Mechanized Russia

[Caesar-Seriona]

That’s the worse plan I’ve ever heard. That is so easy for Germany and Italy to counter. Germany and Italy can wall their way to Moscow. Infantry stacking is the only way to go.

[Argothair]

6 tanks is a good R2/R3 buy if you think you can actually use those tanks to stop Germany from safely stacking Bryansk or Belarus or Eastern Ukraine or something like that. The most obvious reason why that might be true is if Germany attempted Sea Lion, but it could also happen if Germany got diced in Paris and lost most of their fast movers, or if Germany bought a ton of infantry and artillery on G1/G2, or if Germany bought a bunch of subs and bombers on G1/G2. Basically if you can slow Germany down by a full turn by preventing them from stacking the next territory in their lineup (or by taking that territory back from them after they’ve unsafely stacked there) then you gain almost a full additional turn of Russian income before the Russian capital and/or economy collapses, which more than pays for the inefficiency of tank purchases.

On the other hand, if you buy 6 tanks and don’t stop Germany from advancing on schedule, then, yeah, you’ve just blown money Russia can’t afford to lose, and Germany will get Moscow for cheap.

Buying 2 to 3 artillery and/or mech. infantry per turn as Russia is almost always a good idea, because it can force Germany to keep their forces together, or it can allow you to defensively stack, e.g., Leningrad for an extra turn and then safely retreat your mechanized forces (or send mechanized forces from Moscow to the rescue of a stack of infantry retreating to, e.g., Bryansk). You pull off one trick like that, and, again it pays for itself. You win a couple of battles against pairs of German units with 2 inf, 1 art, 1 ftr that you might have lost with 3 inf, 1 ftr, and, again, it pays for itself. Even if you don’t manage to pull that off, the difference between having 9 (or 27) Russian units and 10 (or 30) Russian units is not game-changing…we’re talking about a few percent on the Moscow battle or a few extra tanks for Germany after they conquer it; we’re not talking about throwing the game way.

It’s also just more fun to have something to do with the Russians other than turtle. If it’s not clearly worse to buy a few mechs and art, why not enjoy yourself?

[weddingsinger]

@Argothair I’ll be trying it out over my next few games.

I was mostly thinking in these terms, assuming a G2 Barbarrossa.

R1: 37 ipcs means either 12 inf or 9 mechs
R2: 37 ipcs for 12 inf or 9 mechs

(sure if you’re buying inf you may have bought some art, or tanks instead of mech, but let’s keep the variables simple)

So you’re down 6 units on R3, and its the 1st time Russia can possibly counter attack if Germany moves in force and no Italian help yet with can opening.

But… the difference is that now Russia has 9 mechs that can reach any battle and another 9 that can reach Belarus or either Ukraine. With only inf purchases only the 6 inf you purchased and placed on a respective factory can join your counter attack and its easy enough for Germany to stay out of reach of most of your guys. So its actually a net improvement in the early rounds of +3 to +12 units available.

This should slow down Germany by 1 or 2 turns since they have to wait for Italy. Usually can stack 16 inf, 3 art, 3 tanks in Baltic States and Russia can’t counter. Or in Eastern Poland with 20ish inf, 5 art, 3 tanks.

My way has Belarus with 11 Russian inf, 1 art that can be joined by 14-17 mechs, 2 tanks, 2 fighters, 1 tactical on a counter attack to Baltic States. If Germany is in Eastern Poland R2, add 5 inf to that number.

So Germany can’t move in force until G3 when the 10 mechs/tanks they placed on Germany can join this force, for 25 inf, 5 art. The question there is whether their planes can join, but if the 5 Russian inf from karelia also join in, Russia still wins the battle with 6 German air parked. So Germany isn’t moving on Novgorod or Belarus until G4.

Or am I missing something?

/not sure if tanks on R1 improve the situation or not. I bet I’d want 3 on R2 though, in which ever factory the Germans seem to be heading towards.

[Argothair]

@weddingsinger That makes sense as far as it goes, and I wouldn’t say you’re missing anything, exactly. I think the emphasis on keeping Germany out of the Baltic States is slightly mis-placed; the Baltic States is just 1 IPC. It’s Leningrad that’s the big economic swing zone, so the question is what turn will Germany arrive in Leningrad, and then ultimately in Moscow. I think you could get away with a purchase like 8 mech, 1 art on R1 and R2 against most G1/G2 openings, but if you stretch it much past that and start mixing in tanks or planes as well, then I’d be tempted (as Italy) to stop fussing with Egypt and start sending mechs and tanks for a max stack of can-openers. If you give up too many Russian hit points, then you can’t hold the territory two spaces back (e.g. Leningrad) against Germany’s fast movers, so you’ve got to hold all of the territories in the middle (e.g. Baltic States, Belorussia) firmly enough that Italy can’t can-open them, and if you never build any regular infantry, then you’ll run out of infantry to do that garrison work and you’ll start trading more expensive units. If you get forked enough times, eventually your defense might collapse and you might have to drive back to Moscow in a hurry, allowing the Germans to advance two spaces a turn and make up for some of the turns when the Germans didn’t advance any spaces in a turn.

