The "Red Tide" Strategy

[Dauvio Vann]

@Gargantua:

@Requester45:

Anything other than opinion must be factually accurate for the topic and must be supported by expert consensus where such consensus exists. That being said, the general consensus of the Russian strategy is to purchase mainly infantry, and stack Moscow. However the opinion of some AA players, is that the infantry stack of Russia is not the only strategy that can be used. This is where the “Red Tide” topic has surfaced, evaluating the effectiveness of a strategy other than the standard Russian moves. By no means does the “Red Tide” strategy replace the overall consensus strategy, but merely offers players an alternative to the standard play. Being that a game of AA is extremely fluid, the turn by turn purchases or moves differentiate, and can deviate from an original plan, however a “strategy” will be your overall game plan for any given army or armies during the length of an entire game of AA.

If improving Russian play for combo with Bright Skies is what you are after.

Look no further!  It sounds like what you guys need is to use my RED BLITZ strategy.  I’ve spent a long time developing it; and in the face of MAX moscow crush offensives against expert players.

RED BLITZ gives Russia the best defense, counter-offense options, and sealion punishment possible.

R1, 6 tanks,     (Siberian forces hail mary for Moscow, arrival R6/R7)
R2, 8 mech, 1 tank
R3, Probably all Mech again
You won’t get into Artillery until round 4 or 5+
Infantry/Artillery on your last few turns whilst the germans on the doorstep.

TRUTH:
The russian’s can’t go toe to toe on defense against a fullscale superstack german invasion each round;  but what the russians can do is build counterattack potential capable of delaying the german stack or slowing them down.  If the germans do move up, they’ll get pounded man for man or better.  This is what russia needs to do.

If you stop the german offense for 1 or ideally 2 turns; your siberian forces will arrive in time; and you’ll have a beast of a force for the germans to try and crack; whilst also having the offensive power to strike back; as well as the mobility to hit back at outward territories like stalingrad etc.

The Eastern front needs to be viewed by Russia as a race;  about which side can get as many units in range as possible, as fast as possible.

Also NOTE - that every turn you are delaying the germans, you are holding onto a few more petty $; and your capital;  making up the difference for the more expensive units you’ve built.  Which is why infantry are your late purchase, and not your early one.

Don’t believe me?

Check it out Ripley. (And of course it was implemented at TG6Con)

PROOF:
Review these games at your liesure
Karl7     - http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=40229.255
Variance - http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=40237.0
Wittman - (Game In Progress) http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=40611.60

Like any strategy, it can be defeated, but average or better players will have more success with Red Blitz then with slower inf/art stacks.  Your enemy will have fought an army, and not just a plastic mound of infantry.

(I originally posted RED BLITZ theory last year)
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38080.0;prev_next=prev

For me there is no proof here because it all depends on how good the other player/players are.

BTW, did you get my PM Gargantua???

[Cow]

Wait why is Germany stacking east poland and not baltic states? @_@

[larrymarx]

Because they want to push south of the Pripet Marshes and eventually take the oil fields.

[Gargantua]

@Cow:

Wait why is Germany stacking east poland and not baltic states? @_@

Baltic states is fine, if you go Baltic states you will be stopped in Belarus; but get Leningrad for certain.

If I recall in one of our last games (3 years ago?) this is exactly what happend; you went Baltic states, and were forced into Leningrad.  The delay still fits the strategic goal of pulling the eastern forces to Moscow.

Larrys comment also holds true.  Please be my guest and take Baltic every game.

@Davio Vann

• just saw your PM and will respond
• those players are some of the best in the online league. They would mop the floor with 80%+ of players on axis and allies.org; and do on a regular basis.

@Larrymarx
-even in the face of a drained France, or whatever outrageous sacrifices you are willing to make as Germany, like not taking Baltic, Bessarabia, or defending/blocking Poland/Romania, or Barely winning France for a Shrunk TUV gain etc, 6 armour is still the best build Russia can make R1, so as to allow Russia the critical components it needs to defend itself; and keep the German stack checked, now and in subsequent turns.

