Long Range Aircraft, all out attack UK Turn 1

it is risky and this is why most people play LHTR or no tech for this reason.

What has been your experience with this?

Basically the German player spent everything to get the long range tech. Then attacked with all his planes and the navy (with loaded transport) into UK on G1.

All 3 times I have seen this tactic it has worked.

Probably the reason you see G1 LRA Sealion is that a lot of tournament players use LHTR, a rule variant that delays tech from going into effect until the end of the turn (among other things).  So when they have the opportunity to play OOB/FAQ (out of the box / FAQ) rules, they probably want a change of pace, they want to try something that isn’t possible under LHTR.

It isn’t really a “sound” strategy, though.  It isn’t necessarily UNsound, but it is very risky.

First, Russia must not have killed a German fighter or have landed 1-2 fighter on London (if they do, the odds for G1 LRA Sealion go south).  Second, Germany needs to successfully research long range aircraft.  Then Germany’s fighters and bomber have to NOT get shot down when they fly over London.  Then Germany has to succeed on the actual fight at London.  IF all that goes right, then Germany STILL has a tough time with probably very little air left, probably Anglo-Egypt is still held by UK allowing UK to stall out in Africa, and German-held London itself has to worry about a UK1 recapture with battleship support shot plus transported tank from Eastern Canada, followed by a possible US1 reinforcement.  True, Germany will have 75-80 IPC, but Russia can press on Germany’s east front for a while, as Germany won’t have the reinforcements needed to trade territory until G3 at least (G2 build infantry at Germany, G3 move infantry to E. Europe, G4 trade, or G2 build tanks at Germany, G3 trade).

Germany can solve these problems by investing minimally in tech dice, or by getting some tech dice and buying a transport.  But the LESS tech dice rolled, the MORE the chance that IPC are just wasted.

Probably the reason why LHTR implemented delayed tech was that G1 LRA Sealion knocks the UK player out for a while.  With five player tournaments, I reckon people felt that maybe that was unfair to the UK player.

I think all of this could be better resolved simply saying that in round 1, no capitols can be conquered. As it’s now, it makes even worst the techs.

I still don’t understand how delayed techs are removed from tourneys… they are not a very good purchase…

@Bunnies:

…

It isn’t really a “sound” strategy, though.  It isn’t necessarily UNsound, but it is very risky.

…

For a formal tournament, it is risky to lose an important game. But for a home entertainment, without LHTR or something similar, no one would resist to play such a strategy over and over again. You just try it and if failed, OK, admit lost and try another war and you waste less than 10 minutes. Eventually everyone just get tired and simply inhibit this strategy, just like what LHTR does or just inhibit attack to a capitical in the first turn.

The biggest problem with this sort of thing is in ranked play in on-line clubs.  A new player can take on a highly-ranked player using a simple strategy like this with a fairly decent chance of success.  Since these ranking systems tend to award and penalize points based on the difference in ranking between the opponents, this creates a fairly high risk of the loss of many ranking points for the veteran player along with a decent chance of quick advancement for the novice.  Under these conditions, it’s a lot easier for the new player to try for a big score with a quick-and-easy victory rather than try to beat the ranked player head-on.  The result of all this is that higher ranked players will be extremely reluctant to take on lower ranked ones, thus players end up playing only opponents of similar rank.

As an Allied player, I suffered from this strat once, but came back to win the game. The losses for the Germans were more than their gains! I retook UK, and with US re-inforcements in London was able to rebuild quickly enough to get back in the game. Russia was a powerhouse within a few turns, and pushed Germany into a hole early on.  :-D
So, let Germany try Salion, As an Allied player, it is not the end of the world, I can take advantage of it too. :wink:

@Crazy:

As an Allied player, I suffered from this strat once, but came back to win the game. The losses for the Germans were more than their gains! I retook UK, and with US re-inforcements in London was able to rebuild quickly enough to get back in the game. Russia was a powerhouse within a few turns, and pushed Germany into a hole early on.  :-D
So, let Germany try Salion, As an Allied player, it is not the end of the world, I can take advantage of it too. :wink:

yeah, i ve taken London in my current game against DJ but he has been managed to get back from it, and at a time, situation looked pretty grim for Germany

I just don’t see how it gets you any lasting good as Germany- maybe I am misunderstanding something here.

First you have to succeed, and if you fail, it’s game over.  Let’s say you manage to blitz into England an take it.  You’ve spent a good chunk of IPCs on a tech that isn’t going to do you too much later in the game.  You had to take out fully 6 units on English soil so you’ve almost certainly lost several fighters.  Even after you snatch England’s IPCs and get the 8 income from England, this maneuver probably costs Germany 10-20 IPCs (I didn’t crunch numbers).

It also has the opportunity cost that you will make little or no progress against Russia and are virtually guaranteed to be giving up on Africa.  With no air support the English Mediterranean Battleship is almost sure to survive, and there is very little hope you will take Anglo-Egypt.

After all of this, you will have at most 1 infantry + 1 tank, or 1 infantry + 1 artillery on the ground holding London.  Realistically, you only have one land unit there.

What happens next?

If you took your sub from Sea Zone 8 and took out the Brit’s Canadian transport to reinforce this wild scheme, good for you.

If not: On UK1 the infantry and tank stationed in Canada are up to Sea Zone 2 or 3 and have a good chance of removing your token force.  The UK will still have its battleship in Sea Zone 2 or 3 and will get to support this re-invasion with a bombardment.  You might not even get to roll a die to defend!

