Check this link out mate:
Agressive Russian Strategy
-
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?)
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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. -
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.
-
Don’t get me started on the “odds calcs” ugh…I hate players that use them…it adds so much time to the game and takes 80% of the strategy out of it, IMHO.
I kinda like the idea, though a different flavor might be an armor instead of two inf. Though, I don’t think that’ll do much good in the long run since that German infantry isn’t likely to do much more then grab French West Africa and only long enough to give the Germans an extra IP for the round. (Assuming UK can take Libya and US can retake FWA in T1)
I’ve actually grabbed the Armor with Germany and used it in Europe and given up Africa. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt, either way, an extra surviving tank isn’t going to hurt, especially when you have to counter 16 defensive points with your attack.
Finally, my odds calculator is in my mind: All defensive points added vs all attack points added. Common denominator is 6, obviously. If I don’t have at least 2:1 odds, I don’t attack, I prefer 3:1 odds, though I’ve been known to go 3 inf vs 1 inf defender. It’s 3:2, but it almost always wins. (Yea, there’s an exception to every, and I mean EVERY, rule.)
-
I don’t like it.
-
If the German Sub hit and the Russian sub misses, you have to drop troops in England, most likely. That is counter productive.
-
If you make it through the sea battle, your fleet is scrapped because you left it in the open.
-
You also fail to boost the British navy.
-
You leave the German Baltic fleet intact. This not only allows a harder hit against the Brit navy, it allows the Germans to counter in Algeria with the same move you used to take it.
-
The land battle relies on luck since the odds are marginally in your favor. I have found that when I have to rely on luck I will usually fail. If the land attack fails, Germany can sink your fleet and evacuate the Armor from Finland to Algeria.
My suggestion is if you want to try to get Algeria for the Russians, transport 1Inf to Canada, use your sub to hit the Baltic fleet with your fighters, and if your lucky Germany will withdraw from Algeria giving you the walk in on R2. If not you didn’t loose anything you can land your infantry back in Finland after the UK takes it. This is assuming that you build the AC with US fighter support.
Personally, I will probably continue to use the Russian fleet as fodder, either offensively in the Baltic or defensively in the North Sea.
-
-
Re the Baltic attack: I never saw why anybody would ever use the sub and transport for Russia to hit Germany’s. The attack is disadvantaged and if you do that, you can’t take out the France sub OR back up the British fleet. Every game I play, I just use a plane for that attack. The sub can’t hit it, so why throw ships in that give it the chance to actually be useful? If I’m making no land attacks with USSR, I sometimes use both.
-
1 ftr vs trn, sub? You will lose that ftr half the time.
-
I agree, you’ve probably got about 50% odds of taking a hit if you have to go 3 rounds. I prefer insurance to luck.
-
I prefer 2 Fighters in the Baltic, sub and tranny at France. May as well take out 60% of the German naval vessels with USSR while you build infantry.
Odds are you’ll loose either a plane or a transport. Neither will loose the game, but the fighter is definately the worse one to loose. On the plus side, you may have saved the life of at least one British BB saving the Brits 18 IPCs.
-
with both fighters you cut the odds quite a bit, I would say about 30% to loose one fighter.
-
Why not simply send a transport to the Baltic, and a sub to Spain. You achieve both advantages Jennifer lists, but at much lower risk. There is in fact a good chance you’ll end up with both Russian ships for the second round and thereafter.
-
Because, smith, of the exact reason I just mentioned, which people seem to forget an awful lot: SUBS CAN’T FIRE AT PLANES! If you throw the transport in the attack, you’re throwing in the ability to take an extra hit… you’re also throwing in the German sub actually being able to fire and hit the transport, making the entire point a waste. If you attack a sub & transport with planes only, all that’s able to hit the planes is the transport. Why not take the advantage of rendering a sub useless besides as cannon fodder, and why throw in something that allows them to actually fire at it? Yeah, you’re giving yourself twice the number of hits before your plane gets taken down… you’re also tripling your opponent’s hit rate until such time comes as the transport is lost.
-
If you throw the transport in the attack, you’re throwing in the ability to take an extra hit… you’re also throwing in the German sub actually being able to fire and hit the transport, making the entire point a waste.
Ahh this explains much of your confusion.
If you attack a sub & transport with planes only, all that’s able to hit the planes is the transport.
Even if you attack with a ship though all that can be hit is the trannie. Why is this, because of rolling by columns. The rules actually state that the defender has to roll his lowest numbered dice first, in this case a transport. Should this ship hit, and you logically kill your transport then the sub cannot fire back as all that remains are planes.
Why not take the advantage of rendering a sub useless besides as cannon fodder, and why throw in something that allows them to actually fire at it? Yeah, you’re giving yourself twice the number of hits before your plane gets taken down… you’re also tripling your opponent’s hit rate until such time comes as the transport is lost.
Like I said if you observe the column rolling procedure this will not happen, but sending two planes against a trannie sub is very risky. I would assume that the trannie will get two shots and therefore has about ~30% chance of hitting a plane 1-(5/6 X 5/6). The chances of two transport shots both missing. This is frankly not how I would like to start a game on R1.
-
I actually prefer to take the risk. For one, your odds of killing the Spanish sub increase dramatically with the addition of a tranny for cannon fodder, and if neither die, at least you get a shot at any attacking German fighters.
Also, you have a 50% chance of hitting with both attacking fighters in the Baltic while the Germans only have an 18% chance of hitting anything on round one. Even if there is a round two, that chance is only raised by 12% to 30%.
But unlike most, my goal isn’t to get the non-threatening transport, I want the submarine. I want to hinder their chance of killing any British units I can. Although, I’d prefer to take the cannon fodder (transport) as well, if possible.
-
Also, you have a 50% chance of hitting with both attacking fighters in the Baltic while the Germans only have an 18% chance of hitting anything on round one.
Actually you have only a 25% chance of getting two hits, and also the same odds for no hits.
I actually prefer to take the risk. For one, your odds of killing the Spanish sub increase dramatically with the addition of a tranny for cannon fodder, and if neither die, at least you get a shot at any attacking German fighters.
Well if you want to make Germany spend a ftr to kill the NorthSea fleet on G1 then my way does that as well, but with virtually no risk to air. Further the odds of actually getting the spanish sub don’t increase any as it must be assumed that it will retreat after the first round of combat
But unlike most, my goal isn’t to get the non-threatening transport, I want the submarine. I want to hinder their chance of killing any British units I can. Although, I’d prefer to take the cannon fodder (transport) as well, if possible.
I wouldn’t call the transport non threatening. In fact depending on the bid the use of this unit could be the difference between life and death in Karelia.
-
I meant that each fighter has a 50% chance of a hit. You really only need one, IMO. (sorry, I just plain dont see that transport as a threat. it’s only 1 tank or 2 infantry!) Besides, the UK can take it out later.
And yea, I conceed that you might still loose the sub in spain. So perhaps dumping that tranny on Canada would be better.
I’m still not going all out with Russia as mentioned in post 1. Although, I was thinking about it, and it is a good way to reduce the number of units on the board, dramatically. Perhaps a way to open Finland or E. Euro up for an invasion sooner by the allies? (BTW, unless I can get jap fighters, I don’t like to attack with my eastern russian forces. If I can get jap fighters, I’ll sacrifice 7 infantry and a tank just to get 1 or 2 enemy fighters!)
Suggested Topics
