@Arthur:
I also fell in love with the fighter + inf purchase. I like to be able to send out a lone infantry + planes to take out advanced Axis troops, protecting your backside. It is also good to protect Russia from devastating bomber runs.
100% Normally, I’ll do inf and a fighter the first three turns (as always, depends on the board) before doing that artillery buy. By the end of R3, the Soviets should have, at minimum, five fighters in Moscow. Definitely makes the prospect of a bombing raid harder for the Germans.
@Arthur:
I also fell in love with the fighter + inf purchase. I like to be able to send out a lone infantry + planes to take out advanced Axis troops, protecting your backside. It is also good to protect Russia from devastating bomber runs.
100%  Normally, I’ll do inf and a fighter the first three turns (as always, depends on the board) before doing that artillery buy. By the end of R3, the Soviets should have, at minimum, five fighters in Moscow. Definitely makes the prospect of a bombing raid harder for the Germans.Â
Id rather have +10 inf than +3 fighters. The difference in the percentage chance is around 50%.
Why on earth would the USSR buy mechs?
because having more options is worth more than 1 IPC in almost every circumstance
@Arthur:
I also fell in love with the fighter + inf purchase.� I like to be able to send out a lone infantry + planes to take out advanced Axis troops, protecting your backside.� It is also good to protect Russia from devastating bomber runs.
100%� � Normally, I’ll do inf and a fighter the first three turns (as always, depends on the board) before doing that artillery buy.� By the end of R3, the Soviets should have, at minimum, five fighters in Moscow.� Definitely makes the prospect of a bombing raid harder for the Germans.�
Id rather have +10 inf than +3 fighters. The difference in the percentage chance is around 50%.
There’s an argument to be made for that, but you have to look at the other benefits of the planes. ABH mentioned the lone inf and planes that can be used to hit German troops, as well as the protection against raids, which can be huge. If those early fighter buys dissuade Germany from early bombing raids, the extra IPC’s not spent fixing a factory can easily lead to infantry that may not have been purchased otherwise.
Personally, I’m a big fan of tanks. My 1st round purchase for Russia is 3 tanks, 5 inf. & 1 art. If Germany stays out of Russia I’ll do it again on round 2. Only w/ 3 art. & 2 inf. Turn 3 might see the same unless buying a tac-bomber or two seem prudent. A stack of tanks paired w/ any available Tac-bombers give Russia great offense strike power if an opportunity presents itself once Germany invades.
When I play Germany, I always buy 4-6 tanks every round if I’m not doing the Sea Lion thing.
I tend to think the major reason for buying tanks would be to threaten a take down of Ukraine and/or Stalingrad. At least you can stop unit production for a turn. Is that it? Otherwise, I struggle to see the advantage.
I tend to think the major reason for buying tanks would be to threaten a take down of Ukraine and/or Stalingrad. At least you can stop unit production for a turn. Is that it? Otherwise, I struggle to see the advantage.
Really? You struggle to see the advantage of a stack of tanks rolling through the country side paired w/ tac-bombers? The offence & defensive power speaks for itself I think. Add that to a stack of infantry for fodder and you’ve got a pretty good chance of wiping out opposing forces then possibly blitzing the whole countryside on the next move. Can’t do that w/ a stack of more expensive air units. Jmho.
Hmm, gotta say Maddog: I’m all about ignoring the conventional wisdom in A&A, and I love to see something different. But the heavy tank buying from Russia has me befuddled.
I get the idea of keeping your options open for a counter attack if Germany presents the opportunity. But then you have to protect those tanks, which means you’d have to bring a large force to any attack, leaving that force open to a German counter attack.
I’m definitely curious to see how this would look (and I’ll probably give it a try), but I feel like the end result is an under-defending Moscow.
My friend Larrie buys heavy on infantry and a fight er or tac early on and then starts switching to tanks. Maddog has a good point. I like to play Germany but i it is really challenging against Larrie’s Soviet forces. I need to pay more attention to what the actual buys are but it is always a large stack of infantry with a few artillery pieces and backed up by tanks and fighters. As for the defense of Moscow, you have to get through the Russion horde in the Ukrain and Leningrad first. It is always alot of fun trying to manuver around each other to get the advantage.
But that russian horde is a lot stronger if you buy ART iso ARM since you dont want to dash forward with your tanks alone.
Tanks can be good if they are the only units that can get to the front next turn and they swing the tide of war for just 1 turn so germany cannot advance but that is about it.When you dont have to move far and you got plenty of inf art adds just as much punch then arm does but at 66% of the price.
My thinking exactly. Tanks would still need the protection of infantry, so why would you buy six tanks for 36 when you could buy 5 inf and 5 art for the same (save a buck)?
