Germany First turn buys

What do I do? Well if I’m Germany, then I’ll be reaching for a beer. That means that Russia spared Germany some IPC’s and some Troops that otherwise would be lost. Also, it allows Germany to inch closer to RUSSIA. Who is doing this? They are moving troops away from the fronts in which they will have to turn around and move back to a couple of turns later. It seems like a waste of time, unless they are going for a KJF method. It still leaves the door open for a german Blitzkrieg. Interesting……

That’s exactly the point, Nov.  The temporary loss of an armor to India is more then enough to stop a successful invasion of India by Japan and England puts up an IC there to pump out fodder to kill off Japanese forces.  This slows their attack on Russia allowing Russia to refocus on Germany.

Yes, you saved some money on Round 1, but how much do you loose in Rounds 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8?

Round 8 …… whoa!

I don’t think I’ve ever made it that far.  :-o  :-o  :-o  :-o  :-o  :-o

I routinely get through 10 rounds in a game without extreme dice results.

How long does that take?

Well let’s see…

By not taking/trading Ukraine, Russia now effectively is losign 1 INF per turn.
Germany is also net positive units by not losing Ukriane on R1.  That means that a well played German open can stage forward a stack that is MORE than a match for the WRS.

And it means extra air for Africa on G1, increasing UK’s casualties.

And you are talking about Russia bleeding off forces to hold India.  So Russia gains NOTHING in their own defense against Germany while letting germany have the Ukraine forces still alive on G1, and you are having UK divert HALF of their first turn income to India.

Sounds to me like the UK is losing their fleet, Russia is going to be negative income from R2 forward, and Japan can still take care of India pretty quickly, and gain the free IC in the process.

Good points, Switch.  However, please keep in mind that I’m not bleeding off troops to hold India, I’m lending troops to India for one round and then pulling them back.  1 Armor or 1 Armor, 2 Fighters to India is hardly a detrimental loss to Russia’s defense.  It is detrimental to their first round combats however, possibly reducing them to only taking W. Russia.  (Which I used to do standard.)

It is a new strategy I have never considered. I like the idea of guaranteeing India first turn, but considering what it takes for Japan to take India on the first turn, it just doesn’t seem worth it. Let me expand.

What does Japan have to throw at India on J1? Two INF / 4-5 FIG / 1 BOM. This is assuming that the kwangtung TRN was destroyed on UK1. With the TRN, add 2 INF and most likely a large scale naval engagement. The naval engagement will also force Japan to spread its fleet, not to its liking. To add to the dismay, no shore bombardments are possible. By lending support to India, it makes a Japanese invasion seem very unreasonable. To not lend troops to India makes the India invasion just unreasonable. I picture India typically an option on J2 - J4, mostly leaning towards the latter. But don’t worry, If you do build that IC there, it will become a major point of interest for the Japs. More so than a US IC.

The other discerning point about this tactic is the useless shifting of Russian troops. That rusian ARM will not attack until R3 at best.

@ncscswitch:

Well let’s see…

By not taking/trading Ukraine, Russia now effectively is losign 1 INF per turn.
Germany is also net positive units by not losing Ukriane on R1.  That means that a well played German open can stage forward a stack that is MORE than a match for the WRS.

And it means extra air for Africa on G1, increasing UK’s casualties.

And you are talking about Russia bleeding off forces to hold India.  So Russia gains NOTHING in their own defense against Germany while letting germany have the Ukraine forces still alive on G1, and you are having UK divert HALF of their first turn income to India.

Sounds to me like the UK is losing their fleet, Russia is going to be negative income from R2 forward, and Japan can still take care of India pretty quickly, and gain the free IC in the process.

1 - USSR can have the potential of future manchuria/kwang/FIC income, which they otherwise wont have
2 - USSR does not take UKR R1, but it can and will take it USSR2
3 - USSR should go heavy to WR, to win in 1 round and minimize the counter

USSR can attack 2-3 terrirories and kill 10 German units and lose 6-7 in the process.

OR

USSR can attack 1 territory, kill 5 germans, and lose 1-2 in the process.

USSR still gains a 3-4 unit atvantage, just loses the 3 IPC.

Squirecam

Not to mention, Russia does not loose all 3 of her tanks on Germany 1 anymore by not exposing them to attack on G1 with no real defense.

For a real version of teh German effect of Russia not taking Ukraine on R1, check out the Tournament Consolation game.  Russia ONLY took West Russia on R1.

On G2, they lost their West Russia stack, and Germany has 5 ARM parked in Karelia, plus INF, plus all of their AF is still alive.  And Russia has 1 ARM in India.

But otherwise, Russia has only 14 INF on the board, plus 3 ARM and 4 FIGs.  And those are spread from Archangel to Caucuses, through Russia into Novo then to Sinkiang and to India.

Compare that to Germany’s 26 INF, 2 ART, 10 ARM, 6 FIG, 1 BOM.

Or even Japan (which has only built IC and TRN in J1 thus far)
16 INF, 1 ART, 1 ARM, 5 FIG, 1 BOM.
After J2, add $36 IPC of units to Japan’s total.

Russia has only SIX land units that can strike German territory in R3.  Compare that to Germany having ELEVEN, as well as supeior air forces.

@ncscswitch:

For a real version of teh German effect of Russia not taking Ukraine on R1, check out the Tournament Consolation game.  Russia ONLY took West Russia on R1.

…

But otherwise, Russia has only 14 INF on the board, plus 3 ARM and 4 FIGs.Â

Dude, USSR bought TWO FIGHTERS. Bad move.

I would not use this game as an example at all……

Squirecam

@squirecam:

@ncscswitch:

For a real version of teh German effect of Russia not taking Ukraine on R1, check out the Tournament Consolation game.  Russia ONLY took West Russia on R1.

…

But otherwise, Russia has only 14 INF on the board, plus 3 ARM and 4 FIGs.

Dude, USSR bought TWO FIGHTERS. Bad move.

I would not use this game as an example at all……

Squirecam

2 Russian fighters?

lol srsly?

Yes, but Russia also took out the Med Fleet on R2, without loss.

Changes Africa quite a bit, and removes the amphib risk to Caucuses.

@ncscswitch:

Yes, but Russia also took out the Med Fleet on R2, without loss.

Changes Africa quite a bit, and removes the amphib risk to Caucuses.

At the expense of a loss.

Sorry, its a bad strategy. A KJF/defend India/avoid ukraine R1 USSR needs troops, not fighters.

Squirecam

I tend to agree.

But I honestly do not think that changing some R1 builds would make it THAT much better either.  That was my point.

Of Germany’s starting forces, they lose 6 INF, 2 ART, 2 ARM and a FIG before they ever get to use them (standard West Russia/Ukraine R1).

Excuse me Switch, but I’ve noticed you think of this as standard now…

We had a few jousts a while ago, when I was one of the few on this site who advocated this Russian opener. You argued and argued that W Russia/ Belo was better…  :-D

Just hassling you man. I couldn’t help myself.

Back on topic, I tried Jen’s opener of an IC in France recently. My opponent forgot to adequately cover Britain and I knocked him out on turn 2. Probably the last time I ever try it but it did get me a win. Thanks, Jen…

But if I’m serious it’d better be a Carrier and 8 Infantry.

The main reason for teh change…

I have shifted my UK and US strat a bit, and teh Ukraine openner works better with that change.

Actually Switch, 8 infantry would have made a world of difference over 2 fighters.  The W. Russia Stack would be infinitaly more defensable and Caucasus is really never under any real threat.  And even if it does fall, it’s not like Russia’s planning on making more then 8 units a round anyway for a few rounds.