Russian Strategy

[Ó Ruanaidh]

Ok, so a decided to create a thread entirely dedicated to the strategy of the U.S.S.R. (throughout either called Russia or Soviet Union). I was wondering how one could successfully resist Germany while also putting up a good fight against Japan. For starters,

Assuming that Germany has attacked Russia and gained land, I suggest a player make immediate and vigorous counterattack, or on the other hand retreat farther back. The one big advantage Russia has over Germany is that if Germany pushes to far to fast, Russia will be able to throw their new units into the fray next turn, while Germany’s reinforcements have to wait some time to come up from Germany.

So, I advocate a strategy of trading space, and letting the intial German offensive exhaust itself, then fall back on your factories, where units created in a timely fashion, would then pounce on their outnumbered adversaries and hurl them back.

I was also wondering what your ideas for a first turn build would be, I myself prefer the idea of 3 Tanks, and 5 Infantry, the infantry to defend one of your precious factories, and the tanks to give your already plentiful Infantry some hitting power, and therefore counterattack potential, to the overwhelmingly technologically superior Germans (in terms of aircraft, tanks, and artillery), though I also believe if you plan on a stalwart defensive instead of an “aggressive defense,” that Infantry and Artillery combination is excellent.

Now comes Japan, I wonder what you guys think should be done about the Rising Sun. I myself had liked the strategy of building an IC in Soviet Far East in previous game editions, though it was highly risky against good Japanese players. The AE has killed this plan though, because all lands in Siberia are worth only one, and it is hardly worth 15 ICP to pump out one unit a turn, when Japan can quickly overwhelm you.

Therefore I propose that a defensive line should be set up to the somewhere in Siberia to the East of Moscow, and that Japan should be made to pay dearly for its gains in Siberia, and that troops should be placed in Moscow, to bolster this line, once Japan starts creeping up to territories that are actually valuable.

An intersting strategy suggested to me by a friend also deserves some examination, what if the Russians constructed a Black Sea Fleet? Nothing major, the Soviet Union can ill afford battleships and carriers when the Germans are pounding at the gates. But destroyers every now and again, with some transports. Since there is a good chance there will always be some troops in the Caucasus, Germany and Italy will have to constantly worry about a lightning Russian descent on the Balkans or Bulgaria/Romania, or if the Axis are being careless, Italy itself. In this regard the U.K. can help immensely, and the Germans and their Italian buddies will be forced to hold valuable troops back to defend against this.

So the question for that is, is it cost effective? Is it worth building the ships, or will the Axis find it cheaper to defend, then Russia to threaten? I am intrigued by such responses and thoughts as you trusty forum members can conceive of.

[Jennifer]

In 1941, I have found that Russia’s best option is to liberate Karelia and pull everything else back to Moscow.  Couple this with an all Armor build (or 1 fighter, the rest armor) and you are in a strong position on round 2.

[a44bigdog]

You are correct in your assessment of the eastern front. It is very easy early for Germany to push to far to fast. Russia also has to be careful of committing this same mistake if the tide is turning and you are pressing Germany back. I prefer to buy 1 fighter a round if at all possible with the Russians in the early rounds as this gives an offensive piece that is not lost when the enemy counters.

Japan is more interested in China than Siberia in this game. Chinese territories lead directly to infantry produced in them for free. Japan can be delayed in Siberia by smart play. Keep a token force in Buryatia in case a chance of capitalizing on an early Japanese mistake arises. However, keep in mind Russian troops only liberated Chinese territories and Japan goes between Russia and the US. It can be worthwhile early to maintain a good sized force of the eastern starting infantry in Stanovoj. They can attack any understrength incursions by Japan and are safe from bombardment and transported troops.

I find it hard to see a Russian navy being viable due to the Italian fleet. If they are not sunk by the Allies, that is 2 Cruisers and a Battleship that frankly I don’t see the Russians being able to spare enough to stand up to this. Also there is the question of Axis air attacks as well. I do like the originality of the thought though.

Karelia is a Russian IC however keep in mind that it only can produce 2 units so sometimes liberating it is not necessarily the best thing to do.

[Bardoly]

I agree that a Russian navy build is not very useful, but if England put the hurt on Italy’s navy on UK1, then perhaps on R2 or R3, Russia could consider putting a Sub or 2 in the water.

[Ó Ruanaidh]

My thoughts exactly. I’ve seen some people play foolishly with both Russia and Germany, with Germany exhausting it’s momentum prematurely, then the Russians launching an all out offensive only to be thrown back with terrible losses, putting each back at square one.

When I mentioned the Russian Black Sea Fleet, I meant it to be no more than a transport and one or maybe, if you could spare the money, two destroyers. Of course this force would have absolutely no hope of contending with the Italian Fleet, but this is where the Brits come in, if the British player is informed of the Russian strategy, he can perhaps (after a few turns) destroy the Italian Fleet and clear the Mediterranean. Seeing as how this is in the U.K.'s best interest anyway, as it allows them to take all of Africa, then things don’t look so good. As now both Russia and England could throw units ashore anywhere in Southern Europe, and I kinda like the thought of Russia launching an amphibious assault, followed immediately by the U.K. (if Russia fails) before Germany and Italy can prepare for it.

