• Putting 2 USSR FIGs in London on R1 just invites Germany to spank the crap out of Russia.

    Russia only has enough punch for ONE good battle (they give up Ukraine completely, and if they try Belo and WR, they will be very weak in both.  Germany can counter with taking Karelia, Belo or West Russia (depending on if Belo was attacked) and Caucuses.  That puts Germany at +4 to +6, plus whatever happens in Africa.  And Russia is under $20 for pretty much the remainder of the game.

  • Tsk, tsk, spankings?  Think of the children!  Won’t someone please think of the children?!

    OK, so the USSR will be spanked.  But if it’s a choice between London or Karelia, Belorussia, AND Ukraine, it’s still an easy decision, isn’t it?  I can’t see any other way to defend against the G1 invasion of London (assuming, of course, that tech is immediately effective and a G1 invasion of London is not barred by the local ruleset, and that Germany didn’t go absolutely mad on tech dice and purchased a couple of transports, I think it’s very possible that the German player can take London and get a lock on London by G3 at the latest with only two or three transports purchased first turn, while Japan pushes on the USSR from the east.)

    If there is a better way than 2 Russian fighters in London to help defend, I can’t think of it.  German infantry, tank, six fighters, and bomber going up against UK bomber, two infantry, artillery, tank, two fighters, and AA gun, is favorable for the attackers.

    I suppose you might be saying that if Germany invests minimal IPC on tech, it has a greater chance of failure, and if it invests more IPC on tech, it still has a moderate chance of failure.  For the case of a moderate instead of minimal IPC investment on tech, I can see that the slightly favorable German attack will be outweighed by the fact that a 52% absolute requirement to win (spending 20 IPC on tech dice which must succeed) followed by a 75% absolute requirement to win is overall only a 39% chance of success, meaning Germany will self-destruct if it uses 4 or more tech dice, sure, I can see that, especially since 20 IPC spent on unsuccessful tech is a huge investment.

    What I have in mind, though, is specifically the 16% investment of a single tech dice, or possibly the slightly higher investment of two tech dice, followed byGermany’s purchase cycle dependent on whether or not the weapons development research was successful - and the consequent and straightforward win of Germany in perhaps 31% of its games using an investment of only two tech dice to attack an underdefended London.  If the tech succeeds, Germany builds transports and hopes for a successful attack on London, followed by an almost certain lock on London.  If the tech fails, Germany can still build ten infantry and go either for the KGF stall, or the KGF push on Caucasus if the Allies decide to go KJF.

    In the latter case, isn’t 2 USSR fighters in London a reasonable investment on security?  Maybe not.

  • @ShadowHAwk:

    Or you just shoot down the baltic fleet with your fighters on USSR1 and get rid of the problem all together :D
    Ok ukraine you might have to forgo in that situation but it is not impossible to counter at all. Although 2 figs VS 2 subs 1 tranny 1 dest might not be in your favor but you only need 3 hits to make his invasion near impossible ( put a sub between his fleet and london he has to take it out and if you hit -> end invasion :D)

    No trannies -> No invasion.
    Also invading UK on turn 1 makes the game a lot like gambling imo, gambling on tech dice and then gambling on a pretty hard fight.

    Using the Russian fighters on the Baltic fleet still faces ncsswitch’s problem of leaving the Russian fighters out of any fight.  And I also think that a Russian fighter attack on the Baltic navy is risky, although the additional sub move could be decisive.  Still, the whole Russian operation described is risky (After all, Germany is not locked into having to invade London, and the proposed USSR attacks do mean some pain for the USSR).

    The game is like gambling?  Of  course!  It’s got dice!  The whole thing is about calculated risk.  With a 2 dice investiture, you can get a lock on London, and likely the game, with a 30% chance; even if you fail, you’re only out 10 IPCs . . . 10 very valuable IPCs to be sure, but I’d rather go for that 30% chance plus a stall game in case of failure than for the regular Axis game, which I think is too vulnerable to coordinated Allied attack.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    What if you went with 3 Infantry, 1 Armor, 1 Fighter and attacked the Baltic Fleet on R1?

