Russian National Objective Question

@ampdrive said in How to deal with the insane russian NO:

@shadowhawk Not really true “nothing stops russia” from moving into iraq or finland.Russia needs to be at war on the Europe side.

True they need to be @war, the moment they are at war they can take iraq ( Uk can just take north persia so they can blitzz through.

Yes, sure.  Its just usually not a good idea (since tacs are poor defenders and are usually being lost without replacement, they need another source of fighters to shine).

Little more clarification on #4–when you liberate a capital (lets use Paris), all of the territory that the allies recaptured from the Axis immediately become French again, blowing off the other Allied markers and all going “blue” except for land that the Axis was holding.  So if we say that the Axis owned Southern France and Syria upon liberation, France’s new income at the end of that turn would be 15, but there would be no building or placement of units until the next round (if they live that long).

As you probably read, the Allies can only “liberate” other Allied land if it has been taken by the Axis first.  The only exception to this is the Dutch territory, and if you read the rules carefully, only ANZAC and UK can activate these, USA cannot.  However, in another twist, all Allied planes can land on these whether they are activated or not.

In practice what this means is that taking Moscow or Paris back just tosses a ton of money back into Axis hands, while taking away the income from USA and UK (primarily) that they fought so hard to liberate.  This creates a problem, because the Allies will actively avoid liberating capitals and handing so much cash to the Axis since in most cases, the Axis can easily recapture the key capital zones and control of it would just trade back and forth.

As a result, one sort of universally accepted house rule is to destroy the money rather than give it to the capturing player, after the first capture.

The Allies rarely benefit from capturing a capital, because the Italy economy is usually decimated before the Allies invade, and if you were able to capture Berlin or Tokyo, that’s usually endgame for the Axis if they don’t want to fight on.

You only need to move the carriers there if you have to land planes on them.

In order to move the planes into combat you first must show your opponent that you can make a legal landing spot with your carriers by moving them into position on non-combat movement phase. If the planes survive combat you must move the carrier(s) to land the plane(s). If the planes don’t survive you can choose to do whatever you want with the carrier(s).

Our group has had this discussion many times. It seems unrealistic that a country would develop something that is not useful.  In one of our games Russia bought a non-disposable tech dice and actually rolled a 6 then rolled on the chart and got “War Bonds” which was cool for them but if you look at the list there are very few that Russia can benefit from.  Mostly depends if they are on the offensive.  If they are on the defensive then only “War Bonds” and “Increased Factory Production” seem to be worthwhile.  “Radar” would also be good but its on a separate chart with tech that would not benefit them.  Most would say that Russia should not even consider rolling on tech and I tend to agree unless they are on the offensive and have a massive economy.

Hey Narvik,
I agree with you on the Berlin NO for Russia. It is pretty silly. After all, once Berlin falls, isn’t the game pretty much over?

As for the No German subs in the Atlantic NO for UK, you can’t just go north of sea zones 86 and 87. There are convoy zones all along the African coast where Germany could station subs and bleed more money from the UK. The UK must keep those pesky U-boats away from those waters too.

@otahere34:

This is off subject but has to do with the fact of the U.S. building a minor IC in korea. Can they move within striking distence of that when there not at war even though Japan can not end movement withing 2 zones of alaska or the western U.S.?

Yes.  The United States is only prohibited from being next to Japanese soil in the Pacific.  If they want to leave their fleet next to SZ 6, but not in SZ 6, they may do so.

@Cmdr:

Yea, theoretically, it is possible to get the Armor from Romania and/or Hungary and/or W. Poland to Moscow in 3 turns.  Actually in 2 turns.

Realistic?  I hardly think so.  Your best real chance is at a minimum of round 4 and more likely round 6 if you declare war on Germany 1.

Which is a thought, has anyone tried declaring war on Russia round 2/3 and started an invasion early?  I wonder On round 1, it is theoretically possible to kill 7 Russian infantry, sink a Battleship and a submerge a submarine (unless he wants to stand and fight) and take 3 Russian territories.

Of course, what would you have to give up to do it?

I think you wouldnt have to give up too much if you got lucky  :-). And getting Moscow by G3 is definitely unrealistic…

Advanced Arty would help as well.  However, I don’t think Russia can afford to start rolling TECH unless you use the AA50 token house rule.