Posts made by DoManMacgee

My issue with bringing the UK Bomber into Egypt is that it’s 5 moves (UK->SZ8->SZ12->Lybia->Algeria->Egypt), leaving you with only one move for the Bomber after the battle.

This means you’re either:
A: Killing the Bomber in the battle, which means you lose the bomber.
B: Landing the Bomber in Trans-Jordan, where it will probably be killed by Germany on G2.
C: Landing the Bomber in one of the three African territories adjacent to Egypt, where it will be safe (as long as Germany didn’t bring any air when it attacked Egypt), but will be mildly out of position UK2 (unless you plan on sending the Bomber to the Pacific).

I just prefer keeping the UK Bomber in or around the UK/Moscow area at the start, so it can be used in clearing out whatever navy Germany may-or-may-not be building (the people I play with generally tend to build a Baltic Carrier G1 and land FTRs on it).

Granted, if I’m not seeing any attempt at a German Naval build I’d have no problem with sending the bomber into Africa.

@Kreuzfeld:

Depends on what you do. If you want him to attack borneo, instead of pearl, you do the move i said. If he is going to do pearl, he will need his only TT left here. If you want to make it impossible for him to take borneo, you can place your CV at the philipines. As long as you kill his TT with your cruiser, he will not be able to reach borneo on J1. At this point, it is quite miserable being the japanese. It is a decent backup plan to taking egypt.

I’m familiar with the “block” of Borneo on UK1, yes.  It’s a solid move if you can win both fights and it can crush players who aren’t experienced with Japan.

I’m just personally not a fan because of the odds associated with the battles.

You need to win two battles for the plan to work:

• 2 UK INF Vs. 1 J INF (Borneo), ~70% chance to win

• 1 UK DD Vs. 1 J TT (SZ 59), ~70% chance to at least sink the TT.

• It’s worth noting that you can greatly increase your odds in the SZ59 fight by also bringing the FTR, but that means it can’t reach Hawaii, which defeats the point of this plan.

Two 70% fights looks great on paper, but your chances of winning both are (.70)^2= .49 = ~49%, just shy of 50%.

You can’t afford to lose either of these fights for the plan to sufficiently strangle Japan either. If SZ59 is not occupied by the British DD, Japan can sail to FIC J1 and project power across the Pacific and if Borneo isn’t captured than the entire plan fails outright.

@zooooma:

We might throw some fun variants in there as well. I want to to make new games. I want to make variants of existing games. What about Axis and Allies and Zombies?

• Chris Cocks,
  WotC president and CEO

https://www.rollingstone.com/glixel/features/how-the-company-behind-dd-magic-and-avalon-hill-innovate-w514703

Obviously Zombies was a throwaway hypothetical, but be prepared for a total bastardisation.

And I though A&A: WWI was a stretch…

You all might be missing a more important detail here.

Quote from the same article. It’s the sentence right before the atrocious “zombie” comment:

@Author:

But why, I ask, hasn’t Axis and Allies come to tablet yet?

@WOTC:

“I think we will be correcting that in 12 to 18 months,”

If they’re serious and we’re actually getting an official software release of A&A, that could potentially be huge (or a disaster, if WOTC decides to shut down TripleA),

@Kreuzfeld:

I used to do this move, with the addition of landing two  indian infs in brno.
If japan then goes for pearl, he has to use his TT, which will die. If japan builds 3 TTs, he will be vulnrable to the UK bomber. This means that Japan will have real trouble getting brno back before turn 3.

The place I played, we usually added a german Tank and a german inf in libya as a bid. Because of this, Germany would often take Egypt with about 3 units surviving on G1.

I used this strategy for many games, however , I switched to taking egypt back on UK1. Retaking egypt, combined with landing in Morocco on UK1 (reinforced by USA), would completely criple germany permanently in africa. Germany would be left with 2 landunits, and have trouble reinforcing it. In most of those games, UK would collect all of africa for the entire game.

