Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB

[trulpen]

I also would prefer to get the russian sub to join and strenghten an allied fleet, while also providing can-opening threats. The best route for the sub is not fully clear. Depends on what tasks we want to give it.

[farmboy]

@trulpen said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:

I enjoy art with Russia, but only if it’s feasible. Don’t think it will be regarding the Moscow rush.

For every 3 art, we get 4 inf.

For 37 IPC, we get 12 inf two times and 13 inf the third.

That’s the logic of my suggestion.

12 inf is certainly a sensible buy on R1 and I agree that you will want to maximize Soviet inf in the long run. But on R1, I would still go for 4 art. I probably wouldn’t on R2 and after, depending on the German buys.

I think the loss of 1 inf won’t be as impactful in G5/6/7 as the 4 art buy will be beneficial. An R1 buy allows you to move them in position for G3. And because of the allied play in the med or Atlantic, you may force the Germans to underspend against Moscow later. As the Germans move towards Moscow, having that artillery can reduce their freedom of action a little as they have more difficulty safely splitting their forces. So their ability to hold Bryansk and send fast movers South becomes a bit more constrained. And it is pretty unlikely that the difference in Moscow will have been one inf. You certainly want to maximize defensive builds in Moscow but the difference in the end will be whether allied air can join Moscow in sufficient numbers.

The soviet strategy has to be to turtle when Germany focuses on it. But I think you want to find ways of turtling that reduce German freedom of action as much as possible. Adding a few more art on R1 is a small way to do that. But if you feel safer with an all inf buy that is certainly a good choice as well. Just not my preference.

[trulpen]

I used to go either 6 tanks or 7 inf, 4 art or 3 inf, 7 art. After playing with @axis-dominion I’ve changed my mind and believe that solely inf for atleast the 3-4 first rounds is the most solid purchase strategy.

Glad you provide your thoughts on the matter. It’s good.

[wizmark]

@trulpen Having been on the wrong end of the russian extra NOs in asia and africa, I would say that they are a powerful addition to Russia. Even after I got fast movers past moscow and took the russian hinterlands, you were still pulling in 25+ipcs which really held up the german advance, and pushed me towards the ME just to stop those extra bucks.

[trulpen]

I think if you had pushed harder on Moscow, which Andrew certainly will, I would’ve lost it anyway. But I’m not fully sure. Maybe it’s possible to defend Moscow enough in order to really capitalize on those NOs?

The problem is that the 2 mech and 2 tank will be offside for a while, as the air, but those are atleast more flexible. The 2 inf will be off and never get back for the take-down.

That’s 6-26 TUV very much needed by Moscow. Yet, if Russia is able to drag in more money than that in time, it’s a well worth strategy. They’ll earliest get Iraq R3, which is 5 IPC. R4 would be 5 IPC. R5 can very well be 15 IPC.

That is already pretty late though if Germany is pushing hard. The income also lags of course, only being able to use it the next turn, which makes the strategy less hopeful.

However, I like it! :laughing:

[trulpen]

The UK figs would would then be very crucial for the defence.

[wizmark]

@trulpen Well i was in bryansk by g5, nearly every penny had been spent on fast movers to get as much up as possible, I had all the starting luftwaffe plus an extra bomber and it still wasnt enough to win in moscow. By r5 you had 3 axis territories worth 3ipcs, plus the 9ipc for the NOs. You could easily buy 10 units a turn in moscow whilst germany had to wait for units to move up.

Seems pretty powerful to me!

[trulpen]

I don’t remember exactly, but don’t think I stacked up with foreign air. Maybe too many tanks? For 2 tanks you get 3 mechs.

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

I always like to get some art on R1. It forces the Axis to stack Bryansk with planes to prevent counterattack on G5, allowing the Allies to land in Normandy. It also force Germany to be more cautious on G4. You can compensate for the one or two missing infantry by landing one additional Allied fighter.

[Tizkit]

Apologies for the length.

Observation 1:
Germany is set up for a strong G2 DOW move into E. Poland, especially with leaving the possibility of a turn 2 Yugoslavia strafe of the France mechanized units.
I don’t think it’s worth trying to hard counter this. Sure, it can be dissuaded with a 6 tank purchase, but the reaction will be to stall until G3 and get a more lucrative fight later when Moscow has 6 less infantry than it otherwise would.
In the event of the G2, the Karelia/Vyborg infantry will not be with the main group and be in danger of taking an unfavourable trade.

Observation 2:
Germany going for Moscow on turn 5 is a consideration, but his most lucrative timing window starts at turn 6 with units in Germany, Bulgaria, and potentially the Finland infantry.

Priorities:

1. For the love of Pete, don’t lose Moscow on turn 5.
2. Try to get value out of the Karelia/Vyborg group in the event of the G2.
3. If possible, be able to stand up at Bryansk on G4 to retake the Ukraine factory on R5. This will depend significantly on how many planes Germany makes available, but that will at least pull them away from other purposes.
4. Tilt the TUV swing/winning odds for a G6/7+ as much as possible. Obviously Andrew is playing as the better player, meaning risk aversion… Anything below 80%, maybe even 90-95% he will likely balk at.

My proposed changes:

1. Forget about spreading communism and save communism first. Caucasus infantry should move north and keep the mechs/tanks home. You won’t gain enough money to offset the TUV you will lose in Moscow with a weak defense.
2. Mech/tank from Moscow should go to Belarus to help dissuade the Finnish infantry from moving forward on turn 2. This would put them on a G7 Moscow timing rather than G6.
3. The sub should go to 125, also to make the G2 more costly.
4. The best defense at Bryansk may be to attack, meaning I favour Farmboy’s buy of at least 3 artillery.
5. I would also consider 1 Mech purchase for Novgorod. (but wouldn’t build other units there) This will give the opportunity to counterattack the Finnish infantry if they move forward and leave the possibility of some mechanized units remaining to run to Norway… a reasonable headache for Germany.
6. Forget about the AA gun in Novgorod, it doesn’t look necessary. Pull it to Belarus. If necessary it can join the Karelia/Vyborg infantry in Archangel next turn, if not it will be with the main group.
7. Cruiser in 114, and Sub in 115 would be standard I think.

[surfer]

I don’t think i can improve on that. Good job @Tizkit

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

Tizkit’s comments

1. agreed
2. agreed
3. agreed, he can start convoy raiding right away
4. definitely agree
5. not really necessary since he can’t step forward with 7 inf, but I would prefer a tank over a mech. Essentially same defense and much greater attack. You are always short on attack as Russia
   6)agreed
6. The cruiser ship block in 114 is very essential.

Additional: you can leave the planes in Moscow and still reach everywhere on the Western front. It allows you to land in Yunnan if there is some miracle and you can support Yunnan on turn 2. Sometimes I rush a mech and tank to Sikang on R1 and then return them back to Moscow if the dice are not looking good for China.

[Tizkit]

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:

Additional: you can leave the planes in Moscow and still reach everywhere on the Western front. It allows you to land in Yunnan if there is some miracle and you can support Yunnan on turn 2. Sometimes I rush a mech and tank to Sikang on R1 and then return them back to Moscow if the dice are not looking good for China.

I would tend to agree if the G2 possibility was weaker. The downside of keeping the planes at Moscow is that it wrecks the efficiency of the possible Karelia/Vyborg retaliation. Sure, you can still do it, but your planes must land in Novgorod. This means they will require babysitting by ground units which may subsequently be poorly traded. It could possibly be pulled off with mechanized units, but the planes at Novgorod seems more reliable to me.

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

@Tizkit I have always been a big fan of the northern route around the Marshes. With the G1 buy of slow moving ground units, there will be a limited number of units that can reach Belarus on G3. The Germany guys won’t make it. The Bulgaria units won’t make it. The Finland units won’t make it. Only fast movers built on G2 can reach, plus some planes. The Italians can only get 2 tanks there.

I feel that a significant R1 artillery build will be in position to fend off a G3 advancement to Belarus as they will be sitting in Bryansk. There is no way to prevent a G4 advancement to Belarus, but at least that is another turn of income. At that point, Russia will be forced to retreat to Moscow unless something else bizarre happens.

[Omega1759]

Ouch, that G1. :)

Before evaluating the Soviet buy, it would pay to try to establish what UK/US will do assuming a J1. Sorry in advance for the long ramble.

We seem to have opportunity to put immediate pressure on Germany in 110 / on continent.

UK buy carrier and 1 fighter, save 2

Ignore 106
Send 91 cruiser + Sub + Malta fighter against 96. The Malta Fighter will land into Morocco for flexible repatriation to London (and help retake Gibraltar if Italians go there).
Send 98 fleet + Gibraltar fighter against + UK bomber + 1 UK fighter against 97 (assume no scramble / lose a sub). (land tac + bomber in Cyprus which are safe unless if Italy takes greece) Resulting fleet will be wiped out in one strike if all German air goes to nuke it out., but then 110 is safe and sea lion fully off the table. If Germany spreads to take on the 96 cruiser as well, its’s 3.5 planes lost on average.
Attack 110 with 111 fleet, 109 fleet and 3 fighters.
Land an infantry in Holland Belgium, to prevent Italian and German planes from landing there. France can retake it if Italy tries to reclaim. Get 3 IPC. Gives extra incentive for Germany to hit 110 and lose its air force, Note, Germany can build a carrier and land its South Italy planes on it to deploy all its air. With all the planes , it’s a 95% battle for Germany with 80 IPC loss for Germany/120 IPC for UK. Without the two South Italy planes, it’s a 60% battle with 92 IPC loss for Germany and 110 for UK, which is really not a risk that should be taken. A serious treat to the UK involves building a carrier and invites Sea Lion. There’s 50 IPC left for Germany (makes 8 loaded transports) + say 6 planes left. UK will have 2 IPC + 28 + 5 (originals) + 3 (Belgium) + 2 (Persia) +2 Greece - 2/3 (convoy)= 39 IPC of purchases (9 infantry + 1 fighter or better). A sea lion attempt in these conditions is possible only if US can’t bring bombers to bear which would require a J3DOW. It’s unlikely that this would be pulled off and Germany wouldn’t have much to cover its transport fleet in 110 anyways against a US bomber / carrier planes on US 3. This is very important, others should check this math.

NCM: Land Malta infantry + AA gun in Greece, deploy transport in 99 to draw fire from Italian/German plane or Italian sub (weakens counter on 96/93). Greece most likely to hold one turn unless if Germany air / infantry is committed.

NCM: Take Erie with mech.
NCM: Move Canadian sub to 91
NCM: Stack Alexandria with all group troops available (only remote chance involves all Italian air and is very dicy for Italian naval plans. No Landing possible if 97/96 occupied. This prevent walk in into Alexandria reinforced by German air and will force German air to protect Tobruk instead.

So based on all this and stepping back,

Assuming no JDOW, US should buy a destroyer, a carrier, and 2 bombers, save 4. Place all Atlantic side. Assuming JDOW, Sea lion is off the table because of the US fighter that can be sent to Morocco and reach London on US 2. In that case, can replace one of the bombers with a carrier for the Pacific and adding a transport for the Atlantic.

If G2 attack on 110 is skipped (too risky, not worth buying a German carrier and not worth not hitting 97, then situation is following):

Italy income crippled for I2 purchases (very good), only 1 transport left and potentially dying immediately,

Strong allied surface fleet in 110 (sub can be put as picket in 125 on UK 2), 2 British submarines in the med / all surface units destroyed on Germany 2. Strong air force left in the med (1 bomber, 1 tac, 1 UK fighter). for repeat UK landing in Holland/Normandy supported by air force and bombardment. Possibility to park some surface fleet in 92 to deny Italian NO.

Axis air force still strong but dented ~9-10 planes including some helping the Italians in Africa. Greece is a spiky thorn in the side but will be dealt with one way or another.

The key becomes whether we can cheaply bring US units to bear with cheap protection of 91. It will be tempting for Italians to seize Gibraltar to prevent construction of air base if the US is not in a position to retake it. This airbase on UK 2 is a great force multiplier for 91/92 protection, ferrying of planes to reinforce Soviets, and could be paired up with some ground troops and minor complex in Persia on UK 2.

Based on this and the pressure on Western Europe, I believe we can make a stand in Bryansk on G5 provided that we have enough Infantry. As a result, the main German army will move into Ukraine (we stay in Bryansk and hold. On G6 German goes into Rostov in which case we will want enough fodder to fend an Italian can opener and move to Tambov (then the German stack needs to chose between Bryansk without being able to hold Volgorad). We can add offensive power later after we see things play out / are suffering bombardments.

By G7 the UK should be very well established in the Middle East for as long as Japan doesn’t overwhelm everything!

So I agree with 12 save 1 or 11 infantry / 1 artillery.

[AndrewAAGamer]

So is the World ready to finish R1?

[farmboy]

I’m not sure yet on the US/UK turns but I suspect I would aim for more conservative allied play, building the airbase at Gib and cleaning the German subs. I’m not keen on Taranto since it means trading British for Italian units and you will hopefully have better odds on that fleet later. I want to hold on to UK navy to safely threaten landings in the Med and West Europe against the Germans. And the airbase at Gib allows for the movement of air to the mid east which can then support Moscow. I’d also grab Persia right away to build the factory the following turn as well.

Maybe with the bid placement, you have enough room to safely play more aggressively with the UK. I haven’t been calculating. If I’m fairly certain I can conserve sufficient British naval and air units, I would consider Taranto or Tobruk (especially the latter I’m thinking at the moment)

This would all depend on the Japan’s turn, but either way, I would still use R1 to add 4 art (or the mech in Leningrad as suggested by Tizkit) and focus Soviet units in Europe rather than to capture Axis territories in the Mid East and N Africa. Maybe you can send the mech down hoping for an opportunistic capture of axis friendly territory, but I wouldn’t do more than that. If the air moves to Leningrad, there is also no need yet to move the cruiser out. He can’t successfully attack Leningrad with just inf and bombers and because of the scramble, he would have to commit more air if he wanted to hit the cruiser in 115 (I’m sure he won’t at this point since the air is out of position then.)

[trulpen]

@AndrewAAGamer said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:

So is the World ready to finish R1?

There’s been plenty of good ideas here.

I’m a bit conflicted. Iraq is 5 extra income. That one I think Russia might benefit from before the take-down. Question is then where to put the pansar. Belarus or Bryansk.

The thing is that I’m aiming for pretty immediate pressure on the german west front. Don’t think Germany can ignore that, which also hopefully means some small respite for Russia.

2 inf would be ROI and more. Another 2 mech, likely not.

I actually agree with @Tizkit (who by the way whips me in our present B-semifinal), but am keen to try out this Spread of Communism-strategy. Perhaps just for the hell of it. See how the master refutes it. Atleast @wizmark was impressed by it. :)

I’ll post the turn soon.

[Omega1759]

@trulpen

“Pretty immediate” ;) let’s invade Holland and Greece and force the Luftwaffe to bleed. A good exchange of land units can start right away with 4 IPC troops killed in Holland and Normandy (no air support if go all out on 97). With UK support we can certainly grab Iraqi NO with a reasonable force. The preparedness to do this might delay Germany entry by a turn/let Italy step in first.

[trulpen]

@Omega1759 said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:

@trulpen

“Pretty immediate” ;) let’s invade Holland and Greece and force the Luftwaffe to bleed. A good exchange of land units can start right away with 4 IPC troops killed in Holland and Normandy (no air support if go all out on 97). With UK support we can certainly grab Iraqi NO with a reasonable force. The preparedness to do this might delay Germany entry by a turn/let Italy step in first.

You hit it like a cobra! :grin:

I haven’t analysed it, but it sounds like there’re lots of sacrifices in that plan.

Anyhow, I will not jump the gun, but focus on Russia now. Of course the other Allies moves impact on Russia’s plans and Japan won’t impact at all.

Shortly I’m considering Tobruk, a cheap Taranto and stacking in z92 with UK. If possible all three, but if not, I believe Tobruk and stacking have the highest priority.