I prefer Queso cheese.
Oh
Cheese tactics to win the game?
Cheese tactics can be overcome very easily by experienced Allied players who recognize what is going on in the early part of the game, turn 1-4.
Sealion: win-win or a dead end?
-
okay let us continue over here…coming from here:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23503.0my thesis is:
i am not convinced that building up a german navy is a wise decision. sealion is a dead end! once planned and bought this way, germany is doomed to loose the game.
i think it is a dead end, because of way too much ipcs invested in effectively - economically spoken - no gain. well, uk can be cut out from game for two rounds, that is a good thing. no way to argue. but meanwhile russia gets too big to be conquered. (as russia i would not suggest attacking any german territory in range of the sealion-fleet.) in the long distance, imho, sealion is no game-winner.only with lucky dices…
another important point is: TIME!
you just do not have sufficient time as germany to do sealion AND barbarossa! calculate 3 rounds for sealion, two turns to get all material from the UK to russia plus minimum 4 more turns to conquer russia - heavily fortified. you need to hold 8 VCs for one turn (london will fall to the USA, so you have to go moscow anyway), which in this phase of the game is nearly not possible.
only due to lucky dices. summa summarum already 9/10 turns.rock`n roll
P.S.:
@Xandax:@rock`n:
<snip>i do not agree, as you know already. never seen sealion work AND the axis winning afterwards. that sealion works, no doubt, but only with the price of loosing the european board.</snip>
That you’ve not seen it happen is not the same as it a) can’t happen and b) can’t win the game.
well i agree with you in a), with b) only, if your opponent must have been sleeping. sorry, no offense.
The only time I’ve won OOB as Axis was with Sealion. In that game, removing England caused Italy to become very powerful, very fast - even to the point where it was throwing tanks into Calcuatta, had taken South Russia, the entire Africa and was playing catch with the USA.
okay, get some more details written, please. which round happened what?
Sure, the game might have looked different if I got diced on Sealion, but well …. you can plan with the dice, but you can’t control them.
this is kind of obvious, isn´t it? :D
I’m sure you can win the game without, but well - that’s not really the issue and frankly, I do not care that people win doing only Barbarossa. The issue is that you claim it is a “dead end” and will cause you to loose the game. Well, others disagree, not just me, and use the tactic to great advantage.
you are right, that was never the issue. but as i told you from the beginning on, that i am not convinced, that an axis-party doing sealion wins afterwards. so please, convince me! when you do what? how? etc.
i hate it to repeat myself, but i will do it for you:
could you please outline your “viable strategy”? all i have read is: “sealion then barbarossa then victory”without any details! (where you go with what? in which turn you want to achieve which conquest etc. maybe with some estimated numbers of units you throw in there etc. …)
And no, the game isn’t poker, but that does not change the fact that if you’re a one trick pony, and always visible go for Russia, it’s much much easier to counter, than if the enemy doesn’t know which direction you go and must plan accordingly. And heck - I’d find it a very dull game if it was always a rush for Russia. Doubt I’d even play it much then.
So I’m glad Sealion is a viable alternative for me.i concord with that. it would be dull, otherwise i realized that sealion is - imho - a loosing strat.
so once more: how many games you played in total? how many with sealion? how many won with sealion? (okay the last you answered already, one game.)P.P.S.:
hoping you read my barbarossa-strat, how would you counter that?EDIT:
when i speak of barbarossa i mean a G2-attack consisting of all infantry in the east, massive builds of mechanized infantry, some tanks. moving to eastern poland, pausing one turn, then belarus, bryansk, moscow. if not G6 then G7. builds are til G4 mostly mech, a sub per turn. after G5 only defensive builds and etc.
leaving yugoslavia to italy, taking finland, bulgaria, greece, helping with planes in the med.
better described here: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=22840.0 -
Part 1: WHAT GERMANY DOES.
The most important thing that Germany must do, is build several transports on G1, and put them in position for sea-lion. So, effectively, you could invade England with 8 ground units, and up to 8 planes. That usually wins no matter who your facing. So on G2 you could likely take England AND invade Russia from the west, using your massive G2 money for Russia.
But let’s assume low luck…you lose two fighters and a tactical bomber in your Atlantic battle, and all your subs. England still has nothing to protect his coast. You will still be able to invade with 8 ground units, 2 fighters, 2 tac bombers, and a bomber.
