That 2nd question is not as simple as it seems though - Russia’s role is to defend, but a good way to defend is to counter-attack. So I wouldn’t write artillery off for Russia just because it has to play defence.
russian artillery if you are trading single countries (holding the one you took while vacating the one you took it from) if you are ‘nibbling’ then inf/air is vastly more cost effective.
i also used to just buy the art when i had the extra buck, too piece meal. either art and mean it or save the buck for next turn
@froodster:
That 2nd question is not as simple as it seems though - Russia’s role is to defend, but a good way to defend is to counter-attack. So I wouldn’t write artillery off for Russia just because it has to play defence.
umm this is suppose to be how russia can win not how Germany can win. rember my maxum “Russia: germany can’t take moscow if your march to france.” i sya build inf and artillery unitll you can take addvantage of tank movement.(2 spaces from and ic)
I love artillery. It’s probably my favorite unit. But jsp already knew that. Pound for pound it beats armor in everything but mobility. Run a sim of 5 art vs 4 arm and you’ll see what I mean. Wait, I shouldn’t be saying this. Never mind. Artillery sucks. Don’t buy it.
I love artillery. It’s probably my favorite unit. But jsp already knew that. Pound for pound it beats armor in everything but mobility. Run a sim of 5 art vs 4 arm and you’ll see what I mean. Wait, I shouldn’t be saying this. Never mind. Artillery sucks. Don’t buy it.
just to reinforce this do 7 infatnry and 7 armour versus 8 inf and 8 artillery. then swap the units.
Yeah, I’ve run that sim many times - in fact that question is one of the main reasons I built my sim. However, that sim doesn’t tell everything - the speed of armor is worth maybe more than you think.
Yes, I agree, 8 Art in Ukraine add more punch to the assault on Caucasus than 7 Tanks. However, Those 7 tanks can add their punch to that assault while sitting in Eastern Europe, where they also:
a) are defending Eastern Europe
b) are in striking distance of every single European territory.
So if suddenly the allies land in WE, your 8 artillery in Ukraine are worthless, while the armor allows you to respond. Which in turn may dissuade the attack in the first place. The trouble with building artillery first until the range of Tanks is “useful” is that you’ll have less tanks in the end. There’s nothing like a hammer of 30 tanks and infantry everywhere to keep the allies at a respectful distance.
I could see for Russia though that they would be more worthwhile. Still, defensively you can’t beat infantry, which Russia can build to reinforce territories taken by the UK/US before Germany gets to counterattack.
Dan,
I think you’re missing the point with Japan. 4 Inf, 4 Art fills 4 transports AND maximizes the production capabilities of Japan. Don’t forget that limitation as well.
Personally, I think 6 or 9 transports, 6 ground units in Japan and ICs on the mainland is the way to go with Japan. Gives you the flexibility for more navy/airforce without wasting transport room and gives you unprecedented mobility.
I hold teh same true for England. 3 Transports are all you need, since you’ll want to put a fighter or two in teh mix as well.
I disagree on England - to really keep Germany on its toes something like 7 TRN are nice. Then you can threaten Germany / EE / WE with 14 land units at any time. Otherwise Germany is free to send a lot more stuff to the Russian front. That’s one reason why in our game I was never really concerned about the UK - most of their units had little mobility, and UK was only unloading 6 land units per turn. So, a huge German force went to support the assault on Moscow instead of staying home to guard the side/back door.
With Japan I achieve economy by grabbing all the Island Infantry and grabbing all the land I can early on. Once your production is at 47 or something you don’t have to worry about saving $1 by buying Artillery. And Armor take better advantage of the Japan production limit. Art don’t maximize the production capabilities of Japan. 8 Ftrs would MAXIMIZE the 8 units you can build there in terms of strategic capability. But 4 Inf 4 Arm maximize it more than 4 Inf 4 Art.
The Armor cost no more in the long run because they don’t need transports to get to Persia quickly, so you can build fewer transports and just have a few extra to shuttle Infantry to the front.
With UK you can’t even fill the 7 Trns every turn.
No, but you CAN use those TRNs to grab troops from places like Norway that were previously landed and transport them to other territories like Western, Germany, or Eastern, allowign you to double your force in such an attack.
@ncscswitch:
No, but you CAN use those TRNs to grab troops from places like Norway that were previously landed and transport them to other territories like Western, Germany, or Eastern, allowign you to double your force in such an attack.
