• Ok, So I can only presume that when Russia declares on Japan on R1 that Korea is a gonner to 3 or 4 Inf. Which by the way puts pressure on Japan to retake it, as well as all the other directives they have for J1. Maybe some Tank/Mech combos heading east??? A plane or two?…
    Any Russian strats out there?
    AC


  • Not too much pressure. Plenty forces to retake it, especially since there’s no J1 attack


  • Understood, So is it J3 attack Cal….?


  • @Axis:

    Understood, So is it J3 attack Cal….?

    Depends, but if Russia stacks Amur with 18 inf, I will take them out


  • Unless the Japanese player is brand new and doesn’t understand grand strategy Russia will be praying that Japan stays on its side of the border. A bold Russian in the Soviet Far East (area not single territory) is a dead Russian…


  • Don’t Forget Russia won’t even see those three IPCs as there is a “small” japanese navy in that sea zone that has a convoy raid marker in it.

    :x


  • i like to send a few mech inf and tanks to china once the war starts.  helps keep the burma road open, and japan from getting to frisky with china.  i also back the 18 russian inf up a few spaces till i can get a few tanks or air support for the siberian route.

  • '10

    @Axis:

    Ok, So I can only presume that when Russia declares on Japan on R1 that Korea is a gonner to 3 or 4 Inf. Which by the way puts pressure on Japan to retake it, as well as all the other directives they have for J1. Maybe some Tank/Mech combos heading east??? A plane or two?…
    Any Russian strats out there?
    AC

    Attack on Manchuria on R1 ?? Impossible! If the russians concentrate in Armur, they will be kicked…

    Russia don’t need much troops to secure the chinese border. A few infantries, cause china keep the money and can build in every territory.


  • I have been toying with the idea of a R1 attack on Korea with 5inf from Amur, leaving 1 there, and retreating the other 12 to Yakut or something, where it can meet up with some offensive units and start counter attacking.

    This way I keep some of the defensive force, but still hold Japan up for a turn, and possibly, if the Japanese player actually falls for it, get them to wast a few units chasing after me in Siberia (region not actual tt)

  • '10

    As the japanese player I want to reduce the pressure on germany as soon as possible by cutting of the soviet far east income.

    Planed an attack on J1 with all Manchurian troops and 1 tank, 1 art, 2 inf from Japan.

    If you seperate the russian troops it’s more easier to beat them. (…blitzing through siberia)

    Don’t know if it’s worth to get the 3 IPCs for Korea… :?

    My idea is, to use the higher russian startig income to buy a tac-bomber and fly a figther or figther/tac bomber from Leninrad to the Far east. This is an option to strike back on R2 or R3, or just secure the russian backdoor.


  • @marechallannes:

    My idea is, to use the higher russian startig income to buy a tac-bomber and fly a figther or figther/tac bomber from Leninrad to the Far east. This is an option to strike back on R2 or R3, or just secure the russian backdoor.

    I’ve done this too (FIG+TB) and it indeed helps the Siberian troops alot in holding off the Japanese (for a bit)


  • I like the idea of attacking Korea as the Soviets because its an easy win, for an extra 3ipc gain, and it forces the Japanese to react, keeping them out of position for turn 1. You could bunch yourself up in amur, but Japan seems to be able to destroy infantry stacks with their horde of planes fairly easy, plus with their naval bombardment, it really hurts a Russian defence. I would leave the 1 guy behind in amur just to keep Japan from blitzing through and hitting my stack of 12 further inland. Either way its kind of a lousy situation for both nations to begin at


  • @Clyde85:

    I like the idea of attacking Korea as the Soviets because its an easy win, for an extra 3ipc gain, and it forces the Japanese to react, keeping them out of position for turn 1. You could bunch yourself up in amur, but Japan seems to be able to destroy infantry stacks with their horde of planes fairly easy, plus with their naval bombardment, it really hurts a Russian defence. I would leave the 1 guy behind in amur just to keep Japan from blitzing through and hitting my stack of 12 further inland. Either way its kind of a lousy situation for both nations to begin at

    1. Japan can’t blitz thru Amur since it has no tanks
    2. Japanese fleet in Z6 raids Korea’s convoy so you don’t get the 3 ipcs.


