A discussion on Russia's National Advantages

[Jennifer]

For the purpose of this discussion, we will limit it to LHTR 1.3. (2.0 is not universally accepted yet, and Russia’s NAs didn’t change much anyway.)
And yes, let’s please limit the discussion to Russia’s National Advantages.  There are 6 topics in the Russian NA set, that’s enough for one thread, I think. (Besides, I don’t want the thread killed by the omnipresent moderator for going off topic. :P  )

1)  Russian Winter - Infantry defend at 3 or less for one round declared by Russia in their collect income phase.

Not bad.  But honestly, I think this is too easily countered by not making an aggressive move on Russia.  To me, this is best used by Russia when they expect an attack by the Axis and only to inflict massive casualties so the Americans and British can hopefully recover the war effort.  This really is not going to help out for those little battles where you have 1 or 2 infantry defending.  2 Infantry + Fighter is still going to kill a “tank” just like they would an infantryman.

However, if you have 30 infantry in Russia turning them all into “tanks” could inflict enough damage on the Axis they only win marginally instead of decisively.  (I don’t know anyone who attacks Moscow for a marginal victory, so I assume you would have had a decisive victory.)

At best, it delays the game by a round allowing you to get some more Russians, British and Americans to Moscow.

---

2. Non-Aggression Treaty

This seems to have some ambiguities.

1)  Does Japanese Rocket fire violate the treaty?

2)  Do Japanese SBRs violate the treaty?

3)  If Japan attacks a territory with Russian units in it, does this violate the treaty?

4)  Can Russia counter attack territories that are not orange without violating the treaty?

As for one and two, I’d say yes these violate the treaty.  You have to violate Russian air space to engage in these attacks, thus you have attacked Russia.

As for 3 and 4 I’d say no.  You are not attacking an orange or red territory, thus you may freely counter attack the Japanese and the Japanese can freely kill Russians who get in the way without breaking the treaty.

---

3. Mobile Industry

Again, some ambiguities.

1)  Can Russia move the IC to Russian controlled territories, or only red territories?

2)  Can Russia move the IC to Moscow and have two ICs on the same territory?

In both instances I’d say yes.  The National Advantage, in effect, makes the IC similar to an AA Gun and you can have more then one AA Gun per territory, but you can only use one gun at a time.  So if Russia had two Industrial Complexes in Caucasus, then they would be limited to 4 units purchased.

As for moving into Russian controlled enemy territory, well, it’s Russian territory!  It may not be red, but it is still Russian.  And if the Complex is taken by the enemy and liberated under an ally, and that territory is no longer Russian controlled, well, then you just lost an IC to an Ally.

---

4. Salvage

To be honest, this is the worst National Advantage in the game.  I’ve only gotten this once, and that’s because I had a stellar defense of Russia against the Germans which netted me an extra tank that died to Japan.

---

5. Lend-Lease

Seems to me that LHTR moved to nerf this from something else.  One british and one american unit can add up over time, provided you manage to get one there every round.  Perhaps this should be adjusted to just say two allied units totalling 10 IPC or less.  That would be a fighter or 2 tanks or tank, inf, or inf, art, etc.

Sorry, just trying to think of a way to salvage the lend-lease a bit.

---

6. Railway

Okay, neat idea.  Not expansive enough, IMHO.  If you could extend that rail from SFE to Caucasus then I think we’d have something. (SFE to Yakut to Novosibirsk to Russia to Caucasus.)

Kinda useful in KJF mode though!

[trihero]

Not bad.  But honestly, I think this is too easily countered by not making an aggressive move on Russia.  To me, this is best used by Russia when they expect an attack by the Axis and only to inflict massive casualties so the Americans and British can hopefully recover the war effort.

It’s not bad, so does it need a change?

I agree that Salvage BLOWS! I’m surprised that NA wasn’t changed in LHTR 2.0.

[Jennifer]

@Bean:

Not bad.  But honestly, I think this is too easily countered by not making an aggressive move on Russia.  To me, this is best used by Russia when they expect an attack by the Axis and only to inflict massive casualties so the Americans and British can hopefully recover the war effort.

It’s not bad, so does it need a change?

I agree that Salvage BLOWS! I’m surprised that NA wasn’t changed in LHTR 2.0.

2.0 basically only worked to make NA’s worse, in my opinion.  Very few were improved to be more balanced (either strengthened or weakened.)

