I couldn’t stop laughing after I read that Imperious.
Posts made by Requester45
-
RE: VANN to Baron-Larry Marx to ENIGMA formulas.
-
RE: The Bright Skies
I’m finishing up a game now (at my house). I might try to implement this strategy in one of my upcoming games to see what it is like for myself.
-
RE: [Global 1940] Oil Derrick & Refineries
My question to be attached to this would be, if you upgrade a territory that is originally a 2 IPC territory, lets say the Caucasus, and it becomes 3 IPCs per turn. Would Russia then be able to produce a major facility on that territory?
Based on the list you shared, this would be the case in
-Caucasus (@3 for a major)
-West India (@2 for a minor)
-Western Canada (@2 for a minor)
-Alaska (@3 for a major)
-Egypt (@3 for a major)
-Trans Jordan (@2 for a minor)
-Union of South Africa (@3 for a major)
-Ukraine (@3 for a major) -
RE: The Bright Skies
I would love to see some games that have implemented this strategy. They would be good to dissect, and it has certainly raised some valid points from both sides.
-
RE: The Bright Skies
I can understand the strategy of purchasing mechs, i’m only trying to say that I would purchase infantry instead to further my chances of holding Moscow. Germany can only do so much without taking out the Russians.
-
RE: The Bright Skies
How did you double the infantry from your previous calculations?
-
RE: The Bright Skies
If Russia moved all of the units that you are stating here, Germany would merely need to continue moving past Novgorod right on to Moscow, which will draw Russia to either move our of Novgorod in defense or to attack the German units. Which is a win win for Germany because their other infantry and units from Greater Southern and the tanks and mechs from the Paris attack would be right behind. They would easily move into Novgorod and crush whatever Russian forces were left. It is a lose lose for Russia.
-
RE: The Bright Skies
If Germany is committed to taking Novgorod on G3, they will. I don’t believe that there is any way that Russia could stop that. If you put forces in Vyborg or Karelia, German planes can support the 7 infantry in a G2 attack on one or both of those territories, with the ability to support a G3 attack on Novgorod. Then you have a Baltic fleet that can land there, plus your mass of troops from the Baltic States. As Germany if you use the troops from Germany, Poland, and Slovakia, you have a total 16 infantry, 3 artillery, and 2 tanks. You can use 3 tanks from Greater Southern if you didn’t push them into Paris, and you can also use any planes that you have left at the beginning of G3. Germany start with 12 planes. They won’t lose them all and they will have the range and ability to assist in a G3 attack on Novgorod. That is going to be enough to take out the Russian forces in Novgorod. A committed German player, will take Novgorod. Russia does not have the time to stop this from happening, and after Germany takes Novgorod and destroys Russia’s primary mass of forces, they will not be able to catch up. Germany will SBR Moscow, and Moscow if they are lucky would have no more than a fraction of what Germany could crush them with.
-
RE: The Bright Skies
taamvan makes an excellent point that I would like to touch on. If Russia stacks Novgorod, Germany will wipe it out and be soundly in position to strike Moscow. Once Germany takes Novgorod, all they have to do is use SBR’s to level Moscow, which will already be weak because of the annihilation of the forces in Novgorod. Germany would move with ease onto Moscow.
As for for purchasing bombers with the US, which is what this thread is about, If you make a move to Russia with them, then for the first 4 or 5 turns, Japan goes on uncontested in the Pacific, which is a no go. Can you imagine if the allied forces did both of these things in one game? The axis player would have a field day. It wouldn’t even be fair.
-
RE: The Bright Skies
That is a good point taamvan. I am in the middle of a current game (we usually play one game over the course of a week), where Germany decided not to attack Moscow, realizing that they were at a disadvantage and instead took the 15 NO bonuses in the surrounding territories. Russia, being restricted to mainly infantry has a difficult time moving around their territories to take them back from Germany. Germany has a total of 20 NO bonuses, resulting in nearly 80 IPCs per turn. The allies were able to place 8 fighters and 1 tact 1 bomber in defense of Moscow, which is why Germany turned away. That is the most allied fighters we have ever had land in defense of Moscow. Luckily for the allies, they were able to stave off Italy in Africa, and they took complete control of the Middle East and even the Balkans. This has resulted in a stoppage of growth for Germany, and now the game has become a game of attrition against the Axis.
The point here is that there is no sure fire way to defend Moscow 100% of the time. It has unfortunately been the staple of the Russian army to purchase nothing but infantry, and stack in Moscow, hoping for the best possible outcome. This is the battle that usually will decide the fate of the rest of the game. We can try other tactics with Russia, but should*** come to the consensus that has already been established, which is that the best way for the Russian player to defend himself is to infantry stack.
