Only the German TRN and BB was original and I was more than happy to stop bombardment and troop delivery from Italy. Since Russia starts with 2 fighters by your logic I only lost a dollar. I don’t count the its there so it don’t cost argument. Yes you don’t buy those units at the start but if you want them once they are gone they have to be purchased.
No, by my logic you spent 30 IPCs in fighters. The Germans spent 0 IPCs in navy.
@ncscswitch:
For everyone who dismisses the value of the units your start the game with…
I challenge you to a game where the board starts empty and each nation begins with a build based on their initial income!
I’ll take the Allies :-D
No one is stipulating that all original units are worthless. We are just comparing spent money to unspent money.
For instance, I don’t know a single German player who would be unhappy trading the SZ 5 fleet to kill two british fighters and a bomber. That’s not saying the SZ 5 fleet is worthless, just that it’s value compared to other units is not as high.
Maximizing the value of all of your units (newly bought, and the ones you start with) is the key to victory.
That’s exactly right; I’d rather have the US or UK take out the med fleet with their initial airforce rather than build 3 figs with Russia to do it :/
those 2 fighters are most likely the most important units in the game. so it stands to reason that to buy a third plane at SOME point makes sence, not necessarily on R1 however.
@Imperious:
those 2 fighters are most likely the most important units in the game.
Agreed. ~ZP
@Bean:
Only the German TRN and BB was original and I was more than happy to stop bombardment and troop delivery from Italy. Since Russia starts with 2 fighters by your logic I only lost a dollar. I don’t count the its there so it don’t cost argument. Yes you don’t buy those units at the start but if you want them once they are gone they have to be purchased.
No, by my logic you spent 30 IPCs in fighters. The Germans spent 0 IPCs in navy.
By my logic, Russia just forced themselves to expose a bunch of offensive ground units to German aircraft in Europe. I’d be more than happy to trade the Med fleet for 3 Russian fighters.
@ncscswitch:
For everyone who dismisses the value of the units your start the game with…
I challenge you to a game where the board starts empty and each nation begins with a build based on their initial income!
I’ll take the Allies :-D
I’ll take that bet. Place all of Germany’s ground and air units in West Russia and their navy in sz5 if you only allow units to be placed in OOB occupied sz’s or in sz6 if you allow them to be placed in sz’s bordering any territory you own. I don’t think it would matter where Japan put’s their units but I’d say place their whole navy and 4 fig in sz60 an all the rest in FIC. I don’t need a bid. :-D
It might be fun to really play a game like that if there were limits like: you can only increase the number of units in each territory or sz up to 50% max IPC value based on OOB starting positions, such as a territory that normally contains 10 IPC’s in units can only be increased by 5 more IPC’s in units.
I was not speaking of a liquidation start U-505… I was being sarcastic about startign with a vacant board, then USSR gets to build $24 of units, Germahy $40, UK $30, Japan $30, USA $42… (no combat round 1 since no nation would have any units on the board), the start from there.
It was a post to point out how silly it is to discount the units you start with when determining the value of various units.
Oh, I misread that. Never mind. I’ll just build all ground units(4,2,1 mix inf/art/arm) except for 6 fighters with Germany and place them all in WR. And 1 sub in sz6.
@ncscswitch:
I was not speaking of a liquidation start U-505… I was being sarcastic about startign with a vacant board, then USSR gets to build $24 of units, Germahy $40, UK $30, Japan $30, USA $42… (no combat round 1 since no nation would have any units on the board), the start from there.
It was a post to point out how silly it is to discount the units you start with when determining the value of various units.
I know. I was just messing with you. I value all of my starting units. Otherwise I would SBR with the German bomber from G1.
Back on topic…
I like a R1 USSR FIG build. 3 FIGs to allow for trading 3 territories along the German front. If conditions permit, I will buy a 4th.
But the Russians cannot afford to be the ones to take out the Med Fleet. Those FIGs are too critical to trading with Germany (and later countering Japan advances) to be lost to destroy a TRN and BB.
The Russian fighters should never be used for anything except proven odds battles where they are not at risk, unless its the ‘big battle’ to decide the war…etc
Russians can never replace them unless they are clearly not in trouble.
@ncscswitch:
Back on topic…
I like a R1 USSR FIG build.