Anyway, I don’t know if it needs to be changed for Russian winter.  But if it was changed I’d make Russian winter like this:

Russian infantry attack Russian territories at 2 or less and defend Russian territories at 3 or less for one round.  Russian territory being defined as any territory that is colored red on the game board.

Now it’s not a passive NA, it can be exploited by Russia to attack her enemies as well as defend against them.

[trihero]

Maybe a change for Salvage would be: If you control Ukraine at the beginning of your turn, you may exchange one of your infantry pieces there for a tank. This happens during the mobilize units phase.

This could be gimpy if it’s too hard to hold Ukraine, but otherwise it’s better at least.

Or: If you take a grey territory and destroyed at least one German tank, you may place one free Soviet tank in that territory.

But that just seems too good especially if you’re a fan of the Ukraine/W. Russia attack. However, past that point it will likely not happen again.

[Jennifer]

I like the attack option.  As you said, it would result in an extra tank in W. Russia or Ukraine, but after that, odds are you are not getting another German tank for a while.

Another option for Salvage would be a complete scrapping of the National Advantage.  Just change it so that Russia has Russian Conscripts, 1 free infantry per round in Russia.

or, Scortched Earth:

At the end of any Russian turn, after mobilize new units phase, you may destroy any and all Russian controlled AA Guns and Industrial Complexes on Russian soil

[Funcioneta]

It’s winter, so winter should come each year  :-D 3 month turns, starting Spring’ 42 mean first winter at R4, then R8, etc.

The only real unusable is salvage. I think best are lend-lease, pact and maybe movile industry

[Aretaku]

@Cmdr:

1)  Russian Winter - Infantry defend at 3 or less for one round declared by Russia in their collect income phase.

Not bad.  But honestly, I think this is too easily countered by not making an aggressive move on Russia.  To me, this is best used by Russia when they expect an attack by the Axis and only to inflict massive casualties so the Americans and British can hopefully recover the war effort.  This really is not going to help out for those little battles where you have 1 or 2 infantry defending.  2 Infantry + Fighter is still going to kill a “tank” just like they would an infantryman.

However, if you have 30 infantry in Russia turning them all into “tanks” could inflict enough damage on the Axis they only win marginally instead of decisively.  (I don’t know anyone who attacks Moscow for a marginal victory, so I assume you would have had a decisive victory.)

At best, it delays the game by a round allowing you to get some more Russians, British and Americans to Moscow.

In my opinion, this advantage isn’t worth much. The threat of it’s use is much more useful for the Allies than actually using it.

A smart Axis player(s) won’t walk into a trap they can see…as you said, it’s only good if you can use it decisively in a fight for Moscow.

2. Non-Aggression Treaty

This seems to have some ambiguities.

1)  Does Japanese Rocket fire violate the treaty?

2)  Do Japanese SBRs violate the treaty?

3)  If Japan attacks a territory with Russian units in it, does this violate the treaty?

4)  Can Russia counter attack territories that are not orange without violating the treaty?

As for one and two, I’d say yes these violate the treaty.  You have to violate Russian air space to engage in these attacks, thus you have attacked Russia.

As for 3 and 4 I’d say no.  You are not attacking an orange or red territory, thus you may freely counter attack the Japanese and the Japanese can freely kill Russians who get in the way without breaking the treaty.

I think Enhanced rules clear up all the ambiguities quite nicely…but not sure how/if that applies to 1.3.

3. Mobile Industry

Again, some ambiguities.

1)  Can Russia move the IC to Russian controlled territories, or only red territories?

2)  Can Russia move the IC to Moscow and have two ICs on the same territory?

In both instances I’d say yes.  The National Advantage, in effect, makes the IC similar to an AA Gun and you can have more then one AA Gun per territory, but you can only use one gun at a time.  So if Russia had two Industrial Complexes in Caucasus, then they would be limited to 4 units purchased.

As for moving into Russian controlled enemy territory, well, it’s Russian territory!  It may not be red, but it is still Russian.  And if the Complex is taken by the enemy and liberated under an ally, and that territory is no longer Russian controlled, well, then you just lost an IC to an Ally.

Again…I tend to defer to Enhanced rules for this one.

I don’t like this NA much anyways. Where else can you move it to where it’s useful? Ukraine? Kazakstan? Options are rather limited, but…you CAN move the ICs to 1 IPC territories and deny them to the Axis if things get that bad. It’ll tick them off!

