Here’s a large post, from this very same page, discussing the very same thing:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36942.0
edit-
And looking at it, you actually made the last post there. I’m confused, and I’ll shut up now.
Germany v. Russia –who wins?
-
Who do you all usually find that wins, if Germany is all out on Russia and Russia all out on Germany.
-
Who do you all usually find that wins, if Germany is all out on Russia and Russia all out on Germany.
Russia’s usually going to be all out on Germany, and Germany usually can’t afford to go all out on Russia (since it has to deal with the UK, USA, etc.). In a straight fight Germany would always win because of its superior economy. With the other factors involved (mainly the other nations) Russia’s still more likely to lose in the long run unless a second front is opened (France, probably).
-
I thought the answer would be “it depends on who I draw”
Lots of variables … opening round with no purchases or one on one just Russia & Germany R1 R2 R3 R4 when do you declare war It could be interesting -
It really depends on a number of factors.
Did England die? Did Germany get smacked for it? Did Germany survive mostly intact? Is America going all out against Germany virtually ignoring Japan? Is America going all out after Japan virtually ignoring Germany? Is Russia building fleet? (Battleship in the Caspain Sea?). Is Russia fighting Japan? Is Japan bogged down in the quagmire known as China (a meat grinding machine that turns good infantry units into hamburger and returns no real value to Japan?)
-
Obviously one-on-one Germany should win every time.
In the context of the entire game, Germany/Italy should win on the Europe board 25% of the time (Japan on Pacific 25%, Allies 50%). So ideally Russia (with all allies) should beat Germany 75% of the time.
-
I thought this meant no Sea Lion, because it specified an all out attack on Russia by Germany (though Sea Lion certainly does help Germany against Russia in some ways). Also, the general consensus on this forum seems to be that in the first few turns at least the USA should focus entirely on Japan, though there are obviously people who disagree with that. I’ve seen some good statistics for a German victory attacking Russia turn 1. I’ve also seem some statistics saying the Axis has a better chance attempting a Sea Lion (takes England out, forces the USA to focus on both boards, etc.). Japan attacking Russia definitely would have an impact on a potential German win (or loss), as well. Statistically speaking the game isn’t perfectly balanced yet (though it isn’t as bad as OOB) and different people lean different ways in what they think are the best strategies. It’s a tough question to answer.
-
I think that Germany might have the best chance against Russia if they DON’T do Sealion. Sealion takes an awful lot of German resources that could be better used against Russia. Also, it gets USA into the war sooner and they could decide not to go after Japan in which case Germany will be squeezed between USA and USSR.
Best choice for Germany is to sink all the Royal Navy and maybe make UK think they are going Sealion, so UK doesn’t try rebuilding navy right away and just gets a bunch of infantry for defense. Then, use submarines and at least some of your Luftwaffe to keep the Brits out of the water, especially transports, while focusing all other attention against Russia. This keeps USA out of the war longer (assuming Japan doesn’t do something stupid like declare war on USA) and lets Germany mainly fight one front against Russia with a somewhat minor delaying action against UK. Even after Round 3 when USA does come into the war, Japan may be enough of a pest that USA goes mainly after them and doesn’t put enough in the Atlantic to really bother Germany.
With any luck, by the time the Allies get enough stuff over to Europe to really bother Germany, it will be too late and Germany will be knocking down Moscow’s door. -
knp,
But if you do not perform sea lion, you now have a strong enemy to your rear. So while it takes resources to do it, it also frees up assest that no longer need to protect your flank.
-
@Cmdr:
knp,
But if you do not perform sea lion, you now have a strong enemy to your rear. So while it takes resources to do it, it also frees up assest that no longer need to protect your flank.
Except that the USA will be more inclined to try and open up that flank instead of focusing on Japan. But that would take several turns, at least.
-
Who do you all usually find that wins, if Germany is all out on Russia and Russia all out on Germany.
Russia’s usually going to be all out on Germany, and Germany usually can’t afford to go all out on Russia (since it has to deal with the UK, USA, etc.). In a straight fight Germany would always win because of its superior economy. With the other factors involved (mainly the other nations) Russia’s still more likely to lose in the long run unless a second front is opened (France, probably).
My first game playing 1940 Europe (I had only played spring 1942 before that), I was playing as UK and Russia. I wasn’t used to air bases, so I thought all the planes were out of range in Germany, and so I lost UK 2nd round. Germany didn’t have to contribute much at all–he only used one transport to take London. I felt so stupid after that, but I thought I’d still give the game a shot. the US’s primary goal, when it finally got into the war, was to liberate London (which it did after a while). In the mean time, it was Germany and Italy (from the south) all against Russia. Italy took over just about all of Africa since the UK was out of the game. However, even against this, as Russia, I held out against everything and was even pushing Germany’s lines back a bit. When London was liberated, he gave up because that brought two more powers into Europe.
Was I just playing against someone who wasn’t very good at playing Germany?
-
@Cmdr:
knp,
But if you do not perform sea lion, you now have a strong enemy to your rear. So while it takes resources to do it, it also frees up assest that no longer need to protect your flank.
Yeah, I understand that, but if you sink all the Brit navy and threaten Sealion (AC and transport purchase), UK will likely buy all infantry for 1 or 2 rounds. Basically, you will have a somewhat neutered enemy to your rear. You keep a few planes and subs active to keep the Royal Navy at bay and the rest of your resources can be poured into Russia.
Granted, NOT taking England out will make it harder on Italy, but it also keeps the USA out of the war a little longer, perhaps long enough.
If you DO take London, the US can enter the war immediately and if they decide to go all Atlantic, you will have a lot harder time defending against that and the Eastern Front will surely suffer. -
Was I just playing against someone who wasn’t very good at playing Germany?
Perhaps, but not necessarily. You might have been a little extra good at playing Russia. Maybe the dice were a little lucky for you or unlucky for Germany. I remember a game where Germany went into Russia with four huge thrusts – Finland into Karelia, Poland into Baltic States, Slovakia/Hungary into E. Poland and Romania into Bessarabia. All four armies smashed the Russian early defenses with a lot of stuff left. Then strong Russian counter-attacks end up decimating half the German force. After that it was very slow going for the Germans. The Russians managed to keep putting up strong defenses and whenever a particular German army was whittled down enough, a Russian counter-attack would wipe it out and the German drive was set back again. I think the Minor IC in the Ukraine was exchanged between Russia and Germany about 4 or 5 times.
So your German player wasn’t necessarily bad, maybe just inexperienced. Perhaps he learned his lesson and will take Moscow from you next time. He seemed to do pretty good at taking London.
Suggested Topics