Part 2: WHAT ENGLAND DOES
No matter what the outcome of the first turn was, England MUST prepare for sea-lion. That means buying no less than 9 infantry to place in London. Depending on how well you did in the North Atlantic, the English player will most likely have to abandon a Taranto raid in order to protect is coast. If there are no ships in the English Channel, than Germany can just continue to land soldier in England at will.
PART 3: THE BENEFITS
Germany can control what England does in the first turn, and if the English player does not do the above moves, then London will fall. But let’s say that the English player does do well to protect himself, and defends London properly. This is just a greater benefit for Germany.
- If London is not defended
-Sea-lion can take effect
-You will receive 30 IPCs from London, and another 8 per turn from the territory
-You eliminate an English player
-You free up Italy in Africa and the Med
-You force America to attack England instead of mainland Europe later on
-Your navy is free to act where it wants to***- If London is defended
-Barbarossa will come much quicker.
-You have that same attacking force to invade Leningrad***
-You free up Italy in Africa and the Med.
-You can mobilize more units along the Baltic sea.******All with the same 4 transports
Without a doubt, a planned sea-lion is the most effective move the Germans can make. Executing Sea-lion in G3 may become risky however, to to the fact that it will take longer to invade Russia. If your invasion into England does not seem like it will work, invade Leningrad, it will be nowhere near as well defended as England.
-
I have found that Sealion is usually a must for an Axis win in Europe. If Sealion is successful, then Germany gets a large infusion of cash to buy more stuff for Barbarossa and Italy is practically given a free hand in the Med and Africa.
If Germany decides against Sealion, perhaps because London is too well defended, then they can proceed with Barbarossa but will still have England nipping at it’s backside until the US gets there. Then Germany has the dreaded “two-front war”. Also, the UK will be more able to keep Italy in check in Africa.
If Germany tries a Sealion and fails, which I have seen happen, that is worst-case scenario for the Axis. They will have spent a lot of money on wasted units and will probably be a little weak on the eastern front. Once England recovers from the failed invasion, they can cause Germany some headaches, plus still keep Italy in check and not let them get too powerful. In one game where this happened, Russia actually attacked Germany on R4 and did a fair amount of damage before Germany could push them back. By that time, USA had arrived, took out Italy and liberated France. So while Germany did eventually take Moscow, they lost Berlin to a big British invasion. -
Dead end! Keep Britain down by using your navy & planes to kill any Brit navy around UK. Help Italy as much as possible and attack Russia on Turn 3. If you have a good UK player, he or she can make UK pretty hard, if not impossible to take. Even if Germany takes the UK, it’s usually w/such little troops that the US is able to retake it and that makes for a strong Russia, which will eventually spell doom for Germany, after the US retakes the UK, employs a KGF strategy. That combined w/Russia attacking from the east is not good for Germany. Use the old, attack Russia w/Germany, Italy, Japan strategy, I think is the best approach to win the game. Japan can attack through China, while keeping the US out of the war as long as possible and still mess w/Anzac and UK India.
-
Part 1: WHAT GERMANY DOES.
The most important thing that Germany must do, is build several transports on G1, and put them in position for sea-lion. So, effectively, you could invade England with 8 ground units, and up to 8 planes. That usually wins no matter who your facing. So on G2 you could likely take England AND invade Russia from the west, using your massive G2 money for Russia.
But let’s assume low luck…you lose two fighters and a tactical bomber in your Atlantic battle, and all your subs. England still has nothing to protect his coast. You will still be able to invade with 8 ground units, 2 fighters, 2 tac bombers, and a bomber.
Part 2: WHAT ENGLAND DOES
No matter what the outcome of the first turn was, England MUST prepare for sea-lion. That means buying no less than 9 infantry to place in London. Depending on how well you did in the North Atlantic, the English player will most likely have to abandon a Taranto raid in order to protect is coast. If there are no ships in the English Channel, than Germany can just continue to land soldier in England at will.
PART 3: THE BENEFITS
Germany can control what England does in the first turn, and if the English player does not do the above moves, then London will fall. But let’s say that the English player does do well to protect himself, and defends London properly. This is just a greater benefit for Germany.
- If London is not defended
-Sea-lion can take effect
-You will receive 30 IPCs from London, and another 8 per turn from the territory
-You eliminate an English player
-You free up Italy in Africa and the Med
-You force America to attack England instead of mainland Europe later on
-Your navy is free to act where it wants to***- If London is defended
-Barbarossa will come much quicker.