Agreed for the most part. I don’t like diving on Borneo though. Too risky (only like 70% chance to win, with my rotten luck that’s bad odds for an early game engagement, plus Japan can parry it and retake Borneo if they play smart).

I also like retaking Egypt B1, provided that Germany didn’t win too decisively (if they have > 3 land units left I don’t bother).

I might post in this thread again in a week or two. I’m starting to practice Revised again for a tournament I’m going to over the summer and it’ll be good to dream up new openings for UK.

Necrobump I know.

Don’t know if you’re still out there TripleA, but I’ve been practicing with your strategy and have found that it works pretty well as a bait for a J1 Pearl Harbor.

The extra casualties Japan suffers due to the second FTR (the one that flies in from SZ35 to help with the Solomon Islands Sub) renders them vulnerable (pretty good odds, depending on how the dice went on J1) to a counterattack from the USA (with the BB+TT from W. US, the FTR from W. US, the FTR from Hawaii, and the BMB from E. US.).

Thanks for the great strategy! I’ll definitely be giving it a try at the next tournament or face-to-face game I play in.

WBC (World Boardgaming Championships) in Seven Springs, PA has an A&A Revised Tournament (with modified victory conditions to fit a Over-The-Board Tournament) yearly as part of its con. Not 100% sure of the date for next year (it’s a two-day event at a week-long convention), but judging by the first few years A&A is on the first two days. This year the tournament was on July 22-23.

boardgamers (dot) org is the website iirc, but you can also just search “Boardgame Players Association (BPA)” and it should come up in the first result or two.

We had about 20-ish people show up this year with next-to-zero promotion/hype, which was a pretty good number considering how niche Revised is compared to G40.

Side-Note: Larry Harris and crew were at the convention to demo War Room this year, so if you’re looking forward to that expect a push for it to be an event at future WBCs.

Wasn’t able to get the time off work to go myself but I watched the YouTube streams over the weekend.  Massive kudos to YG for putting on such a terrific tournament.

I saw the win ratios for round one posted on GeneralHandGrenade’s channel and earlier in this thread, but couldn’t find anything for round 2/the medal rounds.  How did those games go?

@TripleA:

Yes, Pearl Harbor is always possible. Japan can muster enough ships to convincingly destroy the fleet at Pearl Harbor. But the question is: what are the consequences after round 1?

I agree with you, but for totally different reasons.  I simply don’t think the J1 Pearl Harbor attack is a good long-term strategy period, as it’s basically trading half of your irreplaceable fleet for 2/3 of the highly-replaceable USN on the first turn on the game.

Either way, I’m going to reply to your points and continue to play Devil’s Advocate, because we’ve got to show Revised the love it deserves!

@TripleA:

You can not attack both the UK fleet and the US fleet with convincing odds if you lose the sub.

Sure you can!  Assuming the British Fleet went to the Kwangtung SZ B1, just send the East Indies SZ BB + CB + 2 FTR.  If you’re feeling super paranoid about Pearl you can send one (or both) or the East Indies FTRs to Pearl and use the FIC/MAN FTRs on the Brits instead.  This weakens your mainland campaign to an uncomfortable degree (you’ll lose a lot of INF taking China this way), but you’ll totally win the naval battles in a convincing fashion.

@TripleA:

So, Japan need to choose in that case to do either one. From a tactical point of view the US fleet is the better choice. But if you let go the UK fleet, you can not buy transports! In combination with the bomber, the UK can wipe out all Japanese purchases in UK2 in SZ60 and 61. If Japan can not buy transports it need to buy IC’s or other suboptimal purchases! Either way the Allies have a certain gain. Or the Allies keep the US carrier with planes, or Japan is forced to delay their push into Asia.

As someone who never does a PH attack J1, I agree with your assessment (although I’d argue that killing the British Fleet + making faster gains on the mainland > killing the USN).  Letting the British Pacific Fleet live past J1 is just asking for trouble.

