British regional influence/balance for sea lion



  • Butcher and I just wrapped up a face to face sea lion game and came to the conclusion that even if London build completely for the defense against a sea lion attack, a G4 attack will still get through.  Since adding units or moving units causes additional balance issues due to mis(ab)use, Butcher and I came up with a new idea for keeping Britain in the war.

    The Idea
    Britain will be centrally controlled from London while it lives.  Calcutta will not have its own income; all of it goes into one central pot just like every other country.  The change is when London falls or a regional capital falls.  After the fall of London each of the three major regions that Britain controls (Canada, India, Africa) will be split into small regional powers.  Ottawa will be the capital for Canada.  Cairo will be the capital for Africa and the Middle East.  Calcutta will be the capital for India and the East Indies.  Each regional capital will only collect income from its region, but ground units will be able to attack together.  If a regional capital falls before London, the income from that region is not collectible.  For example, if Calcutta falls before London and Borneo is still under British control, London will not collect the income for Borneo.  This will ensure that no region is left completely undefended to strengthen another front.

    The National Objectives
    Britain will keep its German sub objective.  The other two 5 IPC original territory objects will be replaced by three 3 IPC original territory objectives.  Each region (Canada, Africa, India) will have a 3 IPC objective for controlling all of their original territories.  The Canada and Africa ones will be tied to being at war with the European Axis and the India one will be tied to being at war with Japan.  All of the income from these objectives will be placed in the central income pool while London is still alive.  If London falls, no region will be able to collect the German sub objective but each region will be able to collects its original territory objective.

    The Regions

    Great Britain
    Capital: London
    Territories: UK, Scotland, British Guiana, Iceland, Gibraltar

    Canada
    Capital: Ottawa
    Territories: All Canadian roundels and Newfoundland

    Africa
    Capital: Cairo
    Territories: Africa and Trans-Jordan

    India
    Capital: Calcutta
    Territories: Same as Alpha 2

    Butcher and I have not had any time to play test this, so I’m sure there will be problems.  Off hand we are worried that Italy will too weak to handle Canada, Africa, and the US once London falls.  Comments or suggestions would be appreciated.



  • To a novice (i.e. me) the 3 regional NOs seems a bit complicated, but Canada and Africa should definitely get enough income to fight on somehow. I think you have a good idea.



  • I agree with you that on G4 if Germany builds right England will go down. I think that is why there is so much clamoring going. I like your idea of trying to balance the game but after a few drinks I don’t know if I could remember all the rules of who has what and who gets paid for what.  I want to say I am not trying to be to critical of your idea because I am with you I think something needs to be done to fix it. What if England had an extra fighter in Canada and extra tank if England. It might not sound like much but over a long battle that 3 and 4 will mean a lot. Just a thought



  • I like it, will try and play it and tell you what its like. The rules are basic and logical with this idea.
    Cheers


  • TripleA

    if uk’s capitol moves, he should lose national objectives. for balance purposes.

    and yes uk building only for defense and still loses makes me sad too. 😞



  • A successful Sealion campaign already comes with enough drawbacks for Germany, and this takes away any incentive for trying it. Combining incomes would also throw the game balance further out of whack.


  • Sponsor

    I like it, especially since I think Canada should be able to fight independently. However I agree with Kobu, any concerted effort to conduct Sealion in the face of a determined British defense will ultimately cost the Germans a successful Barbarosa, unless your USSR player has an off game with dice.

    I go for Sealion if the odds look good, but if not, then I hit the British somewhere else. I will not spend the time building an excessive amount of limited-use transports in the face of the Russian threat to my East.


  • TripleA

    Kobu, you are right. it does make japan hold off from entering the war and germany does have many transports in the ocean which can’t be used as fodder for anything…

    however those transports are very useful even after uk is gone… they shuffle infantry/artillery to attack… you shouldn’t be buying any tanks at all as they cost too much. Also with whatever leftover air you got left combined with those transports, should give you a distinct tactical advantage over russia.



  • @GoSanchez6:

    What if England had an extra fighter in Canada and extra tank if England. It might not sound like much but over a long battle that 3 and 4 will mean a lot. Just a thought

    I dont like the idea of adding units.  If the UK decides to shift that fighter to the Pacific theater that could throw off some element of the balance over there.  Adding too many units leads to abuse of said units.

    @Mountaineer:

    I like it, especially since I think Canada should be able to fight independently. However I agree with Kobu, any concerted effort to conduct Sealion in the face of a determined British defense will ultimately cost the Germans a successful Barbarosa, unless your USSR player has an off game with dice.

    In the game that Butcher and I played, Germany had to fall back on its factories against Russia, but its combined 20 build limit made it impossible for Russia to break through.  Eventually Germany could have pushed back.  The US was too tied up in the Pacific to be a serious threat against Germany.  If the US had swung heavy into the Atlantic, then Japan would run over ANZAC and India.

    @Cow:

    if uk’s capitol moves, he should lose national objectives. for balance purposes.

    Without the NO’s for the regions, Canada will only pull in 7.  Cairo would only get 13ish I think.  That’s not really enough to conduct much of a war.  3 IPCs each isn’t enough to throw the game way out of whack, but enough to make the regions relevant to the game.



  • Good points. I just am afraid after a couple of Grand Marniers I couldn’t remember all those rules. It is hard enough the guys I play with rely on me to know them all. Imagine being about 4 drinks in trying to explain this to your buddies. NOT EASY. I am not trying to be too critical because I think you are on the right track. For me I want to keep the game as simple as possible. If you found a way that works for you. go for it. Cheers.



  • While I do like this idea and look forward to testing it out, I’m not sure we shouldn’t instead be focusing on why Sea Lion is unstoppable…  Granted if UK builds up it costs Germany a lot, then again as Germany if UK builds up defensively I would just turn the other way.  At that point he’s spent 2-3 turns of $$ on stuff that really can’t bother me without buying a lot of higher price stuff (naval and air power).

    I wonder if the answer is in the placement of the Royal Navy - if it were less accessible to the Luftwaffe on G1 perhaps it could still be a factor?


  • Customizer

    I’m afraid that I just don’t get everyone’s views on Sealion.  It seems to me that the majority of people on this forum act like Sealion is some sort of forgone conclusion, like it will always happen.  I have played a number of games and I have found that Sealion is very hard to accomplish and sometimes it just doesn’t happen.  First, you have to DESTROY the Royal Navy while keeping the German navy intact.  I have had some games where the Royal Navy was sunk just to have the RAF come up and sink the German navy.  Result:  No Sealion.
    Even if you do sink all the Royal Navy AND keep the German Navy intact, if UK plops 10 guys there Germany will not likely have enough forces to overcome all the British defenses.  If you try Sealion on G4, that means that UK has had 3 rounds to build up defenses there.  That could mean as many as 30 infantry plus what they started with and any planes they might have flown up there.  Also, if this is G4, then it will also be Russia’s 4th turn which means they can declare war on Germany now.  If Germany has been spending money on units for Sealion, won’t that leave them weak on the Eastern Front?
    Maybe it’s just a difference in tactics, but as Germany I will usually attempt a Sealion on G2 or G3 at the latest and ONLY if I think Britain’s defenses are weak enough.  If my Sealion fails or I think Britain is just too strong, I will use my Luftwaffe to keep the navy at bay (especially transports) and focus on Russia.  You need a lot of build up to start tackling that beast.


  • TripleA

    knp7765. what attacks are you doing? exact numbers.


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 5
  • 9
  • 2
  • 3
  • 8
  • 9
  • 34
  • 27
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

61
Online

14.9k
Users

35.6k
Topics

1.5m
Posts