@cernel That’s quite a loophole you’ve discovered. It’s things like this that made LHTR necessary. You are correct about point 1. Regarding point 2, I see nothing in the rules that would disallow attacking an unoccupied enemy-controlled territory with only air units.
Attacking Ukraine
-
The key factors to me are:
1. The possibility of failure in the Ukraine means the possibility of NO IPCs from Ukraine and the survival of the German fighter, and poor positioning for Russia2. Bad dice at Ukraine are far more disastrous for Russia than bad dice at Belorussia.
2. Committing extra forces to a Ukraine victory means the loss of 3 valuable tanks.
3. Germany’s lost fighter would probably have ended up in Africa or Western Europe on G1 anyways, where the UK and US race to build a navy. It’s a problem for the UK/US, but I find that quite acceptable in light of the UK/US production of 65-70 IPC.
4. Losing the Caucasus early is, I still think, not important. If you produce at Caucasus, you must go to West Russia or Ukraine to go to the German front; Ukraine is, I think, overextension, and West Russia is the same distance from Moscow as it is from Caucasus for this game. Besides which if Germany attacked Caucasus on G1, against a defending force of 4 infantry, that means Germany will have used valuable tanks, or risked air against the Caucasus AA gun (and weakened its attacks on valuable targets like the UK navy and Anglo-Egypt and its subsequent position for a UK1 fleet build). Quite acceptable.If there were a Belorussian infantry or multiple infantry bid, and no bid in the Ukraine, or if the Allies were going KJF, I would probably think of the Ukraine attack as the better choice. But in a game with no bids at either Belorussia or at Ukraine, I still split about 50/50 deciding between which to hit.
“It´s true that R could counter (Germany often to reattack and hold Ukr ), but in most games they don´t because they would loose the whole Wru stack”
Honestly, I don’t see the point of a heavy Russian counter into Ukraine on Russia2, particularly if Germany is in position to counter the next turn. It is likely that Germany will have attacked Ukraine with only LIGHT forces, in which case Russia can counterattack with infantry and fighters (not committing the West Russia stack), while hitting Belorussia and Karelia with additional West Russia forces. Only if Germany hit Ukraine with EVERYTHING should Russia even consider using the West Russia stack (because then there would be no German infantry reserve to counterattack next turn), but only if Germany didn’t build massed tanks at Berlin, but even then Russia has the option of attacking Karelia and Belorussia instead, moving units up from Moscow, and waiting for the Germans to overextend to Caucasus, or to reconsolidate to Eastern Europe.
-
Attack WR only, with overwhelming odds, winning in 1 round.
Hope to lose only 1-2 units
USSR 2, take back Ukraine, caucus, karelia, archangel, belo.
-
I find attacking WR only to be risky. With 3 infantry at Belorussia and another 3 from Ukraine, Germany can attack West Russia or Caucasus, or establish an early forward position at Ukraine.
I think depleting the forward German infantry is a sound idea.
-
What!? Attack the Ukraine with Russia on R1???
My favorite line of thinking is finally getting some attention on this board. It’s been the standard opener for me for over two years.
It’s less about what you kill (although the art/ arm/ ftr death is sweet), and more about dictating the tempo of the game.
An aggressive Russia forces more points of engagement for Germany, which increases the chances of one of their many dicey battles to not go so well. A 5 ftr Germany on G1 forces some tough decisions about their allocation. But most importantly IMO, it lets the German player know that you’re going to kill s–- every chance you get. Early psychological advantage- Russia. A passive/ defensive Russia allows Germany to set up their structures without having to react as much. Now Germany dictates tempo.
R1 Ukraine is a bad idea (IMO) if you’re messing around on the perimeter of the board with Britain and the US. You have to be focused on the prize- to make Germany uncomfortable quickly, to take back Africa efficiently and get Germany’s economy under 40 as fast as possible, so that Russia can turn and deal with Japan when Britain and the US take over the fight against the Reich.
If you plan on doing things other than cleanse Africa and embed yourself in the north with the other allies, then by all means be defensive with Russia, and take W Russia/ Belo or just W Russia.
-
@88:
What!? Attack the Ukraine with Russia on R1???
My favorite line of thinking is finally getting some attention on this board. It’s been the standard opener for me for over two years.
