December 15, 2017, 04:05:35 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Want a t-shirt? Check out our awesome Axis & Allies .org T-Shirt Store! Search me
  Articles  
   Home   Help Login Register AACalc  
Loading
Pages: « 1 2
  Print  
Author Topic: Is Russia always doomed?  (Read 3512 times)
Funcioneta
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*******
Posts: 12860


AA50 '42 2010 League Champion


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: June 18, 2008, 10:42:03 am »
0

A uncareful Japanese player can aid soviets reach 34 ipcs as Jen said. If you send an armor to India and Japan forgets leave 1 inf there, it's 3 free ipcs for USSR. Some similar can happen if soviets letf 1 inf at Buryatia for forcing Japan let 1 inf at Man... and Japan forgets it. It's rare, sure, but sometimes happen  grin
Logged
AxisOfEvil
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 146


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: June 18, 2008, 11:00:06 am »
0

A uncareful Japanese player can aid soviets reach 34 ipcs as Jen said. If you send an armor to India and Japan forgets leave 1 inf there, it's 3 free ipcs for USSR. Some similar can happen if soviets letf 1 inf at Buryatia for forcing Japan let 1 inf at Man... and Japan forgets it. It's rare, sure, but sometimes happen  grin

    If Russia stacks sufficiently in Bury to take Manchuria, i divert japanese forces to kill russian inf. This leaves all of east russia to be gobbled up. Yes, carelessness can expalin alot of extreme results. But Jen sounded as if she was referring to a normal game scenario, and not a scenario that required a weak axis player.
Logged
AxisOfEvil
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 146


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: June 18, 2008, 11:04:13 am »
0

I should have explained my point better

1) Russia doesn't have much besides INF. 
Germany has all kinds of AUX units.

2) Most of Russia's INF is near or on the front lines.
Germany's INF may be several turns away from getting to the front line. i.e. WEurope.

  Well, to me it sounded as if you were making the point that russia had a infantry advantage. I dont agree with this. There is nothing requiring the germans to stack heavy infantry in west europe. The germans start with more inf, and as I play them, gain on infantry, as I out-produce russia in infantry. I buy at least 19 in the first 2 rounds with germany, russia can't match that!
Logged
Amon-Sul
2007 AAR League
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*
*******
Posts: 15491



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: June 18, 2008, 02:21:09 pm »
0

the agressive Russian aproach against an experienced German player simply cannot pass

there is too many ˝risky battles˝ not to mention those 3 in the first round Jen

and simply Russia cant produce 30+ constantly, even if it has Germany will have 40+ and overpower them


And USSR is definitely ˝the easiest˝ nation to play with. There are not easy nations, but some are harder to play with

The Nations:
1.GERMANY
2.UK
3.JAPAN
4.USA
5.USSR

Germany UK and Japan are the hardest to play with, then goes USA and then USSR
Logged
AxisOfEvil
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 146


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: June 18, 2008, 02:42:26 pm »
0

the agressive Russian aproach against an experienced German player simply cannot pass

there is too many ˝risky battles˝ not to mention those 3 in the first round Jen

and simply Russia cant produce 30+ constantly, even if it has Germany will have 40+ and overpower them


And USSR is definitely ˝the easiest˝ nation to play with. There are not easy nations, but some are harder to play with

The Nations:
1.GERMANY
2.UK
3.JAPAN
4.USA
5.USSR

Germany UK and Japan are the hardest to play with, then goes USA and then USSR

  definitely huh? Well. Granted I think Russia may be the easiest, but I definitely dont agree with your list of easiest to hardest. I think UK gives Russia a run for it money on easiest country. But I really guess it depends on what you feel is optimal strategy for these countries, as well as your definition of "ease to use". For an advanced player or beginner?  I think USA is the hardest country for a brand new player. UK, is right there as easiest to use optimally. I dont think UK should have to do much contending in asia or africa (in the late game). I bet ur gonna tell me otherwise, as u said an IC in India is a good idea. I dont agree. UK otpimal play is to shuttle troops to Northern Europe, and contend in africa early, waiting for usa to take over. thats it. They might make some waves in the indian ocean early, but for them to try and contend in Indian ocean for a substained period, i think its sub-optimal.

