@SS-GEN thanks!
What should Russia do?
-
I am new to axis and allies and i want to know whats good with russia?
Only about 10-15 games under my belt.
What do you all do when you play as them?
i have ideas that i work with but they never seems to play out just right. -
Buy mostly inf with a couple tanks. If you just buy inf, you’ll never be able to counter attack. Outisde of that you’re really just trying to hold off the Nazis. Try to control Ukraine and West Russia if at all possible for buffers, and concentrate your forces in the east.
Hope the Allies can help in the west, and Japan doesn’t get too strong in the east.Some general stuff. I’m sure someone will give you much more detail than I have.
-
Try to survive!
-
Punch and hide.
-
-
Shock and awe!!!
-
That’s actually what Germany did.
-
@Col.:
That’s actually what Germany did.
For the first half of the war, yes. Then it was punch and hold.
-
True.
All I was getting at is Shock and Awe is an American term for Blitzkrieg. -
I think the goal as everyone said is to stay alive long enough for UK/US to take Germany.
The main strategy towards that is to buy mostly inf and 1 or 2 tanks every turn to help trade territories with Germany and eventually Japan.Some basic tactics:
Always take and keep West Russia on R1; it is such an important territory since it has access to all the surrounding territories and by stacking your units there you’re always ready to push back any German advance.
Also on R1, take Ukraine or Norway. Norway is good because it saves the british navy; while Ukraine is good because you crush a good amount of German units hurting their advance to Caucasus and it is a safer attack than Norway.
After that just keep trading Ukraine, Karelia, Belorussia as possible.
Once Japan gets close, you need to try to crush their troops as well but by then you should have reinforcements from UK.Hope that helps!
-
After a few online games with some formidable players (like Zukhov44) I am deeply troubled on my US pacific strat and in particular whether Russia can be saved.
The thing is that even if Germany is thrown off Africa, without US help Russia will be hard to survive, if at all.One prerequisite for this to happen is the survival of the British BB, and the only way to do this is a R1 NOR attack. Of course this means that R will loose at least one ftr (or even both…) and that russian troops will be scatered instead of consentrated in WR.
My question is, 1) what is the best buy for an aggressive R game? 3 inf 3 arm? 2) what are the chances for a R1 UKR and NOR attack to succeed and what will be the consequenses of a failure? Can R recover from it? and 3) Even if a NOR and UKR attack is successfull what are the consequenses of leaving WR in G hands (since the numbers are really bad for a triple UKR, NOR and WR attack)?
To make a long story short, is a R1 combined UKR,NOR and WR attack a good idea?
-
My question is, 1) what is the best buy for an aggressive R game? 3 inf 3 arm? 2) what are the chances for a R1 UKR and NOR attack to succeed and what will be the consequenses of a failure? Can R recover from it? and 3) Even if a NOR and UKR attack is successfull what are the consequenses of leaving WR in G hands (since the numbers are really bad for a triple UKR, NOR and WR attack)?
To make a long story short, is a R1 combined UKR,NOR and WR attack a good idea?
Looks like a bad idea. Even if all 3 attacks are successful G can counter them all and losing WR on G1 hurts the Russians in income (-4 from not contesting Karelia/BR). Plus, the Russians will be down in units to the 6 inf from Asia plus their R1 production.
My usual buy is 3 arm, 3 inf because I really like to have an armor stack to switch between both Asian/European fronts.
Just an Ukr/Nor attack might be also a bad idea. G might simply retake Ukr and stack WR with all land units available and fighters, forcing Russia to make a very risky attack or pull back from the Caucasus on R2. And if 1 or both attacks fail and Germany buys 5 inf, 5 arm then the Russians are in deep trouble.
-
I saw the R1 Norway attack played against me on my last 2 games (with Low Luck though). On the first one it was a Nor+WR attack, the second a Nor+Ukr+WR, both succeeded in killing the German fighter.
On the first one I took back WR and Ukr and simply bought 2 bombers, which gave me an airforce of 5 ftrs (no losses on turn 1), 3 bombers and 3 subs, which was well enough to keep the UK at bay, while building a force that eventually took Moscow on G5 due to luck (he was trying to retake WR and lost giving me a path wide open).
On the 2nd one, I merely bought 5 inf, 5 arm for G, retook Ukr and massed everything on Karelia. Meanwhile the US decided to take advantage of Japanese bad dice (lost a BB against the UK carrier) but the Germans got strong enough to prevent any UK foothold in Europe and were gathering strength and were about to move to WR. But he gave up after the US fleet got sunk off Borneo on J5 or 6.
-
Hmm while I consider Nor/WR wildly risky in dice it might not be bad play in a low luck game, as a live UK fleet could make a big difference. I suppose that in a low luck attack on WR, the most R is gonna lose is about 3 inf, and that’s probably not enough of a loss to justify a G1 WR counter.
The primary reasons I’ve been reluctant to try it and have stuck with UK/WR
- G retakes Nor with the tpt.
- R is likely to lose at least 1 fig and whatever air is left will be far away from the Med fleet.
- G gets the Cau walk-in (or kills the 4-6 units there with the ukr units and supporting armor) and G may be able to pressure R early via Ukr stacks.
- G has an extra fig, and gets to use an extra bomber in Egypt…this eliminates the need for risks on G1.
- G still gets to choose b/w the free Uk trn or a 50/50 shot at the American fleet with its ss.
