Axis Sealion strategy.

[tyronec]

I have played 8 or so games so far and in only one, the AAR against Flavius, have Axis played a 'Sealion' strategy from T1.

So here's what happens.
T2 Axis take Poland, Netherlands and Denmark (I messed it up and didn't get Netherlands until T3).
During the winter you wait for a CLEAR and can do Belgium in one turn.
3 subs are out attriting the UK MM, which forces them to counter with at least some resources.

Build sequence for Germany is:
2 Panzers
1 Interceptor
4+ CS, which are the real killers.
As many Landing craft as possible, you have at least 9 by the time France falls.

Italy also builds a stack of Landing craft.

France will fall in June or July. In our game it went in early June. I didn't see anything that Flavius did wrong, and certainly I had a couple of moves that I made mistakes on.

It is then an easy walk into the UK. When we started this game there was a lot of discussion about how the UK can defend against invasion, so I just don't see how any of it works. Axis units can cross using a Night move (making defending UK fleets and aircraft irrelevant) and then any unit defending a port gets trashed by CS. In a couple of turns after Paris falls you are going to gave a stack of Italian units lining up ready to invade too.

At the same time Axis take Greece, Italians from the Sea and Germans from Albania. Three turns, just maybe four.

With no production, except a few Canadians, I don't think the Allies can hold Egypt. There is no need to take Gib as the Spanish join the Axis and that gives an outlet from the Med.

And here is the killer. With no UK to fight Axis can invade USSR, on schedule. They have lost some production from invading the UK but there is no need for any garrisons in the West until the USA joins in. So you have all the Yugoslavs, Italians and Spanish as well as the normal allies.

Conclusion.
The game needs adjustment so that UK can hold out against Axis in '41.
Part of that is their production which is too low.
There is also an issue with the way air attack and invasions work.
Am not in favor of just banning Sealion, do that and the Allies don't need to defend it.

[Jim D Burns]

Regarding air power, perhaps there needs to be a cap on how effective air power can be vs. a single hex in a single turn. Make it so a unit can never go below 60% effectiveness due to air strikes and massed air power won't be so devastating to a single hex anymore.

Jim

[AlbertN]

There is a cap for that Jim - it is a variable in the editor. There is specifically a 60 there. But I am not sure if that is the minimum efficiency that can be reached by bombing - or the total efficiency that can be 'erased' in 1 turn by bombing.

UK production cannot be raised either tbh. Right now UK has a helluva of production since IF no SeaLion happens, D-Day happens in '42.

Night move though should be interceptable by Fleets. Admittedly I am not sure if the UK can park a night moved fleet in the channel for that purpose.

The issue is how invasions are handled first and foremost.

[tyronec]

Regarding air power, perhaps there needs to be a cap on how effective air power can be vs. a single hex in a single turn. Make it so a unit can never go below 60% effectiveness due to air strikes and massed air power won't be so devastating to a single hex anymore.

Jim

WITE had a cap on how many air attacks you could do on a hex in a turn. That could bring some more balance to the whole of the game, as the game is you can break through just about anywhere with enough air power. A change would have quite an impact.

[AlbertN]

I am fully aware of how airpower works - and at the moment is the solution to problems in general.
On the other hand some kind of 'linebreaker' is required at some point.

I'd point to World in Flames but then it would kind of copy the game. (I've WITE too but that's too micro for me).

[Michael T]

Increase UK production or lower the German production. Take your pick. It's time to nerf Germany or buff Britain.

I am yet to play a game as Allied where the Germans have done anything except pound the UK in 1941. Why do a Barbarossa when you can win by smashing the UK.

[AlbertN]

Neither of these is the solution. UK produces already a hefty amount - and Germany production is neither high.

As discussed elsewhere the issue of 'Sealion' is not about production but how some mechanics work. And in another thread I even suggested a re-evaluation of how VPs are distributed to make it more granular as well (but I do not believe VPs are that relevant atm)

[AlvaroSousa]

I am watching this thread BTW.

