Agressive Russian Strategy

[Linkon]

Tanks moved into dice-roll combat are not allowed to move in non-combat. After you win a dice-roll battle with them, they are required to stay in the newly claimed land.

Attacking the Tr, S in the Baltic w/o ftrs gives you unfavorable odds.

Most players I know would rather bulk up a defensive position rather than attack w/disfavor. It risks opening up favorable counter-attacks by your opponent.

[Guest]

Also the biggest reason to not do the crazy Ivan is that it ends up sacking a couple of russian armor in EE/Ukr just to protect Ukr. In the end the only reason the Germans care about EEuro on G1 is to counter attack Ukr if Russia took it, but if you’ve already killed 1-2 of your armor anyway then who cares if I lost a few inf. I’m still better off than if I counterattacked Ukr(4inf 3arm or 5inf 3arm) with 3inf arm f/EEuro, 2arm f/Germ, and arm f/SEuro.

[DarthMaximus]

I don’t think I’d try this strat just because I don’t think it is needed for Russia to be that aggressive in Round 1 in a non RR or non-bid game.

I do usually play RR and would would consider doing something like that in Round 2 minus the baltic battle of course. Manch would be a tough call in round 2, but if Japan attacked too much in rd 1 it could be open.

I’ll hit Fin, Ukr and Cauc (if taken by Ger), and I’d consider hitting Man if it was left open.

[Jennifer]

I’d rather just jump E.Europe with everything I can (less tanks) and use the Tranny/Sub in baltic.

Once you have E.Euro you cut off Germany and Italy from attacking Karelia and if you have 8 inf, 2 arm, 2 fgt there, the last remnants of the Eastern Front won’t be taking Karelia, at least not on T1.

Also, I like to leave Finland/Norway for the US. After Germany falls it’s going to be left up to the US to take Japan, since they have the most convenient IC for the job. (I also like to leave Algeria and Libya for the US as well, it makes up for the 4 lost in Asia.)

Then again, I tend to give as much to my allies as I can as Russia so they can help out easier. After all, the sooner the USA is dumping 12-20 infantry in Finland and the UK is dumping 6-10, the sooner you can turn your red army on mainland Asia.

[Ashkayel]

U guys dont understand the meaning of the game ; try new strats! If u always do the same moves, its boring.

[DarthMaximus]

I like trying new strats, but I like doing it with Germany and Japan.

The problem with most Allied strats (in a regular game) is no matter what the Allies do they are going to win.

I mean even if this strat fails on 2 or 3 battles the Allies should/could still win the game.

Bids and playing RR, allow you to try new things and put a little pressure on the Allies, thus allowing new Allied (and Axis) strats to emerge.

For example, put an extra German tank and 3 inf in Afr to start, or a few extra German inf in Europe, or Japanese inf in Asia. It opens the game up more and gives the Axis more of a fighting chance. If you do, you’ll see that this overly aggressive Russian turn could be a big loser for the Allies, whereas in a normal game the Allies can still win with it even if Russia loses 3 battles.

[Guest]

Exactly right Max!

[Ashkayel]

No, the first time i used this strat the naval and the manch combats went well, but not the 2 europeans. On the germanys turn he took karelia. Russia was open. Its a strat that gives more chances to germany to win if it goes not the way u wanted.

[Guest]

I disagree just because Germany takes Karelia that doesn’t mean it the game, and especially not if Germany is not able to attack all the Allies navies as a result. The lack of a bid makes it virtually impossible for the Axis to win.

[MuthaRussia]

This is actually my favorite strategy!!!

Good idea!

[DarthMaximus]

No, the first time i used this strat the naval and the manch combats went well, but not the 2 europeans. On the germanys turn he took karelia. Russia was open. Its a strat that gives more chances to germany to win if it goes not the way u wanted.

But why, as Russia, open your self up to this?
The Naval battle is meaningless if the European battles go bad, and so is the Man battle. Like your example shows. Why open the door for Ger and give them the oppurtunity to win?

[MuthaRussia]

@DarthMaximus:

No, the first time i used this strat the naval and the manch combats went well, but not the 2 europeans. On the germanys turn he took karelia. Russia was open. Its a strat that gives more chances to germany to win if it goes not the way u wanted.

But why, as Russia, open your self up to this?
The Naval battle is meaningless if the European battles go bad, and so is the Man battle. Like your example shows. Why open the door for Ger and give them the oppurtunity to win?

