Russian N.O. "Loop-Hole."

@ShadowHAwk:

@Caesar:

@ShadowHAwk:

@Caesar:

@barney:

I’m probably misunderstanding here as I admittedly didn’t read the whole thread, but UK and USSR splitting iran would make sense for a pro allies neutral game wise, to represent the fact the allies controlled them.

I agree with your point that iran wasn’t pro uk or ussr. Don’t think they like anybody but themselves

We’re taking about how USSR can abuse the spread of Communism national objective by taking Iraq, the closest nation to do it and if we think it’s a good idea or not to which we got the topic of neutral Iran and Iraq.

In historical context, Iran was pro Axis for sure. The leaders expressed interest in Germany which didn’t make UK or USSR happy because we not only didn’t want them to get oil from friendly nations but also would give the Axis powers a back door.

The NO should really be restricted to europe only, not middle east of afrika, the allies would have never helped russia get those countries ( except for the invasion of neutral Iran )

In historical context, Iran was the only Neutral country. It traded with both germany and the allies. In contrast to the US which was waging an illegal war against germany at that time.
The allies wanted iran to join them, and hand over german nationals that where living peacefully in Iran,  when iran wanted to stay neutral they invaded the country to force them to join them.

Irak was anti-UK because they where oppressed by the british since WW1.

The problem with Spread of Communism is that it technically make sense for Africa and the Middle East. Stalin wanted Europe to see USSR as a European nation. However he wanted to take an advantage any where he gets, he knew that Japan was going to be a thorn in his side which is why he invested interest in Japan true enemy, China. However as history has shown, he willingly joined UK in an invasion of Iran. So it makes sense he can get Communist bonus out of Iraq and Africa. However the African bonus is the bigger issue. I try very much in the early games to get Italy to leave its colonies and destroy there military just to get USSR to take all four of them in Africa for a total of 12 dollars plus 2 for the territory value.

The allies would have never allowed russia to invade or occupy any neutral country ( except iran but they promised to leave once Iran surendered and lend-lease materials could go through )
For the NO bonus in Irak ( which was a british colony at that time ) or afrika the allies have to make way for the russians to invade areas that they wanted themself and not invade them.
For sicily its even more silly as russia needs to get on a US or UK transport do invade those spaces. Russia should never be allowed to go on any persons transports.

If you go for historic accuracy the allies wanted to invade through greece and the balkans to prevent russia from getting those countries so it does not make any sence that the allies help russia take more.

And besides we all know what really happened. And that was UK who wanted to do that and that is ALSO what Germany assumed the allies were going to do. This is actually why Turkey wanted to join the allies sooner than it did but US wanted them to stay neutral as it didn’t give Axis forces in Greece an excuse to invade another nation. US wanted to go right into Southern France from Africa but the agreement was knocking out Italy right then and there.

And as for the USSR being on transport, that is something I never thought of however if I am going to do that, I’d just have the Red Army land on Rome.

@ch0senfktard:

Russia doesn’t get the bonus.
The rule doesn’t say “Axis powers that Russia is at war with.”
So, Germany can deny Russia’s bonus even if they aren’t at war with Russia.

Another thing, if Italy captured a Russian territory on its turn, Germany could noncombat move into that territory without declaring war.

Such a lame rule

Error, I meant a CA.  No CV available on G1.

southern france is easier than normandy g1. you can get one of those fighters in east europe somewhere (you know the one that is out of range from naval and you usually send to yugoslavia than italy). 3 mech fighter good to go.

I prefer to just do france. Though I like the southern france move when I am doing some kind of sea lion play. Prevents uk from merging fleet off gibraltar.

In this instance I prefer to take yugoslavia.

However if I am undecided… yeah I like the strafe. Shove east poland g2 no prob, start advancing sooner. It is really good if you plan on going all in on russia G5. It super all in, all the allies have to do is figure out a way to save russia. That is the whole game right there.

@techroll42:

And only in Europe (always has been) so Mongolia don’t count.

Mongolia doesnt count because it is not a pro axis nuetral.

Its not a Europe specific NO anymore.

Its just any territory that at the start of the game belonged to either Italy or Germany or if it was a pro axis nuetral

Really simple stuff.

However there are none of these outside of the Europe map but several outside of the continent Europe

Strategy Summary:
Using 7 starting pieces and 5 purchased pieces on turn 1 assemble a Far East Task Force
Prepare a Russian turn 2 Declaration Of War against Japan.
or
Bait Japan(surprise them once per player) into a J1 DOW.
Use Far East Task Force to secure Burma road turn 3, India turn 4, and redeploy air to USSR by turn 6 or 7 for defense of Russia. 5 Russian air units are a nice scramble/carrier cargo in India on turn 3.

Note: The India DOW against Japan turn 1 discussed below is designed for the surrender London Strategy I have proposed elsewhere, simply ignore to evaluate this proposal independently.

