If you build a major in Romainia (spend 30 IPCs) on G1, then build the 10 art G2 for an additional 40 IPCs (70 IPC invested) you are ready to invade Russia on G3 (Besserarabia, or E Poland).
If you don’t spend that 30 IPCs on major IC and just build 10 art in Germany G1 (40 IPCs invested), they move to Poland G2, and on G3 those art are still able to invade Russia (E Poland) G3.
Both have similar results, but there is much you can do with the 30 IPCs saved, like build mech/tanks for Germany G2 in Berlin to also hit E Poland on G3.
I know someone has some experience on making this work and the mechanics of how to use this strategy. Any help, comments, experiences, opinions, etc are greatly appreciated.
I’ve never used this myself, but I’ve seen it used twice.
The bad thing of course is that you are not spending that money on forces for Russia. The good thing is that everything you build there is a whole turn closer to Moscow – tanks built there can hit Moscow in two turns, not three. So you’re paying 30 IPCs for a permanent one territory boost to the speed of all units built there.
Is it technically telegraphing? Yes, but sometimes it’s perfectly ok to telegraph and Germany facing off against Russia is one of those times.
Marsh
Marsh seems to see what I was going for. The extra move gets me there quicker and I can send tanks/mechs sooner. One good 10 tank build and I think Russia goes down economically and the Allies will need a lot of push once I do the big infantry purchase and wall up.
This is a very controversial topic which I find myself arguing about in my brain all the time. I used to do it quite often but I have found that I like threatening Sea Lion better because it helps Italy a lot. One time I went as far as building a Black Sea Fleet and taking Caucasus, but it costs too much. Building faster ilunits in Germany will sae you money but not in the long run; you can always get the six artillery a turn later with Leningrad and Umraine. The extra range is nice but you lose some initiative and secrecy against the Allies. I think it all comes down to Do you want to go full Barbarossa? Or do you want to try doing things in the Mediterranean and help Italy or threaten Sea Lion then go for Leningrad? This in itself is the crux of what makes A&A great. Both are viable options which you simply need to try and see how you can execute it and how your opponent responds.
DeGaulle did you get the 39 setup finished with all your revisions? Would like to try it out still.
Email sent! You can also see it in house rules. :-D
Marsh seems to see what I was going for. The extra move gets me there quicker and I can send tanks/mechs sooner. One good 10 tank build and I think Russia goes down economically and the Allies will need a lot of push once I do the big infantry purchase and wall up.
Please note that I’m not actually advocating a major IC in Romania.
Marsh
hahahhahah No one will hold you to that quote Marsh.
Spending 30 IPCs without building any units makes me uncomfortable. 8-)
The movement benefit is quite real though.
Another problem is the fact that building in Romania means those units coudn’t help the West if necessary.
Sometimes building on Germany or even West Germany can kill two birds with one stone by giving adequate defense. On your next turn you move these to the Eastern Front and build another wave. There is no flexibillity with Romania.
I have done it, Won the game.
My plan was to stack rostov on G6 with the italians capable of killing 10 russians, this would force russia to retreat to moscow and I could take caucase, stalingrad and the middle east allowing me to win on production. At that point, germany would have 30 IPC start + 10-15 from france and minors+ 18-20 from russia west and south of moscow. + 0-4 middle east = 58-69. Add to this +5 Leningrad, +5 Stalingrad + 5 cauc +5 denmark/Norway, +2-6 middle east Giving a total of 80- 95 IPC.
I did buy G1 MIC , then on G2, I bought 10 inf in rumania (maybe 8 inf 2 art) and 10 mech in germany, then on G3 I bought 10 mech in rumania and on G4 I bought another 10 mech in rumania. This gave me a total of 40 inf/mech able to reach where I wanted by turn 6 .
If I had just buildt germany, (and wanted max mech) I would have built G1: 8 mech, G2 18 mech, G3 10 mech for a total of 36 mechs being able to reach on G6
The Jewel of the Reich strategy.
Building facilities in Romania can help you win the game, if you do it correct and follow my orders, and your opponent is a casual player from the lower level of the ladder. Against a very skilled and or lucky opponent nothing helps.
G 1 you need to build a minor IC and an Airbase in Romania.
G 2 you must buy a Carrier and two Trannies for the Black Sea
Now you can threat with power projection against 4 Russian territories, Bessarabia, Ukraine, Rostov and Caucasus. This will be killing zones that you strafe with a few inf and a ton of planes. Every time you get Caucasus you will also get a 5 IPC NO.
Use Italy as can opener. Italian planes starting from Italy can even land on the G. Carrier after strafing operations against the Russian territories around the Black Sea.
Russia can no way afford to stack all this 4 territories against a joint Axis operation including both amphibious assaults, can opening and strafing.
G3 you can build inf and artillery in Romania and sail them to Rostov for a fast transfer.
Later turns, Tanks and Mechs build in Ukraine can reach Moscow the next turn, and planes build in Romania can also reach Moscow the next turn, as long as you did not forget to build the AB too.
