Russia Round One–How to justify anything but inf?

Building AC + 2 destroyers in SZ8 landing 2 US fighters and adding the US cruiser is usually a nice option if Germany attacked SZ2 and killed the battleship (if not, just building what you would need to survive an air+sub attack and build transports if you have money left. Depending on the German odds of attack on SZ8 you bring or not the US transports, and you may sent the UK transports on Washington’s coast not to lose extra units without reason against likely German attack.  Even if Germany as better odds to win on SZ8 (depending on how many planes survived/were built), this strat is nice to lure Germany forces away from Russia and you should always be willing early to trade more UK IPC for a bit less Germany IPC (their “real” value is not the same since Russia/Germany front is ALWAYS the most important front). Also, if Germany had a very good turn 1 and kept all planes, you should be willing to take some risks to try to take the advantage out of axis’ hands.

Also it depends on how Germany places is units, if all planes are in Paris, you can build in SZ2 for exemple.

@Bunnies:

@BigPapaSmurf:

Send 5 inf from Kar/Arch, 1 Artillery and two fighters to West russia and stack everything else in Cauc. Leave one Inf in Lenningrad and do your standard moves on the east end.

Don’t you run into Germany taking Karelia and West Russia, and establishing a strong center position from which Russia cannot reclaim Karelia income?

Bunnies is correct. G takes West Russia with units from BR/Ukr. Russia can retake West Russia but will only earn 27 IPC, not being able to contest Belorussia and Karelia. Germany meanwhile can build 5 inf, 5 arm on G1 and put some serious pressure to prevent Russia from stacking West Russia on turn 2.

The main goal of the Ukr attack is IMHO to get the fighter,

Cutting most of Germany’s ability to attack Caucasus is another big big plus.  If Russia lucks out on the Ukraine attack, Germany may either risk fighters on G1 on other targets to send a fighter to Ukraine, or may send valuable tanks to reclaim Ukraine.  Or if Russia lucks out at Ukraine, Russia may retreat to Caucasus to preserve its tanks/artillery.

As equally as important as the fighter is to protect the Russian units on West Russia from being destroyed on G1. If you lose them, you lose any chance of contesting Karelia/Belorussia. Germany may also stack Ukraine like you mentioned, cutting off 3 IPC to Russia (plus the 2 from Belorussia) and both sides get into a war of positions that doesn’t favor Russia (i.e. the Allies better get quickly to help).

@Nomarclegs:

The most important asset for any power in Spring ’42 is flexibility.  Japan (with her large air force and navy, as well as local production facilities) has incredible flexibility.  As USSR I’d opt to preserve as much of my flexibility as possible. That means keeping my men alive.

I agree with the issue of flexibility for both, but the first round is a window of opportunity to harass Japan’s flexibility by giving it a lot of targets to hit so that it can’t focus on everything. If the results of Russia’s opening attacks favored the Russians or just gave out the average losses then those units can be used to throw a few speed bumps at Japan or pressure it.
If you combine all 6 units on Buryatia then Japan has a very big problem to solve, in addition to the usual ones:

US fleet at SZ52 China UK cruiser/carrier at SZ59 UK sub at New Guinea/Solomon UK transport from SZ40 Remaining UK fleet on the Indian Ocean India

And this assumes that the UK didn’t went to attack FIC or Borneo, instead of retaking Egypt. If I’m playing Japan, one option is to attack SZ52, China and Buryatia, but to do so it would mean the Indian advance will be delayed, as well as any reinforcement of the Germans on Africa until round 3. I’ll have to use a lot of the airforce, to prevent any dice failures.
The other is to hit China, SZ52, and get rid of most UK naval units, while reinforcing Manchuria and transporting 1 inf, 1 arm to Indochina, ensuring the fall of India on J2 (and opening the possibility of building an IC on J3). At the same time it positions Japan to reinforce Egypt with plenty of fighters and units carried by the transport, which can also be used instead to bring the 2 inf from East Indies to attack India.

On the first one, Japan will kill 6 Russian inf at the average cost of 2 or 3 of its infantry. It will also have to bring more land forces from Japan if it wants to advance past Yakut. The UK will also have attacked Indochina, taking away the possibility for an IC build there until round 3, the same round that India should fall. Indian IC on built on round 4, produce units on round 5 that can finally be used on round 6. Meanwhile Africa should fall sooner to the Allies, will take more time to threaten/reinforce Africa with Japan.
But…  if Germany got lucky against the Russians (the deciding factor for me) and destroyed a large part of their army then this option is a must because it will give 2 simultaneous blows to Russia’s power.