-You have that same attacking force to invade Leningrad***
-You free up Italy in Africa and the Med.
-You can mobilize more units along the Baltic sea.******All with the same 4 transports
Without a doubt, a planned sea-lion is the most effective move the Germans can make. Executing Sea-lion in G3 may become risky however, to to the fact that it will take longer to invade Russia. If your invasion into England does not seem like it will work, invade Leningrad, it will be nowhere near as well defended as England.
-
I agree with KillOFzee, a prepared Sea-lion is the best maneuver possible for the Germans.
-
hello KillOFzee,
thanx for hopping in here. :)
Part 1: WHAT GERMANY DOES.
The most important thing that Germany must do, is build several transports on G1, and put them in position for sea-lion. So, effectively, you could invade England with 8 ground units, and up to 8 planes. That usually wins no matter who your facing. So on G2 you could likely take England AND invade Russia from the west, using your massive G2 money for Russia.
But let’s assume low luck…you lose two fighters and a tactical bomber in your Atlantic battle, and all your subs. England still has nothing to protect his coast. You will still be able to invade with 8 ground units, 2 fighters, 2 tac bombers, and a bomber.
Part 2: WHAT ENGLAND DOES
No matter what the outcome of the first turn was, England MUST prepare for sea-lion. That means buying no less than 9 infantry to place in London. Depending on how well you did in the North Atlantic, the English player will most likely have to abandon a Taranto raid in order to protect is coast. If there are no ships in the English Channel, than Germany can just continue to land soldier in England at will.
PART 3: THE BENEFITS
Germany can control what England does in the first turn, and if the English player does not do the above moves, then London will fall. But let’s say that the English player does do well to protect himself, and defends London properly. This is just a greater benefit for Germany.
Without a doubt, a planned sea-lion is the most effective move the Germans can make. Executing Sea-lion in G3 may become risky however, to to the fact that it will take longer to invade Russia. If your invasion into England does not seem like it will work, invade Leningrad, it will be nowhere near as well defended as England.
- If London is not defended
-Sea-lion can take effect
-You will receive 30 IPCs from London, and another 8 per turn from the territory
-You eliminate an English player
-You free up Italy in Africa and the Med
-You force America to attack England instead of mainland Europe later on
-Your navy is free to act where it wants to***- If London is defended
-Barbarossa will come much quicker.
-You have that same attacking force to invade Leningrad***
-You free up Italy in Africa and the Med.
-You can mobilize more units along the Baltic sea.*** -
If Germany isn’t planning on Sealion and doesn’t buy any trns G1 then you are letting UK run wild. They can spend their ipcs on 3 nice units for Saf and perhaps some aircraft for UK. Then UK2 they can do the same or perhaps start building fleet.
Under a Sealion strategy you are forcing them to build all inf in their capital these first 2 rounds and /no/ units in Saf. A smart UK player will try and hold UK, and that involves sending as many aircraft from Africa and the Med as possible to UK, further making things easy for Italy.
The other point that bears discussion is all this talk about a heavily defended UK. Do you suppose if you are planning on a sealion after defeating Russia, will UK be more defended G10 or G3? I think its best to go as early as possible against England, this way you force them to cobble together their defenders and if your opponent still makes a mistake like building in Saf you can punish him by capturing UK, all while US is out of the war.
-
@rock`n:
why someone “must” buy transports as germany? i agree with you that the UK has to be prepared for a landing. but, why it is for germany a greater benefit when england is well protected? this logic seems strange to since you have to invest more to take the UK. and if not doing so england already has its material ready to land, right?
and maybe you win on G2, at what costs? loosing an entire airforce to gain 30 IPCs??? that is a suicide-run in the long term, imho.point 1: ok,
point 2: maybe, only IF winning,
point 3: see point 2,
point 4: only afterwards,
point 5: really? what if the USA gives a F*** to do so and goes directly into italy?
point 6: actually notYou’re points are all too short sighted. Losing your entire air force to eliminate the English player completely, along with gaining money and ground to make naval strikes, is worth it in the long run.
Point 5: Well if America doesn’t give a F*** then you get a victory city, money and get to keep the English player out of the game
Point 6: Without the English, your navy doesn’t have any deterrents besides America, and if they’re not at war then yes, you’re navy is free to act where it wants.@rock`n:
point 1: barbarossa should start at latest on G2, so nothing about it with “much quicker”,
point 2: which is therefor well defended, not to get in with 8 troops and58 planes…,
point 3: how???
point 4: only 8, moscow is not nearby the baltic sea…well…Point 1:You’re right, it will happen either way.
