American, Soviet, and French strategies

  • '19 '17 '16

    I dislike the fighter buy on USSR1. You have plenty of factories at this time, no threat of SBR and no need whatsoever for the fighter. Better to buy it later when you are building solely in Moscow and can’t spend more than 30 IPC on inf. It is useful later but mostly only needed when the German bombers are in SBR range.

    Artillery is a bit more useful because you can at least threaten a counter attack with it.

  • '21 '20 '18 '17

    Most groups wont pair US and RUS.  These 3 powers don’t have much unity of purpose unless you know exactly what the plan is.

    If you are going to have two allied players and KJF (Pacific Strong), the power that is most useful to control conterminously with the US is ANZAC.  (one player plays china, Anzac, us, the other uk x2, Russia, france)

    If you are going to have two allies players and the plan is HGE (Atlantic Strong; hurt Germany eventually, there is no such thing as KGF), then it is best to coordinate Russia and UK (and also incidentally China and UK).  one player plays UK, Russia, china, the other plays US, Anzac, and france)

    Lots of players feel overwhelmed by the responsibility of 2 great powers, and the minor powers of china and france don’t take much more than rolling, little planning is involved.

    America doesn’t need factories.  It needs carriers.  Your plan will depend on what the axis does and whether japan attacks on turn 1, 2, 3 or 4.  The main plan you need to begin the game with is

    1. allocation of either east atlantic or west pacific and the teams, as above
    2. be ready to react rather than stick to a pre-set movement plan because you don’t have the initiative until US4.

  • @ShadowHAwk:

    Nice Wild bill but you are basing your moves on assumptions on what the german and japan player might or might not do.

    That is where all the allies strategies writen down go wrong, you can have basic guidelines but you cannot write it down like that.

    What if germany actualy pulls back in order to prepare for sea lion? Will you still vacate your front line?

    What if japan does J1, of J2 or J3 of J4? That does affect your USA gameplay a lot.

    So yes if germany and japan play exactly as you expect them to do, and they roll the dice average and they follow the right strategy then yes under those criteria you can write down a strategy for the allies to follow. This is why there are so many axis players winning against allies players, it is far easier to start learning axis in this game then allies.

    Shadow, I don’t see my post as a do this ……and allies win list, I feel most was expectations and how to react. You are right though, I made several assumptions, and a first time Russian player should be thinking Barbarossa IMO. The Germans can be pretty good at covering up their intentions on G1. Even if the Germans are considering SL, they will most likely hide it still leaving units at the Front (may send inf in Germany east, and recall them to fill transports etc…). They often include naval purchases to keep their options open (could be undecided) or force certain reactions from the allies (mostly UK). As a rookie Russian player you really don’t want to leave valuable inf at the front R1, because even if the Germans are thinking Sea Lion or a G3 Barbarossa you may have just changed their minds with easy kills.

    I recall our first couple times playing Russia, and some mistakes that were made (some repeatedly LOL). Thinking you can fight the Germans at the front, or getting caught up in defending Leningrad. You can lose or trap a bunch of units up there only to realize it was a side show and the Germans are gunning straight for Moscow and will beat you there. I thought it best to have him be aware, as he makes decisions.

    Same for pointing out the Iraq NO, allies keeping sz125 clear, and getting ftrs to Moscow just tools I would have liked to known my first time playing Russia.

    For the USA it wasn’t a bullet point of things to do, it was a philosophy.  Pick a side and don’t be wishy washy. Spend the bulk (not all) of your income on one side, over 2-3 even 4 turns to gain an advantage, then play catch up on the other side as needed. Most have found that if the US spends evenly each turn that you end up with a weak US on both sides. Obviously when Japan attacks dictates much of what the USA can do. There are many debates on what side the US should go if Japan hits on X turn, but I stand by which ever side you go to dominate, and use you allies.

    Both Russia and the US need to work with their allies. The Russians may need help getting their NO’s, or defending their capital. Be that with planes in Moscow, or landings in Western Europe. The US needs to work closely with the Anz in the Pac, and UK in Europe. You need to be aware of the turn order, and how to take advantage of it.