Now I would like to see a Russian player surviving this onslaught, man…
True, there is a large benefit to being able to produce 10 units[such as 10 tanks] closer to the front with a Romanian Major IC on G1. However, the Germans will quickly take the Leningrad and Ukraine IC’s, and this will give the Germans the capability to produce 60% of the amount of units on the front for free. Plus, if 3 tanks are bought each turn for Leningrad and 3 tanks for Ukraine, that leaves Germany with easily 24-44 IPC’s to spend somewhere else. Especially if the rout of G3 Barbarossa is indeed taken, that ability to have a free 24-44 IPC’s[60-80 ICP’s-6 tanks] means that 8-14 infantry or 6-11 artillery can be produced on the Paris/Western Germany front to combat an American offensive/American offensives.
@Charles:
Another problem is the fact that building in Romania means those units coudn’t help the West if necessary.
Sometimes building on Germany or even West Germany can kill two birds with one stone by giving adequate defense. On your next turn you move these to the Eastern Front and build another wave. There is no flexibillity with Romania.
I don’t think arguing that Romania is not flexible is a really sound point. Germany already has major ICs in Germany and West Germany, and the minor in Paris in all but weird circumstances. Germany has plenty of flexibility in where it positions its builds, and adding Romania probably adds flexibility instead of subtracting it.
Once units are placed in Romania they don’t the ability to contribute to West Germany’s defense, but that is easily overcome by placing your units in the correct location!
Marsh
@Marshmallow:
@Charles:
Another problem is the fact that building in Romania means those units coudn’t help the West if necessary.
Sometimes building on Germany or even West Germany can kill two birds with one stone by giving adequate defense. On your next turn you move these to the Eastern Front and build another wave. There is no flexibillity with Romania.I don’t think arguing that Romania is not flexible is a really sound point. Germany already has major ICs in Germany and West Germany, and the minor in Paris in all but weird circumstances. Germany has plenty of flexibility in where it positions its builds, and adding Romania probably adds flexibility instead of subtracting it.
Once units are placed in Romania they don’t the ability to contribute to West Germany’s defense, but that is easily overcome by placing your units in the correct location!
Marsh
You are not getting my point. I am saying that building in Germany or even Western Germany does TWO things at the SAME time: it gives you a one turn defense or possible counteroffense in the West while at the same time giving you the option of sending those units East. So in words the same units are doing two things at once. Not totally optimal but it is a point against Romanian. I think I like the minor IC in Romanian better myself.
The thing about an IC in Romania is that you will use it for the first few German turns only. Yes it will help you somewhat to set up your Barbarossa, (or you could do some Caspian sea thing), but you can get similar results by just building units in Germany w/o spending the IPCs on an IC (spending more on units). Once you push into Russian territory you will use the Russian ICs, basically rendering an IC in Romania obsolete by the 4th-5th turn. Plus an IC built in Romania G1 (especially a major) is like the Brits breaking an intelligence code and they know exactly what you are doing (good bye Italian navy, and hello Egyptian IC).
If I’m going to spend IPCs on an IC I would wait until I have Western Ukraine (it should fall quickly), that way any units I build in W Ukraine and Ukraine could be with-in striking distance of Moscow. You don’t need more units to push into Russia, but you need more units to finish them off. That way if the allies fly a bunch of ftrs into Moscow you can build more units at the front, Romania isn’t going to help you in the later stages of your Moscow campaign. The only possible help a Romanian IC will give you later is if the allies try to come up though the Balkans mid game.
@WILD:
The thing about an IC in Romania is that you will use it for the first few German turns only. Yes it will help you somewhat to set up your Barbarossa, (or you could do some Caspian sea thing), but you can get similar results by just building units in Germany w/o spending the IPCs on an IC (spending more on units). Once you push into Russian territory you will use the Russian ICs, basically rendering an IC in Romania obsolete by the 4th-5th turn. Plus an IC built in Romania G1 (especially a major) is like the Brits breaking an intelligence code and they know exactly what you are doing (good bye Italian navy, and hello Egyptian IC).
If I’m going to spend IPCs on an IC I would wait until I have Western Ukraine (it should fall quickly), that way any units I build in W Ukraine and Ukraine could be with-in striking distance of Moscow. You don’t need more units to push into Russia, but you need more units to finish them off. That way if the allies fly a bunch of ftrs into Moscow you can build more units at the front, Romania isn’t going to help you in the later stages of your Moscow campaign. The only possible help a Romanian IC will give you later is if the allies try to come up though the Balkans mid game.
This makes a lot of sense
@WILD:
If I’m going to spend IPCs on an IC I would wait until I have Western Ukraine (it should fall quickly), that way any units I build in W Ukraine and Ukraine could be with-in striking distance of Moscow. You don’t need more units to push into Russia, but you need more units to finish them off. That way if the allies fly a bunch of ftrs into Moscow you can build more units at the front, Romania isn’t going to help you in the later stages of your Moscow campaign. The only possible help a Romanian IC will give you later is if the allies try to come up though the Balkans mid game.
When I did it, i ofcourse filled all of the w ukraine IC as soon as i got it as well. I also built a minor in rostow and once I had Rostow, ukraine and stalingrad, I produced 9 infs there every turn, keeping the russian bottled up in moscow, while using the infs/arts to release my more mobile elements to attack the middle east from the north. Persia and iraq should fall once you come crashing down wtih 40+ units. The brit could perhaps challenge this. if UK has the minor IC in iran, iraq and in egypt from UK2/3, they should be able to have a lot of units being able to trade cauc and nw persia for a few turns.
