coaxing them into a costly sealion might work out OK for the allies.
