Sea zone 102

@toan6ca1:

Hi, I had a question about the sea zone 102 rule where the US can conduct long range patrols before they are at war.  The rule appears to say that only sea units can go there.  Would that mean that the US can have a loaded carrier there, or not?

Only Transports are excluded:

@rulebook:

US warships (not transports) may also conduct long-range patrols into sea zone 102.

HTH :-)

Any ships but transports. The problem with SZ 102 is the fact that the US doesn’t get any benefit from sitting in that zone what so ever.

@ShadowHAwk:

@Caesar:

Any ships but transports. The problem with SZ 102 is the fact that the US doesn’t get any benefit from sitting in that zone what so ever.

Carrier aircraft from that zone can be used to attack gibraltar.
Thats the benefit.

Correctly

air can also immediately land in UK from there. Also, if Germany tries a fake Sea Lion and moves to the US instead (before the US can build), it allows you to place a blocker.

@toan6ca1:

So to confirm, it’s OK to have fighters on carriers in sea zone 102 before US declares war?

Yes, but only US fighters on US carriers (as long as US have not joined the Allies)!

The last time I played the Allies I used this strategy to completely wipe out the German navy;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X6LjB8bCbw&t=1074s

The only difference was that I only used 1 Carrier. I would do the same every time I play the Americans now because it cant hurt you. With the German navy gone it’s a cake walk into Scandinavia for the Russians.

@GeneralHandGrenade:

With the German navy gone it’s a cake walk into Scandinavia for the Russians.

But I thought that conventional wisdom was, that Russia couldn’t afford to march into Scandinavia because the Novgorod troops would be needed to defend Moscow?

It is easy to walk into Scandinavia against a bad German player… actually almost anything is easy against a bad opponent.

@Herr:

@GeneralHandGrenade:

With the German navy gone it’s a cake walk into Scandinavia for the Russians.

But I thought that conventional wisdom was, that Russia couldn’t afford to march into Scandinavia because the Novgorod troops would be needed to defend Moscow?

Well you can march into Scandinavia or you can use the troops to defend Moscow, not both.

If you can expend the troops on a Scandinavian expedition and believe that you can still make Moscow sufficiently strong, well, anything is possible. How this would come about? Perhaps a Scotland fighter bid and a scramble, perhaps Germany is overspending on Navy or doing something else silly like going for Egypt first. I suppose GHG’s example was a failed Sea Lion attempt which is a valid scenario for a Scandinavian assault. Normally such a move assumes that the German navy is sunk or they’ll just wipe your spearhead amphibiously.

I thought it was obvious from the example that I gave that it was a Sealion attempt.

I put out a strategy a while back called Middle Earth. In order to attempt that strategy you need to make sure that Sealion doesn’t happen so I spent am awful lot of time trying to come with ways that would dissuade Germany from assaulting London. The best way that I found was moving the Americans into position in SZ 102. Of course the UK needs to do all the things they should do to prevent it as well by stacking as much as they can on London in the first 2 turns.

It works like this;

US1- Build 1 carrier, 1 destroyer in SZ 101, 1 Bomber in Eastern US, 1 carrier in SZ 10.
Move fighters from Eastern US and Western US onto carrier in 101. Move Bomber from Central US to Eastern US. Move fighters from Hawaii to carrier in SZ 10.

US2- Build 2 Bombers in Eastern US, 1 destroyer, 2 transports in SZ 101, 1 submarine in SZ 10.
Move carrier and destroyer from 101 to 102. If no subs in the area to assault SZ 101 then move cruiser to 102 as well.

Now you are set up to convince Germany not to go through with Sealion. If Germany goes ahead anyway then you will be able to fly 2 fighters from SZ 101 and 4 Bombers from Eastern US to SZ 110 to wipe out the German navy. Considering that Germany has to build 9 transports to successfully land in London, that leaves them with not enough money to put the number of ships in SZ 110 that can withstand the American fighters and bombers. Remember that German subs do not take part in the battle for 110 because all US has is planes. I chose the bombers as casualties first and landed the fighters back on the carrier in SZ 104. I did it to bait the German air into attacking my carrier, destroyer, cruiser and 2 fighters in 104. They lost most of their planes between that and the Sealion invasion. They were left with no navy and no air force. There were 2 US bombers landed on Scotland where I had left 1 UK infantry to help them take on the tank that had taken London. There was no way between the Americans, UK, and Russian planes which were parked in Leningrad that Germany could build any navy. They spent everything they had in the west and nothing in the east against Russia.

That’s how you take Scandinavia in a cake walk. Russia steamrolled Germany with nothing but tank buys from turn 2 onward. Germany surrendered before the end of the 6th turn. Berlin could have fallen then but I chose to play it safe and bring more tanks into Poland for the turn 7 assault.

