Nit picky German Economizer

[U-505]

For the most part I agree with Frood. Blocking an armor blitz or vacating a territory to prevent an infantry being smashed by a BB is smart. But, attacking a territory with only 1 inf+fig’s is risky, especially Karelia and Ukraine, because if you lose the inf and leave the territory under Allied control they can reinforce usually with a large quantity of ground units and, more importantly, land all of their combined fighters. Germany has to be careful to not let the Allies combine their forces in one territory, especially in one bordering Eastern Europe because that signals the beginning of the end of Germany’s ability to trade Kar-Belo-Ukr.

@ncscswitch:

You’ve got it Romulus.

Leaving that 1 INF forward in Karelia…

• Preserves 2 IPC in Archangel
• Makes Germany commit forces to taking Karelia instead of it being free (forces that could be destroyed by a Russian atack from West Russia on R2)
• Can potentially kill 1 (or more) German attackers in Karelia
• Prevents the need for Russia to fight in Archangel on R2, freeing up 2 INF and 1 FIG for other duties.
• Reduces the German Build on G2 by $2, with no need for an SBR :-)

In the case of leaving Karelia open to allow a German armor blitz into Archangel, the best solution for Russia is to attack Arch with 1 inf and all of their armor. The Russian armor can still threaten Belo-Kar-Ukr, you’re fighters can be used elsewhere, and at best you’ve only pushed 1 inf into Arch which still can be used in Kar next turn. It makes it a wash for Germany in IPC’s if they’re lucky and an IPC loss if they aren’t. Getting the bonus territory and killing a Russian inf in exchange for the armor is the best you can hope for there because you can’t count Karelia’s income in that equation because moving an inf or blitzing an armor up and back from Eastern gains that income anyway. I would be more than happy, as Russia, to let Germany expose an armor in that case.

[frood]

@U-505:

For the most part I agree with Frood. Blocking an armor blitz or vacating a territory to prevent an infantry being smashed by a BB is smart. But, attacking a territory with only 1 inf+fig’s is risky, especially Karelia and Ukraine, because if you lose the inf and leave the territory under Allied control they can reinforce usually with a large quantity of ground units and, more importantly, land all of their combined fighters. Germany has to be careful to not let the Allies combine their forces in one territory, especially in one bordering Eastern Europe because that signals the beginning of the end of Germany’s ability to trade Kar-Belo-Ukr.

That’s partly what I meant when I referred to the possibility that the territory may have tactical value, in which case I will use 2 Inf. So I think I totally agree with you :D

[U-505]

Ok. Yes. I forgot about that line while I was posting. But, when there are all kinds of Allied units flying around Europe it can sometimes be hard to judge whether or not a territory is of tactical importance when you have multiple territories to consider so I usually err on the side of caution and go for the take in Ukraine and Karelia.

[trihero]

That means that 2/3 of the time you will be net AT LEAST +2 IPC to blitz an ARM to an undefended Archangel.

This statement is still misleading, Switch. First, you rounded up to +2 IPCs on average, it’s something like +1.9. Just blitzing Karelia still has a greater average result.

Second, no, it’s not “at least” +2 IPCs. +2 IPCs is the AVERAGE result. The LEAST result is -1 IPC; +4 from the territories, then -5 from losing the tank without killing anything. It seems like you think the minimum result is that the tank will kill something, and also you look at the 10% result as bigger than it is. It doesn’t feel very good at all when you lose a tank without doing anything in return, which happens much more often than killing 2 inf will.

[Guest]

No Wes…

It is as I stated… TWO THIRDS of the time, the German gain is 2 IPC OR MORE

+2 for Karelia
+2 for Archangel
5.8% of the time you DON’T lose 5 for the ARM (it lives)
44.3% of the time +3 for 1 INF killed
13.4% of the time +6 for 2 INF killed

So…
The +4 for the IPC’s of Karelia and Archangel are automatic (if left vacant), I think you agree with me that far.
Then you have 5.8% that the ARM lives, 44.3% to kill 1 Russian INF, 13.4% to kill 2 Russian INF.
5.8 + 44.3 + 13.4 = 63.5

63.5% rounded to the nearest third is 2/3

So 2/3 of the time, you get the +4 from the territories, and then from +2 to +11 IPC MORE (with +11 being exceedingly rare, +2 being pretty common, assuming the Russians preserve their FIG and retreat once the INF are dead; otherwise you have a VERY small (2.1%) chance of Germany being up by as much as +21:  4 for the territories, 5 for the surviving ARM, 6 for the dead INF, 10 for the dead FIG…).

1/3 of the time you are -1 IPC (ARM dies without getting a defensive hit in Archangel).