    My hardest country to use is certainly Germany. They fight all three allies at once, and they have to balance defense and aggression. USA might be next. They have alot of logistical concerns. And options. Pacific, atlantic, europe, africa. The challenge is finding the optimal system to deliver ground troops where they are needed. So third would be japan. Although, i might put uk ahead of japan. Japan is usually not contested in the games I play. Only stalled. SO the challenge is of course, getting optimal number of ground troops in position on Mocosw as early as possible.
Logged
ncscswitch
Guest
« Reply #20 on: June 18, 2008, 04:20:31 pm »
0

Or you can try the Passive/Aggressive Russia...

Belo and WR on R1 with mostly INF plus 1 ART, 1 ARM on R1.
Logged
Cmdr Jennifer
Site Moderator
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*
*
*
*
*
*******
Posts: 48269


League and Tournament Moderator


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: June 18, 2008, 04:28:49 pm »
0

If you turtle up in W. Russia you are primed to hit Karelia, Belorussia and Ukraine on Russia 2.  Assuming Japan hit China and just about nothing else, that should give Russia 31 IPC on R2.  By R3 or R4 you should be stacked heavy in Ukraine trading Balkans, Belorussia and E. Europe with Germany which should be more than enough to break the 34 IPC mark, assuming England is landing in Karelia/Archangelsk and America in Algeria this should be a short game for Germany.  Dice permitting.


Anyway, yes, it is nice to take out 17% of the German fighter squadrons on Russia 1.  However, you are losing 3 tanks and an artillery unit to do it in most games.  (Lost in the counter attack if not on the attack.)  This is just unacceptable to me.  Why would I sacrifice 19 IPC in good units for 10 IPC of German fighters?  (Assuming that is your goal.) 

Better, in my mind, is to have W. Russia stacked to the gills, make Germany play conservatively.  Sure, he has 6 fighters and a bomber.  Honestly, my Germany usually has 6 fighters or 7 fighters and 2 bombers on Germany 2 anyway. (Depends on if I lost the fighter in Ukraine or not.)  So killing one is not going to break Germany's back. 

However, leaving yourself stretched on the front lines AND losing significant units on Russia 1 will break Russia's back.  W. Russia and Ukraine can go badly very easily leaving Russia in the lurch and the allies pulling all the stops in recklase maneuvers in a hope of breaking Germany before Russia breaks.   It can also go very well, but the odds of it going badly seem to drastically out weigh the odds of going really well.

For instance, if you attack W. Russia with 5 Infantry, Artillery, Armor you have a good chance of seeing only 1 infantry, 1 artillery and 1 armor left!  (Most likely result according to frood.)  Sure, you COULD get it without loss, but the odds are much lower.

If you attack Ukraine with 3 Infantry, Artillery, 3 Armor, 2 Fighters your odds are significantly better, but still not bulletproof.  Odds are you will be reduced to three armor, 2 fighters.


Okay, so you make both attacks, you have lost 8 infantry and an artillery in the ATTACK.  That's 28 IPC, more than you earned in your opening pay check.  But that's not the entire story!  Now Germany is going to take out that other Artillery piece and all four of your tanks!  You now only have 2 fighters for offensive units!!!  Total cost in units to Russia: 52 IPC more than BOTH your starting pay and your first round's income combined!  Cost to Germany?  Probably about the same, except, Germany earns 42 on round 1 + 40 for starting pay so can afford it!




Compare that to W. Russia:  You attack with 11 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 4 Armor, 2 Fighters and probably win with 9 infantry, 2 artillery, 4 armor, 2 fighters.  Cost you 6 IPC, cost Germany 18 IPC + Germany will NEVER get that land back on Germany 1.  Move an AA Gun if you want more security, otherwise just garrison Caucasus with one infantry, leave one infantry in Karelia and build up troops.  I've even done the Artillery, 4 Armor purchase on Russia 1 with this opening because that gives you an insane offensive punch on Russia 2, insane enough to make Germany think twice before squandering resources by being overly aggressive, which is what Russia wants to do, IMHO.  A hesitant, restricted Germany, is a Germany that will fall faster.

Okay, so you miss out on killing the fighter in Ukraine.  But you also saved yourself 2 artillery, 4 armor you would have lost.  Sure, Germany takes Karelia, Caucasus and Egypt.  Yes, they have a 48 IPC income for a round.  However, you can take Ukraine, Belorussia and Caucasus (the latter iwth tanks, the former two with fighters) while England liberates Karelia.  So it is only a temporary loss, and, as I mentioned before, on Russia 2 you are not buying more than 8 units anyway.  odds are you are buying 7 infantry, armor with that 26 IPC income, but no matter what, you cannot buy more than 8 units iwth 26 IPC!  So what skin is it off your back to let Germany take Cuacasus (and hopefully lose some valuable units in the attack) for a round?
Logged
Hobbes
A&A.org Destroyer
*****
Posts: 1649


"When Germany gets shy, Russia gets kinky"


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: June 18, 2008, 05:12:37 pm »
0

And USSR is definitely ˝the easiest˝ nation to play with.