UK1 will also see the UK’s Mediterranean Battleship, likely supported by a Fighter from Anglo-Egypt, smashing up Germany’s southern fleet.

On US1 the US can roll into London with 2 infantry and tank and an artillery.  They can support this with the East US bomber, which will land in Greenland.  The chance that your piddly remaining troops survive this assault is very low.  Just to put the nail in your coffin, the US might have secured Heavy Bombers, Long Range Aircraft (to bring the East US Fighter in as well) or Combined Bombardment (so the Destroyer supporting the Transports can bombard).

Benefits/Costs

So what does this accomplish for Germany?  Probably not enough. Essentially what you are doing is forcing a massive, uneven IPC and production trade with the UK.  I don’t think the Axis has the economic staying power to sustain this kind of trade.  It does buy the German Baltic fleet some breathing room, maybe they could be used in interesting/effective ways.

The UK loses: A full production/income phase while regaining London and a bunch of IPCs and units.
Germany loses: Most of a turn of production, and a bunch of IPCs and units.

Germany also loses: Pretty much any hope of getting traction in Africa.  Several fighters that are key to mid-game skirmishes with Russia and later defense/harassment of a rebuilt British navy and American landing force.

I do not realy favour the sealion, simply because the odds are too bad, but if you succeed and drop the UK canadian transport, then you have gained an considarable advantage over the allies

Even after you snatch England’s IPCs and get the 8 income from England, this maneuver probably costs Germany 10-20 IPCs (I didn’t crunch numbers).

You get 30 ipc from UK bank + 8 ipc for London that is a + of 38 for germany. Now you have also to consider how much less units the allies can buy. UK1 no units will be bought that is -30 ipc for the allies and if UK can’t retake London on UK1 (your sub sunk the canadian trn) than they will earn no money for another round thus leading to no units bought by England on UK2 thus at least another -28 for the allies compared to a normal game.

This is a net shift of +38 for the axis and -58 for the allies so we are talking about 96 ipc diffrence.

If you attacked with 1inf, 1arm, 6fig and a bom and even if you lost all except the arm you made a loss of 78+5 (you’ll loose the arm too only later) =83 (actually germany should keep 1 or 2 air units in this battle and still take UK). UK will have lost 2inf, 1art, 1arm, 2fig, 1bom = -50 ipc. So even after the casulties are taken into account the ipc shift for the axis is considarable.

It also has the opportunity cost that you will make little or no progress against Russia and are virtually guaranteed to be giving up on Africa.  With no air support the English Mediterranean Battleship is almost sure to survive, and there is very little hope you will take Anglo-Egypt.

UK1 will also see the UK’s Mediterranean Battleship, likely supported by a Fighter from Anglo-Egypt, smashing up Germany’s southern fleet.

Depending on the bid you may have 1 or 2 units in lybia together with 2 units from South Europe you can attack Egypt and take it.
The single UK BB will surly never take on the german fleet in sz15 single handled so you’ll have to take the fig of sz 35 now you are not retaking egy and you bring less pressure to the Japan player too.

If not: On UK1 the infantry and tank stationed in Canada are up to Sea Zone 2 or 3 and have a good chance of removing your token force.

You can only bring the UK arm because the inf in WCA is simply not in range.

You’ve spent a good chunk of IPCs on a tech that isn’t going to do you too much later in the game.

Noone prohibits germany from buying new aircrafts additionally to the 1 or 2 that survived in UK.

Furthermore I would recomend to use only 1 tech die to try for LRA (other players on this board council against this) if you succeed fine now you can try the sealion, if you miss to gain the tech you only wasted 5 ipc (1arm). IMO that is something that can happen any time in trading battles, so you should not be severly hindered in your efforts.

With Sea Lion available, no bid should be allowed. I think game is balanced with OOB + faq. Delaying techs unbalances the game, favoring allies (instant rockets for Germany for 5 ipcs is another good strategy).

Why would you let the sz 13 BB survive. I’d ignore egypt, the destroyer and canadian tran to hit that BB with med fleet plus atlantic sub positioning you for a T2 retake of england with both your trans.

Because you have a reasonable chance (75%) to kill the canadian trn if you attack it with the sub. And thus a 75% chance that UK gets no income for an additional turn leading to no recruiting in UK2.

And retaking UK is not likely either could US block your med fleet with one of their ships and/or they could decide to reinforce Gbr with 2inf, 1art, 1arm, 1fig, 1bom and maybe russia can land figs too.

Furthermore do you not attack egy if you decide to go after the bb. Under all these circumstances I would neglect the bb and procede as discribed in my first reply.

:roll:
I agree with Funcioneta, if you are playing OOB rules, no prebid IPCs’ should be available. Placing an extr transport in the Baltic prior to G1 just might be worth going for an operation sealion.
My biggest problem is with getting that transport off of Eastern Canada. If my sub losses, All will be for nothing. Especially if both the UK BBs survive!
The most Fighters I hope to have would be 5, After the Russians take the Ukraine on R1. With all my air commited to Sealion I would be taking it defensively everywhere else except maybe for Karilia. Not something that bodes well for the German position. No new territories, no troop builds to push for new territries before G3 and you’ve got one stagnet Germany with a built up Russia staring at you licking his lips on where to hit you with all his armies.
The worst thing that you can do t the allies is sink their moral. They may concede on G1. Then you have only won a very short game, IMO not played a good one.  :wink:

As I said above I’m not that keen on sea lion myself. and if the conditions are unfavorable (like Russia took Ukr) than to hell with it.

Additionally I want to remind you that I would spend only 1 die on tech so germany can build new troops on G1 for 35 ipc.