For the sea battle, yes; for the land battle, no.
Can Russia go Ballistic?
-
Doing this turns you into a paper shell. Remember one of the major advantages you have over germany is that it takes you one turn to get infantry to your front. Push to far with out enough back up and you won’t be able to hit his counter. Pushing to far into Japans territories is the same mistake your to far pushed out and you can’t support yourself. Buratia is a nightmare and putting anyone in there is a death sentence since Japan will almost 100% pull battleships, planes, bombers and whatever else they need to destroy you.
Keep your cards close to your chest with Russia. America and Britain can’t get there fast enough if you over extend yourself to soon you’ll be all alone and also be pushing your allies into doing things they may not like.
-
Also I’d like to point out that if Japan goes with the IC a turn method, plus TRNs, they can be sending a solid wave of 2 INF/1 ART down each avenue of attack, more along the North due to 3+ TRNs. And that means that any breach in Japan’s front line simply leads to 3 +more land units, backed up by 6 FIGs and a BOM for their counter-attack.
Ginsu Defence…
And that gave me my first ever win against Darth…
-
Okay, so what happens in a 5 round maximum game? (Game ends right after the United States posts it’s 5th turn.)
Would you go ballistic with all 3 allies, or play the same strategy?
-
Time limitted games so dramatically skew results… just look at the 2-T game i did with Squash…
I’d also want to know the method that would be used to score the winner for a 5-T game… just IPCs? Number of territories? Total units on the board? Potential gains expected over the next 5 rounds? Every one of those would ahve slightly different specific strats within the main framework.
-
I’ve done total war to determine timed games. You take all the pieces on the board, set up both sides as attacker and roll it out. (Every AA get’s to fire too.)
But I’d say liquidate all assets into cash, determine land value add to savings, add to liquidated units, total up teams and see who won.
-
In that case, it is a purely tactical situation.
Allies NEVER attack with less than devastating force in order to preserve their units since the Axis starts out with more.
-
Hey Jen, I’ve tried that, and one of my friends has tried that against me. It’s been very effective both times. At the very least, the absolute least, the forward russian aggression slows Germany and Japan down long enough for Britain to interfere. I really think Britian is the key to that plan, a factory in India and transports in the Atlantic can work very well with Russian forces on the mainland, and hopefully hold out long enough for the US to tip the scales somewhere.
-
In the Tournament game I just completed, Russia DID go very offensive in the West (on Germany), but was defensive in the East.
It worked, because Germany did some non-standard opening moves, so the extra Russian pressure was decisive.
However, had the US and UK not been poised to capitalize on that extra offensive push, it leaves Russia spent, and in about 2 turns it can be reduced to 8-12 IPC’s with minimal losses to the Axis.
-
Russia almost has to go ballistic on round 1 at least. Especially given you have a primo chance to kill off a German fighter before he can consolidate.
However, I think if you do keep the offensive, you have a strong ability to lock up German forces so Africa is easier to claim and, if you are offensive against Japan, you can keep them backed up giving ground to them pretty slowely…but then again, I’ve only played AAR about 5 times now - against humans.
-
I have to wonder, Jen, if you’re one of the proponents of the 3-way Russian attack on R1. Attack Belo with 3 inf 1 arm, W. Russia with 6 inf 1 art 1 arm, and Ukraine with 3 inf 1 art 3 arm 2 fighter. All of your battles are above 50% of succeeding, and if the dice are good you wind up taking all 3 territories. If not, you thin out the Germans quite a bit. That to me is Russia going ballistic. I’m not a believer of it myself, but there are those who swear by it even if it doesn’t totally succeed.
-
No, but I like the idea now that I’ve heard it!!!
Actually, I go W. Russia with a blocker in Karelia and Ukraine to get a German fighter. The three way might be a bit too taxing on attack forces, meaning I have to build 8 infantry instead of some offensive ground units to cover the loss and I’m going to be out all of my tanks.
-
Bah who needs tanks. Mass more transports as Russia :mrgreen:
I remember there used to be a time when I would build 6 artillery with Russia on R1 lol. I was like hmmm Russia has so many infantry to start with why not go a bit offensive? :wink:
-
I have to wonder, Jen, if you’re one of the proponents of the 3-way Russian attack on R1. Attack Belo with 3 inf 1 arm, W. Russia with 6 inf 1 art 1 arm, and Ukraine with 3 inf 1 art 3 arm 2 fighter. All of your battles are above 50% of succeeding, and if the dice are good you wind up taking all 3 territories. If not, you thin out the Germans quite a bit. That to me is Russia going ballistic. I’m not a believer of it myself, but there are those who swear by it even if it doesn’t totally succeed.
Not a big fan of this. I’m a big proponent of less battles, more force and limiting the effects of dice. Even if all three battles are 75% to win in favor of Russia, that still only gives you about 40+% to win all three.
I’d only consider that in LL, where you are a little more certain to take all three.
However with a 6 bid - 1 inf Lib, 1 inf Belo, you can eliminate the Belo part of this attack on R1, thus negating this move altogether.
-
I’m definitely not a fan of it either. I would also rather have less attacks but much more security in numbers. Like you pointed out, a bid in Europe negates it. And it’s about 44% chance to take all 3 territories, so there’s a good chance you had to retreat in one of them. It only leaves W. Russia at 90%, so if you’re in those 1/10 games where you fail, you’re pretty much doomed.
-
And I think that it has been proven on these boards that even a “win” in West Russia with above average Russian Losses is a pretty serious hole for the Allies to dig out of… let alone LOSING in West Russia due to spreading Russia too thin on the R1 combat front…
-
Aye, that was something that caught me as well. Even if you win them all, now you are in three spots in Germany with no real hope of defending any of them. Once Germany pops through you’ll be in dire trouble trying to set up another decent offensive.
-
Equally as bad is stacking W. Russia and not doing anything else.
Why give Germany an extra fighter? You have plenty of ability to kill it off with minimal losses and Germany really is not in a position to rebuild it. Especially if they buy a carrier!
-
Equally as bad is stacking W. Russia and not doing anything else.
Why give Germany an extra fighter? You have plenty of ability to kill it off with minimal losses and Germany really is not in a position to rebuild it. Especially if they buy a carrier!
WHy can’t Germany just rebuild another fighter down the line after a couple rounds? It’s not as if there’s anything stopping a person if they’ve got enough infantry on the board to add another figther to the arsenal. As long as a person isn’t spread too thin and can spare $10 bucks, buy another fighter.
-
I would not be inclined to do all three battles on the E. front as Russia. Losing 5 units in WRU is a blow enough just when doing two and I remember a few games where I didn’t take WRU on R1 trying to do Belo, UKR and WRU and having serious troubles from then on out.
-
I am a 2 battle R1 person…
West Russia and eitehr Belo or Ukraine.Some determining factors for me on which of the 2 to try…
1. Has a bid been placed in Belo? If yes, Belo is out.
2. Am I going to fight early and hard for Egypt? If so, Ukraine is in.
Suggested Topics
