I don’t buy it. It doesn’t excuse USSR to be this weak. The only conclusion I can come up with is ether they didn’t test Germany vs USSR enough OR they wanted USSR to be this weak.
The Bright Skies
-
If he owns Baltic states and has 1 transport, there is no way you can hold novogrod. It either falls G2 or G3. You could stack everything there and dissuade an attack, but then it can be cut off by the Axis and the slow-movers (1) cannot return to Moscow without getting annihilated. I only had about 35 lesser pieces on Moscow by G5–if this number is below 25 you are cooked since I barely won under that circumstance.
The German Fleet, conservatively, can have CV (2) BB (2) CA (1) and Air (3). This is 8 hits and you will need at least 8 hits to attack it with confidence. In this case, we have only bombers, which are our only potential casualties. Also, all these plans call for building only bombers, which sounds great but its not a very practical choice. US fleet at start, without more, cannot remotely step up to Japan and so if you don’t improve that with some carriers and destroyers, Japan could even potentially destroy you at Queensland.
We are coming up with some good ideas with Russia but it is the weakest power and I think the bigger takeaway here is that there are ways to shore up Moscow power (fighters from UK, bombers from USA) such that a takeover isn’t going to happen on G5-G6, but that if you do this, you scatter the punch of the US all over the board until midgame, at least. If the bombers are moving across the world, they can’t position to fight very well.
-
taamvan makes an excellent point that I would like to touch on. If Russia stacks Novgorod, Germany will wipe it out and be soundly in position to strike Moscow. Once Germany takes Novgorod, all they have to do is use SBR’s to level Moscow, which will already be weak because of the annihilation of the forces in Novgorod. Germany would move with ease onto Moscow.
As for for purchasing bombers with the US, which is what this thread is about, If you make a move to Russia with them, then for the first 4 or 5 turns, Japan goes on uncontested in the Pacific, which is a no go. Can you imagine if the allied forces did both of these things in one game? The axis player would have a field day. It wouldn’t even be fair.
-
Still I don’t agree.
Germanies mass also does not come concentrated, but the large infantry stack from Germany + the rest and the Yugo strafing troops in the south. The German tanks + mech that took out France can only attack Novgorod G4. If you deploy heavy in Karelia R1, the 7 German infantry will not get to Vyborg, or if they do, you could punish him for it. As Russia you can get 18 inf, 2 mech, 7 artillery, 1 tank in Novgorod R2 + airforce. This is enough to prevent a G3 victory over Novgorod.
You also have 7 infantry, 5 artillery in Bryansk, while 7 mech. infantry in Russia that you build.
When Germany can not take Novgorod, it has only two options
1. Stay in Baltic States until reinforcements arrive
2. Go for Moscow and move all forces up to Belarus.However in Belarus, I can attack his forces with all my forces, strafing or even beating him.
The combined attack on Belarus of Novgorod, Bryansk and Russia will be 25 infantry, 9 mech. Infantry, 11 artillery, 1 tank + airforce.
While still taking Iraq in R3.
So, stacking Novgorod does not mean not being able to defend Moscow.
When Germany comes with overwhelming power, so not mainly its starting units, you still have the ability to withdraw from Novgorod to Moscow on time by moving 2 steps ahead. However for Germany to achieve this it needs to wait until DOW3 or 4. This again gives Russia more time + the Allies to prepare.
-
If Germany is committed to taking Novgorod on G3, they will. I don’t believe that there is any way that Russia could stop that. If you put forces in Vyborg or Karelia, German planes can support the 7 infantry in a G2 attack on one or both of those territories, with the ability to support a G3 attack on Novgorod. Then you have a Baltic fleet that can land there, plus your mass of troops from the Baltic States. As Germany if you use the troops from Germany, Poland, and Slovakia, you have a total 16 infantry, 3 artillery, and 2 tanks. You can use 3 tanks from Greater Southern if you didn’t push them into Paris, and you can also use any planes that you have left at the beginning of G3. Germany start with 12 planes. They won’t lose them all and they will have the range and ability to assist in a G3 attack on Novgorod. That is going to be enough to take out the Russian forces in Novgorod. A committed German player, will take Novgorod. Russia does not have the time to stop this from happening, and after Germany takes Novgorod and destroys Russia’s primary mass of forces, they will not be able to catch up. Germany will SBR Moscow, and Moscow if they are lucky would have no more than a fraction of what Germany could crush them with.
-
If Germany is committed to taking Novgorod on G3, they will. I don’t believe that there is any way that Russia could stop that. If you put forces in Vyborg or Karelia, German planes can support the 7 infantry in a G2 attack on one or both of those territories, with the ability to support a G3 attack on Novgorod. Then you have a Baltic fleet that can land there, plus your mass of troops from the Baltic States. As Germany if you use the troops from Germany, Poland, and Slovakia, you have a total 16 infantry, 3 artillery, and 2 tanks. You can use 3 tanks from Greater Southern if you didn’t push them into Paris, and you can also use any planes that you have left at the beginning of G3. Germany start with 12 planes. They won’t lose them all and they will have the range and ability to assist in a G3 attack on Novgorod. That is going to be enough to take out the Russian forces in Novgorod. A committed German player, will take Novgorod. Russia does not have the time to stop this from happening, and after Germany takes Novgorod and destroys Russia’s primary mass of forces, they will not be able to catch up. Germany will SBR Moscow, and Moscow if they are lucky would have no more than a fraction of what Germany could crush them with.
