Sea Lion is a very good Strategy for Germany if done Correct


  • 2019 2017 2016

    Great point with the ANZAC fighters.

    Strongest J1 buy with this strategy is 3TT+art. If you assume the tank is saved for this assault on Hawaii, you still don’t have enough artillery and need to bring 4inf art tank. This is a 60% attack but even if you win you’ve probably lost the bulk of your air force as Japan and the US can rebuild faster.

    And as you say, UK_Pac are running amuck in China and likely retaking Borneo UK1. Perhaps you’d need to omit this attack as Japan? Doesn’t seem a winning move.


  • 2019 2017 2016

    I’ve thought about it and the only way I see this move working at all well is if you omit the attack on Borneo. That means 3TTs can go for the Philippines.

    Assuming that they still take Kwangtung, UK_Pac should then step on Sumatra and collect 18PUs and buy a fighter UK1 to defend against Strat Bombing which can be quite devastating.

    If Taranto is off the table, you are likely to be able to clear the Atlantic of subs with the DD and bomber getting remaining subs in SZ106. Can’t say I like this aspect very much. I think Taranto needs to be done anyway.



  • @Arthur:

    I see Japan so out of position if they throw three carriers after Hawaii.  Don’t forget that ANZAC can land 3 fighters on Hawaii, bringing the total up to 8 allied planes + US bomber. If the Japanese attack with 2 inf 2 art 3 fighters and 3 tacs, along with a BB and cruiser bombard, I see a 25% chance of taking the island on round 2.

    Yes, you can throw even more forces at taking the island, and likely can hold it for a bunch of rounds if you are very determined.  Meanwhile China is out of control with UK Pacific, and you will struggle to adequately defend the Money Island invaders from the weak UK Pacific Navy + air force.  If you don’t have the money islands and are struggling in Mainland Asia, the game is over for Japan.  You could be struggling to earn as much as China + ANZAC + UK Pacific.  At that point the US can spend  almost 100% on the European side.

    Well only 3 carriers are slightly out of position for 1 turn, but then again if you move your whole airforce on hawai what is defending your fleet?
    I think Japan should divert 1 transport and position its fleet of midway if they do this with a BB cruiser and 1-2 destroyers.

    Now the US has something to think about and the japan fleet isnt really out of position either. US fleet cannot attack you at midway and win that fight, it cannot move al its air away from western US and it cannot move its air all off hawai something will give eventualy.
    And if they go pure defensive and try to defend all and move the fleet to the atlantic you can move back to japan in 1 turn and the transport can take alaska, or something in russia or some other islands.

    Sure your carrier air and the bulk of your fleet is out of position, so is the Anzac air, UK has no fleet to speak off and Anzac also has nothing there and you have a mini fleet at your disposal in the south to take some money island and deny some NO’s



  • Assuming that all three carriers are in Midway or Hawaii, they are not in position to help out with anything in the crucial money Island region until J4.  That is a long time for the ANZAC + UK Pacific to bully around the remaining Japanese Navy.  They can’t directly attack the fleet if stacked together, but there is no way for the Japanese fleet to split into two or three groups to protect transports taking islands.

    If you want to scare the US without getting so out of position, have 2 carriers in Caroline Islands and one carrier off of of Johnston Islands.  You can get the Johnston Carrier back in the Money Islands on J3 and threaten a big attack force against Pearl Harbor.

    Please do use your valuable transports to take Alaska or the Aleutians on J2 or J3.  You just barely had enough to capture the Money Islands by J3 without those detours.  Think about the combined value of the Money Islands + Malaya.  That is a massive swing for the Allied vs Axis economies.  Even missing one island is a 13 PU swing each round.  Considering the bad manufacturing position that the Allies begin with, you can’t be wasting time.

    Definitely moves to Hawaii do work in face-to-face games where there is less planning and calculations; a person who has more experience and time to react will be happy to see the Japanese Navy distracted from their more important mission.


  • 2019 2017 2016

    Trusting you meant to write “Please don’t” starting that third paragraph.


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 '14 '12

    I’ve never seen sealion work for the Axis, and that’s 200+ games.  London is very hard to defend against the US.  The USSR gets a few turns of running wild and can actually defeat Germany if the Germans don’t watch it.

    Combining it w/a J1 sounds crazy.  In reality the US can just ignore Europe and smash Japan then wheel around afterward.  Losing most your original ground units, some of your planes, and an entire turn of production really hurts Barbarossa.

    Anyone want to test this on the league?  No LL though and 26 bid to Allies that can’t go to Uk proper obviously



  • @AlphaAeffchen:

    @ Kreuzfeld. You are totally right but the problem is if i do this buys for UK they can do nothing for many rounds in Europe. Italy gets very strong in the med. The USA have to fight Japan. The allies in Europe  are getting a problem because UK is isolatet because of only inf buy and USA has to Focus on Japan (but you are right i have to do this buy for UK).

    In the scenario I made, US will only have to buy 2 bombers on US 1 (in most scenarios) and move 3 of the US planes to canada. They are capable of going towards Japan if Germany don’t buy the TTs in G2.

    If germany doen’t buy 3 TTs on G1 (and save their money instead), I am doing taronto, and buy 6 inf and 1 ftr and lose no time in the Med. If they do buy 7 art on G1, I am buying a mIC in egypt and 5 inf in UK.

    The only “loosing investments” UK has is : 3 inf instead of ftr on UK1, no taronto on UK 1 (I think 3 useless german transports might be too steep a price for germany to pay for this result).

    The other losing investment is the canadian airbase and a few allied TTs on UK2/US2, however, they are more than offsett by the 9 german TTs that has to be bought to force me to do it.

    The advantage I get for this plan is that no german should try for the sealion after US1, then that is just a lost game if they buy the 9 TTs. This means that I can (if I want to) send everything US builds against japan, including US turn 1 build. I am still taking Persia on UK1, so I can build the mIC on UK2 and shut down the middle east as fast as possible. My favourite way of playing the UK is to have 1 mIC in each of iran, iraq and egypt, and to use them to buy volumes of inf and mechs for a giant uk landarmy that can reach where i want them

    I still think the game is favouring the axis, all I was commenting on was that in a J1, it is so much cheaper for the allied to prevent the sealion, so it will never happen.



  • IF the allies are unlucky/unprepared it can work just fine.
    But it might not do much if italy is taken out of the war by the UK before they are trashed.

    If the US cannot get there quick enough having and keeping the UK is a big help for germany, it also ensures russia becomes bigger for a few turns but since you are close to 2 major factories you will outproduce russia soon to the point they have to back down.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 11
  • 11
  • 15
  • 9
  • 14
  • 2
  • 11
  • 39
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

43
Online

13.7k
Users

34.1k
Topics

1.3m
Posts