It’s less about what you kill (although the art/ arm/ ftr death is sweet), and more about dictating the tempo of the game.
An aggressive Russia forces more points of engagement for Germany, which increases the chances of one of their many dicey battles to not go so well. A 5 ftr Germany on G1 forces some tough decisions about their allocation. But most importantly IMO, it lets the German player know that you’re going to kill s–- every chance you get. Early psychological advantage- Russia. A passive/ defensive Russia allows Germany to set up their structures without having to react as much. Now Germany dictates tempo.
R1 Ukraine is a bad idea (IMO) if you’re diddling around with Britain and the US. You have to be focused on the prize- to make Germany uncomfortable quickly, to take back Africa quickly and get their economy under 40 as fast as possible, so that Russia can turn and deal with Japan when Britain and the US take over the fight against the Reich.
If you plan on doing things other than cleanse Africa and embed yourself in the north with the other allies, then by all means be defensive with Russia, and take W Russia/ Belo or just W Russia.
If you REALLY wanted to kill stuff every chance you got, you’d do a Norway/Eastern Europe-Belorussia-Ukraine attack. I far prefer not to just kill stuff, but to gain good overall position. I think a passive/defensive Russia is a bad idea too.
I typically attack into Europe and/or Africa with UK and US, threatening to the Norway/Karelia/Eastern Europe route, and/or Western and Southern Europe, but I find that keeping the Russian tanks early makes for a far stronger counter against Japan late game - which is why I often opt for the Belorussia/West Russia attack instead of the Ukraine/West Russia attack.
-
Fair enough, and totally legitimate strat. There are lots of great ways to play the game.
I’d just say that when G1 rolls around and I still own the Ukraine (and its fighter), I’m happier than if I didn’t. That says everything I need to know about the effect it has on my opponents when I kill it.
And I would never, ever advocate killing stuff just for the sake of killing them, unless I had an advantage both positionally and economically and my opponent had no hope of regaining ground. But the first turn tells you alot about how you and your adversary will play the game, and an aggressive Russia is a force to be reckoned with when played within the framework of complimentary UK and US strategy. Blood spilled in the Ukraine is like punching someone in the nose. You know you’re in for a fight right off the bat. It’s an attitudinal and philosophical thing, rather than an IPC or game mechanic thing. And that does have an effect on the game- we’re not robots.
-
1. I am teh robot!
2. If Russia committed three tanks to Ukraine, I am very happy as Germany. Two tanks, moderately so. One tank and Russia got lucky, gr.
-
OK…
Russia SHOULD attack 2 territories on R1 in my opinion. West Russia is a given.
The question is whether to hit Ukraine or Belo.
Now Ukraine has its advantages. and in most games it pays off well for Russia.
Belo has a lower downside risk if it fails.But more important than the “odds” is this question…
WHAT ARE THE US AND UK DOING?If the UK is going to hit Norway on UK 1, and push hard into Karelia, etc., then Belo may indeed be the better move for Russia. If the US is going to reinforce this northern attack on Germany, then Belo is almost certianly the better option.
If the Allies are heading to Africa, then Ukraine may be a good choice… weaken the Germans in Africa.
Of course, you can also look at it from the split-reaction view… Allies to Africa on T1, then to Norway on T2, so Belo may STILL be a good option to break up a German consolidation befor ehte Allies land heavy… or the other way, that a Ukraine attack to make Germany weaker in Africa since Allies are only landing htere once.
Anyway, hope that was not too confusing. Just putting out reasons for why you may want to do either/or…
-
if ruusia attacks west Russia and Ukraine russia commits 3 tanks,3 infantry, 1 artillery and 2 fighters it will lose the 3 infantry and the artillery on average. it willl lose 13 ipc opposed to germany’s 28 ipc. so far that is a incresae of 15ipc + the 6 the trade of ukraine is worth. if you take the westrussia attack with 2inf from kareila,and the 3inf from both russia and archangle with theirr artillwry and tank, into consideration then you lose four infantry and are left 4inf1art and 1tank in westrussia. that is a 12ipc lose for you and 18 for germany plus 4 for the trade. this puts russia and a 31ipc advantage for R1. Asumming russia buys 2inf2art2tanks and put the two tanks in russia how would you counter attack?
