Yes, Karelia is adjacent to the Baltic Sea.
Winning strat for Germany
-
No, I was talking about the 1st (stalled) Soviet offensive designed to push the Germans out of the Crimea and break the siege of Leningrad. I’m pretty sure it was Spring 1942. After disposing of this threat, the Germans advanced all the way to the Caucasus oil fields before being decisively defeated at Stalingrad. I’m pretty sure the Soviets launched a major offensive 1st after the winter of 41-42, setting the Germans back several months. Someone correct me if I’m mistaken…
Ozone27
-
Actually, there was a major German offensive in the Winter of 1941, so you might be right. But I’m not sure how long it lasted onto the Spring and the German offensive in Crimea began in May. And when exactly in “Spring” does A&A start in?
-
Okay, sorry guys. I must be really amature! It seemed cool to me anyway! The sheer mass of forces that Germany can pile into Karelia would be formidable though, and Russia doesn’t have much of an economy to couner attack. What do you think? I just find it ludicrous to sit cowering in Berlin, when you can make an attack that doesn’t involve trtansports!
-
Russia may look like it has a small economy now at 24 IPCs but within the next two turns (with Russia unrestricted) I fully expect it to be at 24+5 (Ukraine, Norway) = 31 IPCs. This can easily match Germany if the player hasn’t gone all out in Africa. That’s why Germany has to wear down the Russian player (hit and run) and wait until Japan can stack striking at Russian territories.
-
the first russian victory of the war was in winter 1941 when germany falied to take moscow becase all there panzers froze up and russian T-34s don’t.
-
nevermind
-
Aside from the history lesson (Because i’m dumb and don’t know any of the facts :smile:
-
I disagree about not being able to take Karelia. It is possible even with the amount of forces I allocated in the first strategy, much less if you did it legally and sent more forces in there! I have done it a million times! It seems to me that you all need to get a little more agressive, and use what you’ve got!
-
Ok lets say russia takes finland (which a lot of people think is a bad idea. They then buy 8 men for karelia plus 4 from russia plus 1 or 2 from karelia. add 2 fighters and you’ve got a very sizable force. I’m not saying that germany CAN’t take karelia T1 but I think it is a very large gamble becuase they will have to throw everything that they’ve got against it. And when you do that, if you lose, the game is already over.
-
I wouldn’t be sure that you would lose by trying to take Kerilia on T1 but you’re making a terribly big risk. But if Germany goes first, it can easily take Kerilia. Look at the odds: 9 inf. and 9 ARM vs. 3 inf., 1 ARM, 1 ftr.
Personally I like Russia restricted. This represents that the Russians have just exhausted their counter offensive in Spring 1942 and are getting ready for the next German offensive in May.
-
It is possible to take Karelia T1, under a wide variety of possible USSR 1st moves. But the problem is that if the USSR player has had an ounce of sense he has heavily built up Karelia AND another adjacent space (usually Caucases and/or Russia–or better, both). In this case you will be so weakened by the attack on Karelia that EVEN IF YOU WIN, you will be powerfully counterrattacked from one or more territories and will have your armor destroyed. Some Germany players counter this by building ALL (or virtually all) ARM the 1st turn, in order to launch a second attack T2, but no matter what you do, you are STILL GAMBLING that you will score better than the Soviets in dice rolls–a LOT better.
Take my advice–if the USSR builds up heavily in INF T1 try attacking Karelia (if you feel you must) and retreating (into Eastern Europe)when you start losing Armor. If you build INF and maintain most of your ARM (augmenting with some new builds) you will have a better effect in the LONG RUN. You hafta make a good showing in Africa and maintain your FTR/BMR force as a “force-in-being”. The ECONOMIC rather than the strictly MILITARY game is the consistent winner. Simple as that…
Ozone27
P.S.: To say the Germans lost the war in Russia because “their tanks froze” is just completely simplistic. The Germans lost largely (and this too is somewhat of a simplification) because they hoped for (and expected–some of them) a short war–one that wouldn’t last until the winter. They were perfectly well-prepared for a short war of annihilation like in France and Poland, and were not expecting–for instance–entire surrounded Soviet armies to keep on fighting practically to the last man…
You sell the Soviets far too short to suggest that “technology” (that is, tanks that can run in sub-zero temperatures) destroyed the German Army. The people of Russia themselves did…
Just my 2 cents…
-
Historically, the allies won
-
I agree with that “people of Russia” thing. Have you seen “enemy at the gates”? Perfect visual example. A massive horde of people who die is very hard to beat. If the enmey has more people than you have bullets, who’s gonna win?
-
when i say the russians won becase the german tanks froze up. i em not talking about the entire war, i em talking about Germany’s faluire to take moscow in the winter of 1941. it was the winter that gave the Russians the atvantige and opertunity to lanch the counter attack and hold off the Germans. had it been good weather and Germans used there full armoered strangth we might all be speaking German right now.
-
I think that the comment that we would all be speaking right now is a bit of an overstatement. UK and USA could still probably beat the Germans (though at much higher time and loses) and we’re assuming that Germany could somehow build an Invasion fleet large enough to reach N. American shores.
As for the winter, it ruined the German offensive war machine. But the fall probably did just as much damage. Imagine have to move all your men, equipment, and vehicles knee deep in mud.
-
Even if it was the middle of summer, there is no way Germany would have “taken” Moscow in 41’. The Russian Guards were already deployed there. Plus, the city itself had mad entrenchments. It would have been a long, drawn out fight for the city that would have gone on a long time.
Supply lines, more than anything else, halted the massive offensive towards Moscow.
-
Yeah, no doubt that the Reds would protect their home city to the death. Well if I was the Germany I would instead completely encircle Russia and lay seige to it like Leningrad. Though Russia wouldn’t have fallen very soon, it would’ve distrupted Russian rail junctions and communications, crippling the Russian nerve center.
-
Siege warfare is an obsolete tactic against a modern city. Look at Leningrad for example; it was under siege for a little less than 900 days and never fell.
-
Anyway, it would have been too costly to put a siege on Moscow.
-
Moscow did nearly fallen in 1941. Stalin did tried boarding on a train in order to escape from Moscow. He stayed, at the last minute and this decision was right. Anyway if it was mid summer and Stalin did decided to hold Moscow, I think Moscow would turn into another Stalingrad, if the Red Army knew how to fight the german just in time.
Suggested Topics
