Yeah I wouldn’t be sending Russians to India, or be putting them on any coastal territory. If any go to asia, through China is the best bet because it can stall Japan and you can usually retreat when the time comes.
@Bunnies:
Re: using 2 tanks vs 3 tanks at Ukraine / Ukraine attack
Yeah but then they just wipe out three of your tanks no problem and with two tanks on WR, it also helps Russia win faster in WR and helps protect against the counter. Besides, it’s a risk for Germany since there’s so many missions for those german fighters. Either way is good. I think that division comes down to personal preference.
Take a R1 sub buy. You want to land your Russian fighters at Caucasus to threaten the German battleship unless it sails west and takes Gibraltar with transport (to prevent UK air from whacking the battleship and transport) or spends IPCs on a defensive navy and stays at Southern Europe.
Failure to take Ukraine means an additional 2 German tanks that can hit Caucasus. If Caucasus is hit, Russian fighters will be lost, and the threat to the German battleship eliminated. Russia can safety and abandon Caucasus, but then the Germans whack Anglo Egypt and grab Caucasus with 1 inf (or whatever minimal forces), making the R1 sub buy fairly useless.Assuming UK recaptures Caucasus on UK1, Russia can land fighters on Caucasus on R2, to threaten the German fleet for R3, but on J2, a Japanese BB and AC can join the German Mediterranean fleet, and/or Germany can take countermeasures. True, Japan might not be in a position to reinforce, but if that were the case, US2 would be able to threaten the un-reinforced German battleship with 2 fighters 1 bomber anyways. (UK1 aircraft carrier/2 destroyer buy; US1 flies 2 fighters to UK carrier, US bomber to Archangel, R2 reinforces US bomber with 3 infantry, UK2 moves carrier to Algeria, US2 moves fleet to Algeria; US fighters on UK carrier in range of Mediterranean, joined by US bomber). This hits the entire Mediterranean.
(Hobbes mentioned in another thread the UK2 attack - UK bomber into position, UK fighter to French West Africa, UK1 India carrier southwest plus fighter for 2-3 fighter plus bomber, but contingent on Japan and German moves.)
So the strong point of the R1 sub buy (threatening German battleship before G2) is undermined if Ukraine is not taken, esp. considering the possibility of J2 reinforcements.
As far as risk - of course it’s all risky; an early German attack on a 6-7 unit Caucasus is risky, dropping the G1 Anglo Egypt attack is risky, if the German attack on Caucasus succeeds, the UK counter is risky, if the UK counter is not taken, the weakening of Japan’s J1 attacks is risky, if Russia attempts to recapture Caucasus, that will also be risky, and if Russia does not attempt to recapture, that will be riskiest of all!
There are dangerous behind every dice pip. :-o
“Remember what Bilbo used to say: It’s a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don’t keep your feet, there’s no knowing where you might be swept off to."
i’m a beginner, and i don’t know if i understand the R1 sub buy. is the idea to chase the German BB out of the med by threatening it with 2 fighters and a sub R2? If so, i feel like in all the games i’ve played Russia has quite enough on its plate and too few fighters already without trying to deal with German navy… isn’t it better to just let UK/US worry about that, since they’re more equipped to do it? (and indeed, if i understood the point of a Russian Mediterranean sub, to force the BB out, they’ll end up being the ones to kill it anyway, right?)
just though about it a bit more, by placing R1 sub, it forces G to sac the BB if it wants to attack Anglo-Egypt, since russia can immediately strike with the sub + 2 fighters… is that the reason to take a R1 sub buy?
hope you can explain this to me.
just though about it a bit more, by placing R1 sub, it forces G to sac the BB if it wants to attack Anglo-Egypt, since russia can immediately strike with the sub + 2 fighters… is that the reason to take a R1 sub buy?
hope you can explain this to me.
Exactly. Because of the early Russian investment, Germany only gets 1 drop in Africa if it wants Egypt. Alternatives to EGY/SZ 15 for Germany are reinforcing the fleet at 14 or going to SZ13. Normally, these options are mistakes because they leave the UK Egy force intact and allow the Indian fleet to move to SZ15.
As Allies, I want UK/USA to be landing in Europe asap and therefore Africa is a distraction. So the Afrikakorps needs to go in quick time.
Sometimes I buy an additional fighter as well as the sub for a safer overall bet and less chance of losing a fig in the R2 attack. This poses a significant risk and might be a mistake. Perhaps the biggest risk is if Russia gets bad dice R1 and Germany is able to stack Ukr G2 with enough force that Russia cannot retake it without the fighters. Hobbes also mentioned that skimping on inf/tanks early allows Germany to stack Karelia early in the game.