*** I use the word “should” here, because the AA community has played this game collectively for a very long time (from what I gather). We understand the basic principles of the numbers, and the strategic value of most units. The only way that we will see a different Russian strategy, is if we change the attack and defense values of units, which I just don’t see being a feasible outcome. I think the infantry stack strategy closely follow the true life nature of the Russian forces during WWII. The Germans clearly had superior technology, they just didn’t have the manpower to out muscle the mass of Russian infantry.
-
RE: The Bright Skies
When I play Global we record the game stats so that we can review the past. From a large sample size of the games that we have played, Germany takes Moscow about 4 out of 10 times. This is based on a few different factors. Of course you cannot control the outcome of dice, and the purchases of any given player for Germany or Russia.
-
RE: The Bright Skies
That’s a good point taamvan. To allow your army to be vulnerable to can openers, and to German columns is a death wish.
-
RE: The Bright Skies
I think ultimately as the Russian player, your job is to hold Moscow. It is difficult to do so with fewer defensive units by purchasing mechanized infantry. The movement of these units is outweighed by the defensive power of more infantry. Any German player would lick their chops if they saw anything other than full infantry purchases from Russia.
-
RE: The Bright Skies
And that is an extremely valid point too. Germany can easily just move through the south and hit Moscow. Then you would be left with a situation where Russia might control Scan, and Germany just mops up the rest of Russia. With refinement, this strategy could work, but its difficult to stop a straight forward attack from Germany. Especially if they are implementing SBRs.
-
RE: The Red Tigers
I think you are overlooking the importance of Yunnan. I did make the mistake of not clarifying that the Russian tank and mech along with 3 planes would move into Yunnan on turn 2. These 5 units along with additional Chinese units, and a small UK force would be able to hold Yunnan even against a large mass of planes. If China is allowed to consistently spawn a solid number of units, they become uncontrollable for Japan. The great thing is, the Russian planes, and UK planes that are in the Pacific can reach Calcutta for defense, Yunnan for defense, and then within 2 turns, Russia for defense when or if needed.
-
RE: The Bright Skies
That is a valid point Afrikakorps. Thanks for the strategy input.
-
RE: The Red Tigers
Japan has the ultimate goal of diminishing and or destroying both the Chinese, and UK armies in the pacific. Japan will never successfully take mainland US (unless of course you are playing an inexperienced player), and occasionally they will make a push for Sydney, although they don’t pose a very serious threat. Japan will make most of its income from the “Money Islands” and mainland Asia. The sacking of Calcutta places Japan in a great strategic field. By eliminating the UK in the pacific, Japan can then focus on its navy, and protecting its assets, while expanding its expeditions to either Hawaii, or Sydney.
Now China plays an extremely important role during this entire process, as China can delay or even prevent a Japanese mainland conquest. China as everyone knows plays the game through gorilla warfare tactics. Eventually, this cannot be sustained, as they lose the Burma road, and cannot collect enough IPCs to effectively defend the Japanese advance. Japan will either decide to crush the Chinese forces, or bypass them (while holding on to the Yunnan territory). China however has another option as outlined in this thread. Russia can effectively defend China in the Yunnan territory, resulting in a flow of Chinese units continuously turn by turn. Even assuming that China has only three IPCs, with a 6 bonus, they can place 3 units every turn. Russia can afford to use a few of its units, assuming there is a large number of Allied aircraft landing there to support it. It has also been pointed out that the Russian aircraft can make it back to Russia by turn 6 giving Yunnan 2 turn of additional defense. This gives China enough time to build a significant amount of infantry.
Now I say this because Yunnan is a vital territory for both Japanese and Allied forces in mainland Asia. If Japan retains control of it, it has a forwarding base for its units to make a push in any direction for the conquest of mainland Asia. It also chokes China from IPCs which eventually dwindles the already small army. If the allies retain control, China can begin to grow, and effectively keep Japan from taking many mainland IPCs. It also provides a territory for the UK to land planes, and to make an effective push for coastal territories.
Obviously using Russian forces in this way will not work every time (as you cannot predict the rolls of large battles). I will probably use this strategy once in a blue moon to change things up. The last thing I want to touch on, is that once these Russian units move into Japan on turn 1, they will be declaring war on Japan. This puts the Russian 20 in an interesting situation. They are most effectively utilized by defending. Make Japan attack them. Japan knows that the Mongolian pact is a bust, ensuring that they wont spawn 6 additional Russian units in the north. Even if you lose all 20 units, you are delaying an inland push by the Japanese for at least 1 turn, and you should* kill about 6-7 units assuming your rolls fall within the odds.
Of course this is just my opinion, and like I said, I will use this tactic once in a while. It should be effective enough to stop an ill-prepared Japanese.
-
RE: Piece Storage and keeping games intact
I keep my games separate, however I add pieces to them from HBG.
-
RE: The Red Tigers
I have never sent additional Russian units to the Pacific, however after reading this thread I think I may give it a go.