@TripleA:

The UK bomber is important in this strategy. Without it you’re threat to SZ 60 and 61 is not so big. However it is not essential! You might get the same result without it. It will especially help indeed if you want to switch to an KJF strategy. It can double in threatening FIC, but it can do that too from Caucasus or Moscow.

If the Bomber is in Moscow it can make it to SZ60 via Moscow->Novo->Yakut->Bury->SZ60 with 2 moves left to escape back to Yakut (hopefully the Soviets are holding the line there).  Unfortunately they would take 5 moves to get to SZ61, so I can see your point in wanting to keep it in Novosibirsk instead.  I guess the exact position of the Bomber is something you’d have to vary depending on how G1 went.

@TripleA:

Egyptian Blurb

OOB I have no problems with letting Germany go hog-wild in Africa, because given enough time the Americans will force Germany off the continent.  I typically play under WBC rules which, among other things, limits the game to a 5-6 turn (4.5 hour) time limit and heavily modifies the Victory Cities (Egypt is a Victory City, which matters in this case).  Me retaking Egypt B1 (assuming Germany lost at least 2 INF attacking it, otherwise I just write-off Africa in the same way you do) is just a way to delay the German IPC explosion by a turn and a means of forcing them to commit at least one more TT’s worth of reinforcements to Africa (diverting them from the all-important Russian front).

That probably explains the difference in our approaches.  As I said before this is a pretty convincing strategy, especially if you want to play a heavy KJF game.

Hello!

I’m not an advocate of a J1 Pearl in Revised myself, but let me play Devil’s Advocate for a bit just to get some discussion going.

Sub attack is fine.  I don’t know how I feel about giving Egypt to Germany for free in this scenario (and dooming your Africa IPCs), but if you really want that Solomon Sub dead + to reinforce the USN this is really the only way you can do it.

New Guinea attack is good and usually what I do with the Aus. INF+TT.

Sniping the Kwang TT is also good.

Weird Bomber movement but I guess it can work if you’re planning on transitioning into a 100% KJF.  Personally I’d prefer landing in Moscow so you’re at least in position to go after the Mediterranean Fleet if the opportunity presents itself.

Everything else looks good.

For Japan, I think the J1 Pearl attack is still possible/feasible if they really want to go for it.

The US/UK Fleet at Pearl is:
1 SUB
1 CV
2 FTR (1 US/1 UK)

Japan can bring:
0-1 SUB (depends on if it survived the hypothetical B1 attack)
1 TT (from Japan SZ)
1 BB (from Japan SZ)
1 Bomber (from Japan, can NCM back to Tokyo)
1 FTR (from Japan, will have 1 Move left to NCM onto a Carrier
1 CV (from Caroline Islands SZ)
1 FTR (from Caroline Islands SZ)
1 DD (from Caroline Islands SZ)

Which means the battle will ultimately something like:
J: 8-9 HP, 18-20 Power
US/UK: 4 HP, 13 Power.

So the British FTR lets combat go on for a second round and the Allies probably get 3 hits off, taking out the BB tip, 1 TT and 1 DD (or an air unit, I guess it depends on who you’re playing against).  That gives the US a slightly easier time pulling off a huge counterattack if that’s the way they want to go A1.

Pretty good plan actually.  I’d have to test it to see if the extra damage on the IJN is worth losing Africa over.

@Slip:

WBC Rules

These are the rules my group plays with too.  It gives a much better playing experience than playing normally IMO.

It prevents the typical “stack heavy” style that dominates OOB Revised at the highest levels, although obviously you still need to stack heavily to win.

Unfortunately, 42 (1st Ed) is caught between a rock and a hard place.
The game has Revised’s Map/Setup but with Anniversary’s Rule Set (sans China and Italy).

