Jump to content

UK surrender bug?


Recommended Posts

This has been mentioned a number of times before. If Manchester is taken first then UK entirely surrenders, lock-stock-and-barrel, no second capital. Now, the UK should not leave the Home Islands defenseless...like I have done at times when I wanted to try an ill-advised Med strategy and had the RN hit Benito. But at the same time the Axis should not be able to game the outcome by taking Manchester first, then London. It shouldn't matter which order the cities fall, a second capital should still be available. Dragon discovered this bug early and pulled it on several players, so I made it a house rule that if a Sea Lion London had to go first, and I later in the interest of fair play revised it that Manchester also had to be defended by an Army, so the Brits couldn't get too gamey themeselves. Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever happened to the fall back position in Canada? Used to be a choice of Egypt also.

Currently in Gold, I don't believe the German player can launch a successful Sealion in 1940 unless the UK makes some serious errors, like forays into Scandanavia, Middle East, or an all out defense of France.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello SeaMonkey ^^ ,

Maybe it's possible to launch Sealion in 1940 but you have to sacrifice nearly everything to it right from the start, producing paratroops, special forces, and aerial units early.

Then pray for good weather and a two-three monthes blitzkrieg in France ending in june. Still a big gamble and it'll probably be very hard to launch a good Barbarossa in 1941.

I'll have to try it soon.

Also thanks for the Manchester thing, good to know to avoid killing a game ;) .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm looking at the scripts and the DECISION to move the capital to either either Canada or Australia should kick in as soon as Axis units land in the UK and ideally this should prevent the surrender described above... is this not the case? i.e. did the DECISION event not fire?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well how about it forum, anyone out there able to launch a successful SL if the UK focuses on home defense?

I used to pride myself on this campaign, but lately, it's a "no go" with Gold, unless, like I said, the UK player makes some dumb moves.

Not saying that I don't agree that SL should be very difficult, it just seems exceedingly harder than it was before and just maybe everyone has adjusted to the strategy.:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SL is very possible but you could not prepare a proper Barby and you would have to adopt a defensive stance in the east while you are SLing. It's a big risk and will be a very costly venture especially if the RN is concentrated in the home waters. You have to ask yourself, is the payoff/gamble worth it? I think you have to take Gibraltar for the Italian Navy to link up with the KM to provide screening for the amphibs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to forget the pinnacle of the game, Barbarossa, but I see the choice is there, can't say it's viable unless the Soviets could be held off until 42.

Hmmm, perhaps a diplomatic investment and a defensive focus in the East could be the recipe. Perhaps I need to rethink the strategy.:o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this bug has been fixed in Gold. I’m Axis and in the middle of a Sea Lion in a tourney game. My opponent, who deployed the entire RN to the Med to hit Benito thus making a Sea Lion feasible, hit a u-boat from Manchester. That made it the most attractive city to land and take first. The next turn I took London and got the prompt that the English moved their capital to Canada. Bob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...