Zigackly. Throw in a BB, a Bomber and a few fighters and Germany is forced into a much more defensive position. A UK that can deliver that against Germany is a much bigger threat than a UK that is just unloading 3 Inf 3 Art into Norway every turn (or, as Jenn likes to do, 2 TRN loads to Norway or Karelia while one TRN unloads into my nicely vacant EE, which I then slaughter next turn - killing 7 IPCs of her advanced units in exchange for her gaining 3 more IPCs production in UK next turn.)
Trust me, Froodster. You gotta believe that I’m trying to help when I say that, in most cases, armor’s mobility is overrated. Love artillery and it will love you back. :-D
I love artillery. It’s probably my favorite unit.
ok Mr. Submarine :roll:
Cyan, you’re a smart ass. I like that in you. :lol:
Trust me, Froodster. You gotta believe that I’m trying to help when I say that, in most cases, armor’s mobility is overrated. Love artillery and it will love you back. :-D
What I see about artillery:
Inf/artillery cost more than 2 inf. They attack the same and defend the same, but cost more. Inf/art have no mobility advantage.
What I see about tank:
Inf/tank cost more than 2 inf. Tank is far more mobile. Tank defends on 3.
–
I believe that art. units are almost exclusively for late game, and even then conditional upon the position.
Trust me. You gotta believe I’m trying to help when I eat all your cookies. Chocolate chip is overrated. Love your oatmeal and it will love you back. :-D
Screw oatmeal. Thin mint is by far the best cookie artillery out there. Besides owls don’t eat cookies. Stick to mice and tootsie pops. :-P
What I see about armor:
Tank mobility is rarely useful for anything but Africa. When the Japanese reach the Cauc, Kaz, Novo bottlenecks, armors mobility is nullified because they can’t shift to threaten a different territory without taking more than one turn. On the European front, the frontlines are usually static so armors mobility is also nullified. Armor supports infantry, which is only as mobile as artillery. Armors defensive superiority is offset because you can produce more artillery for your money. And when you are trading territories and you have to attack more territories than you have air units to assist with, the guy trading his artillery for the guy trading his armor will come out ahead.
Trust me. You gotta believe that I’m trying to help when I sink all of your transports. Destroyers are overrated. Love your torpedo and it will love you back. Oh yeah, baby. It WILL love you back. :-D
Tank mobility is rarely useful for anything but Africa
If you say this then I think maybe you’re not using tanks to their full potential.
Yes, Africa generally provides the widest-open spaces for tanks to blitz through and sweep up a number of territories in a round, but their range also means that you can keep them back behind your front lines in position to strike a number of territories.
Put it this way:
An Inf in the Ukraine can reach five territories.
A tank in the Ukraine can potentially reach TWELVE territories.
~Josh
Inf/artillery cost more than 2 inf. They attack the same and defend the same, but cost more.
what chu talkin’ 'bout willis?
i feel art is early game and as it moves forward with the inf then armor can catch up for the knockout punch with steady columns of infantry feeding new fodder to the slaughterhouse
Big stack of tanks in EE also very nice… as I said before, can strike every single European territory from there, plus Karelia and Archangel. They defend Ger/WE/SE/EE while simultaneously threatening Ukr/Belo/WRus/Karelia and maybe even Archangel
On defence, armor are a better buy than artillery -
20 IPCs on tanks = 4@3 = 12
20 IPCs on armor = 5@2 = 10 (though you get the extra unit to take one more hit, but that’s less important because your Inf are there to absorb the first 1-2 rounds of hits)
But yeah, Inf/Art do attack better than 2 Inf. But Inf/Arm attacks better than Inf/Art, because with your first casualty you only lose an attack of 1, while with Inf/Art you lose an attack of 2.
And when you are trading territories and you have to attack more territories than you have air units to assist with, the guy trading his artillery for the guy trading his armor will come out ahead.
Quote from Critmonster, “i feel art is early game and as it moves forward with the inf then armor can catch up for the knockout punch with steady columns of infantry feeding new fodder to the slaughterhouse”
U505 makes a good point, and it goes along with critmonster’s just after. Â trading art in greater numbers (w/ inf) for your opponent’s tanks is much better, because you will have more inf/art than tanks, more than likely, especially when you are fighting over a territory that costs only 2 or 3. Â
Art has it’s place, as critmonster said, it is great early to march with the inf and then later the tanks can be more quickly rushed to the front to support, or turned about to counter a threat on the flank. Â if you are Jpn, you can load inf/art early into asia and then follow up with the tanks that can catch up.
of course that’s just my opinion, i could be wrong…
I think if you trade territories with anything more than Inf/Ftrs you need to check your head.