This succeeds at alienating both the “old school” players, who prefer the rule set of Classic/Revised (Transports that can defend themselves, subs that defend on 2, old AA rules, etc.) and the “new school” players, who prefer the larger and more involved maps like 42SE and G40 (and its many variants).

It also doesn’t help that defenseless transports combined with the small scale of the board make the following tasks absurdly difficult:

• Establishing a US/UK Navy in the Atlantic capable of landings any earlier than round 3/4

• Establishing any sort of German Fleet capable of holding Norway/taking UK

• Establishing any sort of meaningful (i.e. capable of threatening the Pacific Islands) Japanese/American Fleet

Not that this doesn’t leave a balanced game (it sort of does, in my opinion anyway), but it severely limits the diversity in strategies that can be employed by both sides.  This leads to the conclusions that Wibe has made about the “optimal” strategies being relatively stale (compared to other versions of the game, anyway.  Even in the fairly static Revised there’s a few variations in strategy available to both sides).

In my opinion, you might be better off going one of four ways:
1. Keep playing 42 1st Edition.  Don’t let some pessimists on the internet get you down!
2. Try playing with the Revised setup/rules on the 42 1st Edition Board.  The setups for the games are identical (just swap out
3. Try buying 42SE (or make the leap to G40).  All the rules (for the most part) are the same as 42 1st Edition with bigger and more detailed maps/setups.
4. Any combo of 1, 2, 3.  Don’t limit yourself to just one version of A&A!

@thetruegriffin:

I guess it’s the difference between re-discovering WW2 and examining alternate outcomes (Revised) versus just straight up reenacting WW2 (G40)

I think you just hit the nail on the head for both Axis and Allies and the wider debate within the wargaming community.

Personally, I favor game balance and simplicity over historical accuracy, which is why I prefer the smaller maps like 42SE and Revised.  Global is fun, but what’s Axis and Allies without Japanese Tank Stacks, German Aircraft Carriers, and Rio de Oro?

Never Fear.  There’s actually three of us still playing Revised.

Can’t watch the video right now but I plan on checking it out as soon as I can (I’ll leave feedback on Youtube since it’s easier to know when someone’s replied to a comment).

Hi all, I lurk a lot but haven’t posted much outside of the Revised Boards and in the comments sections on a few Youtube Channels.

I’m hyped for War Room, and I was even more hyped when I looked at my email this morning and learned that I would potentially get to see a demo of the game at a con I’m going to later this month (WBC in Seven Springs, PA).

I was super hyped to get to meet the legend himself…  Until I look at my calendar…
I’m going on 7/21-7/23 for the A&A tournament but the Nightingale Crew isn’t going to be there until the 27th.  Kind of weird that the creator of A&A has to miss a tournament for his own game, but he probably had scheduling issues.

Anyway, back to lurking/riding the hype train.  Just thought I’d share this bit of almost-news with you all.

@Kreuzfeld:

CVs are good. However, the reason DDs are bad, isn’t that it is a “bad” combatship if you plan on attacking. It is just that the TTs really are good combatships in the game. You will  usually have enough heavy ships surviving the first turn. Those ships combined with TTs will be enough to stop the luftwaffe. The TTs really are great combatships in this game. (seriously)

I understand that TTs are the best ship economy-wise, but I believe that a CV may be an extremely cost-efficient buy for the first turn only (because you have the two FTRs in UK that can land on the carrier no problem).  Later in the game the CV would become extremely cost-inefficient, of course (you’re paying 16 for a 1 HP 3 DEF when you could be spending that same 16 IPC for 2 HP of 1 DEF that can also transport units).

@Kreuzfeld:

I usually land in africa until my pacific fleet makes it to the atlantic. then I split and send uk into norway and start landing in the americans in europe the round after that.

Do you advocate sending the Indian Fleet south?  What do you do about the TT in SZ59?  When I used to play Revised/42/42SE I always remember going out of my way to eliminate it (as forcing Japan to buy more TTs is a good way to buy the allies precious time).

