USSR Strategies

@justluthor
From the Revised FAQ:

"Q. The Nonaggression Treaty allows the USSR to place four units in the territory Japan attacks
first. What if the Japanese player attacks two or more red territories on the same turn?

A. In that case, the Soviet player chooses which of the territories being attacked gets the four infantry."

@Yoper:

I am especially interested in this simply because of how this will affect my use of it in the A&A tournament that I run.  Being that it is a timed event for the individual games, I am curious as to how the extra need for naval units will slow down the Allies in building up for their attack into Europe.

I’d say it can slow down the Allies from 1-3 turns. It really depends on how many naval and air units G has at the start of G2. It might be enough to sink the AC and 2 DDs that seems to be the regular UK buy for UK1, depending on where they are placed. It also depends if the US landed on Algeria on US1 or not and how Africa is going for the Allies.

@bigchris:

glad to see someone putting that idea to good use!  i’ve also found that 5 INF, 2 ARM, 1 ART = 8 units for 29 IPCs is more effective than 4 INF, 4 ART = 8 units for 28 IPCs (if you can get the extra $).

Instead of art I try to buy as much armor as I can when possible.

I also like the allied “blitz” idea to take Ger as fast as possible within 8-9 turns. Recently I’ve been experimenting using Soviet to become part of the attack. Let’s say, in the example as described over, that Ger has 50 inf. + tanks and fighters and USA and UK have no chance of taking it. With 8 inf, 8 art and 2 fighters from Soviet it’s actually possible to take Germany!

It’s “Canadian Shield” on Caspian Sub.

The original writeup was “Operation Hollywood” by a non-Caspian sub player.

Actually, no one had superfortresses.  The only real NA ever used was Russian Winter and Fortress Europe…the rest were forgotten since no one ever played with them.

Meanwhile, if you can scare Japan into SZ 61 or destroy him, you have effectively contained the Jap fleet.  IF you can tkae SZ 60 even if Japan isn’t there, and hold it, you have contained Japan.  (At least you’ve removed their largest production facility.)

Japan is very flimsy.  Ask anyone who’s worked on a KJF strat.  One or two bad moves with Japan and Japan is neutrallized.  One or 20 bad moves with America and at worst Russia has fallen.

Yes….  And im hunted by the sad fact that i have lost 5 games in a row…  Somehow i see my credability disipate when discussing strategy  :(    :cry:

I think that without allied support it is hard for Russia to be offensive.  If the Japan and Germany players are on the same page then they are gunning for you.  I agree with switch that the West Russia stack is Russia’s primary offensive weapon but without aid from the other allies they can’t defeat Germany or Japan.  I suggest defending on the Japanese flank and picking your fights wisely on the German front until the UK and US fortify Karelia or attack Western Europe.  No matter how offensive you want to be your primary focus has to be holding Moscow because 99% of the time the Axis will be coming from both sides.

I know this is an old thread, but since Nix tried it against me last week, worth revisiting…

The Alaska Insertion FAILED.  Japan’s fleet, plus the pouring of units to Asia, was too much for the US to counter via Alaska.  And that was with the benefit of a US IC in Sinkiang as well to further retrict Japan.

Of course, UK losing their shiny new IC in India on J1 was also a pretty serious blow… but not totally unexpected.