Just so I’m being clear…as Russia I buy tanks on the 1st few rounds as long as Germany isn’t invading just yet. Even at that, once Germany steps off, it’s at least 3 more rounds before she’s knocking on Russia’s capital. Â Russia can purchase 10 units of inf & art anytime. In two turns she can have 20 units + what ever original forces can turtle back to the capitol. By having the tanks I purchased in the beginning turns along with tac-bombers and any original starting units I have a decent chance at attacking or counterattacking Germany if the opportunity presents itself. (Especially if the dice Gods turn on Germany.) I have successfully used this strategy more than a few times. All it takes is one weak link in Germanys advance (such as not properly backing up the advancing front lines to counter attack a Russian counter attack) to stop dead Germanys advance. But as we all know…the best laid plans…if the dice are cold… ;-)
Build what Germany builds.
If they build inf/art, navy or nothing on G1, then you build infantry, infantry, infantry, infantry, infantry….
If they build tanks and mechs on G1, you build mechs on the first turn so you can make a stand at Belarus and buy time. After that you build infantry. The stand at Belarus buys you time and time means more infantry.
INFANTRY.
I tend to think the major reason for buying tanks would be to threaten a take down of Ukraine and/or Stalingrad. At least you can stop unit production for a turn. Is that it? Otherwise, I struggle to see the advantage.
Really? You struggle to see the advantage of a stack of tanks rolling through the country side paired w/ tac-bombers? The offence & defensive power speaks for itself I think. Add that to a stack of infantry for fodder and you’ve got a pretty good chance of wiping out opposing forces then possibly blitzing the whole countryside on the next move. Can’t do that w/ a stack of more expensive air units. Jmho.
How does this defend Moscow?
I thought the three rules for playing USSR were: defend Moscow, defend Moscow, defend Moscow.
Id like to challenge YGs solid defensive line and propose a new idea of Defend the North, Attack the South. The focus of this strategy is to overwhelm the axis with too many fronts, forcing Germany to distract too many of its forces away from Leningrad. By focusing power into Romania, Bulgaria, Albania and even Greece, many of Germany’s early game infantry and artillery will be wasted or extended too far south in an attempt to regain valuable Russian NOs. This strategy needs an unpopular UK Greece landing to help with pincer attacks and a lot of offensive buys but could prove to be a valuable fresh blood strategy if done right.
I tend to think the major reason for buying tanks would be to threaten a take down of Ukraine and/or Stalingrad. At least you can stop unit production for a turn. Is that it? Otherwise, I struggle to see the advantage.
Really? You struggle to see the advantage of a stack of tanks rolling through the country side paired w/ tac-bombers? The offence & defensive power speaks for itself I think. Add that to a stack of infantry for fodder and you�ve got a pretty good chance of wiping out opposing forces then possibly blitzing the whole countryside on the next move. Can�t do that w/ a stack of more expensive air units. Jmho.
How does this defend Moscow?
I thought the three rules for playing USSR were: defend Moscow, defend Moscow, defend Moscow.
Well….that’s close…I go by these golden rules of mine for Russia.
Also, My statement about a stack of tanks was “Generally speaking” for the advantage of tanks for any country. Not just Russia.
I’m the type of player that looks for any chance to attack. I’m not much for a turtling strategy. I do not play using electronic gadgets & calculators that show me percentages or odds of a battle either. I’m old school I guess…I can look at the board and pretty well know what my chances are of winning/losing a battle. That said, I’ve been known to attack w/ even or less odds of winning and hope the dice Gods smile on me & not my opponent. Sometimes it works. I’ve seen games turned around and pulled from the brink based on one or two major battles. Those are my favorite games as it really gets the adrenaline flowing & the heart pumping! Who has more fun than us A&A players? (Besides porn stars. :wink: )
Who has more fun than us A&A players? (Besides porn stars. :wink: )
Porn stars that play Axis and Allies while filming their movies?
Id like to challenge YGs solid defensive line and propose a new idea of Defend the North, Attack the South. The focus of this strategy is to overwhelm the axis with too many fronts, forcing Germany to distract too many of its forces away from Leningrad. By focusing power into Romania, Bulgaria, Albania and even Greece, many of Germany’s early game infantry and artillery will be wasted or extended too far south in an attempt to regain valuable Russian NOs. This strategy needs an unpopular UK Greece landing to help with pincer attacks and a lot of offensive buys but could prove to be a valuable fresh blood strategy if done right.
I’m intrigued. Let me ask, what’s the counter if Germany basically says “Screw it, take half that force to the South and we’ll take Moscow virtually uncontested?” Russia can’t bring significant force South AND hold Moscow.
I’m the type of player that looks for any chance to attack. I’m not much for a turtling strategy. I do not play using electronic gadgets & calculators that show me percentages or odds of a battle either. I’m old school I guess…
Frankly, I find it refreshing to see someone who’s willing to go to the potty all by himself without consulting the battle calculator first. Let me know if you ever want to have a game on AAA. :lol:
Y’all may think it’s macho to eschew the battle calculator, but if a game you’ve been playing for hours gets wrecked because you miscalculated a major battle that’s not much fun at all.
Well….that’s close…I go by these golden rules of mine for Russia.
- Attack/counterattack when & where you can. 2) Defend Moscow. 3) Defend Moscow.
I’m happy with that - the best defence is a good offence. Less often in A&A though. Where attacking helps to defend Moscow, you totally should.