@Kreuzfeld:

no, Germany has 5 ftr and 1 bomber after you hit Ukraine. He has a good chance of loosing at least 1 ftr either against the UK BB, or the or against the uk DD in the med.

If you bring 3 FTR + 1 SUB (the one from SZ8) against the 1 UK BB, the chances of you getting hit twice in that battle are absurdly low.  The BB would need to hit you twice in a row (4/9 chance), while you would have to fail to get two hits in the first round of combat.  The chances are better for this.
-There a 6^4 (1296) possible combos of dice you can roll for 4 attackers.

-Of those, there are 18 * 36 = 648 combos where you get two hits.
648/1296 = 1/2 chance to get two hits.

4/9 * 1/2 = a 2/9 (~22%) chance of losing two units to the battleship.

Same goes for the 1 FTR+1 BB Vs 1 DD.  It’s a 1/4 chance for the UK DD to get 2 hits in a row, and a 1/6 chance for the combination of a FTR and a BB to miss the first attack.  Combine those and you’re looking a 1/24
(< 5%) chance of losing the FTR.

So there’s a believable chance you’ll lose one FTR in all of that, and wind up with a 3 FTR stack in W. Europe instead of a 4 FTR stack, but the odds of losing 2 FTRs in the opening sorties are laughable.

@DouchemanMacgee:

I’m more for a Navy build (1 DD/1 TT/1 FTR) on B1.  I don’t build land units because I ferry the tank from Canada to UK and simply land 1 INF in Norway, supported by the air units UK starts with (1 INF/1 ART if the Germans left more than 1 INF there to defend).  That way I have the spawn units to fill my transport fleet next turn for a harder landing somewhere.

You are wasting an entire turn of the allies by not attacking on UK1.

I figured the attack on Egypt was implied.  Not retaking Egypt turn 1 is tantamount to suicide.

I fail to see the point in dumping an entire army in Europe, which would leave the fleet vulnerable to a counterattack and force the allies to waste 2-3 turns rebuilding both a fleet AND a land army.  A good Germany will use those breather turns to win the game.

@Kreuzfeld:

Buying DDs is always bad. TTs are amazing combatunits in this game. Try running a combatsim with fighters against 1 BB and TTs, find out how many you need. It is alot. The DDs are really not worth the extra factor.

That’s two of you know that have pointed out that DDs are a bad buy.  I’ve looked into it a bit and I’m starting to think that a CV buy B1 might be the best bet for not dying to the German Fleet (it helps to be able to land two FTRs on it to basically give yourself 36 IPCs worth of defense for a 16 IPC investment).  Thanks for the advice.  Correct me if I’m wrong on the CV though.

@Kreuzfeld:

Yes :), but not through the entire game.
Round 1-5ish is when you ship to africa. Then, at some point, you swich uk to Norway. You will have saved up some cash and might buy the needed carrier when you do. At some point, you will no longer have a landrout to cauc. At this point, you should have at least 80 americans between morocco and cauc, and about 10 TTs. Then you move all of your TTs to the med, and start landing 20 units/ round in the weakest spot you can find on the mainland. At the same time, uk will round 10 units per round, germany will collapse like a house of cards. I have done this countless times against good players (this is what happens when you win against them).

Ahh, I see.  I think my problem here is that this is a face-to-face tournament played under time controls (that’s how I’ve been practicing, too), so I won’t be able to employ the safer strategies in the strict (5 hour) time limit I’ll have to get into a good position.  That would probably explain why I haven’t considered the slower strategies that both you and MarineIguana suggested.

I played a practice game with this strategy earlier today (and had the Soviets focus on turtling) and the Allies won handily, although it took an exceedingly long time to do so.

As always, thanks for the advice.

Hi all.  Sorry for not replying in a while I’ve been busy with work and University.

