Here’s the options for R1, as I see them.
1. Belorussia/West Russia. Wipes out forward German infantry, preventing a strong G1 attack against Russian-held West Russia, and keeps Russian tanks at West Russia, where they’re safe.
2. Ukraine/West Russia. Wipes out forward German infantry, preventing a strong G1 attack against Russian-held West Russia. Destroys a German fighter, tank, and artillery. The German fighter is VERY valuable. But Russian tanks need to be committed to Ukraine, and will be destroyed in the German counterattack.
2A. Ukr/WR with 2 Russian tanks / 2 Russian fighters. There’s about a 19% chance that the Russians will lose one or both fighters on the attack. There’s about a 12% chance that the Russians will keep both fighters, destroy all German units on Ukraine, but fail to capture Ukraine. That leaves about a 69% chance of claiming Ukraine with at least one Russian tank.
2B. Ukr/WR with 3 Russian tanks / 2 Russian fighters. About a 4% chance the Russians lose both fighters, 2% of losing one fighter, 5% of both fighters surviving but losing everything else. That leaves about a 89% chance of claiming Ukraine with at least one Russian tank.
3. Norway/West Russia. Attacking with 2 fighters preserves the UK battleship, but leaves the German infantry at Belorussia and Ukraine intact, allowing the Germans to hit West Russia very hard on G1, and the Russian fighter is lost. Not discussed in my earlier poll regarding Norway/West Russia was the German fighter depletion strategy.
4. West Russia/Ukraine/Norway. Russia attacks at three territories. Making three attacks instead of two means Russia has to split its forces more, meaning increased casualties when attacking, and leaving the dispersed forces vulnerable to counterattack. Or, Germany could take advantage of Russia’s weak position by immediately trying to establish a secure forward position, from which it cannot easily be dislodged as Russia’s attacking forces are so weak. This attack CAN kill 2 German fighters, though, but odds are good that at least one survives.
Let’s elaborate on 4) a bit.
Russia has 2 fighters that can be assigned anywhere, as needed. Assigning both to Norway means at least one will die, either on the attack, or to the G1 attack on Karelia, where the second Russian fighter must land.
Germans defend Norway with 3 infantry 1 fighter; Russia can hit with 3 infantry 1 tank. At LEAST one Russian fighter should be committed for this attack to have any chance of real success; 1 Russian fighter leaves about a 60% chance the Russian fighter survives and the German fighter dies. 2 Russian fighters leave about a 89% chance of one Russian fighter surviving (again, even if both Russian fighters survive the initial battle, one dies in the German counterattack).
Germans defend Ukraine with 3 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 tank, 1 fighter; Russia can hit with 3 infantry, 1 artillery, 3 tanks. Russia has a 62% chance of killing the German fighter even without any Russian fighter. Adding a Russian fighter brings the odds to about 81% that the Russian fighter survives and the German fighter dies; if the Russian fighter is expendable, it’s about 87% chance the German fighter goes down. (For this reason, I think when trying to deplete the German air force, it’s better to hit Norway with 1 fighter and Ukraine with 1 fighter, than to send both to Norway).
Germans defend West Russia with 3 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 tank. Russia can hit with 6 infantry 1 artillery. Without going into it, this spends a lot of Russian blood, with a success rate of about 63% - and usually even if winning, just one or two Russian units are left. That’s why a lot of players opt to use the second fighter not at Ukraine, but at West Russia, bringing the odds of success to about 90% and an average of about 3 Russian units surviving.
With 60/60/90 attacks, there’s a 64% chance of failure at at least one of the important German-fighter battles. Germany can rush tanks east and create an early strong position. However, Germany cannot grab Caucasus early, and with West Russia in Russian hands, Germany doesn’t have the power to smash into Moscow immediately.
It’s also possible to hit Ukr/Norway only, instead of draining Russia’s attack power to try to take West Russia, The Germans can grab a lot of territory on G1, but they can’t hold most of it. The problem with that is lousy position at the start of R2; Russia doesn’t have any territories to trade.
Comment - Ukraine with 3 tanks/2 fighters has about a 4% “total failure” rate, losing both Russian fighters, with 2% loss of one Russian fighter, and 5% of both Russian fighters surviving, leaving about 89% chance of one German fighter going down. Compare to Russia committing both fighters to Ukr/Norway (either doing Ukr/Norway alone, or Ukr/Norway/West Russia) with a 8% chance of total failure, not killing any German fighters, 44% chance to bag 1 German fighter, and a 48% chance of whacking both German fighters - but BOTH Russian fighters survive.
Comment 2 - the loss of Russian tanks hurts a lot. Russian tanks can threaten a lot of different territories, and can dash back and forth between the German and Japanese fronts as necessary. It’s not that they DO dash back and forth; it’s just the THREAT they pose that’s so nasty. But losing German fighters hurts Germany a lot too, so it’s a bit of a toss-up.