  • @calvinhobbesliker:

    1. Japan can’t blitz thru Amur since it has no tanks

    Thats right I forgot the Mech cant blitz without the tank, however I think leaving the one guy behind will be to tempting for a Japanese player not to take, and screen the other 12 retreat into the hinterlands

    @calvinhobbesliker:

    2. Japanese fleet in Z6 raids Korea’s convoy so you don’t get the 3 ipcs.

    Seriously? why wouldnt you just retake Korea? This dosnt make much sense, why would you waste you naval forces raiding convoys? That and Japan would be down by 3ipc as well, I dont really see the logic behind this?


  • @Clyde85:

    Seriously? why wouldnt you just retake Korea? This dosnt make much sense, why would you waste you naval forces raiding convoys? That and Japan would be down by 3ipc as well, I dont really see the logic behind this?

    Russia can take and retake Korea all she wants, but if Japan has any fleet builds or any homefleet in sz6, Russia will probably never see an increase of 3 income.  If Japan builds two subs on her turn, those ships will still be there on Russias turn.  It’s not a waste of naval forces as the convoy disruption occurs on Russias turn.  They’re just waiting there.  And if Russia is threatening their territories, you can bet that some Japanese navy will be accompanying the transports who will be dropping units on Russias head.  So yes, Japan will be down three at the beginning of her turn, but early in the game she can fairly easily take back and have at the end of her turn.  Russia could only pick up the 3 if they attacked after Japan had moved the home fleet out, which would be R2 or later.  But japan doesn’t exactly NEED to move everything that early and could afford to leave a sub or two if they aren’t attacking the UK/Anzac/US until J3.

    Chances are Russia will probably never see increased income on the pacific side.  On the mainland, she can only make gains from Korea or god help her, Siam or FIC (assuming France is gone).  Everything else goes to Britain or China.  Two subs or a sub and destroyer would clip Korea completely, so all russia is doing is sacrificing infantry that can’t even pay for themselves.  Russian territories aren’t worth much for Japan, but Japanese territories aren’t worth ANYTHING to Russia.


  • Ok, no, I understand the convoy disruption and how it functions, but im pretty sure the ships are put “on station” on the owning players turn, so Japan would take the 3 dollars from Russia on Japans turn, either way Russia wouldnt get to the spend the money so it dosnt matter.

    However I dont understand why you wouldt just retake Korea? Like whats the benifit to Japan in letting Russia keep troops in Korea?


  • @Clyde85:

    Ok, no, I understand the convoy disruption and how it functions, but im pretty sure the ships are put “on station” on the owning players turn, so Japan would take the 3 dollars from Russia on Japans turn, either way Russia wouldnt get to the spend the money so it dosnt matter.

    However I dont understand why you wouldt just retake Korea? Like whats the benifit to Japan in letting Russia keep troops in Korea?

    I don’t think you understand.  There is no “on station” and Japan doesn’t disrupt Russia’s income on Japan’s turn.

    Convoy disruption occurs when a power collects income.  At that point, you check territories that have adjacent convoy markers, and if there are enemy ships, you deduct that from your total territory IPC income.  You do not check to see if you deduct from another players income and you do not need to assign units to be “on station”.  If Russia captures Korea, during Russia’s collect income phase, Russia checks to see if any warship belonging to an hostile power is in SZ6.  Considering that’s Japan’s home seazone, it’s unlikely Russia will ever collect those 3 IPCs.

    The game no longer has any rule where IPCs are taken away from any player EXCEPT for capitol capture.  It’s simply not collected in the first place.  And it does matter.  It’s kind of important for Germany to note if they want to capture the UK, but not reduce the income of the UK before hand (through convoy disruption on UK’s turn).