@Argothair:

Wait, you’re really happy to trade Britain’s 1 BB / 1 DD / 3 TT for Germany’s 2 SS / 2 FTR?

Aside from the fact that you are trading 60 British TUV for 36 German TUV, if Germany positions the rest of its air force properly, then it can hit Britain’s next fleet with a minimum of 3 FTR / 1 BMR, or more if Germany built a new plane (not unreasonable when you know you’re ordering an immediate attack on the Royal Navy). What can Britain put in the water with one round of income that can stand up to that kind of follow-up attack?

On second thought that’s a horrible idea!  Should probably have thought that through a little more before posting.

What would you say the optimal B1 buy/fleet move is, then?  I know it’s a bit off-topic but I’ve only just started playing Revised again and haven’t had the most time to practice.

@Ruin:

Very rarely will I see a good player build a destroyer.

What do you propose UK buy instead of turn 1, then?  A CV (landing the spawn FTRs on it for a decently rock-solid defense)?
I only ask because, while I understand that transport balls are the best option for naval combat, the initial UK Fleet is pretty lacking in terms of punching power (1 BB + 2 TT).
Even if you buy 3 TT (for a total of 1 BB + 5 TT), it’s still going to take another turn or two before that fleet will be able to get anywhere near the European coast.

@superAAA:

I couldn’t really get anything useful from that either.

I think the thing that confuses me the most is sub combat. Basically subs always have the choice to leave the battle unless there are destroyers present for the other side whether they are attacking or defending is this correct? So if a battleship attacks a sub the sub can just submerge before the battleship gets a chance to roll?

In Revised:

1.) Subs must fight one round of combat minimum.
2.) At then of a round of combat (the same step where the attacker opts whether to retreat), a sub on either side of the fight may submerge, ending combat and sharing the SZ with the opposing unit.
3.) If a Destroyer is present in the battle for one side, Subs on the opposing side cannot submerge.
  EX.)  If Germany brings a Destroyer and a Sub to fight a Russian Sub, the German Sub may submerge but the Russian Sub may not.
4.) Unlike later A&A editions, Air Units may hit subs in combat.

Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, but this has always seemed to be the case for me.

@Kreuzfeld:

I think you might be too defensive as the allies. I have quite a few games as the allies and rarely lose.

The reason for doing ukraine is simple. You save british fleet and can lock down the med fast. That German fighter is very important in the med and africa on G1.

I think you have me backwards.  I’m an advocate of striking Ukr. on R1.  I do not like Russian Openings where you let Ukr. go.
I agree with you for the exact reasons you’ve stated.

@Kreuzfeld:

Depending on the result of G1, should should have some very good options on UK1. I will assume germany did place 2 units in libya, sent the med fleet with 1 ftr to 15, while sending 1 inf + 1 art from italy and 1 bomber to egypt.

Germany will most likely have taken egypt and have about 4 landunits left. he will have 5 ftrs and 1 bomber (instead of 6 fighters and 1 bomber). Where germany has placed these 5 fighters is very important. Usually, germany will not be able to place all of the fighters in france/Libya.

Germany can easily place 4 FTRs in France and 1 FTR/1 BOMBER in Libya.

@Kreuzfeld:

I reccomend uk build in this situation of 1 ftr, 5 inf and 1 tank.

I’m more for a Navy build (1 DD/1 TT/1 FTR) on B1.  I don’t build land units because I ferry the tank from Canada to UK and simply land 1 INF in Norway, supported by the air units UK starts with (1 INF/1 ART if the Germans left more than 1 INF there to defend).  That way I have the spawn units to fill my transport fleet next turn for a harder landing somewhere.