If Germany buys extra transports, yes, Novgorow will fall quickly. Otherwise, I believe there is enough time + troops to stop it.
Germany is not going to attack Karelia when there are 2 AA guns, 11 infantry, 1 artillery, 2 fighters and 1 tacticsl bomber, that would be suicide.
Yes you are correct, only 16 infantry, 3 artillery, 2 tanks + airforce vs 2 AA, 18 inf, 2 mech, 7 artillery, 1 tank, 1 tactical, 2 fighters + 3 UK/French fighters. Russia will win that fight.
-
If Russia moved all of the units that you are stating here, Germany would merely need to continue moving past Novgorod right on to Moscow, which will draw Russia to either move our of Novgorod in defense or to attack the German units. Which is a win win for Germany because their other infantry and units from Greater Southern and the tanks and mechs from the Paris attack would be right behind. They would easily move into Novgorod and crush whatever Russian forces were left. It is a lose lose for Russia.
-
Good to have at least convinced you Russia can hold Leningrad G3.
34 infantry, 12 artillery, 1 tank, 2 fighters and 1 tactical against 16 infantry, 3 artillery and some tanks when Germany decides to push into Belarus. Will this not be a massacre in favour of Russia, enough to withstand the tanks from Paris + new builds?
Yes forces from the south can reinforce north, but again, this takes extra time. I count on Germany to go for the open Russian south instead, this is where his money is.
Another trick awaits him, as the Bryansk stack will retreat to Moscow, and as soon he enters Bryansk, the mobile Leningrad forces will combo-attack or strafe.
You guys also seem to forget that Russia income diminishes veruly fast when you just build infantry and defend Moscow. The more aggressive you play as Russia, the more Germany needs to watch its steps, has to slow down etc. and this allows you to get as many troops in Russia as you would you let Russia be raped besides Moscow.
As you concede as Russia that Moscow is your last hope, Germany has won the battle of Russia. Yes he might not have taken the capital but you are in no position to start a counter-attack. At the very least Russia needs a healthy amount of artillery.
About the economic aspect of Russia, I made calculations much income you might have with defensive play (just Infantry in Moscow) and my strategy (Hold leningrad, build counter-attacks).
R1: 37
R2: 34+5 (125)
R3: 27+5 (125)
R4: 22
R5: 16R1: 37
R2: 35+5 (S125)
R3: 30+10 (Iraq)
R4: 27+15 (Finland)
R5: 22+28 (Africa, Norway)In R7 Russia will get another 6 IPC bonus from Sicily and Sardinia.
In short: an pro-active Russia pays, and will make more than up for the difference of numbers between spending 4 IPC per unit (art and mech) than solely infantry.
Assuming Russia holds Leningrad and survive Iraq with 1 tank + 1 mech that take Somaliland + Libya in R5.
When you lose Novgorod, you lose Archangel next turn, and so your bonus. Germany taking Novgorod gets +7. Holding Novgorod is an important IPC swing for the Allies, especially when it results into an Allied scandinavia several turns later.
-
How did you double the infantry from your previous calculations?
-
How did you double the infantry from your previous calculations?
I added the 7 infantry from Bryansk that can also attack + the 7 mechanized infantry I build in Russia R2, as it can also attack.
34 infantry
Novgorod: 18 inf, 2 mech
Bryansk: 7 inf
Russia: 7 mech -
UK and French fighters cannot reach Russian squares. The men from both scandanavia (7) and Poland (11, minimum) can join 6 more ground units from transports, along with every plane. You are putting all the eggs in one basket. You are also massively ambitious regarding Russian income over time.
We are just going back and forth about the details, and don’t think Requester or I are saying that your idea is crazy or illogical or impossible, just that it is a monumentally bad idea against any average+ Germany player because I have not held Novogrod past R4 since 2014, despite trying it every way I could. If somehow you can stack to prevent the attack–which isn’t hard to do, the Germans move around you, cutting your way back to Moscow off, and they take Moscow G5-G7. That’s what 100+ games of Global have demonstrated, at least, to me.
-
I can understand the strategy of purchasing mechs, i’m only trying to say that I would purchase infantry instead to further my chances of holding Moscow. Germany can only do so much without taking out the Russians.
-
UK and French fighters cannot reach Russian squares.� � The men from both scandanavia (7) and Poland (11, minimum) can join 6 more ground units from transports, along with every plane.� �You are putting all the eggs in one basket.� � You are also massively ambitious regarding Russian income over time.