Point 2:The Russians will not have a significant force in Leningrad after 1 turn, unless they abandon, Belarus, East Poland, and the Baltic states, which means you’ll just have that much of a bigger force from Poland, Finland, and you’re amphibious attackers.
Point 3:The British are forced to spend only on England, which means not purchasing units for Africa, and possibly abandoning Taranto to defend the English Channel.
Point 4:Doesn’t matter where Moscow is, you are able to move ground units directly from Germany into Leningrad, saving you 4 spaces. It makes it that much quicker to get into Moscow. -
It is neither a dead end nor a win-win, it depends on too many factors. However, it isn’t an automatic loose to invade England, especially if you actually take England, then you’re in a good position onwards. I’ve also seen absolutely nothing to indicate it is a loose strategy.
So, while I don’t think Sealion is a needed strategy, it is a neeed build process G1. For many of the same reasons outlined in the previous posts.
If you show your hand in G1 and signal clearly a Russian invasion - England will run wild and South Africa is effectively lost for Italy as I see it. If you at least threaten invasion, England has to plan accordingly and all things equal, Italy will have easier time in Africa/Med.Taking England offers large tactical advantage in threathening the USA and provide additional income for the Russian campaign. Russia usually needs to play defensive as well, so even with a Sealion they can’t push far enough into Germany at the risk of spreading too thin and allowing the invetable invasion to just run over them.
USA will have to react to England’s capture or be push right out of European theatre thus potentially giving Japan more free reigns. Effectively Sealion forces the USA to split resources in a much higher degree than otherwise, something Japan usually will benefit from.
And if not doing a Sealion the transports can still be used in the Russia push.
-
I almost always build transports on G1. As said before, if you don’t do it, then the UK has its hands free to buy whatever he wants and can threaten a lot of Axis possesions from the start. Also it will make Italy very weak, because of Saf, Med Fleet/Airforce and expeditionary forces landing in Morrocco or other African lands.
If I build two or three trannies I force UK to build infantry, which limits their movement a LOT. Also makes life for Italy more pleasant. If I decide not to Sealion I can use those trannies to attack Karelia, Baltics or even Leningrad. Even after that I can use those trannies to reinforce the Eastern Front faster with Art and Inf. And the UK always needs to keep an eye on that fleet of yours, so can’t empty the UK. Or they must spend quite some resources to destroy your Baltic Fleet, in which case they don’t use that power against Italy or some landing.
-
okay, killofzee, xandax and jimmyhat: can anyone of you outline how you would buy, move, fight etc.?
til today i have not seen a strategy of winning this game, only a strategy - if you like to call this way - of taking london. about what happenes afterwards just the assumption that russia will definitely fall. but how???
to answer to you three properly i need to know in which manner you would like to win this game.
and: the first two turns, britain has to prepare against sealion anyway. always for two turns minimum. not earlier than UK2 it would become obvious if germany goes east or west. ;)
@ jimmi hat: britain cannot run wild. it doesn´t have sufficient ipcs to do so. italy - in a direct-barbarossa-game - would “cover” britain in the med enough that england cannot spend as much as wanted against germany, believe me.
@ killofzee
@KillOFzee:You’re points are all too short sighted. Losing your entire air force to eliminate the English player completely, along with gaining money and ground to make naval strikes, is worth it in the long run.
which naval strike? you will go into the baltic sea and then get bottled in by the US. no ground for naval strikes…you want to buy navy then? well this helps russia even more. well done! :)
Point 5: Well if America doesn’t give a F*** then you get a victory city, money and get to keep the English player out of the game
Point 6: Without the English, your navy doesn’t have any deterrents besides America, and if they’re not at war then yes, you’re navy is free to act where it wants.is it? it is free to die fast! against the american navy there is no way out then going into the baltic.
@rock`n:
point 1: barbarossa should start at latest on G2, so nothing about it with “much quicker”,
point 2: which is therefor well defended, not to get in with 8 troops and58 planes…,
point 3: how???
point 4: only 8, moscow is not nearby the baltic sea…well…Point 1:You’re right, it will happen either way.