@Kreuzfeld:

You can hit egypt with 2 inf from india, 1 from TJ, 1 ftr from india and 1 bomber from uk. This attack will usually kill every german unit there, and you will quite often have an inf left to take the terr. You can at the same

@Kreuzfeld:

time send your entire UK fleet to morocco.  If US sends its fleet to help you, you will have a situation where germany only have 1 inf and 1 art in africa. while you will have 2 UK inf and 2 tank in morocco and 2 us inf, 1 us art and 1 us tank. Your fleet of morocco will be: 1 UK BB, 2 UK TT, 1 US DD, 2 US TT and 1 ussr sub. At this point The german fighterposition is vitally important. If he can reach with 4 ftrs and 1 bomber, you are safe, if he has 5 ftrs and 1 bomber, this move does not work.

You don’t even have to do that if you buy the fleet I suggest and move the Russian Sub to SZ6 (the one right next to the Baltic) on R2.

The hypothetical UK Fleet I’m suggesting is 1 BB/1 DD/3 TT
Which would be facing the max Germany can send its way:  2 SUB/4 FTR

UK would lose the fleet to that attack but Germany only comes out with an average of 2 FTR.  This means that Germany is effectively losing a large share of its air force to kill a fleet that the UK will happily rebuild on the very next turn.

@Kreuzfeld:

At this point, the german position in africa is misrable. he has 2 landunits, you have 8, you will continue to shufle landunits down there until you have enough UK fleet to switch to the north. Those landunits will run as fast as they can to caucasuss, (you can ususally get between 10 and 30 landunits through before japan holds persia).

In most games I’ve played Germany just uses the Medi fleet to snipe Ukr.
Are you sure the shuttle of troops from UK -> N. Africa -> Caucasus is the best option?  Every turn you’re not threatening Europe is another turn Germany has to setup giant stacks and/or stack Ukraine.

@Kreuzfeld:

So, If you kill that ukrainian fitr, you will get one more round of reinforcements to caucasus and lock down africa on UK1. I have done this soo many times, and this is standard play among top players. The one wrench here is the german baltic fleet. A lot of germans will send it out on G1 to prevent this move. You have to be aware of it and calculate your fleet.

I agree with these yes.  Although if Germany sails its fleet out you can easily intercept and destroy it with the SZ2 Fleet (The BB and the TT) + the 2 FTRs.
Yes this delays your fleet uniting with the Americans but if you build navy B1 and move the Soviet sub to link up with the British R2 the combined fleet can easily repulse the 4 FTR/ 1 BOMBER Germany can send your way.

@GiddyXray:

The thing is: i have no problem putting any pressure on Germany when i don’t do Ukrain R1.

How do you keep the initiative if you’re letting the Germans escape Ukr G1? On G1 Germany can just withdraw the bulk of its forces to a E. Europe stack and start trading Ukr. while easily overwhelming the Allies in North Africa and ferrying a decent stream of units through the Middle East to ensure that India is securely in Japanese hands by J3.  If you’re just sitting in Caucasus/W. Rus trading Ukr you’re giving Germany a free hand to do whatever they want elsewhere.

@GiddyXray:

For a couple of rounds Russia can keep aggressive. I would buy 2 tanks R1.

I agree.

@GiddyXray:

1 FGT R2 and 1 tank in later rounds.

I agree with the 1 TANK/turn philosophy (to keep a mobile and offensive-capable army on the board at all times), but I don’t agree with the FTR on R2.  I understand that you can feasibly snipe the Mediterranean Fleet with 3 FTR (or at least sink the transport) but if a competent Germany scouts a lack of land units what’s stopping them from pouncing on Ukr, Arch or W. Rus with everything (which in turn forces Russia to bring everything to the German front, giving the Japanese a free hand to take Sink/India/Persia).

@GiddyXray:

With my 4 starting tanks i have a very potent force. In UK2 or 3 i start landing in Norway to support Russia. I don’t see how 6 fighters can stop me there.

Germany can either subsist without Norway or simply deadzone it by stacking Ukr.  It’s going to take a decently large stack of Transports to pull together a large enough force to actively hold Norway.

