During the course of a game, if Germany is focused on Russia, the med becomes an allied stronghold, disrupting Europe from the south. If you take this out of the equation, and effectively defend Europe from a Russian advance, Russia will have to focus on the Middle East because the Axis powers will begin to push from both there and the West, along with Japanese forces from the East if they were successful. This creates a huge problem for Russia in late game. I only use this strategy every once in a while. I’m not saying that it is a sure-proof way to win with the Axis, i’m only saying that when I use this strategy I tend to win.
Posts made by Requester45
-
RE: Why not Egypt first?
-
RE: Why not Egypt first?
If you have a strong ground push with Germany south towards the Caucasus it makes for a nice meet up point with the Middle Eastern forces. This can be funded by the extra IPCs you will get for Egypt, Iraq, Peria, and NW Persia. Along with no UK presence there.
-
RE: Why not Egypt first?
Alright let me touch on the things you brought up, firstly, using the 3 tanks from Greater Southern, will in a minimal way impact the ability for Germany to take France. France will fall, there is almost no way that it doesn’t. If you can’t take Paris without those three tanks, you are attacking the wrong way.
On your second point, the IPC’s you gain from taking Paris can be used on G2 to start building a fleet in the med. To my point earlier, the German fleet is only in place to take Egypt, and to defend the med. In no way did I state that it needed to be used to attack UK or Russia afterwards.
If Taranto takes place, this is a good thing for Italy. The remaining ships should move to sz93 where on G2 Germany will spawn ships. Italy will also move units to Southern France, where the transport there can on I2 or I3 it can carry those units anywhere they need to go such as Egypt where they can help prepare for the German attack. Like I said, the Luftwaffe will take care of any allies ships in the med. If you can take Africa and the Middle East, and bulk up the NO’s for both Italy and Germany, they become a monster. It becomes really difficult to stop this large influx of IPCs, because Italy can then defend the med effectively, while Germany pushes onto Russia, with a number of other strategies. -
RE: The "Red Tide" Strategy
When is it not a necessity to purchase 6 tanks on the first turn?
-
RE: Why not Egypt first?
I love that this has come up in discussion because I have done this many times. I find that if G1 you take Southern France with the 3 tanks in Greater Southern Germany, G2 spawn ships in the med. Meanwhile the German Luftwaffe take out any resistance in the med, then on G3 build more ships. Italy the whole time is just purchasing naval units. this will help to bulk up the German fleet (which will in turn protect from the American bombers if that is what they choose to do). Make sure that you keep the fleet in a sea zone with an operative airbase for scrambles. From there any transports you have will be able to land in Egypt with the support of the Luftwaffe (and bombardment if possible). Once Egypt is in control of the Axis, the Med becomes a cespool of Italian growth. You will literally watch Italy grow before your eyes. If Italy can take Iraq or Persia, this is a huge plus, because then they can support the Middle East, while Germany shifts its focus on Russia, and or India. If the US decides to take on the Med instead of going for the Pacific, Germany and Italy will be able to defend, and Japan will thrive. This strategy is great for players who play a longer game. It takes a little while, but the payoff is huge. When Germany is getting NO’s for Egypt and the Middle East, and Italy is getting a solid amount of NO’s, it becomes harder to stop the Axis powers. If Italy is aloud to collect 40 or more IPCs per turn, they will effectively defend the med from the US if they have the proper defense already in place (such as a German fleet).
-
RE: General culture, do you believe it?
I feel like battleship or aircraft carrier. They are both iconic warships
-
RE: How to stack Yunnan?
hcp, it depends on how you are going to play with the allies. Different strategies will result in different outcomes in the Pacific. If you don’t plan on bringing your Russian 20 back to Moscow, utilize them in Amur. Make the Japanese sweat a little bit and confront that stack. You should also consider supporting the defense of Calcutta (although this is hard to do). Japan will have free reign during its first 5 turns or so. Don’t be discouraged, the US needs some time to build its fleet, and then you will see a more defensive play from Japan. The US will alleviate some of that pressure from Japan, and then you should be able to begin to thrive with ANZAC and UK forces, sometimes even your Chinese army will begin to grow.