Point 2:The Russians will not have a significant force in Leningrad after 1 turn, unless they abandon, Belarus, East Poland, and the Baltic states, which means you’ll just have that much of a bigger force from Poland, Finland, and you’re amphibious attackers.finland is two turns from leningrad, so you can count them out. as russia you can manage to have 20 infantry plus 1 or 2 artillery, maybe a tank and 2 fighters and a tactical. you cannot beat this force with 4 transports meaning 8 troops and rest planes! and even if you do so it will cost you too much to continue winning.
Point 3:The British are forced to spend only on England, which means not purchasing units for Africa, and possibly abandoning Taranto to defend the English Channel.
hmm, taranto is a must-have as britain. if not done, italy is kind of free to act. well, no.
Point 4:Doesn’t matter where Moscow is, you are able to move ground units directly from Germany into Leningrad, saving you 4 spaces. It makes it that much quicker to get into Moscow.
4 spaces? at most 3, if you go between leningrad and berlin, between leningrad an w.germany are 2 seazones, so your “speed” would only be in action every two rounds.
anyway from leningrad to moscow there 3 more spaces, after a sealion fulfilled you land on G5 at earliest in leningrad, maybe, plus 3 turns more to moscow plus one turn more holding 8 VCs.
it means in round 8 (!) you must have done it. 7 are needed by the allies to inhibit this effectively…this makes you one round short, no two!It is neither a dead end nor a win-win, it depends on too many factors. However, it isn’t an automatic loose to invade England, especially if you actually take England, then you’re in a good position onwards. I’ve also seen absolutely nothing to indicate it is a loose strategy.
see above, please outline your strategy! then i can answer properly.
So, while I don’t think Sealion is a needed strategy, it is a neeed build process G1. For many of the same reasons outlined in the previous posts.
If you show your hand in G1 and signal clearly a Russian invasion - England will run wild and South Africa is effectively lost for Italy as I see it. If you at least threaten invasion, England has to plan accordingly and all things equal, Italy will have easier time in Africa/Med.same thing, see above: britain has to build up home defence anyway til round 2!
Taking England offers large tactical advantage in threathening the USA and provide additional income for the Russian campaign. Russia usually needs to play defensive as well, so even with a Sealion they can’t push far enough into Germany at the risk of spreading too thin and allowing the invetable invasion to just run over them.
they cannot push in neither way, barbarossa with or without sealion. but it can harass germany a lot, e.g. in norway or romania, just to mention two examples where, not how. if sealion is done, russia can take over those mentioned territories thus delaying a german approach. blocking a landing in the baltic sea for one more turn is also quite possible, depends on the german player being attentive or not.
and yes, spreading too thin is suicide, but not only for russia.USA will have to react to England’s capture or be push right out of European theatre thus potentially giving Japan more free reigns. Effectively Sealion forces the USA to split resources in a much higher degree than otherwise, something Japan usually will benefit from.
“potentially”…there you have it. but not really. the one way or another, london will fall soon back to allied´s hands and therefor is not this much needed to get this done. even to deny a german recapture it is only needed to take or block denmark (italy left aside here).
And if not doing a Sealion the transports can still be used in the Russia push.
i know, that is not questioned.
greetings and thanx for your answers
rock`n roll
-
@rock`n:
okay, killofzee, xandax and jimmyhat: can anyone of you outline how you would buy, move, fight etc.?
til today i have not seen a strategy of winning this game, only a strategy - if you like to call this way - of taking london. about what happenes afterwards just the assumption that russia will definitely fall. but how???
Well, you assume Russia will fall if you go in G1 and will win the game.
There is no deeper meaning, no hidden pitfalls, no philosophical discussion or other such elements. It’s pretty much a text book opening and plenty of strategies on this forum tell about it.
Mobilize to take England is a strategy. If you want the tactical play-by-play per turn, then I will not give you a play-by-play of each turn from 1 to 7 simply because it is irrelevant and each move can be questioned when having the perfect information with “But why did England not do X in turn 1, so you couldn’t do Y in turn 5”. Such discussions never serve anything. It is the overall picture that we’re talking.It is literally simple enough. Taking England does not loose the war.
The strategy is simple.
If wanting to do Sealion - do it in G2 or G3 if possible. If not wanting to do Sealion, don’t.It is your claim that it is an automatic loss that’s the strange bit because I’ve never once seen anything to say it is an automatic loss. It all hinges on that you can win taking Russia without taking England, but that does in no way, shape or form, infer that taking England means you can’t win.
