The most effective russian players I’ve encountered are the ones that are able to build up a force that is able to threaten a counter on a german stack. If a good german player wants to go for Moscow they are able to get it, however I’ve seen plenty games where the UK/USA are putting enough pressure on the German player for him to stop just in front of Moscow. If the Russian player only has bought inf at this point there is not much of a threat for the German player to keep russia contained and slowly kill it economically. However if there is a stack of paired inf/art the pushback power is a lot bigger and thus Germany can be challenged and Russia may be able to break the German wall.
Best Bang for the Buck
-
No offense, but I do all that in my head, even when I play online… based more on guts, than factual probabilities, because at the end of the day it’s dice.
Do you need to win? YES
Are you likely to win? YES
Are you likely to win with more stuff? YESIf you get 1 out of 3, probability is that you should go for it.
I’m not going to trust my game to a bunch of batteries. My guts are good enough of a gauge.
-
@The:
Inf art is always better for islands. With no exceptions.
obviously not or this situation would not come up. How is a inf/art better than an inf/arm in defense? that’s 5 defense strength vs 4. I used to have arm ‘sitting around’ in Japan after the US fleet came through. They provide a threat of good defenders, provided they have a nice inf shield in front of them. Arm defend at 3 and therefore have a reason to be on islands.
B/c first off, like has been said before, infantry artillery is a more cost effective attack than infantry tank. But there are even more reasons in this situation b/c it is an amphibious assault. First off, part of the cost of a tank is built into its move. Therefore, if you are transporting it to islands part of its value is lost and you are being cost ineffective. And secondly, you should never rely on land units to defend islands. One b/c any one who attacks you will probably be using at least two units and some support (either more transports, planes, or fleets). Two b/c although they might attack you, they also may not. So leaving your tank their would be like killing it. Three, b/c the only way for your opponent to get to his land units onto your island to fight your theoretical tank would be to kill your fleets, and you probably shouldn’t have attacked unless your fleets could hold their own. And four, even if you left your tank their to defend, which you shouldn’t have done, and your fleets swam away but remained within striking distance of the island (which they would do if it was worth keeping, and if it’s not, then again why bother defending it with a tank anyways) then the only reason your opponent would attack your island (unless he is below average intelligence) would be if he could defend his fleet from your fleet, in which case his army and supporting units will not be hindered by a tank, which, although better on defence, is not better per ipc on defence. I could go on for every situation, but I covered all of them that I could think of.
-
You might be likely to win hitting a German landing in Arkhangelsk, but if that opens you up to an attack from Bryansk, you might not want to do it. Though, it would satisfy 1 of 3 parameters. Just playing Devil’s Advocate here. (I know you would never, I am just trying to point out that there is a lot more to it than whether it is a good idea or not.)
I agree, you don’t always need a calculator. Many of us intrinsically know the odds of success for many battles and, I should point out, I have NEVER seen a calculator accurately calculate the odds of any major naval engagement, EVER. This one is the worst: http://www.dskelly.com/misc/aa/aasim.html or all the calculators for naval battles. (Does happen to do a good job of say Tactical Bombers, considering http://www.campusactivism.org/aacalc/ doesnt even have the option for them, or two hit aircraft carriers.) So you really end up trying to run a LL situation in your head and trying to figure out how your opponent will respond. I’ve gotten very good at naval battles, and I usually end up “beating the odds” because the calculators REALLY SUCK at running naval battles. Don’t ask me why. If I had to guess, it was inaccuracy due to the two hit properties of capitol warships, but I am not an expert on their code, nor am I a techie gal.
Why do I mention this? Because there is talk of calculators and I want to emphasize that you cannot reroll the dice because the calculator said you should win. You always have to run the numbers in your head as well. Could Eisenhower say “The calculators said we would win on the beaches of Normandy! I call a do over because you rolled 6 hits with your AA Guns!” Of course, if you are trying to test a game strategy, you might want to continually rewind and redo things so you can be sure you are really testing it. In league/tournament? Oh yea, you better run them numbers on paper, in your head and with at least on calculator, IMNSHO. (In My Not So Humble Opinion.)
-
@The:
@The:
Inf art is always better for islands. With no exceptions.
obviously not or this situation would not come up. How is a inf/art better than an inf/arm in defense? that’s 5 defense strength vs 4. I used to have arm ‘sitting around’ in Japan after the US fleet came through. They provide a threat of good defenders, provided they have a nice inf shield in front of them. Arm defend at 3 and therefore have a reason to be on islands.
B/c first off, like has been said before, infantry artillery is a more cost effective attack than infantry tank. But there are even more reasons in this situation b/c it is an amphibious assault. First off, part of the cost of a tank is built into its move. Therefore, if you are transporting it to islands part of its value is lost and you are being cost ineffective. And secondly, you should never rely on land units to defend islands. One b/c any one who attacks you will probably be using at least two units and some support (either more transports, planes, or fleets). Two b/c although they might attack you, they also may not. So leaving your tank their would be like killing it. Three, b/c the only way for your opponent to get to his land units onto your island to fight your theoretical tank would be to kill your fleets, and you probably shouldn’t have attacked unless your fleets could hold their own. And four, even if you left your tank their to defend, which you shouldn’t have done, and your fleets swam away but remained within striking distance of the island (which they would do if it was worth keeping, and if it’s not, then again why bother defending it with a tank anyways) then the only reason your opponent would attack your island (unless he is below average intelligence) would be if he could defend his fleet from your fleet, in which case his army and supporting units will not be hindered by a tank, which, although better on defence, is not better per ipc on defence. I could go on for every situation, but I covered all of them that I could think of.
Interesting. None of these situations are applicable! I think you missed that 747 that flew overhead, I’ll help you out. This is a theoretical question as to which combo is the best on offense and defense. Defense because you can expect your opponent to hit the island on their turn. Not think about it, but hit it.
I have read studies that say women have a hard time visualizing situations in their minds eye, so I’ll even give you a concrete example to lower confusion. Lets talk about Philippines. Japan want to take it back, for whatever reason but cannot contest the seazone with anything more than a blocker, and only has 1 trn in range. Now some players might not take the island, but some might. Japan invades the island with 1 trn. They control the coast, so an arm is of limited value on the continent. (but defends at 3, so a value none-the-less)
So now you know the situation a bit better, your fleet is not parked outside this island. It is getting attacked. It is defended by 1 inf.
I think another advantage to the 1 inf/1 arm combo is that if you miss in the first round of combat and he hits, you only lose 1 attacking pip instead of 2.
-
Ah, you’re right, I do have trouble visualizing situations, so thanks for your example. In any case I would still opt for an infantry and artillery first b/c i still believe that the movement value is wasted, the hit points per cost still is in the inf and art’s favor, and because you don’t win wars by defense; tanks don’t equal their cost defending by themselves for one turn, they equal their cost by constantly attacking and being shielded by infantry. However, I wouldn’t be deterred from attacking if all i had was a tank and an infantry either.
-
Depends on what the counterattack looks like, no? If all they can bring is two infantry, I think I might go with the tank. Dunno how to calculate financial value on that one, though.
Suggested Topics