4. Salvage

To be honest, this is the worst National Advantage in the game.  I’ve only gotten this once, and that’s because I had a stellar defense of Russia against the Germans which netted me an extra tank that died to Japan.

Salvage sucks! I’ve NEVER gotten a tank from it, EVER.

That’s another reason I like Enhanced…tanks defending on 4’s in Red territories.  :-D

5. Lend-Lease

Seems to me that LHTR moved to nerf this from something else.  One british and one american unit can add up over time, provided you manage to get one there every round.  Perhaps this should be adjusted to just say two allied units totalling 10 IPC or less.  That would be a fighter or 2 tanks or tank, inf, or inf, art, etc.

Sorry, just trying to think of a way to salvage the lend-lease a bit.

Again…I dig Enhanced.  :-P

But in 1.3…this is still a great NA, if only because you can give Russia a really powerful fighter force that buys you LOTS of time.

6. Railway

Okay, neat idea.  Not expansive enough, IMHO.  If you could extend that rail from SFE to Caucasus then I think we’d have something. (SFE to Yakut to Novosibirsk to Russia to Caucasus.)

Kinda useful in KJF mode though!

It can be very useful in KJF…I had the misfortune of being Japan when I saw it for the first time, and it frustrated me to no end.

Enhanced is awesome though…BURY-YAK-NOVO-MOS-CAU-WRU-KAR. It makes keeping Karelia early a possibility instead of a suicide tactic.

…I dig NA topics. Perhaps a thread for every country??

[Jennifer]

I’ll be doing a thread for each, after we iron out how LHTR NAs for Russia actually work as written.  There’s a lot of grey area that needs to be made black and white.

Anyway, please refrain from AARe.  The NAs are very detailed there, but they also include a lot of perks that are not listed in the LHTR NA’s.  But yes, I agree, they are a lot more clear cut and much better then the standard ones.

Also Aretaku, note that in LHTR you can only lend-lease one GROUND unit from England and one GROUND unit from America.  That means you cannot convert fighters.  It’s a huge, unneeded nerf to the national advantage as far as I’m concerned.

Anyway, I think we should work on Mobile Industry first, since that’s very easy to abuse.

According to LHTR Mobile Industry is written as such:

Your industrial complexes each may move 1 territory during your noncombat move phase.  It may be used in the same turn to place units (up to a maximum of the new territory’s value). They cannot move during the combat move phase.  If an opponent captures them, that oppionent cannot move them.  You may mobilize at a complex if you controlled both the industrial complex and it’s new territory at the start of your turn.

To me that makes it seem like you treat Industrial Complexes as AA Guns under this rule.  That would mean you can load them on transports, you can move them into Russian controlled enemy territories, you can stack them together like AA Guns, etc.  The only difference being that the complexes revert to normal complexes when captured by the enemy. (And allegedly their complexes become mobile if Russia captures them.)

Anyone disagree with this interpretation?

[Guest]

1.  They can be moved on land (TRN’s do not allow IC’s to be carried on them, therefore they cannot be moved by TRNs).
2.  Yes, you can put more than 1 IC in the same territory, but the build limit is still the value of the territory
3.  Yes, you can move them into Russian Controlled territories, since those territories ARE RED once Russia controls them.

[Jennifer]

@ncscswitch:

1.  They can be moved on land (TRN’s do not allow IC’s to be carried on them, therefore they cannot be moved by TRNs).
2.  Yes, you can put more than 1 IC in the same territory, but the build limit is still the value of the territory
3.  Yes, you can move them into Russian Controlled territories, since those territories ARE RED once Russia controls them.

Points two and three directly oppose the opinions of AAMC JAG Blackwatch who has determined that the complexes MUST be on Red Territories and there can be only one per territory.

Honestly, I think you’re correct and that’s how I read the rules myself.

However, as to point one, I’d say the complex can be loaded on a transport fleet, just like an AA Gun.  The National Advantage is, in effect, turning them into AA Gun units.

Why would you put them on a transport?  Transports cannot be captured, only sunk.

Of course, the other idea is to walk the complex back to SFE or Yakut so when captured, it produces one unit per round.  (Prolly an okay idea if Japan/Germany is only coming at you from Caucasus/Kazakh and you can literally leave your capitol behind!)