Infantry and artillery builds early against that kind of German pressure will not perform better than the tanks and mech(r2) as they will not be able to rapid respond on offence or defence.

Why don’t you map/math out suiciding germanies entire airforce into Russia G1,
And skipping France.  Wow that would be amazing - I would probably still build 6 tanks to respond.

[larrymarx]

6 tanks are not better than 9 artillery in actual combat - this is true even if the artillery aren’t paired with infantry. What makes the tanks better is their range. However, if you know the German stack is advancing towards you, you don’t need that range if you plan on an all-out assault.

You said yourself that the Russians need to be able to attack the forward German stack before it’s reinforced because it’s the “lull in the wave, and the only chance Russia gets to go pound for pound or better”. I agree with you on this point; however, if the stack looks as I described it (which, by the way, doesn’t require “outrageous sacrifices” - at a minimum you simply don’t strafe Yugo and don’t take Bessarabia or Baltic states unless they can be blitzed - Russia has 37% odds against that stack), there is no such opportunity on R2 and the Russians will have to wait. If the Russians must delay their strike until at least R3, it does no good to have 6 tanks sitting around that can’t attack anything for a turn. It would be better to get the artillery, then move them up and buy tanks the turn before you are going to attack.

There is still the argument that possessing a stack of tanks and mechs gives you the ability to continue threatening two spaces away throughout the game - for example, Novgorod and Archangel from a Bryansk stack, or the Ukraine-Volgograd line from Russia if and when the stack must retreat. I really only see this capability as worthwhile against smaller stacks - you won’t be able to take down the main German stack with just the tanks and mechs. It seems to me that the best compromise is to maintain a contingent of tanks and mechs capable of hitting small stacks, but not too much more than that.

[Afrikakorps]

Gargantua you are a genius! I will be buying tanks next time R1 and adding artillery and mech the later turns. The heavy investment in mobile power will suit Russia well. I considered this earlier but decided on the more numbers - - > artillery + mech.

However I am not convinced about the withdrawal of the Russian forces, that is why I have not simply copied your Red Blitz that inspired me developing Russian strategies of my own. Because the USA will focus its first buys ans initial fleet on Europe (Bright Skies) I feel the Siberians play a crucial role in the battle of China, as moving them to Moscow gives Japan freedom to destroy china + UK. In my battles in uses that stack with great effect against Japan so far giving China some crucial time to survive and remain annoying.

[Fatespinner]

How are you going to proceed, if Germany does not attack Russia on turn 1 and instead sets up a large stack and starts to move on G2 or G3? Would that affect the Red Blitz?

[variance]

@larrymarx:

The Germans, if they do the following things:

• pull off the Yugo strafe losing 2 infantry
• bring 3 aa from Germany with the main stack
• add 3 tanks from GSG to the main stack instead of using them in Paris
  can have the following units in Eastern Poland on G2:

Germany could potentially have 4 mechs in there too, just hit France with a lot of planes and sink z111; not z110. No one does that though.

[Ichabod]

@Gargantua:

The reason you need 6 armor R1 is because it stops the G2 stacking of Eastern Poland. If the Germans stack eastern poland you will destroy them. That’s 1 round of extra time you just bought yourself.

Gargantua,

Congratulations on winning the tournament! You are definitely a higher caliber player than me. I hope to make it to a tournament some day. Any questions I may ask (that you may choose to answer or not), is not criticism. Why stack E. Poland? I guess in your games people mostly do the southern drive route? I get to Bryansk on G5. If I can’t force Russia back, I move into Smolensk, then G6 move into Bryansk to be in position for the NOs (Stalingrad / Caucasus). Of course in that scenario of having to go into Smolensk means you “bought” that important turn.

The only reason I might stack E. Poland is if I did the Italian DOW thing and can opened for Germany to stack there so they could collect the $5 wheat/trade NO again and land the Luftwaffe. Otherwise I stack Baltic. I don’t understand any reason why to stack E. Poland as securing Leningrad immediately is important. The Southern Route I think is best done with a G3 DOW so all of the slow movers can catch up.

