Jump to content

Conquering England.. Death trap?


Recommended Posts

In SC gold it was fool's gold to conquer England (Seelowe). Considering the effort involved, the subsequent garrisoning, and the severe war readiness spikes for the U.S and USSR, the "ticket" was not worth the price IMHO.

Has this changed in AOD or is a successful Seelowe still too costly?

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi lhugues41 :) ,

- So far I didn't see a Sealion in any of my AoD games. Seems most players including me prefer to concentrate everything on USSR. Don't think there was any change in last patch for that, I'll need to check.

- Actually I even saw some players "inviting" Hitler to try a Sealion by leaving nearly no defense around London hoping to trap Germans there in a long campaign and weaken Barbarossa -_-' .

- The bad points for Sealion:

1) nearly no plunder

2) low base MPPs for ressource tiles (no rail link to Berlin)

3) low supply (need at least 1 HQ to do anything)

4) need quite many units to defend/conquer it

5) raises USSR-US % mobilization

6) reduces but doesn't prevent Allies come back because of loops

7) small time window and difficult terrain in the north

8) units lost in amphib transports/low supply can't be bought at half-cost

9) RN obvious superiority on the seas

- The good points:

1) cut UK convoys (especially UK-USSR one)

2) more or less eliminates UK from the war

3) eliminates all units in UK production queue

4) protects Axis from Allies bombing campaigns

5) weakens any D-Day offensive/landings, delays Allies come back in the West

6) makes Kriegsmarine free to sail in the Atlantic and beyond

- I think the raise in USSR % mobilization is the main point preventing players to try Sealion. It's just too dangerous to gamble with USSR war entry: mess it up and it's game over in most cases.

- So I suppose possible gains don't outweight risks. You absolutely need to have a strategy from the start to make the most of it, any improvised Sealion is likely to fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your thorough reply. Agree with your analysis.

I do wish this would become a bit more viable, it should be an important threat to keep the English honest. Like the mentioned player, I almost welcome a UK invason.

So for example in my current mirror game with me as Axis, I feel my opponent is almost certainly very very weak in the UK. But I hesitate for reasons above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- The good points:

...

2) more or less eliminates UK from the war

...

That's for me the most important wrong thing.

Conquering Britain doesn't eliminate the UK from the war. It only takes them some MPP and moves the Capital to Egypt. And this is the KO for Italy because they now have a much stronger enemy in the Med. New troops start in Egypt and can conquer North Africa without any problem.

IMHO this is quite unrealistic. A successful Sealion should bring a neutralized UK (and Commonwealth) with the disadvantage of an instant DOW US->Axis (no raise in USSR % mobilization).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe i strong readiness increase for US rather than outright DOW. The reason i think it would be both historical and fair to make successful Seelowe a significant Bene is that it is extremely unlikely to succeed (or at very very high cost) if the UK plays to prevent it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's for me the most important wrong thing.

Conquering Britain doesn't eliminate the UK from the war. It only takes them some MPP and moves the Capital to Egypt. And this is the KO for Italy because they now have a much stronger enemy in the Med. New troops start in Egypt and can conquer North Africa without any problem.

IMHO this is quite unrealistic. A successful Sealion should bring a neutralized UK (and Commonwealth) with the disadvantage of an instant DOW US->Axis (no raise in USSR % mobilization).

In AoD you do not have the choice to select Egypt as captial. Only a capital shift to Canada or Australia is possible.

Another pro-Sealion is that there is a possibility that Spain icreases it's axis mobilization to about 80%.

I had two Sealions in my recent games (one as axis and one as allies)

In both cases Barbarossa was delayed and not at full strenght.

As allies I could slow down the conquest of the UK capitals, so I did not lose the carrier in production.

If I get it cheap I would always go for Sealion and only destroy the production queue, then move on to Barbarossa.

In AoD there seem only to be a small increase in US mobilization, so Sealion will keep the allies of mainland europe for much longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the case of an invasion of Britain I think Stalin would not do anything initially it being his nature to wait and see what develops. If Germany gets bogged down I would think Stalin would gamble on Britain and Germany destroying themselves or weakening each other to such a degree that he could get whatever he wanted without much cost. If it looked like Germany was winning he might stay out of it just to avoid angering Hitler. If Britain was winning he might stab Hitler in the back or ramp up deliveries to Germany to prolong the conflict and bleed them dry. Depends on what his ultimate agenda (other than survival) actually was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...