@SS-GEN thanks!
Best Russia 1 ?
-
Sounds like both of us have played this version a little too much lol.
-
Sounds like both of us have played this version a little too much lol.
Regarding Russia it is pretty much the same on Revised and Spring 1942 if you consider the movement options. Russia actually starts on a better position in Spring 1942 than Revised since the Axis bid is removed from play and thus can’t be deployed by Germany on the Russian front.
One of the worse moves Russia could see happening on Revised would be for 3 German INF to pop up on Ukr/Belo/WRus or 1 armor to E. Eur and 1 inf to Belo, to allow the Germans to counterattack on WRus on G1. That was/is probably one of the hardest strats to pull off by both sides and it all turned into a matter of skill and dice.
The main impact the air/naval changes in Spring 1942 is that Russia can’t count with the Allies as quickly as it did for mass landings on Europe, while on the Asian front there can be a few more possibilities open to the Allies regarding Japan. West Russia is still the whole key to the Eastern front, the same way Kazakh/Novo are for the Asian front. -
-
Seems a lot of axis players G1 are pretty much going all out for WR, pur 5 inf 5 tanks, abandoned WE and head due east! … Then 1 if not 2 J factories, send J fighters to support G for an all out land assault on R.
Well, that is no surprise at all. You don’t see tennis players at Wimbledon trying to hold racquets with their bums (as much as that might improve viewing ratings). Likewise, you shouldn’t see Germany bulking at Western Europe on G1 or Japan leaving its fighters sitting in the middle of the Pacific Ocean on J2.
I know this has already been discussed but, what is the best R1 purchase and comabt play? Seems axis strat to meet in the middle (at any cost sometimes) is becomeing harder and harder to defend without some help of the dice.
It isn’t any harder than it ever was. It’s just that you’re facing different opponents, or maybe your opponents are slacking off less. As far as the best R1, more on that in a bit.
I’ve seen parts of some of your games, Paulzy and I don’t think it’s the lack of a decent script for R1 play that ultimately holds you back. I think it’s your general strategy that you need to think about.
Is Granada right with the Norwegian Gambit ?
Please don’t use this sloppy “Norwegian Gambit” terminology. :roll: It’s a two-fighter-attack against Norway on R1. Calling it anything else just confuses the issue.
Besides, the MACE WINDU FLYING JEDI strategy is CLEARLY superior. :mrgreen:
See what I mean? What the h*** is the MACE WINDU FLYING JEDI strategy?!! Yeah . . .
What about belo and wr ?
No. If you don’t have a very good idea of precisely why you would hit West Russia/Belorussia (and if you’re asking the question, you don’t), you should hit West Russia/Ukraine instead.
Hell, what about buying 6 artys or 4tanks 1 arty pulling everything in to WR/R then blow back up!?!
This is what I mean when I say I think you need to work on your general strategy, Paulzy. I cannot conceive of a scenario in which attacking West Russia only on R1 is a good thing. Unless you’re deliberately handicapping yourself.
As far as buying 6 artillery or 4 tanks 1 artillery, those aren’t new concepts. I say 6 artillery is certainly wrong. 4 tanks 1 artillery are OK, but you won’t get much mileage out of that purchase unless you have some idea of what you’re doing with it.
I realize first 2 maybe 3 rounds can belong to axis, would like some feedback on allied, particualy R defense. When G really gets the ground game goin either stacking kar or kriane with jap air support, russia can get in trouble real quick.
Germany should not be able to stack Karelia. Jap air support to either Karelia or Ukraine are traps for the Axis.
–
1. 6 artillery is wrong because artillery have crap mobility and suck on defense for their cost. Tanks threaten many more territories.
Tanks at Caucasus can threaten India, Ukraine, Balkans, West Russia, Belorussia, Karelia, Archangel, Novosibirsk, Kazakh, and Sinkiang, plus I think Evenki. Or something like that, anyways say eleven territories. Now compare to artillery at Caucasus. You threaten Balkans, West Russia, Kazakh, and Persia. WHOOP DE DOO, four territories.
The THEORY is that artillery are more effective on offense, because they’re tactically useful in combination with infantry in that role. But in practice, their power doesn’t make up for the reduction in threat range.
Tanks cost 25% more, but have a 300% threat range. So they’re three times as useful. If Spring 1942 was a map that had four territories - Berlin, Eastern Europe, West Russia, and Moscow, then artillery would be much better. As it is, I say it’s a rule of thumb that Russia should have a maximum of three artillery.
2. The Allies shouldn’t have a hard time setting up transports to Norway or fortifying West Russia (particularly with Allied fighters). Both Norway and West Russia pressure Karelia. So you’re looking at a situation in which UK and US are each increasing their threat by six ground a turn, and Russia four ground a turn. Germany cannot maintain position at Karelia.
Germany can hold at Karelia for a LITTLE while, and can take and hold it early if it completely abandons Norway (which makes a G1 attack on the UK battleship/transport less likely). But in any event, Germany restricting Russian income by grabbing Karelia early is precisely what a R1 tank heavy purchase is all about. The Russian purchase delays an early German grab, giving UK/US a bit more time to get into position to reinforce Norway.
But even if Germany does grab Karelia early, that usually forgoes the German attack against the UK battleship/transport, which allows UK to set up its transport chain into Europe earlier.
3. Germany maintaining a presence on Ukraine is a problem because it cuts Russian income, and this is MUCH MORE the case early in the game. This is PRECISELY why the WR/Ukraine attack is very useful - it isn’t JUST for the German fighter; it also screws with Germany’s front line units and if successful (high percentage) in capturing Ukraine, stops Germany from landing fighters on Ukraine at end of G1 (and stops Japan from putting 2 more on at the end of its turn), plus all sorts of nasty sheanigans that Germany can come up with on G2.