    What’re the odds?

  • You are still giving up a win in Ukraine if you pull out a FIG (on average you lose more often than you win with less than maximum punch).

    And 2 FIG vs. the Baltic Fleet is not very great odds of killing a couple of German units.

    And in addition to not being able to count on a win in Ukraine, you are now short 2 FIGs for defense of Caucuses.  That means that you have to weaken the WRS and/or leave Caucuses vulnerable.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Yea, but I routinely leave Caucasus with only a blitz blocker and a factory with Russia.

    The idea was to kill 2 or 3 German ships with Russia and hten sink the rest with England.  Though, if Germany’s down 2 or 3 ships in SZ 5, the odds of her building that carrier are smaller and thus they have more firepower against Russia.

  • But if you kill the German fleet in R1 (or a major portion of it) you get a whole new German strat… probably somethign like  10 INF, 2 ARM on G1.  And Russia is going to be hard pressed to deal with that, especially if the Luftwaffe is used to replace the Kreigsmarine.  And Germany can still be a pain in the butt usign single SUB purchases to restrict Allied landings in Europe.

  • 2007 AAR League

    if you plan on attacking UK on G2 and you build all transports on G1 can you take UK or since UK nd America nd Russia seeing it be able to prevent u assuming they send all available things dn britain builds all infantry or something does germany have enough to stop them? o nd a carrier on G1 so UK doesn’t just attack u

  • Note to ncsswitch:  ASSUMING that OOB (even with FAQs) are used, can you think of a better way than flying 2 Russian fighters to London to stop a 1-2 tech dice for Long Range aircraft and transport buy by Germany to get a lock on London?  I know it leaves the USSR horribly weak.

    Note to ajgundam5:  No, a G1 buy of 5 transports does not guarantee taking of London.  (if you buy THAT many transports, it probably won’t matter if UK sends its airforce at the Baltic fleet, because the air will die without killing ANY transports (if a destroyer is taken as a casualty instead of a transport).

    UK has 1 bom 2 inf 1 art 1 tank 2 fig.  It purchases 5 inf 3 armor, and shuttles the E. Canada tank in.  US transports in two inf, art, tank, fightter, bomber.  Assume the German Mediterranean fleet moved west to threaten 7 transports to London, and that the USSR player countered on USSR2 with sub to the sea zone west of Algeria (blocking the German med fleet).  Also assume that the USSR player can NOT reinforce London with Russian fighters (say the Russian fighters landed in the Caucasus, and that the German player attempted a G2 Sea Lion because he/she knew the Russian fighters could not reach London).

    Now Germany has 6 infantry, 6 tanks, 6 fighters, and a bomber (assume no fighters were killed), against 2 bombers, 9 infantry, 2 artillery, 6 tanks, 3 fighters, and AA gun.  That’s an offensive punch of 46 against an AA gun and a defensive punch of 54.  Germany can kill the US transports that reinforced London with a good chance of sustaining no losses, but any German attack on London is now somewhat unlikely to succeed (even 1 Russian fighter would make it near impossible).  Germany holds Africa for a long time, but USSR pushes from the west like crazy, and those 40 IPC of transports don’t do much good against a good Allied player.

  • Well, OOB is hopelessly broken, which is why they are not used.

    But if you are going to use them, and Gemany wants to try Sea Lion on G1…

    Full AF on G1 gives a 85% chance of a win on Sea lion.
    Losing 1 FIG drops it to 73%
    Losing 2 drops it to a crap shoot.

    Even with the Russian FIGs, it is a crap shoot… 51% to take UK on G1 (with full AF).