[weddingsinger]

@Argothair I guess I’m used to opponents taking the Northern route since its easy to stack up for Baltic States and then hit Novgorod with it along with your 7inf from Finland, since its easier for Russia to stack up in Bryansk to threaten Ukraine.

And I was thinking this only works for 2, maybe 3 rounds. After that its not sustainable, but the goal is for UK to be dropping 3 fighters on Moscow each turn UK4, 5, and 6. So buying Moscow an extra turn or 2 before the attack and maybe even buying an extra turn with no strategic bombings is really useful.

[weddingsinger]

In two games in person against modest Axis player(s), mechanized Russia has worked as hoped, delaying Germany 1-2 rounds. It’ll be nice to try it in some TripleA games in the future.

The buy I’m testing is almost all mechs, with tanks getting added on R2 (3 for Novgorod or Ukraine, depending on which way it looks like Germany is going).

It was weird having most of Russia’s money even on R4/R5.

In one game it meant taking Karaelia/Finland because Germany had no more navy and I had just killed his first stack of advancing infantry before his fast movers arrived. I doubt that would work against a German player used to seeing this strategy.

[Argothair]

@weddingsinger What did Germany buy in your test games?

[weddingsinger]

@Argothair One game was a Sea Lion feint where he then hit Novgorod with the transports (yeah, I don’t recommend that either), but he didn’t realize UK was setup for a REALLY strong defense until G3.

The 2nd game was pretty typical. I think his G1 was artillery, after that he shifted to fast movers. Maybe G2 was both inf and mechs for 20 units total.

[oysteilo]

Good topic. I think if Germany declares war G1 you dont have many othee options than infantry. With a G3 DOW i try to have a total of 3 arm, at least 5 mech, 7 is nice, and one extra fighter . I think it is important to challenge volgograd.

[taamvan]

i like the fighter 9 men stratbombing is russia downfall

i love the mechanized idea but if it ever comes down to a siege of moscow was it a suboptimal choice for defense unless it bought you until g7-8

[weddingsinger]

@taamvan

I’m starting to think that for fighters, UK should put its planes on Scotland UK1, then if no Sea Lion they can reach Novgorod UK2. So useful against strategic bombing but also helping defend Russia’s stack(s) on infantry.

With limited play testing, I am liking mechanized Russia… it gives you actual options. An efficient German player won’t make mistakes that let Russia take down a German stack, but it will still slow them down a turn, making the higher expense moot, since you get an extra round of buys but also more time for Allied help to Moscow or time to force Germany to defend the Atlantic side.

[Ichabod]

Instead of Mech…If allies are going heavy enough in Europe (not 100%), but enough to make Germany build defense in their west, a better option is to purchase mostly artillery instead of mech. And retreat all infantry. Don’t waste 1 inf in a territory to prevent a free walk-on. Mostly just results in a lost inf. In theory, if going heavy against Germany, there will be plenty of allied fighters in Moscow to prevent a G6 or even G7 Moscow attack. Once the Siberians come back and pair up with 25-30+ artillery, Russia’s stack is very lethal. I’ve run into a player online triplea (one of the guys who helped create BM3). He does this strategy very well. US makes significant landings, and Russia become defensive; but very lethal. Germany can’t come to Bryansk.

[Ichabod]

@weddingsinger
I’ve played against a group in Nashville a few times. They like Allies. This was several years ago. They bought mech mainly for defense. Mech could drive up to Belarus quicker and reinforce the defense stack. Mech could work for Russia on the front end (maybe slowing down) the German advance into Russia. But I don’t think it will work against a good German player or really be very helpful on the back end like turn 6 or 7. All of those mech in Moscow instead of artillery.

[Argothair]

I tried this in a face-to-face game against Karl7, who of course is very good with the German pieces, and wound up losing Moscow on G6 on a German attack that had 91% odds – but Germany lost about 80% of its stack taking Moscow, so it was likely that the Middle East would have held, and almost certain that Cairo would have held. We ultimately scooped at least as much because the Western Allies didn’t have a sufficient compensatory attack as because the German drive was unstoppable. Like, the Allies were able to barely take Rome on UK6 using a one-two punch, but trading both Moscow and Calcutta for Rome is not a good trade.