-
RE: The "Red Tide" Strategy
That is a great point Gargantua. The ability to hold Germany to playing a somewhat safe offensive, you buy more time for Russia.
-
RE: The "Red Tide" Strategy
I’d like to play this strategy a little bit, feel it out and refine it, to one which could be used in every game. The most interesting thing here is the almost complete 180 flip. I have been one to build very defensively 90% of the time. After this long discussion, I think that the plausibility and applicability of Russian offensive builds is more and more relevant.
-
RE: The "Red Tide" Strategy
That is a good point Gargantua. I feel as though the relation between the Russian “Red Tide” or “Red Blitz” strategy and the “Bright Skies” strategy can be small, or large. Personally I feel that the US needs a strong presence in the Pacific, however some assistance in Europe is needed, whether its some bombers, or small amounts of naval units. I feel the cooperation between Russia and the UK is more important for the European side of the board. When looking at the game as two separate parts, Europe and Pacific, the US has a set amount of IPCs for each game. Pacific being 17 and Europe being 35. Taking this in, I tend to divide the way in which I spend IPCs for the US in a similar manner when I play world. Remember that when you are playing a game of AA where you are not constrained by time, the allies can play a slow and methodical game. By placing 35 IPCs worth of units in the European side of the board, and 17 IPCs on the Pacific side of the board. When the US comes across bonuses, I tend to use most if not all of it in the Pacific. The US will be the only determining force in the Pacific. The UK and ANZAC forces certainly cannot support a staving of Japanese forces in the Pacific, and if you were to spend all of your IPCs to support a “Bright Skies” strategy in Europe, Japan would be an untamed beast, and by the time the US could respond to this, Japan would be to large of a force and maybe even be on their way to 6 victory cities.
-
RE: The "Red Tide" Strategy
If Germany were to wait until G2 or G3 it would give Russia more time to build more offensive units.
-
RE: The "Red Tide" Strategy
That makes for an interesting conversation. A 5 tank purchase with Russia… I have never even considered that possibility.
-
RE: The "Red Tide" Strategy
Thanks for joining the conversation Gargantua! We have been discussing the Russian strategy, and I have found that there are many different opinions on how Russia should use it’s IPCs. I believe that reactionary play is the most suitable, while also including some diversity in your purchases. All infantry is a poor build giving only one effective mean, while purchasing artillery or mechanized infantry can provide you with several options. Now if there is an obvious Moscow push from Germany with solid German purchases, more and more infantry is important.
-
RE: The "Red Tide" Strategy
Anything other than opinion must be factually accurate for the topic and must be supported by expert consensus where such consensus exists. That being said, the general consensus of the Russian strategy is to purchase mainly infantry, and stack Moscow. However the opinion of some AA players, is that the infantry stack of Russia is not the only strategy that can be used. This is where the “Red Tide” topic has surfaced, evaluating the effectiveness of a strategy other than the standard Russian moves. By no means does the “Red Tide” strategy replace the overall consensus strategy, but merely offers players an alternative to the standard play. Being that a game of AA is extremely fluid, the turn by turn purchases or moves differentiate, and can deviate from an original plan, however a “strategy” will be your overall game plan for any given army or armies during the length of an entire game of AA.
-
RE: The "Red Tide" Strategy
Well written Afrikacorps. It is good to highlight both the advantages and disadvantages.
-
RE: The "Red Tide" Strategy
I would have to agree with you. An adaptive play is what is most important while playing AA. For Russia it is crucial to defend, and therefore you must be sure that Germany is not moving forward with 100% focus on Moscow and base your purchases around that. If Germany devotes roughly 80% of its forces to a push on Moscow, then do a simple counter balance calculation and use 20% of your IPCs on offensive units. Make sure that you are keeping the odds in your favor, looking turns into the future. Always think about the worst possible outcome and play accordingly, at least for Russia.