Option 2 send all units to west russia. tht will leave you 9inf 2art and 3 tank there for a lose of 6 instead of 18. so this is and advatge of 14ipc for russia. thsi is really only a 10ipc advantage beacuse germany will attack karellia and get 4ipc advantage
Option3 attack belrussia and westrussia youwill have 2inf in belrussia for an ipc advantageof 12. then for westrussia you will end with 3 Inf, 2 Art, 3 Arm. and ipc advantage of 9+4. this is a toatal advantage of 25 ong1 in teh counter attack and a blixt ferman will lose sme land units so terrtory wise this is +12 so you have a 13ipc advantage on the end of G1
-
if ruusia attacks west Russia and Ukraine russia commits 3 tanks,3 infantry, 1 artillery and 2 fighters it will lose the 3 infantry and the artillery on average. it willl lose 13 ipc opposed to germany’s 28 ipc. so far that is a incresae of 15ipc + the 6 the trade of ukraine is worth. if you take the westrussia attack with 2inf from kareila,and the 3inf from both russia and archangle with theirr artillwry and tank, into consideration then you lose four infantry and are left 4inf1art and 1tank in westrussia. that is a 12ipc lose for you and 18 for germany plus 4 for the trade. this puts russia and a 31ipc advantage for R1. Asumming russia buys 2inf2art2tanks and put the two tanks in russia how would you counter attack?
Option 2 send all units to west russia. tht will leave you 9inf 2art and 3 tank there for a lose of 6 instead of 18. so this is and advatge of 14ipc for russia. thsi is really only a 10ipc advantage beacuse germany will attack karellia and get 4ipc advantage
Option3 attack belrussia and westrussia youwill have 2inf in belrussia for an ipc advantageof 12. then for westrussia you will end with 3 Inf, 2 Art, 3 Arm. and ipc advantage of 9+4. this is a toatal advantage of 25 ong1 in teh counter attack and a blixt ferman will lose sme land units so terrtory wise this is +12 so you have a 13ipc advantage on the end of G1
You almost totally did not mention the possibility of German counterattack, sole exception Karelia.
The advantage of Belorussia is that 1) there is much less chance of a disastrous battle, 2) in case the battle does turn bad, Russia’s position will still be strong, 3) Russia preserves its tanks beyond the German counterattack on G1.
-
I used to be a strong advocate of attacking Ukraine instead of Belo but I recently changed my mind. For 3 reasons.
1. As stated before, an unfavorable result in Belo is a minor setback. An unfavorable result in Ukraine is potentially disatrous.
2. Armor is much more valuable to Russia than it is to Germany. Germany can easily replace the Ukraine losses while Russia can’t. Forcing yourself to have to completely rebuild the Russian armored corps when you should be building infantry is just helping the Axis. As the frontlines close in around Russia, armor located in a central point, such as Cauc or Rus, can threaten many territories at once. Don’t throw away your armor early when you might be desperately needing it later in the game.
3. Most importantly, the payoff is roughly equal. After you consider the gains and losses of unit IPC value, position, and restriction of Germany’s opening turn it all ends up being about the same except Ukraine is just riskier. If you attack WR and Belo, you’re usually going to get a first round kill in WR. If you attack Ukraine and WR, you may come out ahead by winning in Ukraine but it’s mitigated by the fact that you will be allowing Germany usually 2 rounds or more of defense in WR. By attacking Ukraine, you have to count on a good WR attack with far less firepower than if you had attacked Belo. If the WR attack goes poorly, no matter what happens in Ukraine, Russia comes out on the losing end. All the benefits of having Ukraine go well can be wiped out by a round or two of good defense in WR.
Attack Belo. No matter what happens in the Belo attack you’re still in a solid defensible position. Attacking Ukraine can sometimes leave you extended and vulnerable. Let the Axis make the risky attacks. There is no reason to take the chance of shifting the balance of power in Europe to the Axis before Germany even gets it’s first turn.
-
what about the attack/retreat option in ukr? there are some benefits to that move as well. ukr is definitly the more strategic position of the two(ukr/belo) and by not attacking ukr on r1 than you are potentially giving up the ability to trade that terroritory. with smart german play that is.
-
I understand why Belo is a good option, and less risky. I understand why all armor into W Russia is a good idea.
