For Nix:
So you ONLY attack West Russia on R1, leaving Belo and Ukraine untouched. That leaves Germany 6 FIGs to work with. I probably will NOT hit West Russia in that example. You are looking at a Karelia Stack from Germany as my counter…
For whoever said "move an INF into empty Manchuria…
I don;t leave Manch empty in that scenario. I move my TRN to SZ61 and land Japan troops to manch, build my IC there, and land all of my FIGs there after smashing China.
Go ahead, hit Manch. I’ll lose a couple of FIGs, you will lose your entire Eastern force. Now Japan has a free ride west, with no Russian forces east of Moscow…
But still has a pain in the ass India, especially so if youo lose 3-4 figs on R2.
Gongrats on your “advance”.
And if you move your forces to yakut you will be hit by Russian forces (if you don´t move in Force).
in my opinion it´s worth it for Russia, but in the end this is i belive a despute about prioritys, i don´t think there is a “right” or “optimal” solution here…
But what do i know; i constantly lose games here (wins a little more at Triple A 50/50 atm), but win maybe 7/10 in real world (wich of course is quite different from playing online…)
:-P :-P
To be honest, I’m having a bad game with the allies if the Axis don’t loose at least 2 fighters on round 1. And they should be loosing at least 3, plus any they loose at Pearl, if any.
And Switch, you’d be surprised how many people leave Manch Empty. Only reason I put 6 infantry in Bury…that and it forces you to choose between 1 IPC Buryatia with 18 IPC of units on it or 2 IPC China with 16 IPC of units on it.
@Nix:
Let me elaborate, since you are “angered” :wink:
Who’s angered?
And why is my crack pipe missing?
To be honest, I’m having a bad game with the allies if the Axis don’t loose at least 2 fighters on round 1. And they should be loosing at least 3, plus any they loose at Pearl, if any.
And Switch, you’d be surprised how many people leave Manch Empty. Only reason I put 6 infantry in Bury…that and it forces you to choose between 1 IPC Buryatia with 18 IPC of units on it or 2 IPC China with 16 IPC of units on it.
I rarely lose a fighter with Germany at all unless Germany attacks and holds the Ukraine. After that, I might lose a fighter at Pearl Harbor.
In MOST of my games, all I lose in the initial three turns for air is 1 German fighter tops. MAYBE 2 German fighters and 1 Japanese fighter if I am having really horrible luck.
There is no choice between Burytia and China. That US fighter must be destroyed.
@Nix:
Let me elaborate, since you are “angered” :wink:
I buy 3 Inf, 3 Arm.
I will hit WR with everything i can exept the 2 arms that go to Yakut. (and 1 inf blocker in karelia)
Leaves me with: And let´s say i lose the more or less average 3 Infs. We have 8 Inf, 2 Art, 2 Arm and left in WR (+ 1 AA gun).
" figs to Russia, 1 Inf in Karelia s a blocker.
6 inf Buryatia, 2 Arm Yakut, 2 Inf goes to Cauccasus, 4 Inf to Russia(from Novo and Evenki)
I´ll land 2 Figs i Russia and place my purchased troops as follow.
3 inf in Cauccasus for total of 5 inf, 3 Arm in Russia for a total of 4 iNf, 3 Arm, 2 Figs.
WR can be hit by Germany with; 6 Inf, 1 Art, 3 Arm, 5 figs, 1 bomber. (if they dont attack anything else)
If Germany does that they will probably win (94% chans, but will have either AF left or at best 1 art, 3 arm and AF), but to a huge cost, and UK/USA are having a grand party in Westrussia on Round 2.
If Germany pulls forces into Cauccasus they will be anihalated by Russia on R2.
If Germany skips the 5 Figs there is only a 30% chans of a win.
If germany does not hit me, UK will build an IC in India (if they kill the inf in FIC), but USA will not build Sinkiang IC (i think that is better to put it all in a navy towards europe)
So it´s a SJF. (and if it goes really good in the start i might purhase an American IC anyway.