We are just going back and forth about the details, and don’t think Requester or I are saying that your idea is crazy or illogical or impossible, just that it is a monumentally bad idea against any average+ Germany player because I have not held Novogrod past R4 since 2014, despite trying it every way I could.� �If somehow you can stack to prevent the attack–which isn’t hard to do, the Germans move around you, cutting your way back to Moscow off, and they take Moscow G5-G7.� � That’s what 100+ games of Global have demonstrated, at least, to me.
Thank you for the patience Taamvan, but I think those detailed are crucial in proving the consensus wrong. So far, I have not been convinced by the counter-arguments and thus have the idea my strategy can be a good one.
However I just have played about 20 life games over de past years, never online so certainly are less experienced. I did read this forum 1000 times over and over haha.
UK fighters and French fighter can land in Scotland first turn and land in Novgorod turn 2, on time for a G3 attack.
This is also why I am so persistant on the USA early bombers. They are crucial in this battle of Novgorod and support of a more aggressive Russia. Aggressive does not have to mean advancing Russia. But a Russia that can counter-attack on strategic locations. Just like Dark Skies revolutionized German play, Bright Skies will revolutionize USA and Russia play.
If I am right :P
-
I would love to see some games that have implemented this strategy. They would be good to dissect, and it has certainly raised some valid points from both sides.
-
I would love to see some games that have implemented this strategy. They would be good to dissect, and it has certainly raised some valid points from both sides.
I will have a live game sunday where I will test it against my father. Will make pictures and a battle report. However he is the least experienced Axis player of us, normally being Russia/USA himself.
Started two TripleA games also, but have no time unfortunately to continue them for the next month.
-
I’m finishing up a game now (at my house). I might try to implement this strategy in one of my upcoming games to see what it is like for myself.
-
I also like to share my view on Russian economy, to support why I am so positive Russia can become most exciting nation to play instead of most boring.
RUSSIA = 30 IPC
But many national objecties to growSiberia: +7 IPC
SZ125: +5 IPC
Iraq: +5 IPC
Italian Somaliland + Libya: +7 IPC
Italian Islands: +6 IPC
Scandinavia: +11 IPCThat is +41 IPC, PER TURN for a total of 71 IPC without entering German borders (as those can be easily defended by Germany)
-
Yes but you have to account for the loss of territories throughout time, as well as the ability to lose some of those bonuses like sz125. I don’t think Russian IPC income can become a monster. It is difficult for Russia to obtain some of these, and it would take some time to grab the Mediterranean and African territories for the bonuses. You also have to think about the amount of resources it would take for Russia to obtain all of the bonuses that you listed. How would you plan on gaining this very large amount of IPCs?
-
Yes but you have to account for the loss of territories throughout time, as well as the ability to lose some of those bonuses like sz125. I don’t think Russian IPC income can become a monster. It is difficult for Russia to obtain some of these, and it would take some time to grab the Mediterranean and African territories for the bonuses. You also have to think about the amount of resources it would take for Russia to obtain all of the bonuses that you listed. How would you plan on gaining this very large amount of IPCs?
I think only the Scandinavian is the difficult one actually.
Iraq + Africa + Island is simple.
Take Iraq R3, one tank will go to Libya, one mech to Somaliland
Take Libya + Somaliland R5
Get tank + mech in 2 USA transports R6
Unload at the islands in R7 and collect bonusSiberia NO, keep the 18 at Buryatia
SZ125, let the UK fight for this one with destroyers. Use your own sub first. Not too impossible.
Scandinavia needs most planning and effort, but when you keep Novgorod and USA bombers destroys Baltic fleet, it is realistic and possible.
So actually just 1 tank + 1 mech for 17 IPC south
UK help for S125 so free for 5 IPC
Combine Russia and USA effort for 11 IPC scandinavia -
So yes Russia will lose a lot of territory, I am planning on it, especially in the South. However I will keep Leningrad and surroundings and will keep making a healthy 40-45 until I get to Scandinavia + Africa. Then it becomes a monster able to overpower Germany on its own.
-
Right, so some of these you don’t achieve until late game. The Scandinavia gambit is controversial because if the German player is skilled, they will not lose Scandinavia, or if they did, it’s because they wanted Russia to waste time and units from defending Novgorod and or Moscow. I feel as though the reason most players play a conservative “boring” game with Russia is because of trial and error. When I first began playing AA years ago, everyone wanted to play an aggressive Russian game including myself, because in human nature. You want to have some fun battles and out maneuver the enemy and out smart the enemy. However through trial and error we find that Russia cannot keep up with the ever expanding German forces. Germany rapidly gains IPCs and Russian territories, while Russia is slowly losing IPCs and retreating. Russia cannot compete in this way, and instead are forced into a shell (Moscow). The only way that Russia is going to be able to compete in a way in which you describe is if the German player has dedicated their game strategy to taking out the UK both in the Atlantic, and the Mediterranean. Which is not the case most of the time, because Russia is a sleeping giant. If you look into the war in real life, Hitler realized this too late. He knew that he would have to attack Russia and have a two front war and by waiting too long he allowed for Russia to gain too much momentum.
Suggested Topics