[Requester45]

If Germany were to wait until G2 or G3 it would give Russia more time to build more offensive units.

[Gargantua]

@Ichabod:

@Gargantua:

The reason you need 6 armor R1 is because it stops the G2 stacking of Eastern Poland. If the Germans stack eastern poland you will destroy them. That’s 1 round of extra time you just bought yourself.

Gargantua,

Congratulations on winning the tournament! You are definitely a higher caliber player than me. I hope to make it to a tournament some day. Any questions I may ask (that you may choose to answer or not), is not criticism. Why stack E. Poland? I guess in your games people mostly do the southern drive route? I get to Bryansk on G5. If I can’t force Russia back, I move into Smolensk, then G6 move into Bryansk to be in position for the NOs (Stalingrad / Caucasus). Of course in that scenario of having to go into Smolensk means you “bought” that important turn.

The only reason I might stack E. Poland is if I did the Italian DOW thing and can opened for Germany to stack there so they could collect the $5 wheat/trade NO again and land the Luftwaffe. Otherwise I stack Baltic. I don’t understand any reason why to stack E. Poland as securing Leningrad immediately is important. The Southern Route I think is best done with a G3 DOW so all of the slow movers can catch up.

If you review the posted games - against expert players.

You will see that the 6 tank build forces the Germans into stacking eastern poland together G2.  Because deviations from stacking Eastern Poland; going north or south, are exposed to significant counter attack potential.

that is why I have not simply copied your Red Blitz that inspired me developing Russian strategies of my own - AfrikaCorps

Good!  That’s what this thread is all about!  Thank you for the compliments gentlemen.  I’m just posting my opinion on Russian defense doctorine. Take from it what you will.

Regarding the withdrawal - Keep in mind my “point of no return” is Timguska.  You can always re-enter the chinese back door if Russia is doing hot in Europe.

[Requester45]

That is a good point Gargantua. I feel as though the relation between the Russian “Red Tide” or “Red Blitz” strategy and the “Bright Skies” strategy can be small, or large. Personally I feel that the US needs a strong presence in the Pacific, however some assistance in Europe is needed, whether its some bombers, or small amounts of naval units. I feel the cooperation between Russia and the UK is more important for the European side of the board. When looking at the game as two separate parts, Europe and Pacific, the US has a set amount of IPCs for each game. Pacific being 17 and Europe being 35. Taking this in, I tend to divide the way in which I spend IPCs for the US in a similar manner when I play world. Remember that when you are playing a game of AA where you are not constrained by time, the allies can play a slow and methodical game. By placing 35 IPCs worth of units in the European side of the board, and 17 IPCs on the Pacific side of the board. When the US comes across bonuses, I tend to use most if not all of it in the Pacific. The US will be the only determining force in the Pacific. The UK and ANZAC forces certainly cannot support a staving of Japanese forces in the Pacific, and if you were to spend all of your IPCs to support a “Bright Skies” strategy in Europe, Japan would be an untamed beast, and by the time the US could respond to this, Japan would be to large of a force and maybe even be on their way to 6 victory cities.

[larrymarx]

Most of the players here seem to agree that building offensively is a good idea for Russia, but it isn’t yet clear exactly what the consensus is on what units to build, when, and under what circumstances. I would like to propose the following:

If Germany is set up to bring a “normal” amount of units to an Eastern Poland stack:

22 infantry (reduced by 2 for a Yugo strafe)
5 artillery
3 tanks
3 aa

then Russia should respond with a Red Blitz and buy 6 tanks per Gargantua’s suggestion. The Germans will either:

a) hold back from advancing their main stack
b) take Baltic States instead of Eastern Poland, or
c) get crushed in Eastern Poland

All three of those outcomes are good for Russia. Russia would prefer for Germany to take the northern route so they aren’t threatening to capture the southern oilfields.