[Michael T]

Your swimming against the tide Cohen. It's obvious from results and analysis that Germany is OP ATM. I would tend to wind Germany's production down rather than increase UK.

The mass of grey units on the map in the later war period is nuts. The Allies have no hope of pushing the Axis back to Germany by 45.

Has anyone actually seen Berlin fall in a PBEM game?

[Michael T]

I would also be getting rid of all that free flak the Germans got. Make them build that stuff. Give the UK their Strat bomber back but put it in the cue. Arrive sometime in 41.

German production as it stands hits over 400 by early 1941. And if they choose not to attack Russia (which is the default strategy these days) they are incurring very few losses so they can build a massive army by mid 42 that is impossible to throw back.

[AlbertN]

I did! And I was the Axis.
Well surrendered before. But Allies in summer '44 were already in Germany in Munich and Hamburg line wise.
Same opponent of my AAR where I did Sealion. He did DDay in '42 yawning.
It was not a 1.05 game though.


And I do DDay yawning in 1.05 games against a few opponents in '42 or even end of '41. Sure then I get stalled for the time begin as Axis shifts troops away from Russia but I get a foothold. And whilst Axis is bogged down the Allies (mostly USA though) still churn out new units. To be able to land in France or Denmark in '42 or I repeat late '41 is paramount as Allied offensive capability.

In a game I took Kiel, secured Denmark; landed in France, secured Brest peninsula (by end '41), landed from Denmark in Finland taking it out (Summer '42), and by halfway end of Summer '42 Allies were poised to march inward in France toward Paris. And from Finland / Denmark a landing was made to take Konigsberg, Riga and Talinn.

All the while Allies were providing 40-50 production points a turn to the Soviets (Which are instead quite needy of cash. I'd have lent more but Soviet MErchant Marine is the hard limit!)

I am sure by '45 I'd have been well in Berlin.
How? Airpower, Cheap invasion measures, ports allowing infinite troops in the port itself the turn the port is taken, etc.

I do not deem my opponent a novice or else - but he informed me he deliberately wanted to avoid SeaLion or Spain strategy and go historical.

I am fine with current production model (Except minors should retain their whole production - and give out oil) except some more oil for the Axis. AAs are fine and the Strat Bomber could be built. Currently I think Germany needs some buff alongside Soviets. W.Allies are definitely OP and I am still of the belief a Sealion do not seal the game, USA can retake UK back in '42 (But I've not tried that out yet) with -current- mechanics.
It will be as easy as is for Allies to land somewhere - and if Axis keeps their airforce to protect UK then Soviets have a field day.

[Flaviusx]

The Allies, once they are all in the game, should be outproducing the Axis by around 2-1. This doesn't happen. It's more like 3-2.

But the production situation is particularly bad early on. France and Britain combined barely equal German production. In reality, this should be more like 1.3-1. Once Germany acquires a few conquests, it will be outproducing the allies rather handily, even with the Norwegian convoy shut.

Britain should not have production equal to France and half that of Germany. It should be more like 75% of German GDP. 150 to start with, in other words.

Germany starts with the enormous advantage of being fully mobilized. It can focus on new builds immediately. Furthermore, it can easily boost its production by putting much of its army on garrison mode. And Germany can afford big ticket items rather easily and essentially buy one big ticket item nearly every single turn after the first two panzer buys are out of the way.

Germany also can knock out the low countries one by one before May of 1940. This adds to its production and advances the line forward. By May, it will be sitting on the French frontier with a crushing advantage and simply roll France and go straight to Britain.

The game goes completely off rails once it is the UK vs Germany and Italy. At that point the Axis production advantage is on the order of 4-1. So of course most Axis players are just going nuts with that because why wouldn't they? For mechanical reasons, Sea Lion is a cinch, too. Britain cannot stop it. Period. With a bit of luck Germany can wrap this up and do Barbarossa, too! And it will have Spain and Yugoslavia as additional partners. It's pretty silly all around.

[Michael T]

A big +1 from me Flavius.