That why I move to SZ 102 every time I play the Americans now. There is either no Sealion attempt, or it turns into a short game. This thread wasn’t about taking Scandinavia, it was about using SZ 102. My last post was just relating what happened the last time I used it.

Interesting idea.

If the Germans take Normandy G2, they could mobilise a CV there or even two to defend the US aerial attack though.

Still, 3 bombers + 4 fighters on a cruiser, BB, CV + 2ftrs is a positive expected outcome for the Allies.

I’ll have to watch your defending Sea Lion video.

Yes Germany could do all of that, but it would take all of their money. Again, Russia gets the upper hand in the east because Germany didn’t spend a dime there. They would basically be spending everything they had in the first 3 turns plus 20 ground units from the opening set up. Also, if they save their battleship then there’s a strong chance that there are UK boats left to assault 110 after America throws their planes at it. The loaded carrier in 102 plus bombers makes Sealion a very bad idea any way you look at it. Those units are not a waste of money after that either as they can be used effectively. Also, you might have noticed that I still managed to place a carrier and a sub in the Pacific on the first 2 turns. If Germany doesn’t buy a ton of transports then you can spend most or all of US 3 in the Pacific now. Mission accomplished with boats in both oceans to move forward.

I think we are looking at SZ110 the wrong way.

Lets make the assumption that Sea Lion is a go and Germany is going all in.

Why are they building CV again? You can spend 30 IPC for 2 airfields, one for Normandy and one for Belgium and have 6 planes able to scramble into that SZ and provide the same as 3 CV in FTR protection on that SZ.

The idea that Germany needs a CV to be able to provide FTR protection of the fleet is not needed and can be covered with Airfields.

SZ112 is covered by a airfield SZ 113 is covered by a airfield. There is no need for CV from Germany to cover the fleet. Germany with the purchase of just one airfield can cover SZ110.

Maybe it is just me but a CV can be sunk. A Airfield who does the same role, protect the fleet, does it better with 3 aircraft scramble, cannot be destroyed in less taken by land units on a invasion is the way to go.

Hey, I get it, having a German CV looks cool on the board but in the big picture is a total waste of IPC in the early game. Land based aircraft on coastal Airfields is all Germany needs.

You’re ignoring the additional defence that a CV provides. A CV can be moved later but an airbase can’t. You’re also assuming that you have additional planes that could be placed on the airbases.

Well that is very true, Iam making some assumptions.

#1 if you have a CV you need two planes. Regardless of bought or on the board.

#2 If you have airbase it has 1-3 planes on it regardless of bought or on the board.

So, that is a total wash. The planes have to come from some where.

#3 A CV’s defense in a naval stack is of no importance. So, you have a stack of navy with a CV and 2 FTRS. You replace that out with 3 FTR land based units and remove the CV from the defense you are actually better off for inflicting CAS. Now, I will concede that a airbase on the coast cannot take a hit and absorb one CAS against you. That is the one advantage a CV has over a Airbase on the coast.

#4 Where again is this German CV moving again? It is not like a German CV is going on a rampage across the Atlantic headed for USA. It is sticking to the coasts of Europe or the coasts of the Med, where they also have Airbases to guard them.

Bottom line for me

There are very few places a German CV is needed because land based units on a Airbase perform the exact same function on the Europe map.

The Pacific map is a totally different beast and requires CV to move air power forward to project a threat. FTR and TAC on the Pacific map almost require a CV to move them into a position to attack.

Germany will need to leave a number of those planes in 110 or the navy will be wiped out in the scramble from London. Those are planes that they need to assault the land units in the UK.

Again, buying 2 air bases means that Germany has spent all of their money in the west. Russia wins the war in the east, America takes back London through SZ 109. If you’ve never tried using SZ 102 then I recommend that you give it a shot. Pray Germany goes Sealion so you can make it a short game for Berlin. If they don’t go Sealion then you have a loaded carrier and 4 bombers to throw at the Axis.

@PainState:

#4 Where again is this German CV moving again? It is not like a German CV is going on a rampage across the Atlantic headed for USA. It is sticking to the coasts of Europe or the coasts of the Med, where they also have Airbases to guard them.

SZ91 to defend a fleet assaulting Gibraltar is the main thing for Germany. Yes, you can get away with Italy taking Gibraltar and moving directly from SZ110 to SZ92, although that does assume that the Allies don’t fortify Gibraltar significantly.

Then they can move into the Med and be used in the assault on Egypt, or even sail towards Cape Horn.

@ShadowHAwk:

CV are better then airbases in any case.

I wouldn’t say any case. What about if the Allies are convoying SZ6 or SZ97? An airbase is way, way better because you only lose one destroyer and sink 2 1/3 subs on average. Two airbases allow sinking 4 1/3 subs per turn.