    Your BEST defense, using OOB, is to attack the Baltic Fleet with 2 FIGs, and to kill a German FIG in Ukraine.
    It gives you a 25% chance of killing the entire fleet (taking the TRN as final casualty), preventing a Sea lion attempt completely.
    Use the SUB as a blocker in SZ6, which increases the odds that the TRN will nto even get through (if it is the only ship remainign in the Baltic, Germany has to use another FIG to get the TRN to UK, and even tehn a 2 in 6 chance the TRN sinks).  You are now up to only about a 30% chance of a Sea lion battle even occuring.  And if it does, it will be short 2 FIGs by Germany., making it a crap shoot for teh actual battle.

    Final odds, with 3 battles needed to execute Sea Lion:  about 15% chance of success.

  • I know there must have been posts in the past explaining why OOB is broken, and I agree to some extent.  Assuming that NAs are not used, though, why is it that OOB / FAQ is “hopelessly” broken?

    It’s not a question of the initial attack, it’s also a question of holding London.

    I think using 2 tech dice is much less of a “crap shoot” as a calculated risk.  A “crap shoot” is dropping 8 German dice on tech, hoping that the Germans will get really lucky and take London while ALSO not losing more than two or three fighters.  Dropping 2 German dice on tech lets you try to get a lock on London and win the game straightaway; even if you fail, all it’s cost you is a single fighter, a couple tanks, or two infantry and an artillery (in light of the fact that you can still drop 10 infantry, I feel that it’s a reasonable investment.

    If you attack the Baltic fleet with 2 Russian fighters, and attack the Ukraine, that means that you must land at least one Russian fighter in Karelia, and use three tanks against Ukraine (for favorable odds).  So now Germany can choose not to try the G1 Sea Lion at all, kill the USSR fighter, and kill the Russian armor in Ukraine with relatively few losses.

    What I’m saying, or what I meant to say, is that I feel that with OOB rules, 2 Russian fighters to London is the least risky way of defending against G1 Sea Lion.  You will not lose those fighters unless Germany decides to take rather a big chance on London.  If you choose to attack the Baltic fleet and take Ukraine, I feel that Germany can choose to do something else besides G1 Sea Lion (since Germany goes AFTER USSR, and can respond accordingly).

    BTW, I think it’s 72% that Germany takes at least one casualty on six fighters and a bomber from an AA gun, and even then, I don’t think it’s 51% to take UK with infantry, tank, six fighters, and bomber (using the 28% probability that no German air was shot down) against bomber, two infantry, artillery, tank, and four fighters.  Germany loses attack power very quickly after the first casualty, but the bulk of the London defense is in fighters, so it loses only the weak bomber, then the moderately effective infantry and artillery, and only finally, the most effective fighters.  Even then, Germany has the problem of actually having to have a ground unit to take London, so cannot take the German tank as a casualty before taking the German bomber as a casualty.

  • On my sample Combat, i ahd UK preserving the BOM (had not re-set the OOL on the sim that preserves expensive units)

    As for the detriment to Russia in that scenario…
    With the Baltic Fleet toast, UK starts landing in Karelia/EE/Germany via the baltic in UK2 with 6 divisions plus air and BB shot.  That immediate reingforcement of Russia is a heck of a boos,t and mor ethan counters the lost FIGs.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    We’re talking Sea Lion in Round 2 now?

    England has 1 Bomber, 5 Fighters, 2 Infantry, 2 Armor, 1 Artillery and 1 Fighter, 1 Bomber, 2 Infantry, 1 Armor and 1 Artillery from America vs what, 6 infantry, 6 tanks, 6 fighters, and a bomber you said? (I know you did, I copy pasted it.)

    Outcomes of 10,000 battles
      avg. # IPC value
    Attacker: Left: 22.5 Lost: 100.5
    Defender:      Left: 27.1 Lost: 97.9

    Surviving Attackers (started with 6 Inf, 6 Arm, 6 Fig, 1 Bom.)
    Surviving Defenders (started with 4 Inf, 2 Art, 3 Arm, 6 Fig, 2 Bom.)

    Overall %*: A. survives: 44.5% D. survives: 53.5% No survivors:2%

    • percentages may not total 100 due to rounding.