  • '15

    @simon33:

    I dislike the fighter buy on USSR1. You have plenty of factories at this time, no threat of SBR and no need whatsoever for the fighter. Better to buy it later when you are building solely in Moscow and can’t spend more than 30 IPC on inf. It is useful later but mostly only needed when the German bombers are in SBR range.

    Artillery is a bit more useful because you can at least threaten a counter attack with it.

    Disagree that there’s no need for it early on.  It deters SBR (by G3 Russia will already have 4 fighters), it helps with those little counter strikes (instead of having to use artillery on the front lines you can strike with 5+ planes), and using the money on extra infantry early doesn’t equal more infantry later.

    Let’s say turn 1 and 2 Russia spends 74:

    • 24.67 Inf

    or

    • 2 ftr & 18 inf

    Now let’s say you want to get those extra planes on turn 3 and 4 instead, and lets say Russia can spend 65 total:

    • 21.67 inf

    or

    2 ftr and 15 inf

    Either way, Russia has 2 ftrs and 39.67 inf.  So the question is what has more value in those first few turns: 6 extra inf, or two extra ftrs?  I’d argue the latter

  • '21 '20 '18 '17

    There was a post last month that argued at length for Russia buying primarily artillery, and this is smarter than tanks or planes.

    Tanks are for counterattacks from the back lines.  You shouldn’t be attacking anything with Russia, its a massive miscalculation unless Germany is ignoring you.

    Planes are too expensive and you don’t have enough to make a difference anyways.  You don’t have 3-4 fighters R1…you have 2.  Even if you add a few, its not enough to deter a SBR.    Many people make the argument that even if you shot down a strat bomber, the risk of losing a fighter in return is too great, they are too precious and Germany should gladly trade 1:1

    Mechs are surprisingly good, because they pair with artillery (and tanks if you have any).  Mechs can rush into battle from your backlines to ensure that you have local 1:1 artillery matching.

    Infantry are OK, but you only need to buy as many as is required to match arty 1:1 in every standoff.

    The OP points out that unless he is bringing in Japanese or Italian air, that the germans may be reluctant to set their big armor stack right next to your capitol.  They need that armor in the stack because that’s the only way it can stop from being destroyed.  Stacks of “2” defenders are notoriously vulnerable…but in this case, arty is pretty much better than inf (same D, x2 better Offense for 1 IPC more)

    If you have 20 men and 20 artillery or more in Moscow or one of the squares next to it, you have the most versatile stack (offense/defense) that you can in the shortest amount of time.  If you need to hold out, the UK will have to provide the air (and squash your NO).


  • @Nippon-koku:

    @simon33:

    I dislike the fighter buy on USSR1. You have plenty of factories at this time, no threat of SBR and no need whatsoever for the fighter. Better to buy it later when you are building solely in Moscow and can’t spend more than 30 IPC on inf. It is useful later but mostly only needed when the German bombers are in SBR range.

    Artillery is a bit more useful because you can at least threaten a counter attack with it.

    Disagree that there’s no need for it early on.� It deters SBR (by G3 Russia will already have 4 fighters), it helps with those little counter strikes (instead of having to use artillery on the front lines you can strike with 5+ planes), and using the money on extra infantry early doesn’t equal more infantry later.

    Let’s say turn 1 and 2 Russia spends 74:�

    • 24.67 Inf

    or

    • 2 ftr & 18 inf

    Now let’s say you want to get those extra planes on turn 3 and 4 instead, and lets say Russia can spend 65 total:

    • 21.67 inf

    or

    2 ftr and 15 inf

    Either way, Russia has 2 ftrs and 39.67 inf.� So the question is what has more value in those first few turns: 6 extra inf, or two extra ftrs?� I’d argue the latter

    That is a very interesting though Nippon-Koku. There are several factors you have to account for to see which buy is better for Russia. Are the fighters worth it at all, and if they are when should they be purchased?

    At first I thought the answer was obviously those 4 extra inf and 2 arty are better a few turns earlier because they can be used to counter/defend against Germany earlier. The infantry you build in Moscow take time to reach the front and become an implied threat, but the fighters you build in Moscow are immediate implied threats, so infantry should be purchased before planes with that line of thinking. When you look past game theory and go into real game scenarios, though, more factors come into play.