You’re free to believe it if you want, but a belief does not make it true for anybody else.@rock`n:
and: the first two turns, britain has to prepare against sealion anyway. always for two turns minimum. not earlier than UK2 it would become obvious if germany goes east or west. ;)
Seeing as you have no transport, have shown that you wish to move into Russia (possible even building the Romanian factory)- there’s no reason to defend England for two turns minimum.
Buy some navy and buy some planes to rule the sea, buy some troops in South Africa. Take Norway or Denmark after a few rounds of navy just to disrupt. Fly planes to Russia to defend.
No need to spend all your IPCs on infantry for two rounds. If England does this (buys infantry) regardless of Germany move in your games, well - then I understand why England is ignored by you because then they truly set themselves up to be irrelevant in the European scene.
If Germany starts buying transports at turn 3 or 4, it’s easy enough to build up infantry at that time after the transport purchase - unless England already rules the sea and air.
And if you wain until turn 6 or 7 or later - there’s a large possibility USA will have all but contained Japan enough that they can start fortify England with planes or put out a navy to scare off any invasion fleet or move into the Med.@rock`n:
USA will have to react to England’s capture or be push right out of European theatre thus potentially giving Japan more free reigns. Effectively Sealion forces the USA to split resources in a much higher degree than otherwise, something Japan usually will benefit from.
“potentially”…there you have it. but not really. the one way or another, london will fall soon back to allied´s hands and therefor is not this much needed to get this done. even to deny a german recapture it is only needed to take or block denmark (italy left aside here).
Everything is potential in this game. It’s potential you’ll take Russia without Sealion and it’s only potential that London will “fall soon back” as well.
And even if London is retaken, you’ve forced enough dedication of resources not used elsewhere. As said - getting the USA out of the Pacific is a major boon for Japan. The USA going all-in in the Pacific is hard on Japan. Just as USA going all-in in Europe, is hard on Germany/Italy. Splitting up the US benefits both Axis sides very much.I’m not here to convince you to do Sealion, I’m here to challenge your notion that it is automatic loss for Axis.
-
It’s a dead end. But you have to threaten it.
Unless they do something stupid.
-
Well obviously every game is different, so all you’re going to get is generalities from me. After a successful Sealion I like to leave my fleet in the north sea and invade the arctic ocean so that I can reach Novgorod and save Norway/finland from the russians. I will go through the baltic if I can hit the Russian bb in the process. G4 is the round after the fall of England, usually my fleet is consolidating in the northsea, bringing some remaining tanks from England back to Europe.
I think the biggest thing to keep Germany alive is your G4 purchase. Most likely you’re going to need a ftr or 2 that you lost over England, also a dd to block the US fleet when the time is right. Everything else should go towards armor with perhaps 4 inf. This purchase means that when Russia advances into Europe you already will have a nice counter punch. G5 and on build inf. If Russia lunges too far into Europe, count a win for Germany, you can land in novogorod and beat his army back to Mosocow. This happened in one of my games, he threw 8 armor and a bunch of inf into Yugo. We traded the balkans for a while and he put a heavy threat on NItaly, but my Germ army was marching to moscow and captured it.
I also tend to get art early for Germany, I’ll actually stack more art than inf in my lead stack. Thats because in later rounds, when I have novgorod from my trns fleet I can build inf there and mechs in Germany to use the artillery bonus.
Lastly, when you approach Moscow you might find the need to switch to a southerly axis to capture Stalingrad before hitting Moscow. This is where mech inf are really going to come in handy, and perhaps an Italian can opener or two.
-
Rock’n’Roll, on my first turn, I buy three transports, 1 sub, and 1 inf. I destroy the entire North Atlantic Fleet, Capture France, and move 15+ inf on the front line.
Second turn: If England builds 10 inf and does Taranto, i invade England with 3 tanks, 4 inf, and 1 art. I also send 3 fighters, 3 tact bombers, and 1 strat bomber. That’s a total combat value of 44. The English would have a combat value of (10 inf @ 2 + 4 3 fighters @ 4) 32. I also have naval bombardment. This means England MUST abandon Taranto and move to sz 112 to prevent a G2 Sea-lion. If the English DID block Sea-lion than I simply invade Russia. If Leningrad is heavily defended with “20 infantry plus 1 or 2 artillery, maybe a tank and 2 fighters and a tactical,” than #1 I land in Vyborg and allow for a PENTA(?)* attack into Leningrad on Turn 3, and #2 I Send armor and mechs in south Russia to capture the more valuable territory. So if I take Leningrad on turn 3, that only leaves 3 turns to get to Russia itself. I will also be able to ferry more units in directly from Germany into Lenningrad for more Firepower in Russia.