The point of the FTR cloud isn’t to actually kill the UK Fleet (It can’t do that cost-efficiently), but to force the Fleet to remain in one place at a time (if any transports split off from the main fleet to land in far away places the FTRs and Bomber can easily wipe them out with a pretty minimal chance of a loss).

The other point of the FTR cloud is to allow Germany to commit to battles against small landing parties without having to leave as many units behind to die in the counterattack.  Let me give an example:

UK amphibs into Norway, taking 2 INF/2 ART.  They kill a lone INF defender without losses.

Germany sends 3 INF + 6 FTR + 1 Bomber to attack Norway (a bit of a reach, but it’s for the sake of the example so bear with me here).

Under low luck, UK gets 1 hit and a 1/3 chance at a second (INF and ART defend on a 2, 24=8, 8/6 = 1 + 1/3).  Germany will get 4 hits under low luck (31 + 63 + 14 = 25, 25/6 = 4 + 1/6).

So Germany will one-shot 14 IPCs worth of material while losing 9 overall (I’m assuming that the 1-2 INF that survive will die on the following British turn when they commit another landing party).  That’s pretty good value if you ask me, especially if UK is committing 100% to Europe (and losing 7+ IPCs between India/Persia/Trans-Jordan/Egypt).

@GiddyXray:

The ships in the mediteranean Sea are lost to me! The uk home fleet is quite save in the first turn. I use it as a base for my future fleet. Uk1 I build a carrier to expand the fleet. If all german units position to strike my fleet i buy more defence, or i combine with the US first! I position myself to strike the Baltic fleet at some point.

What’s your timetable for killing the Baltic, out of curiosity?

I usually try to have it dead by B2 (you can do it with a B1 FTR+Destroyer+Trans build).
Sometimes you have to delay until B3 if Germany goes with a naval opening, but in those kinds of games an aggressive USSR can usually win on its own.

@GiddyXray:

After that it is not worth loosing the fighters at a sea battle that will cost the UK a few transports at most.

I agree, but remember the whole point of the pressure is to force the UK player to spend turns investing in a navy.  This buys Germany much needed time to stack aggressively in the USSR’s direction, forcing them to keep their men focused on the Germans and giving Japan time to get its IPC levels up to snuff with the Allies/put a drain on the Soviet and British Economies.

@GiddyXray:

In the mid game Germany is focused mainly on landings from the Allies. Then Russia is starting to fight off the Japanese with his tanks. Russia has an income of around 26 IPC with which it can survive the mid game easily. End game he will be under great pressure from Japan! But if the Allies have normal luck and do nothing stupid, Germany is dead or close to it!

But you’ve never inflicted a serious loss on German hardware in this scenario.  All Germany has to do is build heavy INF stacks all day (with the occasional Tank thrown in to harass the Soviets), and the Allies are going to take an awfully long time to start hurting Germany.

Additionally, if Russia is sending 5-10 IPCs of Tanks East every turn what’s stopping Germany from moving the E Europe stack into Ukr and putting the Russians in a desperate situation (guarding Caucasus and W. Rus simultaneously).

@GiddyXray:

So my conclusion so far is that you sacrifice russian tanks for a chance on a german fighter, that would harm the UK a little bit. But the UK can counter this with a buy of an extra ship. In my philosophy that trade off is not so optimal.

The Ukr fight can be won pretty reliably R1 actually:

R:
3 INF (from Caucasus)
1 ART (from Caucasus)
2 TANK (1 from Caucasus, 1 from Moscow)
2 FTR (1 from Karelia, 1 from Moscow)

Vs.

G:
3 INF
1 ART
1 TANK
1 FTR

TripleA gives the Soviets an 85% chance to win with, on average, both FTRs and a lone tank surviving.

So value-wise USSR loses 23 IPC (everything but the FTR) while the Germans lose 28.  A USSR win no matter how you split it.
It seems like a narrow advantage but remember the USSR gets 3 of those IPCs back by virtue of taking Ukr.