    And Japan absolutely WOULD retake Korea.  No one said they wouldn’t.  However, considering that Russia never profits from their aggression, it’s not exactly bad news for Japan if Russia to attacks Korea, because it thins Russia down on a distant front for no economic gain.  So, if Japan trades Korea, eventually the Russian east front is so weak that Japan can simply crush the rest and move full on through the east towards Moscow.  And Russia netted nothing (economically) and probably lost a disproportionate number of units because Japan can pummel a stack of infantry with their airforce and bombardment advantage.  That said, it does SLOW Japan and that may be worth it, as long as it doesn’t make Russia so weak that Japan can just move into Siberia with minimal investment

    Baiting Russia to take Korea means that Japan can easily smite them.  Japan almost WANTS it to occur; at the very most it’s something they (most likely) easily take back.  What Japan doesn’t really want is to press into Russia and THEN hit the stack, as their airforce can’t get back to the action easily and their navy can’t help at all.  Russia keeping infantry on a coast is always a dangerous gamble.

    If Russia is used aggressively it’s probably more useful liberating Manchuria (obviously R2 or later) for China than ever bothering with Korea.  At least with Manchuria, China MIGHT get the income (not the home seazone) or maybe even place units there, while slowing Japan down and keeping China alive a bit longer.


  • Without the rule book in front of me, I cant really debate you on the specifics of the convoy disruption rule, but that dosnt sound right to me, its not how I remember it, but without the source material in front of me, I really dont know.

    @calvinhobbesliker:

    1. Japan can’t blitz thru Amur since it has no tanks
    2. Japanese fleet in Z6 raids Korea’s convoy so you don’t get the 3 ipcs.

    No mention is made of Japan retaking Korea, which is where my question is directed at.

    If Russia just bunches up in Amur, they’re dead. A standard J1 opener seems to be hit them with everything in the area and take 'em out. Seeing as Japan has a staggering amound of airpower, and its Naval bombardment, its not a bad move and numerious post have said its Japans best option. I see Russia’s best option with these forces is to just be annoying, as they’re pretty much dead sooner or later anyway. I would say its worth it to attack Korea, just to misdirect Japanese forces away from the Central Pacific and Souther-East Asian fronts, which are where they need to focus to win. Retreating into the hinterlands create the very situation you describe, where Japan is drawn inland and its reenforcments arent able to reach the front quick enough. As it causes Japan to send forces in the total wrong direction, to me, it seems a worth while move, as any Japanese unit playing whack-a-mole in Siberia against the Soviets is a Japanese unit not fighting in India, or the DEI or Australia, or Hawaii, the places in the Pacific Japan needs to win the game.


  • @Clyde85:

    @calvinhobbesliker:

    1. Japan can’t blitz thru Amur since it has no tanks
    2. Japanese fleet in Z6 raids Korea’s convoy so you don’t get the 3 ipcs.

    No mention is made of Japan retaking Korea, which is where my question is directed at.

    Ah.  Well, I don’t think he was saying that Japan WOULDN’T take back Korea.  He was saying that on Russia’s turn, it wouldn’t collect Korea’s income in the first place because you said:

    @Clyde85:

    I like the idea of attacking Korea as the Soviets because its an easy win, for an extra 3ipc gain

    To confirm that disruption occurs during the collect income phase as I described it, I direct you to the following post by Krieghund in the Europe 1940 threads:

    @Tava716:

    So, sea zone 72 starts out the game with a French destroyer in it.  on round one, I (Italy) moved into Kenya… do I not collect the 1 IPC point due to the destroyer being in a convoy disruption zone?  The arguement in my group is that I should collect because France has not done a turn yet… I think I lose it though…

    @Krieghund:

    Welcome, Tava716!

    France and Italy begin the game at war, so you lose the IPC.


  • Well thats fair enough, I’ll re-read the rule when I have the rule book in-front of me just to refresh my memory.

    Alot of this depends on the individual player, as certian players might just ignore the Soviet movements all together, or only make a limited advance. Others, however, like to play very agressively, and cant help themselves and would just dive al out into Russia. This plan works best against those kind of players, while a more conservitive player might not be greatly bothered by it.

Suggested Topics

  • 2
  • 38
  • 14
  • 50
  • 4
  • 8
  • 19
  • 4
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

34

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts