I guess what we have here is a matter of personal preference…
By using a blocker in Karelia:
Russia loses 1 INF
Germany is +2 IPC’s (for a net G1 revenue of 42)
Germany has a 1/3 chance of losing 1 INF
Net Shift: Even (Germany +2 IPC, Russia -3 IPC INF, Germany -1 IPC INF)
Not using one:
Russia has 50/50 of losing 1 INF on R2
Germany loses 1 ARM
Germany is +4 IPC (for a net G1 revenue of 44)
Net shift: Russia - 0.5 IPC (Germany +4 IPC, Russia -1.5 IPC INF, Germany -5 IPC ARM)
This of course does not consider any positional advantage that may or may not result to Germany based on Russian force diversion to Archangel in R2 (which I still think can be a major factor).
There is also one other factor…
With the blocker, Germany is going to go pretty hard into Karelia, especially w/ the WRS adjacent (5 INF/4ARM minimum), so the odds of a dice frack are negligable (around 0.2% chance that Germany loses 2 units)
Without a blocker, and with the proposed “light” strike on Archangel, the odds of a dice frack increase, the odds of losing an INF AND an ARM is 2.6% with an Archangel counter of 1 INF/3 ARM. AND, a 0.1% chance of mutual destruction is introduced!
That may not be a huge factor, but as a player I want to maximize the odds in my favor.
Using a blocker, Russia fairs half an IPC better by leaving the blocker; and removes the risk of an R2 battle in Archangel completely.
Blocker’s serve their purpose. As mentioned before, it ties up assets. (Your opponent has to defend land s/he could have left empty, or invade to kill the blocker which costs at least 6 ipcs for 2 infantry, more then the property’s worth for sure.) They also stop blitz’s…
This of course does not consider any positional advantage that may or may not result to Germany based on Russian force diversion to Archangel in R2 (which I still think can be a major factor).
And this doesn’t consider the positional advantage that definitely results from Germany being down a tank. Like Darth says I don’t see anything wrong with sending 1 inf + 4 tanks to Archangel on R2 to take out that German tank. Those tanks have nothing to do anyways, and they’re in position for any German advance.
I really fail to see how some units in Archangel throws the Southern line to the Germans. It’s like you always forget that Caucasus immediatley borders Ukraine, which means the Russians have +units able to deal with them there, and it’s never like the Germans push south early even if they see some units in Archangel unless the Russians got dice fracked.
Without a blocker, and with the proposed “light” strike on Archangel, the odds of a dice frack increase, the odds of losing an INF AND an ARM is 2.6% with an Archangel counter of 1 INF/3 ARM. AND, a 0.1% chance of mutual destruction is introduced!
Forget light strike, think 1 inf + 4 arm. If the Germans take 4 arm in Archangel to mean they can advance, they’re stupid!
Net Shift: Even (Germany +2 IPC, Russia -3 IPC INF, Germany -1 IPC INF)
Your math is wrong too. Germany +2 then -1 = +1, then Russia is -3, so the net difference is -4 IPCs Russia.
Net shift: Russia - 0.5 IPC (Germany +4 IPC, Russia -1.5 IPC INF, Germany -5 IPC ARM)
Your math is right there. Would you rather be -4 or -0.5?
I too thought that leaving Archangel bare was totally inconceivable when I first started the game, but I think it doesn’t serve the Germans well to lose their tank for minimal gains.
I thing you are right to buy an additional fighter R1. It will help you in the further trade of countries. But just one should be enough. As a Russian you need mass. And for the final defense of Moskwa allied fighters are required anyway.
As you are on defense in most games I wouldn´t recommend to rely on rtl. One should have 4-6 for deterrence. The West Russia stack is where most of them should be stationed. In addition to these I would rely on tanks. Due to their movement of 2 they later help to assist allied defense in India for example or may counter a japanese intrusion. Generally the help to cover a greater territory. With them you are able to create more deadzones. But more than everything else you need inf, inf, inf as fodder.
So I would recommend to buy the fighter R1, after that some rtl. R2, followed by tank/inf in mid game. In the final stage, if your allies played bad or unlucky and the axis is knocking on your door, all inf is required.
And to the discussion in the last post, I thing you should indeed leave 1 inf behind wherever it is not obvisously going to be killed by an overwhelming force. But even then it´s worth to thing about it. I.m.o. the russian job is to keep Germany busy in many small fights, to cause fraction as Clausewitz would say. The more smaller fights Fritz is in the more you may be lucky once. I´m really happy if for example Ukraine remains russian. It´s the momentum to push! :-D
You are right, I fracked the math on the first one.
Germany +2 then -1 = +1, then Russia is -3, so the net difference is -4 IPCs Russia.
I think that works out to -2 for Russia, not -4. (+1-3=-2)
But -2 is still worse for Russia than -0.5. Especially since the -0.5 also results in a dead German tank.
So the short term economics clearly favor allowing that German tank to blitz to Arch.
I do not agree that an Inf or 2 plus Armor going to Arch in R2 means that Russia has a lot of units out of postion to contest the South. The Armor can still get to the South on R3, and any surviving Arch Inf can help trade Kar on R3, which you would otherwise probably be doing with WR units.
