I have to concur with the others who have posted. A combined transport and infantry build for Japan on turn 1 is the way to go. If Russia took Manchuria on round 1, and if the UK executed the “Kwangtung Maneuver”, the only place left for Japan to build is Southeast Asia. While initially it MIGHT be safe (the US can take that factory using China and Sinkiang forces one time in 3, and later will threaten it with a southern island hoping fleet), it is too far from Russia to do any good, and forward progress against Russia proper is easilly blocked by Novosibirsk infantry units. Japan HAS to focus on gaining IPC’s in round 1 in order to sustain a transport invasion of Russia through the back door (Manchuria to Yakut to Novosibirsk to Russia). Also, as Japan builds a transport navy (protect by heavy naval forces that were NOT sacrificed against the US at Hawaii) the US has to garrison Alaska heavilly (that japanease transport fleet ferrying troops to Manchuria is a single move away from an all out invasion of Alaska too). That reduces the number of US dollars that can be spent on the European war, allowing Germany to maintain the frontal assault on Russia that eventually leads to Japan taking Russia. So for an opening move, Japan re-takes Manchuria, takes Australia, blasts the results of the Kwantung Maneuver (if executed) or takes China using air force and Kwantung infantry. If Japan still holds Manchuria, they assault Yakut and take it. If the UK builds in India, that simply takes more pressure off Germany and allows THEM to take Russia, aided by the threat floating through the Siberian lands… too far from India for UK to do a darn thing about. YAKUT is the key for Japan. Take it and hold it, you have one territory with all of your west-marching forces to defend it from the Russians, and you force Russia to try to defend TWO territories against your massing forces. The drain on Russia: defending Evenk AND Novosibirsk plus holding Karelia and the Caucuses with an income of only 20 or so IPC’s is FATAL, REGARDLESS of UK and US support. And with Russia gone, the Alllies WILL lose (economic victory is immediate on taking Russia, world domination only a few moves away)
CA's 101 and R1-R2
-
aside from all the craziness of that post I think CA and a couple other more serious respondents are quite right about a few things. and it goes back to a dicussion I think yanni had last year.
firstly russia rulessecondly, CA is right about your typical AA novice playing russia. what do you do in T2? his answer is very simular to yanni’s Idea of robbing your enemy of their invasion casualties. meaning that when they do attack it will cost them in tanks and planes, not infantry, also meaning that if you can handle that counter attack you stand a great chance of surviving.
now I know many of you like to attack with russia on T1, and I’m not for that at all either. I prefer calculated mass counter attacks where the enemy is weakest or most vulnerable. this occasionally means that I give up a country here or there (like western europe when I’m Germany) but who cares if you take it, and only have one man to defend it .
when I have to attack a layered defense (lets say ukraine from karelia), I won’t use my tanks (or at least not many of them) in the frist wave. I hold them back unless I’m sure that the break through will be so total that my armor will not be in any danger from the counter strike. remember russia only starts with three tanks in position.
conversly I choose to defend, I pull back my tanks and planes into the safety of russia, leaving a large enough force in karelia to chew up all the german infantry. and I buy 6 inf and one tank. if the germans attack en mass- my counter attack force takes germany in t4-5. if not, the germans have lost the initiative and russia constricts them en mass. one country at a time. I don’t worry about japan- since I’m my own ally I send the US after them. -
yeah, i think russia is the most important country. if it holds, the axis will almost certainly lose. if it falls, the axis will come pretty close to winning, either being rich enough then to take out england, or just being able to get the IPC victory
-
I too enjoy playing Russia because they are so critical to an axis victory. And when/if the tide turns in favor of the Allies, Russia is in a good postion to start eating up territories. Remember, the allies winning is only half the victory, whom ever has the biggest piece of the pie afterwards is the true winner….
-
well put alamien 8)
-
Russia is criticle to the game. However sending the US against Japan is risky. Japan’s navy can put up a good defense while Japan’s ground forces make inroads in Asia depleting Russian income. Life becomes easier for Germany if the US focus is on Japan. I feel sending the US to Europe or Africa is more efficient, making Germany fight on two fronts, keeping them away from Russia.
Suggested Topics