Later in the game, there’s not much the Allies can do to stop Germany from stacking Ukraine and getting Jap fighter support. But by that time if the Allies have established transport chains into Europe, that’s pretty standard.
3. Jap air reinforcing Germany at Karelia or Ukraine is often a trap for the Axis. Suppose Japs reinforce Karelia late game with Jap fighters. Now what? If Japs pull out, Germany gets slaughtered by US/Russia. If Germans pull out, Japan gets slaughtered by UK. So both Germans and Japanese get locked into defending a territory that they don’t really want to defend. Japanese fighters on Berlin and/or Eastern Europe are a different matter, but Karelia (and less so Ukraine) is often not a good spot for Jap air to hang out in.
-
Buy 3 inf 3 tanks. Attack ukraine with 3 inf 1 art 3 tanks 2 fighters to be safe. 9 inf 1 art 1 tank to western russia. Always do the west russia battle first. After the west russia battle you can see if you can retreat from ukraine after 1 round of combat or not. If germany gets 3 hits in west russia on defense or less and you get 4 or 5 hits the first turn on attack in ukraine and your opponet got 3 hits or less you can retreat. This will save your 3 tanks and 1 art. Killing the fighter in ukraine is nice, but saving those 3 tanks is much more important.
I agree with the 3inf 3 arm buy, and the WR + UKR attack.
I am currently switching towards bringing 2 armor to west russia simply to reduce the risk of getting diced badly there. As Hobbes states 3 losses is absolutely max.
Remember to bring the Russia AA gun to WR.Retreating from a battle you actually would win (strafing), as ROC describes for the UKR battle is a very usefull Russian tactic. I use it a often, if my opponent brings forward a stack which is too weak defensively. And this is where the value of the armor really comes into play.
Hobbes mentions the trading of the eastern europe territories (UKR, Belo and Karelia).
A solid Russian strategy (and German as well) involves cost effective trading of these territories. Have anyone ever made an analysis of how many and which units should be used to take a territory occupied with (1 inf, 2 inf etc.) in order to play economically optimal? -
Have anyone ever made an analysis of how many and which units should be used to take a territory occupied with (1 inf, 2 inf etc.) in order to play economically optimal?
(whistles innocently) :-D
Yeh, but I know how people LOVE text walls.
My theory is if it’s more than 100 words, 90% of people will not want to take the time to understand it.
-
@Bunnies:
Yeh, but I know how people LOVE text walls.
My theory is if it’s more than 100 words, 90% of people will not want to take the time to understand it.
There’s always the Article Submission section hint hint - a lot of my recent articles simply evolved because I didn’t want to go consulting threads back and forwards.
-
Hobbes mentions the trading of the eastern europe territories (UKR, Belo and Karelia).
A solid Russian strategy (and German as well) involves cost effective trading of these territories. Have anyone ever made an analysis of how many and which units should be used to take a territory occupied with (1 inf, 2 inf etc.) in order to play economically optimal?Rule of thumb for me:
- 1 INF vs 2 INF/1 FTR or 1 INF/1 ART/ARM
- 2 INF vs 3 INF/1 FTR or 2 INF/1 ART/ARM
- 3 INF vs 4 INF/1 FTR or 3 INF/1 ART/ARM
The attacking forces will also greatly depend on the availability of planes. Germany can trade those territories quite effectively if it concentrates its planes on a single territory, allowing it to bring the same amount of INF as the defender.
While, some other times I may deliberately send additional infantry with the Russians to each attack to force the Germans to spend some of their armor in the counterattack. -
Never use your armor to take territory except for the first round, and the other exception is if you can take and hold the territory.
-
Hobbes mentions the trading of the eastern europe territories (UKR, Belo and Karelia).
A solid Russian strategy (and German as well) involves cost effective trading of these territories. Have anyone ever made an analysis of how many and which units should be used to take a territory occupied with (1 inf, 2 inf etc.) in order to play economically optimal?Rule of thumb for me:
- 1 INF vs 2 INF/1 FTR or 1 INF/1 ART/ARM
- 2 INF vs 3 INF/1 FTR or 2 INF/1 ART/ARM
- 3 INF vs 4 INF/1 FTR or 3 INF/1 ART/ARM
The attacking forces will also greatly depend on the availability of planes. Germany can trade those territories quite effectively if it concentrates its planes on a single territory, allowing it to bring the same amount of INF as the defender.
While, some other times I may deliberately send additional infantry with the Russians to each attack to force the Germans to spend some of their armor in the counterattack.Good stuff. Yeah if at all possible you want 90%+ odds on trading battles. 95%+ is even better, if you have the air power necessary. The point is not merely to avoid risk (eg losing the battles) but also to inflict more damage when the enemy is forced to counterattack, and force the enemy to bring more units into the counterattack, which you will then get to destroy.
But it gets more complicated when a power is under attack from 2-3 powers and getting worn down. In this context air is more helpful because you dont want to expend to many units in trade and dilute your numbers.
-
he Article Submission section hint hint -
The plus side of writing articles here is not having to deal with $%@! editors.
The bad part is . . . having to do the editing yourself.
:-P :-P :-P
-
@Bunnies:
he Article Submission section hint hint -
The plus side of writing articles here is not having to deal with $%@! editors.
The bad part is . . . having to do the editing yourself.
:-P :-P :-P
But then you get a specific strat associated with your name… just imagine it being referred on the forums as ‘Bunnies Flying Windu strategy’. IT’S COOL :mrgreen: oh yeah!
Suggested Topics
