AgentX wrote:@steelwarrior, try to skip Sealion '42, if you can. It is much harder than Sealion '40.
AgentX wrote:So, you'll have to do the much harder Sealion '42 later. It is brutal and you will need more fighters and bombers to deal with a much larger British air force and navy.
A look at this in more detail...:Diplomatic wrote:Try to avoid Sealion 42 - it is much harder than Sealion 40, but not impossible.
***SPOILER ALERT***
In Sea Lion 40, this is what the Allies has at their disposal:
Total units: 51 (cost=27125)
Core units: 31 (cost=6295)
Aux units: 20 (cost=20830)
Contrast this with Sea Lion 42:
Total units: 72 (cost=39441)
Core units: 49 (cost=12821)
Aux units: 23 (cost=26620)
Of course, this must be put in relation to the German forces. In Sea Lion 40 the stand-alone scenario provides 44 units (cost=31409) while in Sea Lion 42 you get 53 units (cost=31454).
So when playing the scenarios stand-alone at least, the quoted claims are very true: the Allied side gets a 45% increase in deployed prestige while the Axis gets almost nothing!
When you play the campaign, the outlook is better, since you can either go to Sea Lion 42 directly after Rush to Moscow, or (which probably is much preferable) you can gather your momentum through Kiev and Moscow 41. Whether the extra scenarios (you can lose Sea Lion 40 to retain maximum prestige, then do marginals at Greece, Barbarossa and Kiev; followed by a decisive at Moscow 41) is enough to fully compensate for the extra 12000 allied prestige (which is probably better allocated too!) is not for me to say, however...
It's probably still better to win a decisive victory at Sea Lion 40 and to gather experience and prestige on the Ostfront, thus delaying the "jump" to USA East Cost until 1943 (by holding off a decisive victory until the Moscow 43 scenario). But now we're discussing Sea Lion 42...