If I have any kind of African bid, I probably go with heavy tank build in Berlin (maybe not eight, but lots of tanks), send the Med fleet west to take Gibraltar, and consolidate at Belorussia with a couple fighters (which I can now afford to do because I can send 1 sub 1 btl 1 trns 1 inf to Gibraltar with even a fighter escort), plus move most of the rest of German forces to E. Europe (and the usual hit on Anglo-Egypt). Now Belorussia and West Russia are stuck with stacks that can’t attack each other (Russia CAN attack, but it’ll be pretty expensive, and Germany can counter hard), but now Russia has the additional problem that any heavy attack at Ukriane is immediately counterable by German Med fleet plus Eastern Europe plus Belorussia stack, or Germany could respond by attacking West Russia or even Karelia. It’s almost impossible for Russia to make a big defensive stack against Karelia, so E. Europe infantry can march into Karelia next turn to threaten Karelia-Archangel-Moscow, forcing Russia to abandon the profitable Caucasus/West Russia/Ukraine holding.
Alternatively, use the German Med fleet to secure Anglo-Egypt.
If Germany secures Anglo-Egypt, the Allies can mount a quick Atlantic offense, but Germany can counter with pure infantry/tank German builds while Germany and Japan concentrate on Moscow.
If Germany does not secure Anglo-Egypt, the Allies can reclaim Egypt, but will have a much harder time bringing their IPCs to bear before the Germans and Japanese make a hash out of the Russian forces.
–
IF there is no African bid, the German position is far weaker, but I think two plus fighters plus massed units at Belorussia still forces Russia to be very passive.
New Paint:
I’ve been playing with a new opening. I’ve found that in recent games I’ve been to reactionary and not proactive enough (aka Aggressive.) I actually blame NoMercy for this because he made the statement that he could aways goad me into making attacks on his terms because he knew I’d be overly aggressive.
Here’s the new open:
3 Infantry, 1 Fighter from Karelia to E. Europe
1 Armor from Archangelsk to E. Europe
Overall %*: A. survives: 51.3% D. survives: 40.9% No survivors:8%
Not Stellar odds, I’ll admit, but let’s work through the rest.
3 Infantry from Archangelsk to W. Russia
3 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Armor from Russia to W. Russia
Overall %*: A. survives: 98% D. survives: 1.6% No survivors:0%
Odds are super here! Might even consider reducing the attack, but I don’t see what else I could use the missing fodder for…
3 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Armor from Caucasus to Ukraine
1 Armor, 1 Fighter from Russia to Ukraine
Overall %*: A. survives: 63% D. survives: 32.3% No survivors:5%
Again, the odds are not stellar.
Interesting thing here is you are not risking anything with Russia you would not have lost anway. And actually, you have a much higher potential gain then normally.
England follows that up with a 3 infantry from India, 1 Fighter from SZ 35 assault on FIC.
Overall %*: A. survives: 46.6% D. survives: 44% No survivors:9%
So you have a very good chance as the allies to kill 3 axis fighters on Round 1 with no losses you would not otherwise have sustained using more traditional attacks and expecting traditional counter-attacks.
Now yes, the Axis could stop all these attacks with minor bids, but how often do you see 9 IPC bids going for 1 infantry in FIC, 1 Infantry in Ukraine and 1 Infantry in E. Europe? Why? Because no one expects it.
3 Infantry, 1 Fighter from Karelia to E. Europe
1 Armor from Archangelsk to E. Europe
Overall %*: A. survives: 51.3% D. survives: 40.9% No survivors:8%
- percentages may not total 100 due to rounding.
Not Stellar odds, I’ll admit, but let’s work through the rest.
3 Infantry from Archangelsk to W. Russia
3 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Armor from Russia to W. Russia
Overall %*: A. survives: 98% D. survives: 1.6% No survivors:0%
- percentages may not total 100 due to rounding.
Odds are super here! Might even consider reducing the attack, but I don’t see what else I could use the missing fodder for…
3 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Armor from Caucasus to Ukraine
1 Armor, 1 Fighter from Russia to Ukraine
Overall %*: A. survives: 63% D. survives: 32.3% No survivors:5%
- percentages may not total 100 due to rounding.
Jennifer, you stole Rainynite’s opening. I actually don’t think it is very effective unless all the battles go very well for the Allies. Russia is left far too exposed to counterattack, especially if not all the attacks go well. And while you are correct that you don’t often see infantry in each of FIC, EEur and Ukraine an infantry or two in Ukraine is quite common, in which case your attack odds decrease significantly.