The odds are in favor of a positive IPC and unit value exchange for Germany by sending an ARM to blitz a vacant Karelia and Archangel with the MOST COMMON result being Germany Net +2 in combined IPC and Unit Value.

And then the positional advantages of making Russia use their AF on a battle they otherwise would not have to fight at all, and sending 2 INF out of position to the north…

[Romulus]

This analysis should be a hint for meditation.

I say again one little infantry in Karelia may avoid more problems even if is for sure a loss for Russia!

I try to do an analysis similar to the one made by Switch, but considering for sure the lost of the territory:

1/3 of the time defending russian infantry should kill one attacking infantry (+3), then die(-3) and losing the territory(-2), net: -2
2/3 of the time inf die without killing nothing: 2/3 * -5

net loss for Russian: (1/3 * -2) + (2/3 * -5) = -0,66 - 3,33 = -3,99 on average -4 IPC

Am I right?

So we should retreat that inf to stack it with other inf (very likely) or move in Karelia more forces to take it (very very unlikely).

But… the possibility for German of blitzing a tank give them the following advantages:

So 2/3 of the time, you get the +4 from the territories, and then from +2 to +11 IPC MORE (with +11 being exceedingly rare, +2 being pretty common, assuming the Russians preserve their FIG and retreat once the INF are dead; otherwise you have a VERY small (2.1%) chance of Germany being up by as much as +21:  4 for the territories, 5 for the surviving ARM, 6 for the dead INF, 10 for the dead FIG…).

that usually are not taken in account!

Result?
Is it not worthy to reason in terms of economy about trading of territories?
Is it more important to reason in terms of opportunity negated to the enemy?
Is it more useful the dispersion of own forces (1 inf alone) that cause more dispersion for the enemy (2 inf and 1 fig attacking)?

I know that units are the more important asset of a nation in A&A (units are the actual power of a nation, IPC are potential power still to be concretized) but I am starting to think that dispersion of forces is useful when aimed to force a consequent dispersion of the enemy and when used to reduce options and lessening the optimal attack of the enemy.

[trihero]

That’s true switch, but the AVERAGE IPC gain is still around 2. The most common result is killing one inf and dying, that is exactly +2 IPCs gain.

Also, the correct way to look at it is this:

44% of the time you killed one inf, which is a net gain of +2 IPCs (same as blitzing Karelia)
33% of the time you killed no inf, which is a net loss of 1 IPC (3 IPCs worse than blitzing Karelia).

So 77% of the time you are doing the same OR WORSE than simply blitzing Karelia.

You look at it as 66% of the time as doing the same OR BETTER.

We are sharing the 44% in the middle, but when you look at the part we aren’t sharing, it’s 33% to do worse, and only 22% to do better. How are the odds in Germany’s favor? The 44% of the time when you kill one inf is precisely the same net gain as simply blitzing Karelia, it is neither worse nor better. You talk about positioning, but the inf leftoever in Archangel are ready to take back Karelia so it’s no loss there.

Needless to say, remember all we’re talking about here is if Russia has not defended Karelia. If I were Russia I’d defend it, but I have played people who don’t, and in that case I don’t think it’s worth the German effort to blitz to Archangel, because 77% of the time it is the same or worse.

[Guest]

You are negating the value of giving the Russians FOUR needed attacks on R2 instead of only 3… and having only 2 FIGs (MAYBE 3) available for the attacks.  That leaves Russian ART and probably some ARM hanging out on the front, against Germany’s 5 FIGs and BOM…

You start spreading Russia’s initial forces THAT thin, and Germany is going to make some substantial LONG TERM gains, especially with the increased losses of Russian forces going for 4 attacks on R2, and the smaller number of Russians for the Germans to attack in each territory on G2.

If Russia pickets Karelia on R1, Archangel never changes hands ($2 lost to German coffers)
Russia still has only 3 attacks for R2:  Karelia, Belo, Ukraine… all of which would STILL be there, PLUS a 4th Archangel attack if you let the German ARM blitz to Archangel.

Also, the picket in Karelia prevents Germany from blitzing Karelia in the first place, which negates one of your advantages above.

In short, Russia is NOT going to abandon Karelia, they SHOULD picket it with 1 INF.
If they do not, then the likely 2 IPC advantage for Germany of running up on the Russian Border with 1 ARM is indeed VERY worthwhile.

[trihero]

You are negating the value of giving the Russians FOUR needed attacks on R2 instead of only 3… and having only 2 FIGs (MAYBE 3) available for the attacks.  That leaves Russian ART and probably some ARM hanging out on the front, against Germany’s 5 FIGs and BOM…

True, but also consider the larger picture - Russia is in the habit of using artillery on the front lines. They have 2 of them in W. Russia, and 1-2 in Caucasus. And then there’s 2-3 fighters. They have no trouble of extending to all 4 areas, in which you will only see 0-1 German inf. Germany can’t afford to picket out 2+ inf that early on, and it’s quite easy for the Russians to take out 0-1 inf in all 4 territories. Ukraine is trivial because of the 6 men in Caucasus, and then that means you have that fat W. Russia stack to take out Belo/Karelia, and 6 men in Russia to assign to Archangel. Of course you will not need to assign that many men, but the point is that Russia isn’t struggling to take back the territories; there are plenty of units available.