Strategy Details:
Turn 1:
Purchase 2 fighters, 3 Mechanized Infantry.
Deploy 17 infantry, 1 AA gun to Amur as bait(above Manchuria+Korea).
Deploy 1 infantry to Yakut S.S.R. to redeploy against a blitzing tank later.
Deploy 1 armor, 1 Mechanized Infantry to Volgograd(Southern Victory City/Factory).
Deploy 2 fighters, 1 Tactical Bomber to Russia(non-surprise/feint option) or Caucasus(feint).
Deploy 1 Armor, 1 Mechanized Infantry to Caucasus(feign a Middle-East staging, prevent a German 5 turn assault on Moscow).

At this point, few Japanese players are expecting Russia to deploy 7 land units and 5 air units in China, so they may choose to seize Amur. This is a critical blunder and should be avoided as you consume 10-11 land units in Asia plus 2-3 air units to destroy that force, without pulling your entire fleet out of position. These 11 land units are needed in China. In my opinion.

China turn 1:
Build 4 Infantry
Deploy 12 infantry to Szechwan, 1 Fighter
Alternative: Attack and kill 1-2 Japanese land units(if 3-4 are present, soften up for India) with 3 infantry and 1 Fighter leaving 9 units plus fighter in Szechwan turn 2.
Collect 8-9 IPCs

_India turn 1: (hinges on if US enters the war turn 2 by surrendering London, disregard this section for independent review of USSR tactic)
Purchase 1 air craft carrier. Save 1 IPC.
Declare war on Japan
Deploy 6 infantry and 1 Artillery to Burma
Capture(preferred) or Clear Yunnan with 2 infantry and 3 planes, land 3 planes in India.
Deploy 1 DD to sz 37 block Jap Navy
Deploy 1 Transport to Sumatra, secure 4 IPCS with 2 Infantry from Malaya.
Deploy 1 Infantry from Malaya to Shan State
Deploy 1 BB, 1 CA to sz39 to protect carrier build.
note Deploy 1 DD french sz72 and 1 DD UKsz71 to sz 75 (in range of sz 39,76,80,41,57,60 as needed)
Collect 21 plus, 5 IPC NO, plus 1 saved for 27 IPCs.

Anzac turn 1: Build 3 infantry save 1 IPC
Deploy 1 fighter to UK carrier
Deploy 2 fighters all land to Queensland to secure landing for US planes on turn 2.
Deploy 1 transport and 2 Infantry to Java_

Russia turn 2
Deploy 2 armor, 5 Mechanized units to Sikiang, China via Kazakhstan (DOW on Japan if needed)
Deploy 4 fighters, 1 tactical bomber to Szechwan to protect 10-13 Chinese units from Jap air attack.
Deploy Amur forces if alive to capture or clear Manchuria and Korea(lower priority)

Now Japan turn 2 must use caution if they hit Amur. They have too few units(11-12) to stack in Kweichow as Russia can hit those units with 7 land and 5 air, clearing that stack.
If they stack in Hunan 12 units (assumes fleet elsewhere unless Amur is ignored), then China moves into Yunnan with 10-12 land units builds 2 more, 7 UK units merge in, along with 7 USSR units on turn 3 prior to J3 assault, plus as many air units as desired up to the allied total of 5 USSR+ 3 UK + 1 Anzac = 9 by turn 3, 11 by turn 4 or later when other 2 anzac land on carriers. US planes to follow as an option from Australia.
These leave china with 26-28 land units plus 9 planes in Yunnan(1 more land if Shan state infantry is alive to move in), vs Japanese 12 land units and typically 12-14 air units even if all 20 air units can hit, its not pretty.

Japans land movements get tricky if they can not land air units to protect them, this keeps China in the game multiple rounds, and using can opener maneuvers, you can drive Japan back since 12 units from Russia are a size-able threat.

If India goes fleet with heavy air support, then Japan must choose whether to sink it since that raises the potency of the US fleet off Australia. See actual play test description below for large naval battle composition.

Unless Japan stays focused like a laser this situation creates opportunities for China/and its allies.

I welcome your comments upon any of the merits or lack there of, of these proposals and plans.

(Sorry for my absence, I have begun to focus on Allied strategies now.)
Maroon text is background information, skip if you just wanted strategy details
Recently, I began to seek ways to address my biased perceived weighting of Alpha2 towards the axis.

Summary: Germany takes UK by turn 3 or 4, Russia can move into Germany on turn 4 but is often driven back. Japan destroys China by turn 3 or 4. US spins its wheels staging in the Pacific to keep a powerful Japan from ending the game, Europe grows into a forest fire that the US struggles with after the focus lifts from Japan. <biased view=“” based=“” on=“” my=“” observations,=“” feel=“” free=“” to=“” disagree=“”>While testing a failed Russian navy concept(I had to try it once before I rule it out), I took two things out of this:
1st: A Russian navy was ineffective, but a one destroyer build with a starting sub and scramble from sz 127 shows promise of keeping the sz125 Russian Objective 2-3 rounds without a moderate German naval/air effort that could draw assets away from the US on those critical turn 4-6 maneuvers.
2nd: Russia’s first turn build is expendable in a 10+ turn game with a SeaLion Threat.