If Germany is set up to bring an “extra” amount of units (at least 2 more than they have in the stack I described above), Russia should build 9 artillery. They should still bring everything up to the front lines to keep the Germans honest, but they will fall back to Bryansk on R2 and buy another wave of artillery.

In either scenario, there are two goals:

1. to hold at Bryansk instead of in Russia. If the Germans take the northern route, this is accomplished by keeping enough firepower across the two territories that the Germans can’t advance to Smolensk. If the Germans take the southern route, Bryansk simply needs to hold defensively.

2. to contest every territory in reach that doesn’t contain the main German stack. This includes Novgorod if the Germans go south, but not if they go north.

If the Germans are pouring everything into the eastern front, Russia will require Allied assistance in the form of American bombers and British fighters and mechanized units to accomplish goal 1).

In order to accomplish goal 2), the Russians should maintain a mechanized contingent consisting of around 8 units until and unless the British have enough units in the stack that they can take over this role.

As I see it, it is open to debate whether the Russians should pull the Far East forces. It may depend on how intent the other Allies are in bolstering Russia’s defense.

[Requester45]

I’d like to play this strategy a little bit, feel it out and refine it, to one which could be used in every game. The most interesting thing here is the almost complete 180 flip. I have been one to build very defensively 90% of the time. After this long discussion, I think that the plausibility and applicability of Russian offensive builds is more and more relevant.

[Gargantua]

Because Russia faces the “accordion” and the “Can Opener”  it’s only real oppurtunites are on it’s turn of attack; or atleast, forcing the enemy to be weary of such attacks.

When building defensively only,  the germans don’t have to worry about making missteps or mistakes,  they are never caught on them.  When you change the game up, with russian offense,  suddenly the balance is very delicate.

[Requester45]

That is a great point Gargantua. The ability to hold Germany to playing a somewhat safe offensive, you buy more time for Russia.

[General 6 Stars]

@Gargantua:

Guys, many of you are missing the crucial concepts.  By being offensive minded Russia can hold on to it’s capital to R8+ and by securing it’s far east forces into the capital.  Whilst being on the maximum ready to counter sealion.

RUSSIA buying 6 ARMOR first turn is a must.  It’s not a debate.  If you take the pains to look at any of the game links I posted - against seasoned veterans; you’ll see what I mean.

The reason you need 6 armor R1 is because it stops the G2 stacking of Eastern Poland.  If the Germans stack eastern poland you will destroy them.  That’s 1 round of extra time you just bought yourself.

Now… continue with the “counter attack” methodology, and buy yourself 1 more turn somewhere over the next four,  and you’ll have bought enough time for all your eastern forces to make Moscow.  Which will buy you even more turns and time; and make the axis mission that much harder.

You’ve also invented the possibility of catching the Germans off guard, or asleep at the wheel.  If they are not paying close attention, you will smack them something serious.

Moscow G5/G6 is now impossible.  Moscow G7 unlikely,  Moscow G8+ possible.  This is how you fight back.

GAR
        Have you tried this in HBG 39 1st Edition game ?

[variance]

Wehrmacht strategy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfGoDNIsJBs

[Requester45]

Thanks variance

[Afrikakorps]

Gargantua I don’t have the time to watch your games now, hopefully can do it a later moment in time. Thank you for joining the discussion, before nobody seemed to think a counter-attacking Russia was the best defense, now you seem to have convinced most.

I will buy 6 tanks R1, after it I first stack my artillery pools both at Novgorod and Bryansk, I want minimum 6 at both strongholds. The benefit from stratrgically placed artillery is that they are cheaper while having similiar effect as tanks + upgrading your initial infantry. After building those pools, I will be producing a mix of tanks and mech. Russia is the perfect place to have 2-move units, I will upload my studies about its geography later.

I am intrigued about the Siberian infantry, but have always considered it a waste of pressure from the Allies. Me and my brother have become expert at the defense of China with forces from Russia, China and UK and our Axis have not managed to wipe us.

Don’t you miss the 7 IPC that are lost so easily? Does the infantry mass really make such a difference in G8? How do you play your USA?