On the other hand, in no case is the fig + sub a waste, since the purchased sub is useful against Japan’s shipping.
germany has over 80% odds to win in anglo egypt round one anyway though, and in all my games that BB doesn’t make it past round 2 even without russian sub. so it still seems like whats gonna happen with the R1 sub is germany takes egypt anyway and then loses the BB to russia instead of UK or US. i still need help understanding why russia needs to take that upon herself to deal with the BB instead of focusing on survival/beating back german ground forces
germany has over 80% odds to win in anglo egypt round one anyway though, and in all my games that BB doesn’t make it past round 2 even without russian sub. so it still seems like whats gonna happen with the R1 sub is germany takes egypt anyway and then loses the BB to russia instead of UK or US. i still need help understanding why russia needs to take that upon herself to deal with the BB instead of focusing on survival/beating back german ground forces
The difference is you are getting the fleet R2 instead of UK2. Also, in most cases Russia will just lose the sub, so Allies lose a sub instead of a fighter (or 2) if they wait until UK2.
Take a look at the starting units in Africa. If G takes Egy G1, then UK counters Egy UK2 with 3 inf fig bmb, normally clearing it with 2 inf left over. Skip to G2. If Germany is allowed to use the bb/trn on G2, then they can land again in Egypt, or take Trj. Normally, they go to Egypt, and together with the units from Libya they will have 4 ground units, and typically 3 ground units survive.
Now, UK only has 1 inf plus 1 fig 1 bmb to counter Egy. But of course–in this scenario they can’t–since they need to use this air power to take out the fleet on UK2. That means the Afrikakorps will survive for a while and the tank will do some blitzting. Since UK has no ground forces except 1 inf from South Africa to oppose it, the Africa Korps can gradually move south towards South Africa, and Japan can use fighters to defend it from Allied air strafes.
Now if Russia takes care of the G fleet on R2, then Germany is denied its 2nd drop in Egypt, and consequently will only be able to counter Egy with the inf/art on Libya. On UK2, UK uses the fig + bmb + inf to take or clear Egy…and that’s it, the Afrika Korps is kaput. The battle for Africa is over on UK2, until the Japs arrive.
Is the gambit worth it over the long run? Who can tell? What I like about it is if Germany’s income is lower and UK’s income is higher, then that’s excellent news for Russia. If you finish Germany quickly in Africa, then it makes it harder for Japan to prop Germany up, since it can’t defend German possessions down there.
ok that makes perfect sense. thank you for taking the time to explain it to me! i will definitely try the R1 sub buy next game and see how it works for me. it’s a little scary spending the money down there, that’s a big chunk of my defense budget
We abandoned the Russian sub buy when it failed to take the BB and then the BB shot down two UK fighters and a US bomber RD 2.
Really? You have to be very unlucky, and, to me that’s not reason enough to abandon this tactic.
I don’t have my battle calculator with me, but it must have something like 95% chances of success.
And the odds of not losing a signle Russian FTR must be close to 50%…
That’s as good a deal you’re gonna get to sink a BB…
well just tried it for one game, and sure enough, the BB ran out to the pacific (where it was eventually sunk) and G failed to take egypt. helluva deal, i’ll keep trying it to see what results i can get.
well just tried it for one game, and sure enough, the BB ran out to the pacific (where it was eventually sunk) and G failed to take egypt. helluva deal, i’ll keep trying it to see what results i can get.
If they failed to take Egypt, how did they get out of the channel?
excuse me. i meant atlantic. i have this really bad habit of writing the opposite of what i’m thinking. :|
i’ve done the R1 sub buy twice more since then, and i have to say that i’m sold.
excuse me. i meant atlantic. i have this really bad habit of writing the opposite of what i’m thinking. :|
i’ve done the R1 sub buy twice more since then, and i have to say that i’m sold.
I do that all the time here too. So many specific details to keep straight when talking strats it’s easy to mess up.
I hear a lot of people saying that the R1 sub buy is a good way to go. But I’ve also heard a lot of people talk about taking Finland in R1 to save the UK battleship. Any thoughts on which one is a better way to go?
Each has its pros and cons.
The Norway attack saves the SZ2 fleet if successful. However Russia will also attack WRus or try its luck with a Nor-WR-Ukraine attack. Even with regular odds those units will be likely destroyed by the Germans (eliminating a large part of the Russian army), and there’s a risk that WRus or Caucasus become vulnerable to a German counterattack. If Ukraine isn’t attacked then that German fighter will be available to attack Egypt.
The sub buy allows for the German Med fleet to be sunk R2, unless it has pulled back towards SZ13 (and landing Gibraltar) instead of attacking Egypt. On the last situation the Russia can still attack the fleet if the UK/US take Algeria. However, either situation will require for the 2 Russian fighters not to be available for ground combat, forcing Russia to use armor to retake Kar/Belo/Ukr.