This debate deserves plenty more analysis, but superficially the trade-offs don’t seem attractive imho.
-
Well, while I completely agree it all deserves more analyzes, i have just a few points to make now as an advocate of Norwegian gambit:
- G retakes Nor with the tpt.
It is not that easy. The usual outcome is that russia takes norway with an inf and a tnk. You cannot take that out just with a tpt, you have to send at least one fig too. And that fig cannot be used elsewhere.
- R is likely to lose at least 1 fig and whatever air is left will be far away from the Med fleet.
Russia will never lose more then one fig, unless the things go completely wrong. You can always take the russia bound fig on retreat. The Med fleet has to be dealt with by UK or US, that is an obvious trade.
- G gets the Cau walk-in (or kills the 4-6 units there with the ukr units and supporting armor) and G may be able to pressure R early via Ukr stacks.
Correct, but not that easy. On contrary Germany might get itself into a trouble soon, with UK and US starting to pressure effectively R3. But if Germany is to get under pressure, it would only happen with an aggressive russia.
- G has an extra fig, and gets to use an extra bomber in Egypt…this eliminates the need for risks on G1.
You do not have an extra fig – you have lost one in Norway, and you will need at least one of your existing figs to take it back. If you send fig to norway, bomber and a fig to AE, you have three figs to deal with SZ8, just like after standard WR UKR R R1 attack.
If you try to take west russia R1 than things get even much trickier for germany. you can do it, and honestly I fing myslef in gretaest trouble against opponents who do try, but you still have great sacrifices to make: no AE, no Norway, maybe no Karelia, maybe no SZ 8. With any single plane asigned to another mission the likelihood gets lower.
- G still gets to choose b/w the free Uk trn or a 50/50 shot at the American fleet with its ss.
Which is true anyway, only that the choices are broader for the UK BB and tpn in the standard UKR WR R R1. And this is the only choice i really do not want the germans to have.
-
If you try to take west russia R1 than things get even much trickier for germany. you can do it, and honestly I fing myslef in gretaest trouble against opponents who do try, but you still have great sacrifices to make: no AE, no Norway, maybe no Karelia, maybe no SZ 8. With any single plane asigned to another mission the likelihood gets lower.
Germany only needs 1 ftr to try the AE attack. Unless the 2nd ftr survives (which it shouldn’t, in order to get the 1 inf + 1 arm on Norway) any Russian units moved to Karelia didn’t participate on the WR attack and won’t help on its defense either. Plus, Germans can always use the 2 inf on E. Eur and 2 arm from G to attack Karelia.
Bring the 9 inf + 1 art+ 3 arm to WR and the Russians should lose 2 inf, giving them enough to stand against a German counterattack but ceding Caucasus to G. Bring less and risk the survivors being destroyed, plus G making a big armor buy on G1 that will allow them to stack Karelia and retake Norway later.
-
Really interesting posts.
The bottomline I am getting is that R1 NOR is a great plus for the UK, but an even greater minus for Russia.
Are there any other ways for Russia to prevent the G1 kill of UK’s BB (besides sending the SS to join as fodder)? Can the UKR ftr destruction really prevent a risky G player from dedicating the bmb to the BB kill? I doubt it. Nevertheless, imho there is no way to initiate a US pasific strat without that BB surviving G1.
-
Are there any other ways for Russia to prevent the G1 kill of UK’s BB (besides sending the SS to join as fodder)? Can the UKR ftr destruction really prevent a risky G player from dedicating the bmb to the BB kill? I doubt it.
My regular opening for Germany assumes that the Ukr fighter will be destroyed and I try to take out both Egypt and SZ2. It is not risky: Egypt with 2 inf, 2 arm and 1 ftr is 88.5% odds, SZ2 90% for sinking both the BB and the transport. The odds of both attacks being victorious are lower but I don’t think that much.
Nevertheless, imho there is no way to initiate a US pasific strat without that BB surviving G1.
I’m kinda divided on that one. It really depends on Germany’s purchases and how many air/naval units it loses. If G can prevent the UK from building the AC + 2 DD buy then going Pacific will be suicidal.
-
I saw an interesting R1 play last night that I’ve never seen done or discussed. He did not attack with 1 of his fighters, but moved it to Egypt after combat. I was actually happy to see it done (he couldn’t use it offensively and now I have an opportunity to kill one of his two knights).
Standard Egpyt odds: [89.7% Attacker, 9 IPCs lost]
Germany: 2 inf, 2 tank, 1 fgt
UK: 1 inf, 1 tank, 1 fgtwith the additional fighter: [52.6% Attacker, 8.7% Tie, 18IPCs lost]
What do you all think about that? In our game, I took the territory with 1 tank (kept my fighter as well), he than countered on UK1 and basically kept Africa afterwards. I think I’d salivate as the Axis every time someone did that, but if they sometimes keep their fighter, the territory, and at least weaken G enough for an easy recapture and hold, maybe I’m kidding myself.
-
That fig to egy move is devastating when it works. If Germany doesn’t take Egypt, then UK gets the ez fleet kill on UK2. It’s an interesting gamble, but it has potential to go wrong if Ukr doesn’t go Russia’s way or if Germany gets a lucky roll in Egy.
It certainly stretches Germany out and forces them to take tons of risks or omit a major battle like SZ2.
Suggested Topics