*My FIVE pronged attack will come from:
1. My main force in the Baltic States (9 inf, 4 art) Combat value = 21
2. The 3 tanks, 4 inf, and 1 art from England which I landed in Vyborg in G2 (C. V. = 16)
3. 6 inf from Finland to Karelia (Combat value = 6)
4. An amphibious assault with the transports, picking up units from Germany and moving directly into Leningrad, could be a combo of different units, 4 inf 4 art most likely (C. V. = 16) Plus Naval bombardment.
5. The remaining Luftwaffe, 3 fighters, 3 tac bombers, 1 strat bomber (C.V. 25)
Total Combat Value (21 + 16 + 6 + 16 + 25) = 84 Almost unstoppable
So if and when the Leningrad garrison is destroyed, it’s a clear path to Russia. I don’t care if my navy (which I only invested 27 IPCs in) is stuck in the Baltic sea. That’s all I want from it. -
BTW i am NOT playing with the Alpha setup, i am playing with the OOB setup
-
Every game I have played that someone did not at least threaten Sea Lion turned into a loss for the Axis. The UK can just get up too much no good is they feel zero pressure. The consequences for Italy are too severe. Funny thing is almost every game where Sea Lion was pulled off successfully by Germany resulted in an Axis loss also.
The only time I won a game in which I Sea Lioned was when I also pulled off a J3 India crush as well. My opponent who is normally pretty good and probably a little better player than me played a poor game that day. By knocking out both UK’s I was able to put enough victory city pressure on both sides of the board, combined with swining the IPC advantage to Axis.
-
Every game I have played that someone did not at least threaten Sea Lion turned into a loss for the Axis. The UK can just get up too much no good is they feel zero pressure. The consequences for Italy are too severe. Funny thing is almost every game where Sea Lion was pulled off successfully by Germany resulted in an Axis loss also.
The game is difficult enough for Axis.
That’s exactly why it’s bad to show your hand in G1 and not at least threaten Sealion. -
I tried to say simple, I hope you can understand （by Chinese boy）
this is by google translate……
Germany want sea lions, must make the Navy.Countermeasures:
SZ91 cruiser, back SZ110
Gibraltar fighters, returned to London
make 1 carrier (cannon fodder) + 2 tank or 4 infantry or 1cruiser (not recommended)United States make 5 transport at SZ101，the Pacific Fleet SZ101 collection!
Because the strength of the Mediterranean fell, SZ98 Navy -> SZ81
Cairo garrison, down to the AES.
Indian Navy, SZ76 collection
If Italy does not occupy Cairo, Fleet convergence in SZ91
If the Italian occupation of Cairo, all of the counterattack. Italy’s attack only once.U.S. fleet at SZ101, If Japan does not attack USA， Germany Can’t defense the Counter attack ，from USA army.
it will lose strategic initiative of german sea lion was failed，the eastline will be conterattacked by the Soviet Union
If the Japan Fleet go east, Calcutta security, the British fleet can Attack Italy
If Germany want Barbarossa G2 , but the fleet did not use, waste PIC
For the U.S., the construction of 5 Transport have strategic significance. Atlantic、Pacific, they can be used.so, I always strongly oppose the German go sea lions!
～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～
我尽可能说的简单，希望你们能看懂
德国想海狮，必须生产舰队。英国在之后针对行动。对策：
SZ91的巡洋舰，回到SZ110
直布罗陀的战斗机，回到本土
生产1航母（炮灰）+2坦克or4步兵or1巡洋舰（不推荐）美国东海岸建造5个运输船，太平洋舰队SZ101集合！
因为地中海实力下降，SZ98的海军——>SZ81
开罗的守军，往下，到AES。
印度海军，SZ76集合
如果意大利不占领开罗，舰队在SZ91汇合
如果意大利占领开罗，全部对的反攻。意大利的攻击只有一次。美国的舰队移动，如果日本不管，德国海狮失败后迅速灭亡。
如果日本东进，加尔各答安全，英国的舰队可以打意大利
德国如果想巴巴罗萨，但是舰队没有用，浪费PIC
而对于美国，建造5个运输船有战略意义。大西洋、太平洋，都可以使用。所以，我极力反对德国海狮！
Suggested Topics