I think my main mistake was that on R2 I placed slow movers up front in Vyborg with fast movers behind the lines in Leningrad, with the idea of maximizing my threat to Finland. This might have worked fine if the Allies were swarming toward Norway, but the British Atlantic fleet was wiped out, there were German subs in the Atlantic, and the British and Americans were both focused on beating up Italy in the Mediterranean. Without Anglo-American pressure on Norway, the Russians can’t afford to invest too much against Finland. Karl7 was able to temporarily retreat all Finnish forces into Norway, and just come right back to Finland after Leningrad was dead zoned by the advancing Baltic States stack. I held Finland for one turn, and then I wound up with 10 slow movers stuck in Vyborg, unable to either kill the reinforced Finnish stack or safely stack up in Leningrad.

What I should have done was put the fast movers in Vyborg and the slow movers in Leningrad – that way I could have moved the entire stack to Archangel or Belarus to join up with the rest of my forces to form one mega-stack capable of temporarily holding out against the main German forces. Instead I was defeated in detail. All of my armies except the 10 inf/art in Vyborg and a blocking force of 4 inf + 1 AAA ultimately made it home to Moscow for the G6 battle, which is a somewhat impressive recovery rate (if I do say so myself) given that I was playing far enough forward that Germany wasn’t able to build any units in either Leningrad or Kiev until G6. Still, 15 armies is still too many to lose when you’re building mechs; the point of mechs is to get damn near everybody home.

I’ll try the strategy again with the proper configuration of fast and slow movers in another game and let you all know how it goes. Keep the faith! The Allies will find an answer to the German mech/tank rush.

[barnee]

@Argothair
Nice report. Mechs are so versatile, they are challenging to play. Truly a great addition by Larry.

[weddingsinger]

@Ichabod More or less agree completely.

So far going mechanized means you can capitalize on German mistakes, which is harder to do with single movers. Certainly it would mean if the German player does something different (Sea Lion), Russia will be a force.

The 3rd part I’m not so sure of is whether the extra defense at the start really does slow even a disciplined, good German player down a turn. If it does, its worth it since Russia ends up with the same number of units (with the extra turn of buys) and has an extra round of Allied help.

[taamvan]

the oob game is too imbalanced for this to make a positive difference. G1 can buy an extra turn, endgame is G5-6 now. I recommend modding the game as I have laid out before. Russia cannot take iraq or scandanavia because these are needed for allied factories controlled by powers that can afford that. pieces left west are cut off and destroyed.

[weddingsinger]

@taamvan I’m inclined to agree about original game… I’ve been testing mostly in balanced mod to some success.

I am happy to report that mechanized Russia will absolutely punish Germany for Sea Lion. In one case an opponent did a delayed Sea Lion (land on Scotland G3, London G4) and Russia took Berlin R5. That game was all artillery R1 and then mechs/tanks R2 and R3, then more planes.

[Argothair]

@weddingsinger Agree; I won an in-person game recently after buying 9 mechs on R1 and 8 mechs / 1 tank on R2 against a German Sea Lion. The Germans took London, along with heavier-than-expected casualties, on G3, but the Germans never pushed the Soviets out of Romania and the Russians wound up out-earning the Germans (trading 4+ of Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Finland each turn) by about R5. The Axis scooped when they saw that the US didn’t even need to liberate London; Russia could hold Germany off all on its own while the Western Allies contained and rolled back Japan.

Granted, this involved some luck on the defending dice for London (Germany should have had additional air force survivors) and some sub-optimal positioning for German defenders (with a bit more advance planning, Germany probably could have held more of Eastern Europe), but it still felt like a board where you definitely wanted to be playing the Allies.

I would say that mechanized Russia makes a much weaker defense of London possible. I bought 2 inf, 1 ftr for London while sending away 2 infantry to Gibraltar and sending the entire British starting air force to either Taranto or to pick off a sub off the coast of Canada (meaning that the fighter had to land in Canada and couldn’t return in time to defend against a G3 Sea Lion). I think that was slightly too weak; if I had that game to do over I would have bought 3 inf, 1 ftr for London and perhaps not sent the fighter to Canada (sending only a DD instead) to kill the German sub…but the fact that my pathetic defense worked anyway was a sign of just how powerful MechaRussia is against Sea Lion.

[weddingsinger]

@Argothair I’m sort of debating whether Russian bombers become worthwhile when you see Sea Lion since you can hit Berlin hard and use them for other things on your attacks.

For those who do want to invade with Russia, hit the Slovakia pathway because German transports can hit the coasts. Tanks in Slovakia force German/Italian blockers in Southern Germany, etc but unless you’ll be able to take Berlin, push south and gobble up all that precious money… take N. Italy if you can…