I said Finland, but I meant Norway. I do think Finland should be a separate territory that automatically switches sides depending on who is winning.
Anyway, I guess it comes down to what the Allies think will be more economical: Save the battleship, or save AE (and by extension, all of Africa).
I also hear a lot of people talk about sending Japan towards Africa. When (what round) do they usually do this? If you save Africa from Germany, does it just compel Japan to move faster? And if so, is it worth it (or even possible) to hold Japan off? I would think the earliest Japan could get to Africa would be J4 or J5(assuming the UK sinks the Japanees transport UK1).
It sounds like some people say they can save and hold Africa long enough that an R1 sub buy is better than saving the UK battleship. And now that I wrote it out, I’m inclined to believe that.
I also hear a lot of people talk about sending Japan towards Africa. When (what round) do they usually do this? If you save Africa from Germany, does it just compel Japan to move faster? And if so, is it worth it (or even possible) to hold Japan off? I would think the earliest Japan could get to Africa would be J4 or J5(assuming the UK sinks the Japanees transport UK1).
In a KGF game (without a substantial Pacific push by USA), Japan can and normally does take Africa eventually. They can land there as early as J2. The rub is this requires diverting transports, which are a limited resource. If Japan is focusing on Africa, then it might be ignoring the Pacific islands, or they might be getting less boots from Japan onto the mainland.
Allies can hold Africa, but this requires shucking land units into Africa (typically via sz12, which tends to be vulnerable to air attack). Whether they should is a tricky question–Africa contains many key swing ipcs, but concentrating on Africa means less boots to Europe.
If Japan is focusing on Africa, then it might be ignoring the Pacific islands, or they might be getting less boots from Japan onto the mainland.
well now that’s interesting. i’ve literally never bothered with the pacific islands as japan, is this a bad thing? especially hawaii. always seemed like it wasn’t worth tying up the transports and troops for the 4 rounds or whatever it would take to get them all. not that i wouldn’t mind the extra income, but i felt it was more urgent to pressure russia.
well now that’s interesting. i’ve literally never bothered with the pacific islands as japan, is this a bad thing? especially hawaii. always seemed like it wasn’t worth tying up the transports and troops for the 4 rounds or whatever it would take to get them all. not that i wouldn’t mind the extra income, but i felt it was more urgent to pressure russia.
Hawaii, Australia, and New Zealand, are worth 4 IPCs. If Japan gets them fast, then that can add up. Also, If the UK gets Borneo, then Japan has to send the transports anyway.
Tell me what you think…
:-o Operation Iron Horde :-o
-----------USSR–-------------
Buy: 8I
Attack: WR- 2I & 1F from Karelia; 3I from Arch; 1A from Cauc; 1A & 1F from Rus
Move: 2I SFE to Bury; 2I Yakut to Bury; 2I ENU to Novo; 2I Novo to Sink; 2T Rus to Sink; 1T Arch to Novo; 2I Kaz to Cauc; 3I Rus to Cauc; 2F WR to India
Place: 4I in Cauc; 4I in Rus
–---------UK–----------------
Buy: IC, 1B
Attack: JP SS w/ Aussie SS; NG w/ 2I from Aus; JP TS w/ F from CV; plus whatever’s clever in Atlantic
Move: India Ocean Fleet out of range of JP Southern fleet; 1I Persia to India; 1I Jordan to Persia; B to Rus; 1F to China
Place: IC in India
–-----------US–-------------
Buy: IC, 1B, 1CV
Attack: as possible (esp. Kwang)
Move: 1F HI to Aus; 1F WUS to HI; 1F EUS to UK; 1B ESU to HI; CZ 10 Fleet to CZ 20; 1DD CZ20 to CZ55; 2I Sink to China.
Place: IC in Sink; 1CV in CZ55
The USSR forces in East Asia will evict Japanese Asian forces plus all those Allied fighters force the Japanese Navy to contract and defend xports. Germany is allowed to run wild but US and UK fighters from new IC’s can defend Russia before it’s overrun.
Nomarclegs I think you will win the game quickly with that strategy if Japan or Germany play suboptimally. Japan in particular has to be very careful not to lose its fleet or its bastion on the mainland.
However an experienced Axis player will try to conserve the Jap fleet, and then bide his time and advance the Germans to West Russia or Cauc (Russia most likely won’t have the numbers to counterattack). Germany can put its entire might into Barbarossa since there is no UK fleet to threaten its rear. From Cauc, Germany either waits until it has enough force to attack Russia, or it conquers Sink and India, allowing Axis to dominate mainland Asia.