So basically I think that if certain situations allow it, why not go for it? As for Japan I greatly like your plan of holding back away from the coast with the bulk of your eastern forces, that way you could at least negate the advantage of the Japanese Navy, though it could be problematical if you counterattack, and then Japan counterattacks that same turn, before you had a chance to pull back, and uses it’s battleships and cruisers to wipe your troops put before you can retreat to the safety of Siberia.

As for Cmd Jennifer, I think that plan is very bold, as it would imply that Russia is planning to hit back on it’s next turn, giving it plenty of firepower. I like that idea, since you can hurt Germany bad by narrowing the advanced units gap, and if the German player is to proud to retreat closer to his reinforcements. However, I believe that I would only take that option if my infantry was not so horribly reduced by Germany’s initial attack. If the die roll favors me, and many infantry are left standing, then I will definitely do that. So I guess another, rather ironic, strength of Russia, is that Germany goes first, and thus Russia can develope it’s strategies as a reaction to German moves.

[bigopfer]

@Cmdr:

In 1941, I have found that Russia’s best option is to liberate Karelia and pull everything else back to Moscow.  Couple this with an all Armor build (or 1 fighter, the rest armor) and you are in a strong position on round 2.

I have played 1941 version my last 2 games, and both times I was Russia. First off, I really think that 1941 is a hard fight for the allies. However, in both my games, Gibralter was a staging ground for US/UK air strikes against Italy and Germany. As Russia I played an entirely defensive strategy, stacking infantry in my big 3 and retreating all infantry from the East while Germany was stacking offense in Eastern Ukraine, Baltic States, and East Poland. On R1 I built 2 subs in SZ 16, and on R2 I built 4 subs in SZ 16, and the rest of the game continued to make subs there. These subs were a great threat to the Italian navy, even when they would build 2-3 destroyers a turn, I would make it out of my fights with 1-2 subs leftover. Italy was a waste and my huge amount of infantry in my big 3 were solid. (Germany did, late in game take Karelia, by that time I had started building tanks instead of infantry since I had so many and I liberated Karelia) In the end the Axis failed to reach Moscow by the time US and UK were in france, and Italy did nothing all game. I think subs are a GREAT play for Russia in SZ 16!

One of these games US had heavy bombers and was IPC bombing Italy and Germany with UK Jets defending at Gibralter. The other game, Germany got Heavy Bombers, and got greedy building bombers and not enough land forces to attack/defend which was his undoing. In that game, Russia was knocking on Berlin’s door with tanks/inf.

[allies_fly]

@bigopfer:

I have played 1941 version my last 2 games, and both times I was Russia. First off, I really think that 1941 is a hard fight for the allies.

Russia buying subs?  Doesn’t sound like a very difficult fight for the Allies to me…

[spectre_04]

Every time I try to hold up the north and Moscow at the price of pulling out of Caucasus I pay for it.  Its easy for Germany and Italy to tag team in there on you.  I think its more critical to hold that factory as well since it provides 4 build and protects your entire underbelly.

[bugoo]

Don’t know how well this will work in the future, but I just tried something and it worked out fairly well.  Germany did a standard attack to get there 1 NO but left Karelia alone.  I purchased 1 inf, 3 art, 3 armor.  I stacked 10 inf/1 art on Caucasus, everything on Moscow I could, and pulled back to archangel with Karelia forces.  On R2 I pushed into Ukraine with 11 inf, 4 art and 4 armor, plus an AA gun (i shifted my AAs so Karelia was left empty) and purchased another 4 arm 1 fig.  I pulled my archangel force back to Moscow for protection.  UK/US was kind enough to grab Norway, Finland, and hit Karelia to weaken the Germans there.  This would have allowed me on R3 to trade Romania for my NO, but the game ended before then (other player was tired) so I didn’t get to see how it would pan out.  I think me turn 2 purchase should have been inf instead of armor, maybe with a second plane to let me do more trading though.  Was looking forward to collecting all those IPCs too  :evil:

[Ó Ruanaidh]

Nice, I’m glad that people are finding ways to beat the “German Ogre.” I also realized that Italy can help Germany out in Caucasus, but every game I’ve played the Italian player is to greedy for land in Africa and cares little about Germany’s position in Russia, though they themselves depend on it.

I played out my strategy of building 1 transport and 1 destroyer on turn 3, but as predicted the Italians laid waste that small fleet with their cruisers, the turn before the British came in and annihilated their fleet. Though I think it would have been quite effective if I hadn’t jumped the gun. As it was though it was a wasted investment and cost me dearly. Germany was able to take Caucasus and I failed to take it back turn 5, then we ended the game because it was getting late, and some of our players are horribly indecisive and take 20 minutes for their turn.