Completely disagree with that one: Russia/USSR is the more demanding nation to play with.


Anyway, yes, it is nice to take out 17% of the German fighter squadrons on Russia 1.  However, you are losing 3 tanks and an artillery unit to do it in most games.  (Lost in the counter attack if not on the attack.)  This is just unacceptable to me.  Why would I sacrifice 19 IPC in good units for 10 IPC of German fighters?  (Assuming that is your goal.) 

Jennifer, your entire argument has a point but it also has a few things you didn't mention:

The math isn't like that: G has a starting total on Ukr of 9+4+5+10= 28. R uses 9+4+15=28 on the attack, plus any surviving units have a chance of taking out at least 1 inf on the G counterattack. Add to that the 9+4+5=18 that G loses on WR and you've just gave G a combined loss of 46 to your 40 (assuming 4 inf losses on WR, attacking with 9 INF, 1 ART, 1 ARM, about 80% odds you'll get that or better) on R1, plus G will not receive the 48 from Caucasus. And on the Ukr attack you'll have a 10% odd of not conquering the territory and a 3.4% odd that any G forces will survive the attack.

When you presented the WR attack (combined with the Ukr one) you mentioned only 5 INF, 1 ART, 1 ARM attacking? What would you do with the remaining 4 russian INF that can reach WR? Keep them in Karelia?
I'm asking because if R has 5 inf, 1 art, 1 arm left there, then it is very unlikely G will try to counterattack it with 3 inf, 1 arm + airforce (especially if R moves the AAGun to WR). They can try it and yes they can succeed but that will mean G will not make other attacks.
Logged
ncscswitch
Guest
« Reply #23 on: June 18, 2008, 05:36:45 pm »
0

If you do WR/UKR, you send MAXIMUM forces to both territories, starting with everything that can reach Ukraine going there, then everything that is left that can reach WR going there.

The only caveat to that is whether or not you keep a Blitz Blocker INF as Russia in either Karelia or Archangel.

That puts 8 INF, 1 ART, 1 ARM against WR (odds are to take with loss of 3 INF)
and 3 INF, 1 ART, 3 ARM, 2 FIG against Ukraine (odds are to take with 3 ARM, 2 FIG)

USSR loses $37 IPC (counting the loss of the 3 ARM on the G1 counter in Ukraine)
Germany loses $42 (counting ONLY the R1 combat losses and NO G1 counter losses).

If the Allied strat allows for Russia to trade even with Germany, this is a good trade.  But in most cases, Russia has to trade about 25% better with Germany for the Allies to remain strong in the early game (Germany loses 2 INF in the Ukraine re-take would meet this need)
Logged
Cmdr Jennifer
Site Moderator
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*
*
*
*
*
*******
Posts: 48269


League and Tournament Moderator


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: June 18, 2008, 05:46:47 pm »
0

I only referenced the fighter because that seemed to be the only thing people wanted to do - kill a German fighter.


You lose as much as you gain in the attack which is a FAR worse situation for Russia than for Germany.  I still hold that it is FAR better to have those 3 armor in Russia 2 than it is for Germany to have that Fighter.  Especially since Germany can easily afford a solitary fighter and still earn more than the Russians, but Russia cannot afford the three armor and even hope to earn as much as Germany.
Logged
ncscswitch
Guest
« Reply #25 on: June 18, 2008, 06:28:40 pm »
0

You do NOT kill as much as you gain.

If the R1 rolls are AVERAGE, and the USSR hits just a single unit on defense in Ukraine, the Russians are +15% on unit value in the trade.
Logged
axis_roll
A&A.org Battleship
******
Posts: 4462


Spring 2008 Singles champion (Gold medalist)


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: June 19, 2008, 04:03:35 am »
0

How to play Russia is not as simple as:
Do this buy, attacks and moves on R1, do this buy, attacks and moves on R2, etc.

You have to play with a team goal as the allies.

Are you playing KGF?  Might you look to pressure Japan instead?  Will you be balanced?

On top of those questions, you need to look at how the battles have gone.  If Russia rolls poorly on R1, you need to hope for some help from your allies or they might just be overrun by Germany.