    And it will cost you ALL your air force except MAYBE the bomber which you cannot use to take the land with.  You edit the results to leave you 1 ground unit to take the land and it changes too:

    Outcomes of 10,000 battles
      avg. # IPC value
    Attacker: Left: 14.2 Lost: 108.8
    Defender:      Left: 37.3 Lost: 87.7

    Surviving Attackers (started with 6 Inf, 6 Arm, 6 Fig, 1 Bom.)
    Surviving Defenders (started with 4 Inf, 2 Art, 3 Arm, 6 Fig, 2 Bom.)

    Overall %*: A. survives: 29.8% D. survives: 68.6%

    So the question is, do you want to loose your entire Airforce and not take the land, or do you want to allow England to hit you with 5 fighters and a bomber next round?

  • Sea Lion G2 is a total joke… a fantasy AT BEST.

    UK moves their BB, TRN and their brand new (UK1 build) AC and TRN into SZ6.  Russians send their SUB there in R2.

    HERE IS THE KICKER… With 6 TRNs in the baltic, Germany is VERY weak in Central Europe, and is dead set on Sea Lion in order to win.  So Russia sends 2 figs from Caucuses to SZ6 UK AC in R2.

    US sends their FIG and BOM to UK and 4 land units.

    Before Germany even TRIES to land in UK, they have to fight past the Allied Fleet of 1 BB, 2 TRN, 1 AC, 2 FIG, 1 SUB.

    You need FIVE of those German FIGs, plus the entire Baltic Fleet, just to get your landing force through 60% of the time.  Adding the BOM gives you 88% chance to make the landing.  But lets save the BOM for London since we have a 3 in 5 chance of getting to land in Londown without it…

    That means Sea Lion with NO AIR SUPPORT.

    6 ARm, 6 INF, 1 BOM against 4 INF, 1 ART, 1 ARM, 2 FIG, 1 BOM, 1 AA (with UK doing my normal UK1 build) and 1 FIG, 1 BOM from the US.  And seeing 5 TRNs bought by Germany (and no land forces) on G1, I AM sending 2 INF, 1 ART, 1 ARM via US TRNs to London on US1.

    Now you have a less than 15% chance to win on Sea Lion… AFTER a 60% chance to even reach London.  Germany’s odds are LESS THAN 1 in 10.

    And in thsoe 90% of games where you lose…
    you are out 6 of your 10 ARM (actually 8 of 10 since 2 died in West Russia and Ukraine)
    you are out 5 of 6 FIGs (1 dead in Ukraine at teh start, 4 in the naval battle to get your TRNs to London
    you are out 6 INF from Western, Germany, Eastern, Norway (plus the 6 dead in WR and Ukraine) out of 25 to start.

    On R2, before you even attempt Sea Lion, Russia is going to take Belo and Balkans (you can;t counter the R1 attacks because you need those forces in range for Sea Lion).  Yo uahve also given up Egypt sicne your FIGs have to stay in range.

    Germany falls, 90% of the time, about G3 or G4.  Because on UK3, the UK builds more fleet, the Americans sail their ships to SZ6 (2 TRN, 1 DST) and attack the TRNs with 2 TRN, 1 DST, 1 FIG, 1 BOM  (90% end of thsoe 6 German TRNs), and UK is free to start landings in Germany on UK3 while Russia just masses their troops, takes out the last German forces in Eastern and Soutehrn, and starts buildign ARM en masse in Rome to take Germany.

  • @Jennifer:

    We’re talking Sea Lion in Round 2 now?

    England has 1 Bomber, 5 Fighters, 2 Infantry, 2 Armor, 1 Artillery and 1 Fighter, 1 Bomber, 2 Infantry, 1 Armor and 1 Artillery from America vs what, 6 infantry, 6 tanks, 6 fighters, and a bomber you said? (I know you did, I copy pasted it.) . . .