[bbrett3]

The Russian Black Sea navy seems like a decent Idea, but you can only pull it off if:
A) the Italian fleet is gone
B)  you have the $$$ to spare, which means the das Germans are reeling
and if both of these things are happening your on the road to victory anyway……

[Ó Ruanaidh]

I agree with letter A, the plan is hardly feasible with Italian Battleships and cruisers cruising around the Med, but to B I say, not necessarily. If you wanted to buy a fighter, you could perhaps get a transport instead, so that way, Germany would have to leave at least 2 infantry behind in Bulgaria/Romania, and Italy would have to garrison the Balkans and Italy itself, which ultimately pays off on the Eastern Front in my opinion.

[atarihuana]

that trn alone would be german bomber fodder

[Ó Ruanaidh]

Hmmm, so it would be, perhaps if you buy a destroyer one round, then a transport the next, that why the Germans have to decide if they want to risk losing a bomber for some Russian ships.

[bbrett3]

@Ó:

Hmmm, so it would be, perhaps if you buy a destroyer one round, then a transport the next, that why the Germans have to decide if they want to risk losing a bomber for some Russian ships.

IMHO I’d rather have 3 tanks opposed to a 15IPC navy in the black sea, which will probably get sunk

[Ó Ruanaidh]

Naturally, but that is boring and un-dynamic, we need to keep things fresh, and the enemy will be thinking “What the hell is he thinking?” Which can be an advantage, because he will not know how to react. If you know a bit about actual World War II, then you’ll know that Mussolini really threw Churchill and the Brits off balance by being so unpredictable, he attacked in Greece, and in Egypt, and other places, and the British stretched themselves thin trying to counter that. In fact, if Germany had intervened decisively in Africa after the evacuation of the British from Somalia and Greece, they would likely have knocked the Brits right out of the Med. So the same applies to this game, if your opponent is not sure what you are doing, he as to guess, and has to place forces to counter what he thinks you are going to do. Comes in handy sometimes, whereas with 3 tanks, he knows precisely what you’re going to do with them, and be easily able to counter it, as long as he has money.

[bbrett3]

@Ó:

Naturally, but that is boring and un-dynamic, we need to keep things fresh, and the enemy will be thinking “What the hell is he thinking?” Which can be an advantage, because he will not know how to react. If you know a bit about actual World War II, then you’ll know that Mussolini really threw Churchill and the Brits off balance by being so unpredictable, he attacked in Greece, and in Egypt, and other places, and the British stretched themselves thin trying to counter that. In fact, if Germany had intervened decisively in Africa after the evacuation of the British from Somalia and Greece, they would likely have knocked the Brits right out of the Med. So the same applies to this game, if your opponent is not sure what you are doing, he as to guess, and has to place forces to counter what he thinks you are going to do. Comes in handy sometimes, whereas with 3 tanks, he knows precisely what you’re going to do with them, and be easily able to counter it, as long as he has money.

I think that you have a valid point about being unpredictable, but there’s a difference between being stratigically unpredictable, and being upredictable just for the sake of it

I do see what you mean though…… :wink:

[Imperious Leader]

If the Soviets build ANY naval while the Germans continue to hold Soviet territory, then the Soviets will surely lose. They need tanks and planes and not transports or destroyers.

They used to have a guy back in 98 ( on MSN game zone) who always bought a Battleship for 24 IPC on turn one and went on to win some victories, but i think he was fluffing up his results so he can tell his grandson how he won games with Soviet Battleships.

Buying naval for the Soviets is like claiming you found the lock ness monster

[gebs99]

ive played several times as Rusia, i have never really finished agame (somebody always has to leave) but what I usually do is buy a mix of soldiers and tanks, soldiers for karelia and caucasus and tanks for moscow. I like to use what i call a “guerilla” strategy with Rusia. I usually hit the german frontline where i can kill more tanks than the ones ill lose. I always keep my units out of reach of tanks in germany then pull out and leave several territories controled by only one soldier to stall. This is usually my firts turn.

For the rest of the turns I attack the german frontline only to thin them down then I retreat from the atack and regroup on the territory my units have retreated to. in the best case you would leave germany with a single soldier in the territory o just a few units, useless ofr a counter attack, out of reach od the german capital and within reach of your new tanks un moscow.

The roll of the UK player in this strategy was also importan, the player understood my plan and helped me take finland and norway and made attacks on the german sides and in france to distract.

The point of my strategy y to causa damage, retreat, stall, basically frustrate de german player.

[Field Marshall E. Rommel]

I think the Russian Strategy is pretty simple, but hard to execute.  Russia needs a good mix of tanks as the forces need to be nimble to attack muliple positions within the Russian territory as Germany advances.  In order to slow Germany’s push into Russia, a player needs to be able to take advantage of gaps in Germany’s trail from Berlin to Moscow.  I would advise to go 2 tanks instead of a fighter anytime of the week.

Also, looking at the map and seeing the amount of men Russia starts with, the first purchase should be tilted toward armor as compared to men.  I typically go all tanks, but that may be extreme for some players.