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

@AlphaAeffchen:

Hi simon33,

thx for your reply. Why should i land fighters in hawai. If Japan crushes them anyway with coastel bombardment and so on in turn ? I mean yes the us has more money at the beginning but this would be a waste of resources… (Japan has enough planes).

Probably you’re right if there are 3 carriers. You can only get 5 planes on. Putting this into the battle calculator even with only one TT, It’s 80% with a 13IPC swing Japan’s way. Reducing to 64% and 12IPC swing if you throw away your bomber as fodder.

@Arthur:

Hence you have at most two carriers and one transport for the raids towards Hawaii.

He’s already said it’s a 3CV commitment to Pearl Harbour.

If I was doing that, I’d commit 2TTs to Philippines and one to Borneo. Without the Cruiser, the BB, DD and sub are a slightly dicey naval battle too with a scramble - probably need a fighter to support it, best from SZ33.

Yes, it’s 64% battle even if you use the tank but what are the consequences of it going bad? Not that devastating.

You’d need to buy at least 2TTs J1 - and divert one to the Philippines if you need to.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.