    So the question is, do you want to loose your entire Airforce and not take the land, or do you want to allow England to hit you with 5 fighters and a bomber next round?

    Er, who are you talking to?  I wrote that G2 SeaLion WON’T work.  “No, a G1 buy of 5 transports does not guarantee taking of London.”  Even later, I mentioned “That’s an offensive punch of 46 against an AA gun and a defensive punch of 54.”, I hope you don’t think I would think those were good odds!

    The only SeaLion I advocate is a 1-2 tech dice for Long Range Aircraft with OOB (and possibly FAQs), to allow Germany the 16-30% chance to attack on G1 with 1 infantry, 1 tank, 6 fighters, and bomber, against London’s existing forces, as well as leaving Germany the IPCs to buy transports to secure London on G2 or G3; and even then I only advocate it if Russia did not fly its fighters in, and if OOB/FAQ rules are being used (because, of course, LHTR delays tech from going into effect, so you couldn’t get all those fighters to hit London).

    The response I’m looking for is how to counter that threat other than flying Russian fighters to London, and ncsswitch has responded with a proposal of a Russian fighter attack on the Baltic, and a Russian attack on the Ukraine, combined with a sub move to block the German attack.  I think that is too risky because it commits three Russian tanks and Russia must win the Ukraine battle to kill that German fighter, and because both Russian fighters will probably die attacking the Baltic, in which case Germany could opt not to go G1 Sea Lion at all, but build mass ground units (POSSIBLY eight tanks, although I normally think of that as insanely reckless for Germany), and try to smash Russia instead.  But that’s not to say that I think ncsswitch’s proposal is bad, because preventing a G1 Sea Lion with 2 tech dice is pretty difficult anyways; if Russian fighters just fly to London (which was what I proposed), Germany is quite strong with the Belorussian and Ukraine forces intact.  Maybe if USSR did a hit and run on Ukraine, and hit West Russia . . .

    “As for the detriment to Russia in that scenario… (Russia attacks the Baltic fleet with 2 fighters)
    With the Baltic Fleet toast, UK starts landing in Karelia/EE/Germany via the baltic in UK2 with 6 divisions plus air and BB shot.  That immediate reingforcement of Russia is a heck of a boos,t and mor ethan counters the lost FIGs.”

    First, if Russia was attacking the Baltic fleet - and all combat moves are made “simultaneously”, so I would also see the commitment in the Ukraine, and see that Russia was going to try to prevent G1 Sealion - I would probably kill the transport before the destroyer, because I just wouldn’t need the transport; I’d be planning a quick attack against Moscow at that point.  Second, in such a case, I do not see it as clear that Russia will kill the Baltic fleet, even if both Russian fighters die.  Third, even if the Baltic fleet was cleared, and UK built AC, transport, and 2 infantry, that fleet could not threaten E. Europe or Germany that early - there are just too many ground units being built in Germany and being pushed through E. Europe.  (If UK didn’t build an AC on UK1, and tried moving units into Karelia or E. Europe on UK2, Germany just uses W. Europe fighters and the bomber at Libya to clear, which is why I assume UK WILL build an AC, and not two transports, three infantry, and a tank.)  Fourth, if UK does stay in the Baltic, the US push on Africa and the Mediterranean will be postponed, and every turn that Africa is delayed is costly to the Allies.  Fifth - do you normally attack the Baltic fleet with Russian fighters on Russ1; if you do, how does that go?

    I actually think the UK unification is the second best scenario for Germany, because it allows 6 transports, 2 subs, destroyer, 4-5 fighters, and bomber to attack a combined fleet of 2 transports, sub, aircraft carrier, 2 fighters, and battleship.  In such a case, I wouldn’t try invading London at all.  Let me clear, though, and state that I am firmly against 5 G1 transports; you can’t count on UK to unite that fleet, and even if it does, USSR’s push is just too strong.

Suggested Topics

  • 2
  • 46
  • 2
  • 6
  • 3
  • 53
  • 4
  • 8
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures