This topic came up in the FAQ, figured it’d be a good idea to let the debate be in its own thread.
I can see some benefits:
-Can get units to Yunnan by R2, can also reinforce India.
-Distract Japanese offensive in China and SE Asia. They have the power to wipe out the Siberian army, but it would take up all their air power.
-Even if Japan takes Siberian territories there is no bonus associated with them, making them far less valuable to their war effort.
Some downside:
-Will undoubtedly weaken the defense of Moscow, in both starting units available and future income to build units. However if it’s a foregone conclusion it will fall anyway I can see a case for simply sending units to preserve victory on the other board.
So I guess it could be a net positive. Thoughts?
I always DOW Japan R1 with Russia, but I never attack unless they leave Manchuria and Korea poorly defended on turn 2 or later. I just like to have the ability for my ally’s planes to land in Siberia if need be.
I like to always leave at least 12 infantry behind in Siberia. Gives the Japanese player 1 more thing to worry about, and it can be really helpful. The other 6 I send around to the other end of the China border. They tend to get there the same time the Japanese player does, and it can often stop them in their tracks before they are able to grab free territory east of Moscow.
Besides, those 18 infantry, in my experience, rarely arrive in time to make a difference in the battle for Moscow. And sending them away basically gives Japan free money from eastern Russia, and can be a real blow to the Russia economy.
As noted by Chocolate Pancake, a declaration of war does not necessitate a Combat Move. Declaring war allows Russian troops movements if they want to feign them. But the primary reason in my view to have an R1 DOW on Japan is that even if you don’t attack, as soon as Japan attacks US then US are free to land in Russian territories and reinforce russian troops. As long as Russia remains neutral, they limit US possibilities, at no benefit to themselves. In my opinion, this is an exploit, and Russia simply should not be allowed to declare war without punishment or some sort of trigger, but that’s the way it is.
Japan should get a NO for holding Siberian territories (as well as Mongolia) since taking Lake Baikal was a goal of theirs before being pushed back by the USSR and Mongolia. So they will at least get some reward for chasing down Russian troops in Siberia. It does add some consequence for a Russian DOW.
I agree with Pancake and kcdzim about (not) attacking with the siberians.
I think it is better to wait attacking Manchuria/Korea untill Japan is comitted in SE Asia. (and cannot counterattack your siberians in 1 turn) OR have Japan leave a large defensive garrison which also hurt its offensive in China/SE Asia. Create headaches for Japan for as many turn as you can, not sacrifice everything in 1 turn.
On the other hand the Siberians can arrive in time to defend Moscow, especially if the UK has FTR to help defend Moscow. Furthermore, the Siberians add tremendously to the Russian ability to counterattack Bryansk RU7-RU8. They force Germany to focus on nothing but Moscow, leaving western parts of ‘the reich’ more vulnerable.
Sending them all away will result in lost Russian production, but 18 to 21 units (incl. Mongolians) will arrive in Moscow, for a neutral net result until RU10. Keeping them all to oppose Japan results in more production but still less units for Moscow. The increased production cannot replace the loss of 18 to 21 units for Moscow, at least untill RU10.
So I think a RU1DOW is a good thing but what you do with the Siberians is a different thing entirely. and greatly depends on your German opponent and the pressure you will expect on Moscow…
That’s true. What you do with the Siberian troops really comes down to personal preference and strategy.
We actually had a couple of guys get into quite an argument over it once. They were each playing half the allies, and the guy playing the Europe half insisted on having the Siberian troops sent back to Moscow. Europe guy won that fight, but the Pacific guy was upset, especially when the Axis won on the Pacific side of the board that game.
I do this often. I do this because I do not move China away from the burma road NO bonus. I stand my ground and if all of Japan’s air attacks, china + russia means lots of air kills, the pacific will be difficult for Japan after that especially if China and Russia wins on defense against all of Japan’s air.
If you do this, I suggest more aggressive positioning with anzac/ukpacific/usa. Force Japan to choose what attacks to ignore and what to commit to instead of getting away with one big attack.
For example if I am staying next to yunnan with china, on J2 he can attack the china stack or burma stack or java (2 inf 3 fighter on it), or possibly naval positioned off of queensland. Whatever he ignores will punish him (along with all the attacks he will want to do, like phil kwangtung etc). It is true he can delay war and just focus on China, but that does mean Japan will be way behind in islands.
It just depends on how aggressive you play.
I move everything into Amur to provoke Japan into attacking my stack of 18 and 2 AA guns with everything they have. This will divert Japan from a much more profitable strategy in the south Pacific, and it should allow the Pacific Allies to gain time and position around the money islands. It will also activate Mongolia giving Russia 6 more units, and will also allow the European Allies to attack Spain without giving 6 Mongolian units to the Japs. It’s a sacrifice for sure, but with Moscow against the wall no matter what the Allies do, at least the Allies should keep the money Islands and Malaya out of Japanese hands, and a poor Japan is a beatable Japan.
Declare war.
Believe in the dice and attack Korea on turn 1.
Why would you want to attack spain?
One move landings into Europe. Two majors and 130ish IPC puts 20 troops in Europe. In three moves its 40. You can set this up if Japan doesn’t declare war early or lets you (as US) declare war. If you overwhelm Atlantic, you can usually defend off Japan long enough that VC’s do not matter (at least in live game experiences).
130 seems like a lot, but not when games go for as many turns as they do.
Why would you want to attack spain?
One move landings into Europe. Two majors and 130ish IPC puts 20 troops in Europe. In three moves its 40. You can set this up if Japan doesn’t declare war early or lets you (as US) declare war. If you overwhelm Atlantic, you can usually defend off Japan long enough that VC’s do not matter (at least in live game experiences).
130 seems like a lot, but not when games go for as many turns as they do.
You can 1 move into spain or gibraltar you actualy allow germany to help italy keep gibraltar. And basicaly give axis the middle east NO and the egypt NO. Is that worth the saving on transports and giving extra ipc’s to germany and giving them the extra inf from turkey and sweden? If you dont start your turn at a friendly naval base you cant get back to US in 1 turn.
Why are you giving up the Middle East?
We hit Spain and Turkey at the same time. With a factory positioned in Persia/Iraq, its no contest and the extra troops don’t even matter. At the end of the game, the allies had a factory in Turkey, Persia, Egypt and Spain. Use Greece as a staging point and Italy will be wiped up.
The only reason we tried it was because Germany was pretty much cleaned up in Russia and Russia still had a 30+ personal army.
