@barnee said in All the Russian openings: For Begginers:
yea so that is called “bridging”. Once you load and then unload the trprt is done. So it doesn’t have to move, although obviously it can, but loading and unloading dictate the number of dudes it can transport in 1 turn.
I’m sure someone else will give a more detailed answer, but that’s basically how it works. : )"
thank you b. for clarifying that about unloading. I had imagined that if it could move two sea zones then I could make more than one trip each with capacity but that would be against the rules. of capacity. and as p. added once unloaded ends, so cant move to adjacent sea zones.
another mistake I made was to “collect” one inf from each island for example one inf from philipines move first step to borneo, load second inf and move second step to Australia to invade… I see that is also forbidden by the quote that p. brought. so thanks for involving him.
@hirohito22 said in All the Russian openings: For Begginers:
another mistake I made was to “collect” one inf from each island for example one inf from philipines move first step to borneo, load second inf and move second step to Australia to invade… I see that is also forbidden by the quote that p. brought. so thanks for involving him.
or perhaps “collecting” is permitted? to “collect” one inf from each island for example one inf from philipines move first step to borneo, load second inf and move second step to Australia to invade?
but not to unload two infantry in two places one inf in philipines and second in the adjacent sea zone for example borneo.
I can confirm collecting is permited.
@Black_Elk
Ever since I read your post about East Indies IC I built it in 99% of my games. However since the rank reseted and I am still silver (after a 5/0 placement it seems that now I drop faster in rank due to ‘idle’ than I can win games), the outcome is inconcludent so far. In fact is too good to be true haha.
To explain, if ally players get full KGF and leave Pacific uncontested AND UK doesn’t kill 2nd transport, I can potentially win India in turn 3. Unless diced, ofc. Wich, again, in AAO it happens a lot.
However, with 2nd Jap transport destroyed I prefere building 3 transports in J1, I feel I can expand faster like this.
@hirohito22 said in All the Russian openings: For Begginers:
@hirohito22 said in All the Russian openings: For Begginers:
another mistake I made was to “collect” one inf from each island for example one inf from philipines move first step to borneo, load second inf and move second step to Australia to invade… I see that is also forbidden by the quote that p. brought. so thanks for involving him.
or perhaps “collecting” is permitted? to “collect” one inf from each island for example one inf from philipines move first step to borneo, load second inf and move second step to Australia to invade?
but not to unload two infantry in two places one inf in philipines and second in the adjacent sea zone for example borneo.
Rulebook, page 31 again:
“A transport can load cargo from one or two territories in or adjacent to friendly sea zones that it occupies before, during, and after it moves. A transport can pick up cargo, move one sea zone, pick up more cargo, move one more sea zone, and offload the cargo at the end of its movement. …”
Download it from https://avalonhill.wizards.com/rules
@Green-Vandago I am confused about the East Indies IC. It is on an island, so you still need transports to utilize it fully. Why not just use Japan and not waste the 15 ICs?
Building all those transports especially if UK attacks your destroyer and transport may not be a good idea, Reason: UK and USA have too many naval assets in PTO and you need to buy additional hardware to stop the pileup. I would buy only 1-2 transports tops, 1 fighters, 1-2 subs/destroyer.
@Dimitri said in All the Russian openings: For Begginers:
@Green-Vandago I am confused about the East Indies IC. It is on an island, so you still need transports to utilize it fully. Why not just use Japan and not waste the 15 ICs?
Because it opens up the possibility of an early turn 3 attack on India. It’s of course situational, but when the possibility opens up it can be deadly. Unless diced, of course.
Anyway, it works best if both initial transports are available. And it can be done regardless of what US is doing, but usually will try to build a fleet to counter you.
Edit:
Here’s how I play, if Japan has 2 starting transports.
1st turn:
2nd turn:
Doing this, in turn 3 I can attack India with:
As you can see, that’s quite a lot of troops, and most of the time India will fall.
Great article! I agree that Karelia is a country you should just as well forget about. Caucasus is actually an important piece in your defensive line, but unfortunately can be taken if you are playing with an open SZ 16(by a massive land/amphibious and fighter supported assault). Try to just hold a line by shuffling infantry up and down, this is confusing for Germany and is just fun. If you end up losing all but Russia, or all but Russia and the Caucasus, you can still be hindrance by sending small assaults at weak positions, blitzing in and out with tanks for extra IPC’s, or build a strategic bombing force. The way most games go Russia is a hindrance force by round 2 or 3. So, draw German resources away from more critical fronts, and give aid to your allies major attacks.
@Green-Vandago Thanks, it is clearer now!
I’m curious as to why the Buryatia stack R1 is considered such a bad idea. Sure, the Japanese can take this out but it comes with an opportunity cost as the air units involved are then not able to participate in the Pearl Attack or hit China J1. Japan then has to keep an eye on Manchuria, too. It’s work done, walk the stack out R2.
Interestingly I think that’s like the default move that the computer opponent does if assigned to play Allies. Not that I’d suggest following the machine for much, but who knows might be something to it that most have neglected? I think its just the high cost for the Russians vs what Allies are likely to get out the deal long term. 5 inf for 15 ipcs is pretty pricey for a bait, and parking a Brit fighter to back it up takes that up to 25 likely destroyed. I don’t know could just be me, but if Russia stacks Bury without a Brit fighter I will always try to smoke it on J1. If they do bring the fighter then the profit for the Bury attack starts getting closer to Pearl level trade off (such that J might consider leaving 53 alone to pull it off). Japan can also run a hit on 53 with the sacrificial fighter coming from sz37 instead of Tokyo if they wanted, and still land the Bury fighters on deck in sz60 after.
4 inf 1 tank 2 fighters 1 bombardment vs 5 inf 1 fighter is still like 80% to the attacker with 2 units remaining on ave, 3 if attacker won.
Every now and again that might break unlucky for Japan with a dud or something, but most times they blast through 6 hitpoints like it was nothing, and then the north is open road for the rush to Evenki line. Obv the plan for that to have much pay off would be like full on KJF slam trying to break the Japanese in the first couple rounds. For a fast game high stakes might be fun, cause there’s only so much Japan can do in their opener. If I was Japan I’d prob just bring the bomber into it, and focus north initially instead of Pearl, cause it would really suck to get rolled on the mainland immediately. Or like you mentioned, also possible to ignore the Bury stack and just bolster manchuria on D, delay of game tactics for both sides hehe. But on balance I think its just tough for Allies to have Soviets leading the charge in the East, when they are already struggling so much just to maintain vs G onslaught, and then not having those Siberian dudes to back up the middle path across China or as a life line to bolster the center in the 4th round. This based more on the A&AO situation which is slightly different from the physical board, with no bids and such to help the set up beyond the Gencon tweaks. Then again its just kinda speculation, I haven’t seen enough games where players tried for the Bury stack to really know the ultimate trade off. That’s a strong telegraph for KJF, so as G I would just go for broke in the opener I think, and play for the fast game on the center.
@Eqqman Think also about it this way. This game is very much balanced around the tension between Germany and USSR. If cared for, those 5 inf can potentially make the difference between Moscow falling or not. I know that whenever I have stacked Bury as Allies and seen it wiped on J1, USSR has this sudden naked feeling.
@Black_Elk Just had the Burytia stack + Russian fighters happen against me in a game. I ended up resigning immediately as my 90% attack on the territory failed as I scored no hits on my first round and the defender had a higher-than average set of rolls on defense. I might have soldiered on anyway but on the UK’s turn they were successful in the 2/3 chance at taking both Borneo and New Guinea. On my counterattack I also lost an extra fighter as I accidentally clicked it to attack New Guinea instead of the UK navy.
Clearing this stack severely limits Japan’s ability to do anything in the south unless you’re willing to risk Russia taking Manchuria R2, especially if you get the UK fighter there as well so there are 3 fighters. But as you said it seems only useful if the plan is full-on KJF.
AA 1942 Online related comments have been moved to the respective category:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/36212/russian-openings-and-aa-online
@Eqqman hi describe the uk attack there. which navy did they have? how did they get navy so far from their factory? beside one transport in india?
@hirohito22 Been a while since I wrote that post, but UK can send Transport alone to take Borneo at bad odds while all other warships attack the Japanese DEI fleet at 2/3 odds.
