Sealion???

That’s the point though. Sea Lion is an objective for Germany but there is no justification for doing while the USSR is still a credible threat because once you capture London, there is no way in hell you can defend against the US liberation and the Soviet invasion. Hence, just don’t do it. I am only suggesting that if one wanted to do an early Sea Lion, you will need Japan to put so much pressure on USSR that Germany can focus completely on US thus Japan will lose in the Pacific. I agree Sea Lion isn’t a wise move.

@Elsass-Lorraine:

@NotEvenJail:

Its starting to feel like this guy is just trolling us with these “essays.” I mean come on, man. Many of these statements are way too out of touch. Can’t be serious.

I would hesitate to jump so far so quickly. He/she probably is just discovering this forum and/or other sources of strategies, and their game group has probably been disconnected, if you will, from the most effective strategies that the wider A&A community takes for granted.

I will note that in his first essay (the Barbarossa one) he mentioned how G40 had recieved “little attention on this blog”, which I take to mean the main axisandallies.org website (which most definitely does have a lack of G40-related articles, last I checked) as opposed to the forums. I knew about axisandallies.org the site long before I knew about the forums, so maybe that is what happened here.

I didn’t mean to be harsh just speculating. I get it. This game is special because it has a lot more nuance than one would readily perceive.  I have no problem with the thread just made me scratch my head.

Only on triplea have I had the pleasure of successfully pulling off Sea Lion. I’d love to do it on a table top game. The most recent time I had I think 8 tanks standing. No loss of aircraft as hits (2 fighters due to an AAA gun hit). I left the tanks there to really make it costly for the US to liberate London. My team won the game…London didn’t get liberated until like round 11. It was a very long game.

I prefer Barbarossa, but if the UK hands London a silver platter because it got too aggressive…then it needs to get punished. I don’t care what anyone says, no allies player like the advantage of London being knocked out for several turns. I’m not going to G2 purchase of a Sea Lion if several factors occur of course. But if Sea Lion is done right, the US has to respond and Japan has the chance to rage. Also, if Germany DOWs at the right moment, Russia can be pushed away from E. Poland (which I think is the critical position to keep Russia from getting to). They will come back, but then Germany might have the chance to get in position to start pushing Russia back from the border territories. Scandinavia might fall for a time being. Private Panic mentions losing a battle with favorable odds. That’s not going to occur on a regular basis.

If the UK gets really aggressive in it’s spending in the middle east UK1 and Sea Lion doesn’t occur, then in those situations I have a very difficult time overcoming a substantially large stack of UK fighters.

And it would be possible as well. Most times when Japan attacks round 1, it involves all the ships leaving SZ 6 and all the planes leaving Japan, so there would be nothing to defend those shiny new transports.

Regarding Unstoppable Sealion:

I am not saying with any certainty that this would give the Allies a victory, but my face-to-face playing partner and I have had some discussions on what the Allies can do to counter Sealion. We have come up with two possibilities that we have never been able to try and no one has really talked about, much less tried.

1.) Try to sink the German fleet after it attacks the UK. This is contingent on the US buying bombers in the starting rounds and the UK preserving what ever fleet and aircraft that it can.

Under the new rule, Russia immediately enters the war when London falls. So, if Soviets see Germany build a G2 transport fleet, they can build a small fleet in sea zone 127 or 115 so as to take Norway on R3 when they enter the war. Now, the US can fly it’s bombers to attack the German fleet in sea zone 110 and land in Norway. If some German fleet still survives, the UK can use it’s remaining fleet and planes to clean it up.

Problems: What if Germany goes to sea zone 109? This prevents the US bombers from making it to Norway. Possible Solution: Russian build in sea zone 127 and take Scotland on R3 so the US bombers would have a valid landing place. Problem with that: Germany could use a blocker in sea zone 125 or 126. Possible solution to that potential problem: Could the UK position its fleet in such a way on UK 1 so that on UK 2 it places a blocking ship into sea zone 110 and 111 so the only option on G3 for Germany is to do Sealion from sea zone 110?

If the German fleet is sunk post-Sealion, what happens? How badly does this hurt the Germans? Is not enough pressure placed on Japan if the US spends rounds 1 and 2 buying in the Atlantic?

Those were some of the questions my partner and I had. Personally, I think it would be a huge blow to the Germans to lose their fleet because they wouldn’t be able to transport any remaining troops back from the UK to face off against the Soviet for a time (if ever).

2.) The only spot on the entire map that the US can use one set of transports to shuck troops back and forth is Alaska to the Soviet Far East (sea zone 2- sea zone 3). Now, if Germany does Sealion, Moscow survives past round 10. Right? Well, if the US buys fleet and ground for the Pacific, on US 3 (after London falls), they could move to sea zone 3 and offload into the Soviet Far East. From there, mechanized infantry and tanks can make it to Moscow by round 8 (best case scenario). Well before Russia falls. Can they get enough there to matter? I don’t know, but I’d like to try it out. To me, it beats flying mountains of planes since ground units are cheaper.

A few of the positives for this: By having a fleet in sea zone 3, you threaten Japan. Slow walking troops can go to Korea and or Manchuria. The US only needs to build one fleet to have a real effect and place lots of boots on the ground. It also helps the Russians maintain their income from all of the territories in Asia…. a real bonus in my opinion.

I would love to try these ideas out on my own, but I have a newborn in the family and that precludes me from playing for the foreseeable future. Guys and girls, give this some thought. My partner and I believe there could be some validity to these two ideas.

@Violent.copper:

sz 110 max defender 1 cruiser 1 bb 2  fighters
send
108
103
germ 2bombers and 1 tac(landing on the sz 112 AC)
west germ 1 fighter 1 tac
95%

The Allies can defend with a max of 3 scrambled fighters, not just 2.  That French fighter in London can scramble as well.  And remember that any casualties caused by the allied air must come out of German air, the subs can not be used as fodder vs. air.  This will not matter if the cruiser and BB get two hits before they die, but it is a factor to consider.  Germany will still win, but it will be a little more costly.  I’ll leave it to better minds than mine to calculate if it is better in the long term for the allies to scramble or hold the fighters in reserve for defense during the sealion invasion.

The 2010 era  Ruleset was called Alpha, for “First Edition Global 1940”.  Extensive revisions to the setup were then made, through multiple iterations (Alpha +1, +2, +3) and the final version was then slightly modified into “Second Edition Global 1940” which was published and circulated a few years later…2012-3 I think.

Anyway, Alpha +3 was a playtest version that was circulated on the internet for improved play and was then published, so that’s what we recognize today as “G40”.  Only a few other minor map changes and rule wordings were changed.    Piece sculpts are different, artillery is very confusingly similar to flak guns, the smaller teams didn’t have their own molds just copies of the other molds.  Second Edition is far superior as a purchase, since First is obsolete.

That means that there are 3 official Rulesets (Alpha, Alpha +3 G40, G42).  You could go back and play the first edition (alpha 1), I bought in after that, so I’ve only seen the boxes, never played.  its radically different starting pieces for all teams.

See the thing is it still doesn’t matter Germany is crushed and the game is all but over as Italy falls soon after. Then Japan can be ganged up on no matter how many ipc’s they have.