[Guest]

I want to see the WWII era TRN that can be used to transport steel mill components :-P

The only ADVANTAGE of Mobile Industry for Russia is to be able to push the IC FORWARD as they push Germany out of Ukraine.  Otherwise it is a really crappy defensive move that only serves to delay the inevitable seizure of your IC and reduce enemy build rates once captured.  And anyone who has played with TripleA knows that, once you capture territory with Russia, it turns RED :-)  “Flags” are simply a means to represent this on a game board that is pre-printed and cannot change color.

By Blackwatch’s reasoning, I could theoretically move an IC into Japan controlled Yakut, since by his reasoning Yakut is a RED territory, regardless of who has a “flag” there.    8-)

Allowing Russia to stack both IC’s in Moscow makes sense.  Since that is what they actually did… consolidated their industry into a much smaller territory further away from the advancing Germans.  If you still limit the production value to the territory value, there is no reason to not allow the IC to share a territory with another IC.

Being able to do both of those (put both in Moscow, or push the IC forward into Ukraine) might actually make Mobile Industry worth having.  But under Blackwatch’s version of it… it is almost completely worthless… almost as valuable as Russia with Super Subs  :roll:

[Jennifer]

Believe his rational for the one IC per territory limit was because Colonial Garrison cannot be used to create two industrial complexes on the same territory.

Anyway, putting an IC on a transport fleet isn’t really that hard to conceptualize.  How do you think you’d get an IC out to Borneo anyway?  The parts would be shipped by transport, right?

[Guest]

The Colonial Garrison thing is apples and oranges.  UK has no way to MOVE an IC.  So building one where you already have one, if you maintain the territory build limit, is a waste of the IC because it gains you nothing.

[Pervavita]

Your industrial complexes each may move 1 territory during your noncombat move phase.

i think this means land only, no transports IMO.
i would like to see this kind of thread for each nation too. i’m learning these rules and find this infromitive.
i have just read all the NA’s and i find USSR’s are not the best

[Jennifer]

@Pervavita:

Your industrial complexes each may move 1 territory during your noncombat move phase.

i think this means land only, no transports IMO.
i would like to see this kind of thread for each nation too. i’m learning these rules and find this infromitive.
i have just read all the NA’s and i find USSR’s are not the best

Yea, I plan to open the other four nations soon.  This was a trial balloon. :P

[Imperious Leader]

Mobile Industry
IN RESPONSE TO THE THREAT FROM THE RUSSIAN FRONT, THE SOVIETS MOVED

THEIR FACTORIES EAST. THEY PRODUCED 5,000 TANKS EAST OF THE URALS IN
1942.
Your industrial complexes each may move 1 territory during your noncombat move phase. It may
be used in the same turn to place units (up to a maximum of the new territory’s value) if you
controlled both the industrial complex and its new territory at the start of your turn. They cannot
move during the combat move phase. If an opponent captures them, that opponent cannot move
them.

this is ridiculous. It means every turn the factory can “hop” around like its got wheels and drives around ploping off tanks and planes like excrement. Who’s driving this thing? Stalin himself?

This should be one time only event for each factory. It took 5-6 months to relocate the Ukrainian factories to the Urals, out of German bomber range.

[Jennifer]

IL

Considering how bad the Russian advantages are, over all, I don’t think allowing the complexes to move around is going to cause much strife for the Axis.

Remember, you cannot both move it into newly taken territory and build there.  However, you could retreat it to friendly territory and build there (assuming it’s your territory.)

Honestly, I like the idea of bringing the Caucasus IC up to Karelia eventually.  Yea, Cuacasus is high value, but Karelia is easier to defend and it si a VC

[Imperious Leader]

yes but the same factory can move every turn! its like they use the Caucasus factory and plop it in any territory getting infantry to any Soviet territory… which is like why even have the Railway NA? the factory NA can do this better.

The second Soviet factory can deploy against the Japanese and then back up or advance each turn like a siege tower…

If you think about it its makes AA into chutes and ladders… totally unrealistic.

[Pervavita]

i can see slowing it, but not limiting the number of moves.
what i mean is you can’t use it the turn it moves. that would mean it would slow it’s use, but not limit it too much.

i always thought USSR should have a new Malita/conscript unit, and NA’s could work for this great. at $1 or $2 they get a unit that attacks and deffends at 1, Artillary has no bonus to it, and it can only move with in USSR starting territoris. that was before the west USSR teritory, so that may extend to that, but not further.
it’s a little off topic, but it also fits hear i think as it would be a NA…. cheap crummy infantry.

[Imperious Leader]

cheap crummy infantry….

yea thats something they had alot of. Not exactly PC but accurate.