Also, can Germany afford their figs/bomb on Round 2?

The reason why I ask is because it is not readily apparent as you seem to make it out to be. Usually the German figs are hanging out in W. Europe on G1, in order to give some sort of minimum threat to UK shipping, so that they don’t just land on Norway on UK1. If they are in W. Europe, then it puts them out of position to contest Ukraine/Belo and also land back in W. Europe. Displaced fighters from W. Europe makes it that much easier for the UK/US to move around and land hard.

The German bomber is also likely to be contesting Egypt again on G2.

So really, while there is indeed a potential of 5 fig/1bomb, do not make the potential look as if it has no costs to the Germans. If they do want to use the 5 fig/bomb to trade territories for that one turn, that puts them out of defensive placement in W. Europe.

In short, Russia is NOT going to abandon Karelia, they SHOULD picket it with 1 INF.

I agree, if for different reasons.

[DarthMaximus]

I have no problem leaving Kar empty on Russia 1.

Whether I leave it empty or not depends on my losses in Wrus.  If I take Wrus w/out loss or lose only 1 inf then I’ll keep the guy in Kar.  If I take maybe 2 or more losses I’ll move him to Wrus for added defense and use on R2.

[trihero]

Leaving Karelia open gives the Germans the opportunity to spend 0-1 infantry to take it. If you leave an inf there, they have to stick out 2 inf, which is what you want - the turtle coming out of its shell.

[newpaintbrush]

I always leave Karelia open on R1.

If the Germans blitz to Archangel, hurrah, thats a 5 IPC tank mobilized at the front for 2 IPC of territory and 1.5-2 IPC on the retake.  Good deal for Russia, especially since the Germans can’t possibly retake Archangel in force.

As far as leaving even 1 infantry in Karelia - well, the Germans have no problem kicking Karelia’s ass.  I’d rather save my infantry for when it can make a difference.

[frood]

@trihero:

Leaving Karelia open gives the Germans the opportunity to spend 0-1 infantry to take it. If you leave an inf there, they have to stick out 2 inf, which is what you want - the turtle coming out of its shell.

That’s why my approach for attacking a territory with 1 Inf in it is 1 Inf + 2 or more Ftrs. Save those Inf until you have a big ball of them.

[Crazy Ivan]

I always play with the theory that,
“Your best defense, is a damn good Offense!”
Not a foolish offense, but a well calculated strategy, that intices your opponent to stick his neck out, again and again to take out those 3 infantry pickets so you can crush their remnants with rebuilds next turn. makes for a fun game too, Attack, attack, attack! (wait, that’s another game).
But anyway, Germany has to keep the pressure on Russia for as long as possible to help Japans growth. Then Japan can save their butt in the end.

[Guest]

And Ivan that is how I view the ARM blitz to Archangel.

It makes the Russians stick their neck out… in Karelia, Belo and Ukraine.  Then I cut that head off, and have Russians shoved back and start trading a territory closer to Moscow.

[trihero]

And Ivan that is how I view the ARM blitz to Archangel.

It makes the Russians stick their neck out… in Karelia, Belo and Ukraine.  Then I cut that head off, and have Russians shoved back and start trading a territory closer to Moscow.

I remain unconvinced. Having already shown you how you are in error by your own statistics, it seems that your only remaining argument is about Russian positioning, but I have addressed how Russia isn’t lacking on units in any of those territories. I don’t see how taking out a tank at low cost makes the Russians lose the long term advantage O_o Nor do I see how having to trade 1 extra territory for 1 turn (at good returns for Russia) when you have plenty of units makes a difference.

[Guest]

First:  Start with a “traditional” Russian openning of WR and Ukr w/ typical dice.

Then the German counter in Ukraine, and the blitz to Archangel
Combine with a Karelia Stack, and the Med Fleet in SZ15…
Now look at the board at the start of R2…

Do you see it yet?

[Lucifer]

A good solution to this, if Germany do the “Angel-blitz”, UK can take Archangel.

Peace folks  :wink:

[trihero]

I’m a W. Russia/Belorussia opener myself, maybe that’s the difference…

[Romulus]

But what if German have still a sub to use as a roadblock in sz5?
UK probably could not invade Norway in second turn, so the blitz of the german unit, finally hurted UK.
And this… for not leaving an inf in Leningrad!