Yopu aren’t opening yourself up, you are actually protecting Karelia… :wink:

[Guest]

No you aren’t. In 2nd Edition no RR no bid there is little to no chance Germany can or will attack Karelia on G1. If they do you can manage it so they will have very bad odds against them. At the same time without a bid they will quickly lose Africa, and they will never have the income to leverage against Russia to achieve victory. Max is 100% there is no reason to take any chances on R1 without a bid.

[Jennifer]

I think the worry here is that you’ll fail your attacks in the land battles, not taking the land and not destroying enough enemy forces to prevent Germany from killing your 8 infantry (+2 fighters?) in Karelia leaving you no offensive forces on the west and forcing you to dump into Moscow.

I veiw Russia as a country that must hold it’s borders forcing Germany to build up for at least 2 rounds so that the US can get into the mix. Anything that jeapordizes this, is giving the axis powers more advantage then they should have. (I kind of prefer leaving the axis with 18% chance of winning a normal, 2nd ed. rules game.)

I do like taking E. Euro with Russia (even if I have to put my tanks there) and letting UK or USA take Finland/Norway. (hey, it’s free money, right?)

[Guest]

I prefer to have Russia take FinNor as the extra cash can be godsend in the later stages of the game. Even when they can take Alg/Libya I will try to because Russia with 27-29ipcs is far more powerful than when they have only 21. Although, I think whomever takes FinNor has little bering on deciding the game.

[Jennifer]

I’d say Fin/Nor has almost no bearing at all on the game. But I still prefer USA to have it, it costs 8 ipcs more for the US to join the war then for the Russians and only the US is posed to take out Japan if they don’t just surrender after the fall of Germany.

[Guest]

The problem with this reasoning is that it assumes an endgame scenario, but to first get to this you’d have to beat Germany. So for this reason alone I think you are putting the cart before the horse. I like Russia to have FinNor because it enables them if they have Yakut to make 27ipcs a turn which is very nice. Also, there are times when Germany will be so dug into Europe when it may be necessary for Russia to defeat Japan in Asia for the Allies to win the game. If Russia has 25ipcs, but then adds 7ipcs(Yakut,Sfe,and Manch) they become almost as powerful as Japan without a US campaign in the Pacific. In this scenario I assume that Russia can push Japan back in which case Japan probably loses India which puts them at only 33-36ipcs. Obviously, Russia with even 29ipcs is more than able to keep up with the Japs at this point, and this illustrates the need for the Japs to establish an early position in Asia.

[221B Baker Street]

If Russia has 25ipcs, but then adds 7ipcs(Yakut,Sfe,and Manch) they become almost as powerful as Japan without a US campaign in the Pacific. In this scenario I assume that Russia can push Japan back

And of course some UK/USA troops, tanks and planes could also be sent there to assist via Karelia - Moscow - Novo … 8)

Once Germany cannot pose a threat to Russia (either because of their defeat or because of a long stalemate in forces), its only a matter of time before Allied victory. Unless of course Japan can make the final push for an economic victory. I will sometimes push Japan back in Asia before cracking the German Nut to prevent this from happening.

[APolaris]

Here’s a good question I hadn’t noticed:

Russia can hit Africa on turn 1. To do so they would take their sub and transport, hit the sub on WE sz with them, and if they win, can land either 2 inf or 1 armor in Algeria. Both attacks would be advantaged in some way, as 2 inf would be more likely to win/survive the battle and any counterattacks while the armor, if it survives, can blitz African territory (unless the Germans immediately wipe it out). It is true that most Russian units are required in Europe, and I normally also use the Russian transport to help defend E. Canada sz (the sub hits the sub and a plane hits the Baltic), but I can’t see why 2 Kar infantry hitting Algeria would be any worse than having 3 Kar infantry hitting Finland-Norway (then again, no first-turn attack against Finland-Norway ever made sense to me: it’s not even worth enough IPC’s to buy an extra unit and it doesn’t protect your tanks that much better than Ukraine does). Speaking of which, it could even actually make the Finland attack worthwhile since if Algeria and Finland are both taken, that’s actually worth anything extra.
Of course, if the German sub hits first, you’d just take off the sub and make the transport retreat, and you’d have the unfortunate instance of having to land the 2 infantry in Canada or UK (or Finland if you actually attacked it). I think this move would prove more useful in that variation somebody mentioned about Russians reclaiming Allied territories from the Germans could choose to take the IPCs instead of giving them back to their Ally, as a Russian-controlled Africa could prove simply devastating.

[Guest]

This is a good but risky idea. Note that 2inf versus 1inf is not a slam dunk battle. Most odds calcs list it as ~65% but it was worked less than half of that for me. I would say a better idea would be to attack the BalSz with your tran on R1 and if it survives land in Alg on R2. This can be a very hard to and costly move to counter for the Germans.