SS
The odds of success in all 4 attacks…
.513 x .98 x .63 x .466
14.76%
Those are abysmal odds. Just try Sea Lion on G1, your odds are not THAT miuch worse at 6.3%
Actually, with an 8 IPC bid and an extra TRN in the Baltic, you can increase the odds of Sea Lion G1 all the way to around 34%, better than 1 in 3. Whereas with ANY bid the odds of that 4 territory Allied strike drops down into the low single digits (worse than Sea Lion)
But hey, if tyou want to set up game boards and do the 1 in 20 for the quick win, knock yourself out :-D
You’re taking odds of success to own the land. You need to add in the odds of success of mutual destruction as well, because as the allies, I don’t need the land as much as I need to demolish your massive standing armies.
(59.3% + 98% + 68% + 54.6%)/4 = 69.98% chance of winning if you don’t want to own the land.
(51.3% + 98% + 63% + 46.6%)/4 = 64.73% to own the land in all 4 attacks.
Do you want to risk the damage inflicted by that opening on your army? Bearing in mind the allies start with a very significant financial advantage and it’s going to take time for you to get there.
So the chances are actually significantly higher then you describe. (You made an algebraic error. An average is not the product of all four attacks but the sum of all attacks divided by the number of instances.)
And yes, I did lift that from Rainynite. I think it’s a pretty strong opening, even if you fail, you cuase significant damage.
Even to clear the land it is only a 21.58% chance.
To figure total odds, it is not an AVERAGE of the percentages, but a multiplication of them in decimel form.
hence .593 x .98 x .68 x .546 = .21576 or 21.58%
and for your second line of figures the result is as I previously posted… 14.76%
It is a SEQUENTIAL SERIES of odds, thus the multiplication.
I think you’re off. I think it’s an average because you are averaging the chance of success, not correllating the data into a bell curve.
No, because the results are cumulative.
Example:
You have a 50% chance of taking Ukraine (again, just an example)
And you ahve a 50% chance of taking West Russia
Half the time you get Ukraine
Half the tiem you get West Russia.
25% of the time you get both
25% of the time you get neither.
So it IS a cumulative series, which mens multiplication.
I had someone use your 3 attacks on R1 in a game not long ago, and as predicted, 1 failed.
Try your move in a few games, I think you will find that you ahve several failures of your strat, missing at least 1 territory 85% of the time.
but the allies can fail in taking the land in all of the attacks as long as the axis loose 2-3 fighters. (att fighters assumed to retreat if they can.)
It´s still craoy odds, and switch are correct it´s multiplication that is to be used.
The reason is that it´s 3 different things that are happening, and they are not connected with each oter, but in order to score a “succes” you need all three to happen.
Pr(first aaction)*Pr(second)*Pr(third)=The total odds for all three things to succed.
It’s really no crazier then hitting Borneo, New Guinea, SZ 59, SZ 45 and maybe SZ 5 with England on round 1 is. Or assuming you’ll kill the fighter in Ukraine with Russia.
It’s just a different kind of crazy. And I’ve proven to myself that a conservative strategy in the early part of the game by the Allies spells their imminent, but not assured, defeat in the end. You almost have to go radicle and do as much damage as possible (even if you sustain more expensive losses) in Round 1 maybe even Round 2 to assure a victory for yourself. And odds are, the dice will back you up. You’ll almost definately not get ALL of your objectives, but it’s like a shotgun. You might miss the target, but you’ll do so much collateral damage that the Axis cannot possibly hope to recover in one round alone.
I will admit, I have had some succes with Russia going a little crazy on R1-3 :-) But the Allies were playing stoic, conservative, and were right on the mark to cover my bacon once I was spent (and had pretty well spent Germany as well). The combination made short work of Germany (well, the combination, and some poor German attempted counters to it).
I find that Crazy Ivan with Suicidal Limey and Bored American works quite well in destroying Germany.
Crazy Ivan: Risking it all for minimal gains in land, but maximum damage to enemy units.
Suicidal Limey: Attacking superior numbers amphibiously to strafe them until all land forces are destroyed, again the goal is to do as much damage as possible, even if you take more then you give.
Bored America: Lands reinforcement units. Never conquers anything, just holds basic land to ensure a base income level for England/Russia.
If the Allies fight using WWII style tactics (Africa then Western), that is about the ONLY way to play it.