[Michael T]

In my current game I am Allied and I am just managing to survive with the UK (it's mid 41). The Axis player is sensibly playing the Med strategy. His production is up around 450, Italy IDK, UK is around 160 I think. So poor old UK must face a combined Axis production of around 600 I guess against UK/Canada of less than 190 in total.

It's frustrating as hell. Cos US and Russia sit by and do nothing while the Nazi's subjugate Europe.

While I find it immensely challenging and I enjoy the game I have doubts I can push the Germans back again. Time will tell. I do know I will not be starting another game as Allied until something is done to address this issue.

[battlevonwar]

Primary Issue: is that Sea Lion is required otherwise UK/USA invade Europe with 5 tanks/10-15 Corp/10-15 Air in Jan-May of '42. A good Allied Player can achieve this. (why would as Axis fight Barbarossa when Sea Lion Pays and the other doesn't?) Change that around!

2nd Issue: If you're fighting hard in the East which a clever Russian can do, Protecting Italy which requires RESOURCES that are German. Then you have "what left for the West?"

Third Issue: Germany will not have 20 Units to send West nor couldn't pick the location to put them if it does have them. Rail capacity doesn't allow for the movement of more than 3-5 units at a time. Big Ones, 3 perhaps.

Finalized: Sea Lion must be possible at high cost with good return if the UK player is inept. Plus D-Day must be more difficult than dumping 15-20 Units in any Port anywhere on the map! Meaning Russia has to be defensible in '41'42(meaning it needs a better air force)

[AlbertN]

If we look to historical production models I could agree. Problem is historically UK was building tons of ships which is not the case here. Nor in any other game that leaves full freedom of production to a nation.

And UK in '41 should be reeling and fighting for survival / on the defensive. Currently the Middle East is not threatened (Supply issues on Axis end) safe fuck up from Allies.
If the game is without Italian option, also, UK can easily take out Iraq and Iran before anything happens there, just to be on the super safe way. And as long as airpower does not come in range, landings risk to fail.

How many landings happen in Middle East in your games?

That said I reiterate I fully agree presently SeaLion is too easy to achieve (in general invasions are too easy to achieve). But as Allies are, they can also very easily land in '42 if left unmolested - and Axis has no way to molest UK except by doing Sealion. (Spamming submarines does not seem to me a viable business. By '41 they're virtually neutered by 20+ escorts teched up).

So to me the issue is how invasions are performed - the ways things react (cheap baiting by DDs for instance to lure opposing bombers to spend their action points) - and airpower (Which I pointed out some patches ago already in the game mentioned above of Allies deep in Germany in Summer'44).

[Michael T]

And UK in '41 should be reeling and fighting for survival / on the defensive

Why do you think that? It was not the historical situation.

[battlevonwar]

They hadn't won the Battle of the Atlantic nor North Africa. They had a devastatingly useless Night Bombing Campaign. It wasn't till '42 where they were helped to win the Battle for North Africa, '43 The Battle of the Atlantic, '44 D-Day. On their own it may have taken ages...

ORIGINAL: Michael T

And UK in '41 should be reeling and fighting for survival / on the defensive

Why do you think that? It was not the historical situation.

[AlbertN]

It was not in '41?

They were not at risk of invasion, but they were armwrestling in the desert, pratically losing battles once Germans arrived or having phyrric victories with their overwhelming forces (in numbers) against a depleted Afrika Korps that barely received replacements.
They had the issue of submarines sinking a hefty amount of their shipping.
Their strategic bombing was highly ineffective in '41 as well.

I'd like to point out that in the other thread someone else has posted screenies of how in '41 UK are invading Italy mainland already (Albeit not sure if that's a PvP game or else). So at least I am not the only one who shows that in '41 UK on its own can already do landings!

[Flaviusx]

In 1941 it was the Soviet Union fighting for its life. Britain was not nearly so pressed. The uboats were a silent menace, yes, and there was the North African to and fro, but Britain's back wasn't against the wall in 1941.