I don’t. And for only one reason: Because you can’t forsee how R1 will turn out. We’re having that discussion in the other thread about having to plan for bad dice in ADS and this case is a perfect example. No matter what you attack on R1, if Russia ends up taking heavy casualties and you bought the 3rd fighter, you’re going to be missing the 2 inf, 1 art you could have bought instead. I prefer to wait until the battle lines are established before deciding if I can spare the 10 IPC’s for a 3rd Russian fighter. I see extra Russian fighters as a luxury as opposed to a neccesity. If Germany can push a big stack covered by an AA into Ukraine or Belorussia earlier than normal because Russia is short on ground units then the 3rd fighter bought on R1 just became a poor purchase.
I think it should if ever be build only after Soviets are out of immediate danger, and more likely if this is a KGF deal.
otherwise it would be good for R2-3 provided the German player is spending IPC on fleet that will not impact USSR, such as the transport piggyback to Russia from baltic. The fighters would be good to keep Japanese back long enough to make an impact on Germany
Exactly. It’s much better to wait until the battle lines are drawn first. That way you can not only determine if it is possible after seeing R1 but also determine if a 3rd fighter is a correct purchase after seeing Germany tip it’s hand on it’s strategy on G1. Buying a 3rd Russian fighter isn’t always the correct move, even as late as R3, so you shouldn’t pigeonhole yourself by doing it before you even see the first die fall.
Ya know, 40 IPC worth of equipment in W. Russia might still take Russia on Round 1. :P
I think I’m back to where U-505 is currently stating (not because he said it, but because I’ve been playing around with R1 purchases). I’m finding that it’s not as hard to hold Ukraine early on as I thought since you can put 3 inf 1 aa there and the Germans don’t really want to touch it; it’s too risky to use fighters, too risky to hit with everything because of Cauc + W. Russia, and inefficient to throw away art/arm at it when the Russians can do about the same. Then you only generally need 2 figs to trade the other 2 territories; if the Germans send more than maybe think about getting another fig but they will be spending themselves thing sending more than 1-2 inf.
And like U-505 said, it’s contradictory to play ADS and assume things will go well for you, I’m surprised that Switch wants to buy a fig immediately because that’s not planning for bad dice at all. It’s the same reason that you don’t want to buy double complexes with Japan immediately, because you need to see how Pearl goes and if you need more naval screen after that, which tran does.
If you get diced badly on R1, nothing you purchase is going to make much of a difference. The extra FIG though (combined with eastern INF being brought to the German Front is a pretty good way to help control the damage.
As for the Ukraine w/ AA issue…
Med Fleet it out of existence instead, and invite Russia to come back again and again :-)
If you get diced badly on R1, nothing you purchase is going to make much of a difference. The extra FIG though (combined with eastern INF being brought to the German Front is a pretty good way to help control the damage.
2 inf + 1 art makes a much larger difference in a counterattack than 1 fig will. It will also allow you to have more land units to take territories, which a fig won’t.
The extra FIG though (combined with eastern INF being brought to the German Front is a pretty good way to help control the damage.
All being said I don’t think buying a fig off the bat is terrible, either.
As for the Ukraine w/ AA issue…
Med Fleet it out of existence instead, and invite Russia to come back again and again smiley
That I could live with, because UK2 will kill the med fleet with 3 fig 1 bom and suddenly Germany is overspent in Ukraine. I think it’s more of inviting Germany to come again and again because typical Ukraine/W. Russia ends up with 6 inf 1 art 1 arm in W. Russia with 5 inf 1 art in Cauc, that’s 11 inf 2 art 2 arm 2 fig to counterattack Ukraine, which doesn’t favor the Germans stacking it hard. I guess the Germans could build 8 arm in anticipating of countering again, but soon they are out of inf and having to defend from too many angles.
2 inf + 1 art makes a much larger difference in a counterattack than 1 fig will. It will also allow you to have more land units to take territories, which a fig won’t.
I look at the fighter as a more efficient tool to kill enemy infantry so that you dont have to waste an extra fodder on the same battle.
So a battle to kill 3 Germans infantry can be done with good odds with 3 fighters and 2 infantry, whereas if you kept trading back and forth over the same you would need extra infantry with 2 fighters. If you dont think this will occur with the Soviets/ Germans then its not a good option… but usually its a common thing.
Probably more important with Japanese who cant hit you early with lots of land, so you can save the fodder.
so to bottom line it: Its a more efficient tool for saving infantry as fodder for small battles and improving odds.
the 2 infantry and one infantry will be used as fodder during the course of a game in extra “payments” for trading small stacks which does result in the Soviet player with less net exchanges of value with axis.
