It’s not allowed.
Russian Fighters
-
Wow, you missed the point. I would rather have the US take out that navy with their starting 3 fig 1 bom rather than have Russia build 3 additional fighters just to take it out.
-
What planet do live on Jennifer, thats the reason I currently use LL more often than ADS. I been screwed too many
Planet TERROR!
(now on DVD!)
-
this poll got me thinking back when i first saw it and i decided to try it out. i have now played 4 or 5 games with R1 purchouse being 2 fighters. i have not regreted it once (ok maybe once when i got too ambisouse on R1 by making two attacks). i think the added punch of 2 fighters can be a big help in the game for Russia. the flexability they give the Russian offence and deffence are great. you can get into a teritory trade with German and not expose your valuable units to counter strikes and also guard your valuable teritories.
the loss of early fire power and fooder is far out waighed by the flex and fire power latter in the game. -
Try Artillery, 2 Armor, Fighter on R1.
-
An added FIG requires added fodder…
3 INF, 1 ARM, 1 FIG.
Without adequate INF fodder, you end up unable to maximize the benefit of the extra FIG(s).
As an alternate…
2 INF, 2 ART, 1 FIG…But that leaves you more confined to Germany and reduces the potential threat to Japan allowing them to advance more quickly with no REAL threat of counters…
-
I was thinking of being frugal for rounds 2 and 3 and building only infantry to supplement the extra fig and armor.
The armor is just really nice as anchors.
-
how much infantry fodder do you need?
what risk level do you take when trading?
for 1-3 inf defending, do you always send the same number of infantry? -
If I buy Russian fighters at all I’ll try to spread the purchase out over a turn or two (read that: save ipcs). Otherwise I always run into the “not enough boots on the ground” syndrome. In theory I’ve tried to justify their outright purchase before by telling myself “yah, but this will ‘pay for itself’ with an extra attack hit here and there and/or allow something last another roll.” But in practice it always seems to come down to the same thing: if I’m not placing at least 7 Russian units a turn I’m seriously short on boots somewhere sooner or later. It’s almost always a shortage in Asia too since Germany is the closer front. If I don’t have the boots to spare to send east they just don’t get sent. So Japan usually likes Russian fighter purchases, Germany not so much. ~ZP
-
Yes, only one, but not on the first turn.
Buy 7 inf, save 3. Attack the standard.
You’ll have 32 the next turn, for 6 inf, an art, and the fighter.
Resume the next turn with standard purchasing.
-
Yes, only one, but not on the first turn.
Buy 7 inf, save 3. Attack the standard.
You’ll have 32 the next turn, for 6 inf, an art, and the fighter.
Resume the next turn with standard purchasing.
(Spock voice)
Illogical. You can buy an eighth infantry that first turn, and move it into position on the second turn. There is nothing to gain by saving 3 IPC.
(Kirk voice)
Or is there? Dun dun dun.
(McCoy voice)
Dammit, Jim, since when do you say “dun dun dun”?
(Kirk voice)
Since I got this new crack pipe lolz!
-
i can see the advantage of 1 and then again 1 latter (R2 or R3) to get more infantry for fodder, but i realy havn’t had much trouble with getting enough boots on the ground most times with Russia. 1 fighter is worth 2 Armor for Russia IMO as Armor don’t tend to last long well fighters do tend to.
i guess it’s all stratagy you use with Russia, i tend to play a vary aggresive Russia against Germany and a more conservative Russia against Japan. -
Lately my attacks have been territory specific. But this is my weird strat year.
3 IPC territory, I send at least 1 more infantry then they have units defending.
2 IPC territory, I send 2 infantry if they have 1 or 2 defending, and 3 infantry +1 for each additional infantry over two. (3 infantry defending = 3 attacking. 4 Infantry defending = 3 infantry attacking. 5 Infantry defending = 4 infantry attacking.)
1 IPC territory, I attack if I can get a tank or if they only have 1 infantry there and then it’s one infantry on attack. (Goal is to kill the defender, not necessarily to take the land.)For that, I need some infantry for trades, but more fighters will trump massive infantry stacks and tanks make good deterants from advancing enemy stacks.
-
@Cmdr:
Lately my attacks have been territory specific. But this is my weird strat year.
3 IPC territory, I send at least 1 more infantry then they have units defending.
2 IPC territory, I send 2 infantry if they have 1 or 2 defending, and 3 infantry +1 for each additional infantry over two. (3 infantry defending = 3 attacking. 4 Infantry defending = 3 infantry attacking. 5 Infantry defending = 4 infantry attacking.)
1 IPC territory, I attack if I can get a tank or if they only have 1 infantry there and then it’s one infantry on attack. (Goal is to kill the defender, not necessarily to take the land.)For that, I need some infantry for trades, but more fighters will trump massive infantry stacks and tanks make good deterants from advancing enemy stacks.
Wouldn’t strategic decisions of taking/killing units override the IPC value of a territory?
In other words, $1 or $2 will NOT win/lose a game for you…… -
@Bunnies:
Yes, only one, but not on the first turn.
Buy 7 inf, save 3. Attack the standard.
You’ll have 32 the next turn, for 6 inf, an art, and the fighter.
Resume the next turn with standard purchasing.
(Spock voice)
Illogical. You can buy an eighth infantry that first turn, and move it into position on the second turn. There is nothing to gain by saving 3 IPC.
(Kirk voice)
Or is there? Dun dun dun.
(McCoy voice)
Dammit, Jim, since when do you say “dun dun dun”?
(Kirk voice)
Since I got this new crack pipe lolz!
Lol, I was tired when I typed that.
-
I have never purchased a Russian fighter, A bomber once but no fighter.
-
@Cmdr:
Lately my attacks have been territory specific. But this is my weird strat year.
3 IPC territory, I send at least 1 more infantry then they have units defending.
2 IPC territory, I send 2 infantry if they have 1 or 2 defending, and 3 infantry +1 for each additional infantry over two. (3 infantry defending = 3 attacking. 4 Infantry defending = 3 infantry attacking. 5 Infantry defending = 4 infantry attacking.)
1 IPC territory, I attack if I can get a tank or if they only have 1 infantry there and then it’s one infantry on attack. (Goal is to kill the defender, not necessarily to take the land.)For that, I need some infantry for trades, but more fighters will trump massive infantry stacks and tanks make good deterants from advancing enemy stacks.
Wouldn’t strategic decisions of taking/killing units override the IPC value of a territory?
In other words, $1 or $2 will NOT win/lose a game for you……Hence why I generally send 1 infantry and a fighter to a 1 IPC territory defended by 1 infantry. Killing the enemy at least denies him position and 3 IPC. But that’s assuming it’s worth it for ME.
-
Where’s the smiley for something that goes right over someone’s head?
We need that one created
-
Whatever the idea is.
:| -
<(–-< ----------------------------------------
:?
-
take the “/” out of the first move, then it will work
edit: well then you got it before i posted :-D
Suggested Topics