    A. Can the 4 inf 2 arty be used for a more effective possible counter attack than 2 fighters. The answer is yes, obviously, but is the counter attack reasonable? The answer to that is simply, no. A good German push is going to be un-counterable/defensible anyways. Meaning countering a German/Italian stack in West Russia/Ukraine/Bryansk isn’t realistic. The odds would be at best horribly unfavorable for you to attack.

    B. Can the 4 inf 2 arty be used for a more effective defense than 2 fighters. The answer, again, is obviously yes, but is the defense reasonable? The answer depends on what you want the allies to do as a whole. Russia alone can’t defend certain key positions without support from her allies, regardless of how many infantry they buy. If you want to have UK help defend Bryansk later in the game with fighters, then you might want to build 4 inf 2 art over 2 fighters, but if not then maybe you should build the 2 fighters over 4 inf and 2 art.

    C. What would the planes be doing if purchased early rather than later/not at all? This depends on what your strategy is for the allies. The only reason you’d want early fighters is to help china. Russia and China alone cant stack stack Szechwan with enough units to defend against a J1 that puts 20 planes in Kwangsi. You’d have to put the 3 UK planes there as well, which would mean you are declaring war against Japan as UK on turn 1. That is because Russia and China can easily stack Szechwan if Japan declares war on turn 1. Here are the numbers for what the defense in Szechwan would look like given maximum values for offense and defense minus 3 infantry for China that would be used to take back Yunan, which is average.

    Japans Offensive power that can reach Szechwan:

    10 fighters
    8 tacs
    2 bombers

    Total offensive power: 70

    Russia not purchasing two fighters turn 1, and UK not declaring war:

    10 Chinese infantry
    1 Chinese fighter
    2 Russian Mechs
    2 Russian tanks
    2 Russian fighters
    1 Russian Tac

    Total Defense power: 45
    Win %: 3

    Russia purchasing two fighters turn 1, and UK not declaring war:

    10 Chinese infantry
    1 Chinese fighter
    2 Russian Mechs
    2 Russian tanks
    4 Russian fighters
    1 Russian Tac

    Total Defense power: 53
    Win %: 22

    Russia purchasing two fighters turn 1, and UK declaring war:

    10 Chinese infantry
    1 Chinese fighter
    2 Russian Mechs
    2 Russian tanks
    4 Russian fighters
    1 Russian Tac
    2 UK fighters
    1 UK tac

    Total Defense power: 64
    Win %: 76

    In Global 1940 2nd edition with an average bid of 25 I’d say the buy might not be worth it. That is because Japan declares war Turn 1 much more often then in the balanced mod version, and a turn 1 declaration means a lot less air-power that can reach Szchewan.


  • @taamvan:

    Infantry are OK, but you only need to buy as many as is required to match arty 1:1 in every standoff.

    In my oppinion the maximum ratio of infantry to arty is 3:1. Meaning you have 3 infantry/mech for every 1 arty you have. That is because you only want to loose 1’s on the first round of dice, if the rolls are average. This will give you perfect efficiency because you won’t loose any value on your artillery the second round.

  • '19 '17 '16

    It’s only 1 IPC difference. You would likely still have some ones on the second round with that ratio.

    Back to the USSR1 fighter buy, I’m still of the same opinion. I did say it might be plausible when the German bombers move into SBR range, although might also be better to use British fighters for the purpose. As others point out, if the Germans come in with a single stack the counter attack possibilities don’t eventuate or are better to use ground troops, perhaps with a strafe. Fighters only make sense in secondary theatres and for that to make sense, you have to be virtually guaranteed that they survive and can return to defend Moscow.


  • You can only really use the british fighters if Japan declared war T1.


  • If Japan does a great J1 DOW on W.Allies,  ie:loses just 1-2 inf… ,

    how should US respond? It’s first 2-3  rounds of buy?
    And UK India? Should it keep its FTRS or send them to the Med?

Suggested Topics

  • 8
  • 2
  • 30
  • 73
  • 4
  • 8
  • 10
  • 38
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

28

Online

17.0k

Users

39.2k

Topics

1.7m

Posts