Summary: Having concluded(perhaps shortsightedly) that Russian offensives against Germany are ill-advised, and that having Russia sit and build up while doing nothing until turn 4 is also ill-advised, the logical focus of early efforts is in Asia.

Note: The below strategy was play tested 12 turns in combination with a surrender London, and Turn 1 DOW against Japan by India and Anzac after a Japan DOW turn 1 on Russia’s bait.
Japan had 2-3 critical choices to make, all of them could have changed the outcome which was: Japan was brought to her knees, with no American builds in the Pacific until turn 5, and 1 UK carrier built in S. Africa on turn 1.
Starting US Navy was forward deployed and used in Pacific when it entered the war on turn 2. Japanese navy was stacked off of French Indo China to threaten an India first campaign.
India and Anzac collected at war NO’s on turn 1 (Anzac did not have the island NO)
(all Mediterranean forces were stacked in sz92 Gibraltar turn1. 2 Land units(London/Scotland) and 3 planes were landed on Algeria(sz109 transport was critical) to prevent an Italian landing site for a German air assault against the UK sz92 force G2, (1 DD was left to block Italian bombardments/naval assault in sz 94) Turn 2, UK Navy Reinforced US navy in sz91 Gibraltar.
Buy turn 3, India was able to stack:
3 carriers, 1 BB, 1 Cruiser, 2 DD(French/UK), 9 fighters(3 Anzac,2 UK, 4 USSR fighters-3 scrambled
vs. the Japanese fleet able to hit it by turn J4:
3 Carriers, 2 BB, 2 CA, 4 DD, 2 subs (Japan had moved fleet to Philippines turn 2, as one transport was  used turn 1 against Amur, 1 was in Japan, and with only 1 transport, India first was not viable.) This was the second critical choice that failed to see the potential of the Indian navy on one side, the US navy off of Australia, and the cost of the first critical decision to hit Amur depleting Asian land units and pulling 1 transport out of range.
Egypt did not fall in 12 turns stacking 5 UK fighters (2London,Scotland,Gibraltar,Malta) plus 1 Tactical on Egypt turn 2 as US planes landed on UK/US fleet, causing Italy to drive through Middle-east to grab Volgograd rather then engage 15 land units, 6 air in Egypt. Italy was not safe to move away from scramble air cover for first 3 turns, as a 6 UK air force would scuttle 1 BB, 2 CA, and 2 DDs in 3 combat rounds. (3 hits round 1, 2 round 2, 1 round 3 vs. Italy 2 hits round 1, 2 round 2, 1 round 1 leaving 1 French fighter to sink unescorted transports if all UK air lost) this forced an Italian carrier build on turn 3, and fleet was able to move out turn 4….by then 5 US air offered a one , two punch threat.
In fact, the axis were forced to use a turn 2 neutral crush on Sweden, Spain, and Turkey just so Italian units could be transported to turkey when fleet was able to deploy on turn 3, this also permitted the axis to stack 30+ units on Gibraltar by turn 5 as Germany went navy for first 4 turns to drive the US away from Gibraltar since Germany was out producing the US due to capital plunder early on.</biased>

@Krieghund:

Yes.

Oh that is SOOO sweet! Wish I had known that previously.  I had not attacked a French Destroyer for fear of losing the non-Aggression NO for letting FIC be free (figured it was all or nothing.)  Ah well, my fault for not checking first!

If you only have one type of troop, it’s a binomial distribution:

Prob(k) = (n choose k) * p^k * (1-p)^(n-k),

where k is the number of hits, n is the total number of units, and p is the probability of a hit.

If you have different units, you need a product of binomial distribution for each permutation of possible events.

So, for the example of two tanks and two infantry, what is the probability of three hits? I’ll in words, then write it out:  You can have either 2 infantry hit, and one tank, or two tanks and one infantry.  Those are the only two ways that you can get two hits:

Prob(3) = (2 choose 2) * (1/6)^(2) * (5/6)^(2-2) * (2 choose 1) * (3/6)^(1) * (3/6)^(2-1) + (2 choose 1) * (1/6)^(1) * (5/6)^(2-1) * (2 choose 2) * (3/6)^(2) * (3/6)^(2-2)

Prob(3) = 1 * 1/36 * 1 * 2 * 3/6 * 3/6 + 2 * 1/6 * 5/6 * 1 * 9/36 * 1

Prob(3) = 18/1296 + 90/1298

Prob(3) = 108/1298

Now, if you have 3 INF, 2 TANKS, and 1 FGT, what is the probability of 2 hits?

Well, how many ways are there to make two hits?  I’ll write them out:

2 INF, 0 Tanks, 0 Fighters
1 I, 1 T, 0 F
1 I, 0 T, 1 F
0 I, 1 T, 1 F
0 I, 2 T, 0 F

An example of how one of these terms expands:

1 I, 1 T, 0 F:

(2 choose 1) * (1/6)^(1) * (5/6)^(2-1) * (2 choose 1) * (3/6)^(1) * (3/6)^(2-1) * (1 choose 0) * (3/6)^0 * (3/6)^(2-2)

If you want Prob(2), then you need to take the sum of the probabilities of all those possible ways to make 2 hits.

Clear as mud?