Second one, the 6 Russian inf get away or make a kamikaze against 2 inf, 2 ftr on Manchuria. Usually they are pulled back and can reach Russia by round four. If there’s no Russian threat to retake India then I’ll get that IC for it and by round 5 I can start using its units. Meanwhile, the UK’s production is going down and down (India, Persia, Jordan, Egypt, the rest of Africa, possibly Australia), either forcing the Allies to retake Africa or start facing a losing economic situation, which gets worse as Japan keeps building its attack forces and advancing towards Russia.

Tough call? Yes, it can be.

8-)

Maybe there is a small contradiction here.  Perhaps the rule on page 30 should say “anytime it would otherwise fire”.  Fire is simultaneous, whereas the actual dice rolling is not.

I don’t think that the purpose of placing an IC in India is to hold India. It deters Japan from walking straight into Russia an dallows the allies much more time to get into Europe. Also with India only having a value of three I don’t feel like the IPC drain is a huge commitment. Also when you couple this with a IC by the US in China you turn Asia into a back and forth contest between for those middle terrorities similar to how Russia and Germany treat Eastern Europe.

As the UK in this strategy I usually build a sizable air force to keep Germany from amassing a navy, which with help from the U.S. this is not a problem. That frees me up to put a combination of units in India and to attempt a pipeline of units into Archangel. I feel like the goal with the India IC on UK1 is to stall Japan and harass them when you can. This leaves Russia to devote a much larger force to Germany and with a little luck I have been able to to attack Japan with Russia as well.

Good question.  Re. the problem of fighting USA with 2 facts….at least with 2 facts the Jap fleet has some more flexibility to maneuver with less transports to protect.  On the other hand, 1 fact is probably better against KJF since that way you can build 3 inf/tanks on the mainland, plus air/sea with the rest of your cash.

Against KGF, buying transports and using the Japan factory is more economically efficient, but I’d like at least one factory on the mainland  or tanks to quickly exploit Russia if they are open.

It all depends.  The decision ought to depend on how vulnerable Russia is and what UK did on its turn.

@Patton5:

Other problems… against a canny opponent the UK cannot build a factory in India.  Japan has a huge fleet and troops right next door and so this old time tactic is useless.  I’m struggling to find any effective strategy for the UK in this new version of the game.

Very true. The only way that the UK can put an IC in India against a Japanese player that doesn’t want him to have one there, is if Germany doesn’t take Egypt on G1 for whatever reason.

However, if by some miracle Germany doesn’t attack Egypt on G1, an IC for India is an outstanding buy IMO. Sacrifice the Cruiser in your Pacific fleet to take out the Japanese transport in SZ59. Then on your non-combat move, move your infantry from Persia into India, take your transport and pick up the tank from Egypt and the infantry from Trans-Jordon, and drop them off in India as well. Lastly, take the fighter off of your Carrier and the fighter from Egypt, and land those in India as well.

Then retreat your carrier to whatever SZ you deem safe for future use. You can even move it through the Suez in an attempt to link it up with your Atlantic fleet if the Med is clear of German ships.

This gives you a total of 5 infantry, 1 tank, 2 fighters, and an AA gun to defend your India IC which you’ll place at the end of your turn. The maximum the Japanese will be able to attack India with on J1 is 2 infantry, 4 fighters, and 1 bomber. The chances of a Jap victory are almost non-existent (around a 10% likelihood I believe), and even if they do, you will have completely decimated their entire air force.

Combine the well-defended India IC with an American IC in Sinkiang which is supported by a garrison of 4 Russian troops, and you have a good starting point to your JTDTM defense.

I’ve yet to have a Japanese player even attempt an attack on India on their first turn when I use this strategy. Yes, you’ll be sacrificing a cruiser and a transport….But you’re eliminating a Japanese transport, and establishing a firm grasp in Asia with an IC in India and a large force to defend it.

Now obviously you leave Africa open for an attack which the Germans will no doubt take advantage of on their second turn, but I usually remedy this by purchasing a South Africa IC a turn or two later. Pump out a few tanks in Africa in addition to the three you’re putting in India each turn, and you’re golden.

If anyone ever wants to play a game of AA42, hit me up. I’d love to play via TripleA, or just play by forum (which I’ve never done, but I’m sure I could learn quickly).