All infantry on R1: does it still apply?

[Upside-down_Turtle]

In previous A&A games, anything but 8 inf on R1 was considered suicidal.  Is it now 10 inf in AA50, or has anyone done something like 3 arm and 5 inf, or 3 figt and lived?

[dondoolee]

It looks good on paper, but the 3 times I tried it (all w/o NO’s) I got spanked.  That being said they were when I 1st started playing so it still may be legit.  When you look at it though there are some pretty tempting other builds.  If Germany goes light on the armour, Russia can buy all armour and match germany’s production.  You could buy an airplane which does wonders for offensive attacks by sacrificing less valuable material, but I still deep down have that philosophy that infantry is the best bang for buck if you can use it effectivly.

[keplar]

the last time i played as russia i used the 5 inf and 3 armor ratio for most of the game. i was reasonably successful with it.

[HannibalSW]

Last game I played, my brother built mainly infantry at first, retreated most of his other forces back, and late in the game produce progressively more armor.  I worked on sending infantry first followed by armor, but UK was aggressive and the US also tried landing in France, so Russia breathed easy for a turn or two.

[axis_roll]

There’s several thoughts on R1 buy from agressive 6 tanks thru the conservative 10 inf.

The key is what did Germany do/go on G1?
If Germany bought all tanks, then the heat will be turned up quickly on the Russian Bear, so 10 inf might not be a bad buy.

Russia definitely lacks offensive power.  If you buy the 10 inf, a good R2 buy is plenty of art to turn those men into an offensive force if Germany tries to park next to Moscow/Caucasus.

I think a combination of men and power works well for Russia.  4 inf, 2 art, 2 tanks is a nice middle of the road, or 3 tanks and 5 inf.  A ftr (or bomber) can be a good buy to trade territories more efficiently.

Alot depends on:

• Germanys moves

• Allied objectives

• Playing style

[DarthMaximus]

I agree with axis_roll that it can really depend on G1.

However, for the question of 10 inf, I usually go 6 inf, 3 rt instead.  I do this for scenerios where I think I need to get a ton of units on the board but the 3 rt really upgrade your attacking/trading ability and can really help in strafing German stacks light on inf and heavy on armor if they venture to close too soon.

I seem to rotate a lot between 5 inf, 3 arm and 6 inf, 3 rt.  I use the 3 arm buy if Ger brought a lot to Bst and stacked Fin to take Kar heavy.  Here the 3 extra arm help in making sure Ger can’t move everything into Kar on G2 or you can counter with a massive Belo stack and the new armor.

If I’m not that pressed or don’t need the armor I’ll go with the rt.  I’d like to get a ftr but usually wait until rd 2 or 3 when you can get the Arch NO and have mid 30’s in cash and can get a better feel for how much pressure Ger/Ita are going to bring.

[murraymoto]

I agree too, alot can be determined by G1.

but aside from letting the Axis determine what you are doing, a heavy INF buy I think isn’t going to break you and whereas in other versions where you may get one turn to buy something else, here you can buy mixed unit types more frequently, even every turn and still be competitive.  Still, INF needs more time than Armor to get to the front unless you just sit and wait for the front to come to you, but then you may be buying just INF from then on…

[Butcher]

Buying all inf is not necessary if G1 indicates less aggressive attacks against Russia. In my only game, Germany built a tranny on G1 and wasn’t set up to take Karelia on G2, so I bought 1 fig and 4 tanks. It ended up working well, as i captured Poland on R4, reinforced the U.S. in Italy on R5, and crushed Japan before they got through China on R5.

An Axis surrender happened quickly after  :-D

[Adlertag]

If you only buy infantry, then you can retreat from territory to territory to Sibir.

If you buy a mix with tanks and artillery too, (like the 4 inf/1 art/1 tank combo) then you can do some power projecting against weak German positions. Soon you will be in Berlin, visiting IL.

[souL]

no punch for Russia, 10 inf will bury you quickly.  I like 2 inf art 4 arm and 5 inf 3 arm but it’s all taste… just watch out for those extremes they don’t get you very far.

[bugoo]

It depends, if going for a KGF i will go all armor, all the time.  KJF or balanced then i try for 1 fig, 4 inf, 2 art.  But in KGF honestly you already have enough inf to block for the first 2-3 turns you should build as many armor as you can afford (buying inf to round off your builds, like turn 2 you typically have 31 IPCs, i buy 5 arm, 2 inf).

[dondoolee]

latley I have found the 10 inf build a viable option (maybe not optimal).  If Russia sends a significant portion of her units for Eastern theater speed bumps (China, Persia, Bury, etc) than a 10 inf build against Germany seems like one of the more sound options on the table, in order to make up for lost manpower sent towards Japan.  Though this option can put Russia on the defensive pretty quickly, which may not inherently be an awful thing.

[Omega]

A buy of 2-3 fighters + infantry for remaining seem like a good idea. What do you think? With the aircraft, you have mobility in your attack, and you lose 0 material (Russia can send infantry wave after wave!). Granted, one aircraft is the price of 2 tanks. But in the long run, you might be saving some IPC

I haven’t played a game yet, so not sure if it is a good idea or not

Robert

[Upside-down_Turtle]

Yes, Russia can send waves of infantry, but the idea is not to see them as expendable.  Stalin could do that because Russia had a population six times as large as Germany.  However, in A&A, Germany has significantly more IPCs than Russia, meaning Russia can’t waste anything.  What was a less than optimal strategy in real life is suicide in Axis and Allies.

[Commando Brado]

I’ve seen a lot of post indicating building Russian offensive power is the key. I guess it depends on what scenario you’re talking about but I like building all Russian inf on Turn 1 and have been very successful with it. I agree that it depends on what Germany does turn 1 but still think this is a viable option. It kinda dictates to the German player which territories he attacks. Germany can’t attack both north and south effectively. So they have to chose. And the Russian players builds as much inf in the way of the German advance as possible and then bleeds the German player of inf, forcing him to attack Russian inf w/tanks. By that time the Allies should be taking territories, resources, bombing Germany, etc… and then the German player starts to die. Especially if the US has a KGF strategy. Then, the Russian player can start building offensive weapons. And, the extra inf in the early turns gives the Russian player extra inf for the defense of China and it’s backside.

[Zhukov44]

I don’t think all inf is the best buy in Revised or in this game.  It’s not a bad buy…just not a great one.  If your inf/art and inf/armor ratios are too high, then either you don’t counterattack and thus get less IPCs per turn…or you lose more inf then you should in counterattacks because you aren’t bringing enough punch.

[KindWinds]

I do not think so.  I like to buy a bomber and 6 inf and hustle Italy to East poland for a r4 strike at Russia.  I have noticed that as soon as russia goes on the offensive it seems to spell the doom of germany just my .02.

[Commando Brado]

I agree w/the offensive punch buy in later rounds, even Round 2. Just not in Round 1. By buying all inf in Round 1, it gives you 10 to 11 inf in Karelia, plus 4 Caucasus and 4 in Russia. Then, buy offensive weapons in later rounds to go w/all those inf you have. By buying offensive weapson in Round 1, it doesn’t seem to give Russia enough inf to absorb all the losses it’s going to take. Plus, w/a stack of like 10 inf in Caucasus in Round 1, it’s plenty of inf to attack and take any territory in the south that the Germans have losely defended.

[bugoo]

But at what cost?

It really depends on G’s turn 1 buy as well.