For the most part, allowing a German Tank to blitz to Arch gives me something to kill with Russian Armor on R2, Russian armor that otherwise would probably not be used. And I’d rather kill that German tank now when its alone, than later when its backed up with Inf.
Lastly a point was made that allowing the tank to blitz to Arch forces Russia to react to Germany, ceding the initiative to Germany. I don’t look at it that way. By leaving Kar bare, I’m the one trying to trick Germany into blitzing to Arch. So he’s reacting to me, in a way that I want him to react. As Russia, I’m dissappointed if Germany does not blitz to Arch, it means he didn’t fall for my trap.
I think that works out to -2 for Russia, not -4. (+1-3=-2)
No, you see, anything positive for Germany is negative for Russia. So +1 for Germany is the same as -1 for Russia, so -1 and -3 together is -4. What you’re doing is if Russia had +1 then -3, that would come out to -2.
Doh, now I feel stupid. Of course you are right. Though it only further lends support to my contention (which you support) that leaving behind a “blocker” in Kar on R1 is a bad move for Russia.
And thank you Tri (and DM), for championing my cause here. You’ve done a much more eloquent and thourough job than I could have.
OK, a poll then…
If you’re Germany, and you see a lone Russian infantry in Karelia, how do you attack it?
The answers will provide the evidence for my assertion that the blocker is a good thing for Russia. Germany has to use either 3+ infantry to kill it, or 2 infantry and a fighter. That compromises some of Germany’s other options.
Example- 3 infantry in Karelia means 2 less in E Europe, which means potentially 2 less in Belo or the Ukraine on G2 if Germany wishes to push forward. As we all know 2 infantry can often mean the difference mathematically whether a move is feasible or not .
And if a fighter is used, well… Germany’s air power is needed more in other places. Every battle is critical.
IMO, leave the blitzing tank out of the equation. The blocker forces German offensive action that otherwise would be a simple 1 infantry walk-in. As the German player, which one causes more potential problems- stepping in to Karelia for free or being forced to assault it?
I don’t attack Karelia on G1.
If it is empty, I’ll move an inf from Fin to take it and tranny the other 2 inf to EE.
If it is occupied (by 1 inf), I’ll keep 1 inf in Fin and still tranny 2 inf to EE.
My G1 is occupied by a counter of Ukr (or Belo - although I may chosse not to counter that either), as well as killing the British BB and DD in the Med and taking out Egy.
So I do about 4 battles, which I think is more than enough.
1 sub, 4 ftrs to UK BB
BB, loaded trn (possibly ftr if I have an extra) to UK DD
4 inf, 1 arm, 1 bom (if 1 inf bid to lib) to Egy
necessary inf (1-3 pending on how R took it) to Ukr (or belo) with 5th ftr
I perfer to build up and move in force rather then risk nickle and dime myself to death. My stack on EE tends to range from 7+ inf, rt, and 4+arm after G1.
And for this reason I don’t think it is that critical for Russia to even defend Kar on R1.
I perfer to take Belo with 3 inf and 2 ftrs and move in force to WR with 9 inf+ with needed rt and/or arm support.
I rank Ukr as more imortant then Kar, thus that is generally my focus no matter which side I play.
I always just run Karelia over with 3 inf from Norway. To me they have absolutely nothing else to do, so I’m hardly stretched for units. I use the tran to bring 2 inf from W. Europe over to E. Europe; I consider it a waste of resources to defend W. Europe on G1 when the UK has no feasible way to take it without risking their navy. Those 3 inf in Norway will never have anything to do if you’re the type that runs the Baltic navy away anyways, since there won’t be a tran to help them out.
But Tri…
The UK navy in SZ7 at the end of UK1 is not a bad move. UK drops an AC and loads it with existing FIGs and another TRN. Russia blocks in SZ6 on R2. Only way Germany can attack that fleet is with AF… and 4-5 FIGs and a BOM against 1 AC, 2 FIG, 1 BB, 2 TRN is not a happy fight for the Luftwaffe.
Huh? Subs can go right through the Russian sub, for starters to get to the UK fleet to act as fodder for the Luftwaffe. Secondly, I hope the UK didn’t land anywhere otherwise it will just about troopless and can be boarded through SZ8 from the gibraltar fleet as well as through SZ6. A carrier + transport leaves you with 2 infantry leftover to purchase, so hopefully you didn’t land in W. Europe with many forces otherwise it’s very bare with like a bomber and 2 inf.
I don’t think it’s a terrible idea to build defense with the UK fleet, but you have to be very careful about it, and you’d better hope the US rocks at logistics since it’ll be acting as a major landing force instead of UK with the UK’s cash going into defense.
If UK and US are idiots, and the Germans and Japs geniuses, the Allies will lose.
If you attack a country with ground forces, whatever ground forces you attack with are committed.
For this reason, I like to have three USSR fighters and some artillery.
Tanks are a must-have; if Germany does massive infantry push, the tanks can rush back east to mess with Japan.
Basically, I usually build a fighter, LOTS of infantry, and a couple of artillery every so often.