But honest opinions here- aren’t you all in a slightly better mood when you take Germany’s first turn and have 6 fighters? I know I am, and I assume my opponents feel the same way. Playing a more conservative Russia means that in exchange Germany has a little more offense with an artillery and armor saved, and flexibility with the 6th fighter, which also means more offensive options, shorelines a little easier to defend, etc.
I think that the extra fighter adds up in ways not completely IPC or pip related. It’s a little extra pressure on allied shipping, it sits nicely in France or on a carrier, and it provides one more unit on the front with Russia which won’t get killed if you’re engaging in a trading war. Flexibility is terribly important with Germany- the less options you have the easier it is for the allies to hem you in. I don’t want to oversell the importance of one fighter, but it does have a tangible effect on the game.
Personally as the allies I like to try to deprive Germany of as much of that flexibility as possible, and as Germany gain as much flexibility as possible. I believe that taking out the Ukraine is the beginning of accomplishing that objective.
-
There’s no point in hitting Ukraine if you don’t kill the German fighter, IMHO; Noob.
-
There’s no point in hitting Ukraine if you don’t kill the German fighter, IMHO; Noob.
That´s true, you neither kill the fighter nor do you get the territorry, all you do is to kil poor inf pieces (or maybe a tank).
-
If you are planning on attacking Ukraine I think it would be fun to build an AC and Trn on R1 and then Germany has a big problem on their hands :lol: … either attack the British DST and take Egypt or attack the Russian Navy with almost all you Air Force which would realy mess up their normal plans … but I’m sure there are some critisms and I doubt I would do it …
-
Or IGNORE the Russian fleet AND Africa, and just slam everything you can into Caucuses, stage everything forward possible, and destroy Russia on G3 or so…
-
if ruusia attacks west Russia and Ukraine russia commits 3 tanks,3 infantry, 1 artillery and 2 fighters it will lose the 3 infantry and the artillery on average. it willl lose 13 ipc opposed to germany’s 28 ipc. so far that is a incresae of 15ipc + the 6 the trade of ukraine is worth. if you take the westrussia attack with 2inf from kareila,and the 3inf from both russia and archangle with theirr artillwry and tank, into consideration then you lose four infantry and are left 4inf1art and 1tank in westrussia. that is a 12ipc lose for you and 18 for germany plus 4 for the trade. this puts russia and a 31ipc advantage for R1. Asumming russia buys 2inf2art2tanks and put the two tanks in russia how would you counter attack?
Option 2 send all units to west russia. tht will leave you 9inf 2art and 3 tank there for a lose of 6 instead of 18. so this is and advatge of 14ipc for russia. thsi is really only a 10ipc advantage beacuse germany will attack karellia and get 4ipc advantage
Option3 attack belrussia and westrussia youwill have 2inf in belrussia for an ipc advantageof 12. then for westrussia you will end with 3 Inf, 2 Art, 3 Arm. and ipc advantage of 9+4. this is a toatal advantage of 25 ong1 in teh counter attack and a blixt ferman will lose sme land units so terrtory wise this is +12 so you have a 13ipc advantage on the end of G1
You almost totally did not mention the possibility of German counterattack, sole exception Karelia.
The advantage of Belorussia is that 1) there is much less chance of a disastrous battle, 2) in case the battle does turn bad, Russia’s position will still be strong, 3) Russia preserves its tanks beyond the German counterattack on G1.
I did i gave you the advantage at the end of G1 for option 2 and 3. i was not sure what the based counter attack for option one was so i asked and if i get an answer i will add up the loses
-
@ncscswitch:
Or IGNORE the Russian fleet AND Africa, and just slam everything you can into Caucuses, stage everything forward possible, and destroy Russia on G3 or so…
You’re right … I tried playing it on TripleA and I had not enough infantry :| woulda been cool to have a Russian Navy
-
Even if you did Ukraine and West Russia on R1, it is still an EXTREMELY high risk move likelt to back-fire.
And a well played Germany can exist a long time even if deprived of Africa early
As evidence, see how well Bo is doing as Germany in the Tournament Consolation game. He lost th Med Fleet on R2, yet still has 42 INF, 4 ART, 6 ARM, 4 FIG, 1 BOM and other than Africa is down only Norway and West Russia in the middle of Turn 5…
Suggested Topics