Many times, it comes down to personal preference.  For example, most Allied players will agree that a KGF mentality (especially early game) is the optimal strategy.  This usually employs Russia tying up German units in an effort to bleed Germany dry whilest UK and US mount forces to pressure the western front as early and strong as possible.  In this case, a more agressive Russia is preferred, with combat moves and purchases bent on this thinking.

This is not to say that a KGF can not be done with a passive approach of 8 inf purchases.  Again, the comfort level of risks in battles determines a players approach.  Unlike the Axis, Russia CAN be agressive but does not HAVE to be agressive if they don't want to be.

What you'll see here are arguments that back player preferences.  When you get the expected dice rolls, everything is good.  A more conservative Russia adds some cushion to that dice tolerance.  Also, as the allies, conservative play is usually the order of the day:  it is alot easier to defend in this game than attack.

If you are having trouble getting smashed when playing Russia, I would suggest a conservative, inf based mode of thinking.  When Germany starts to close in, pump up the art to ward them off.  The tricky part comes into play when the Japanese start to join the party Smiley
Logged
kfgolfer
A&A.org Mechanized Infantry
**
Posts: 35


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: June 19, 2008, 07:30:56 am »
0

i just dont see how Russia could "bleed Germany dry"??  russia has very little money and German has a lot!!  Germany keeps buying tanks and simply runs over russia Inf at will too quickly... Russia can only defend itself for a short time and where does the allied help come from?  a D-day invasion?  UK air raids?  I know I am a rookie at this game, but it always seems russia can't hang on long enough to Allied help.. never happens when My opponent loves buying Tanks for Germany and steemrolls over russia almost every time..
Logged
Cmdr Jennifer
Site Moderator
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*
*
*
*
*
*******
Posts: 48269


League and Tournament Moderator


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: June 19, 2008, 08:33:12 am »
0

The trick is to defray the cost of bleeding Germany across the three allies, primarily Russia and England at the start of the game, England and America at the end.


In my scenario above, Russia trades Belorussia and Ukraine (4 Infantry, 2 Fighters loss of 12 IPC a round) and England take Karelia (2 Infantry, Battleship, Fighter, cost 6 IPC.)

Germany has to retalliate (or not take it back) with 6 Infantry, 3 Fighters cost of 18 IPC.

Note, I am assuming that each territory is taken with 1 infantry, 1 fighter each round, a safe assumption I feel.


-18 IPC to Germany hurts Germany more than -12 to Russia and -6 to England.  Sure, Germany probably has 20 IPC of builds on top of what they are losing, and Russia only 12 and England only 15, but that's still 27 Allies, 20 Axis (note I am ignoring both America and Japan here because Japan needs more than two or three rounds to be a threat to Russia and America the same against Germany.)
Logged
axis_roll
A&A.org Battleship
******
Posts: 4462


Spring 2008 Singles champion (Gold medalist)


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: June 19, 2008, 09:30:53 am »
0

i just dont see how Russia could "bleed Germany dry"??  russia has very little money and German has a lot!!  Germany keeps buying tanks and simply runs over russia Inf at will too quickly... Russia can only defend itself for a short time and where does the allied help come from?  a D-day invasion?  UK air raids?  I know I am a rookie at this game, but it always seems russia can't hang on long enough to Allied help.. never happens when My opponent loves buying Tanks for Germany and steemrolls over russia almost every time..
Jen has it right.

The western allies should be dropping as many units as quickly as possible into western europe (or elsewhere in europe) to make Germany fight THERE as well as with Russia.  Germany can not keep throwing units against all three allies for very long, expecially if all they buy is tanks... hence the bleeding dry of the vermach.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

2017 Support Drive

Read about this support drive.
Support Level
Forum Username
Note: payee will appear as Livid Labs, LLC.
Buy Axis & Allies
  • Axis & Allies 1942 [Amazon]
  • A&A Pacific 1940 [Amazon]
  • A&A Europe 1940 [FMG]
  • [eBay]
  • [eBay]
  • A&A D-Day [Amazon]
  • A&A Battle of the Bulge [Amazon]
  • [eBay]
  • [eBay]
  • WWII Themed Combat Dice [FMG]



Axis and Allies.org Official Gold Sponsor: Historical Board Gaming

Axis & Allies.org Official Silver Sponsor: Field Marchal Games
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP © 2015 Livid Labs, LLC. All rights reserved.
Axis & Allies is registered trademark of Wizards of the Coast, a division of Hasbro, Inc.
Note: the copyright below is for the forum software only.
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!