Russian Navy

@Baron:

@Caesar:

@Bob77:

Nope. Facility aa only fires at the bombers directly attacking it. Unit aa guns only fire if their territory is being attacked.
Side note, it would be cool if aa could chose to defend air or ground combat. Like german 88s being used as anti tank guns and 20mm being used against infantry and lite vehicles. Oh well. Back to the game.

Right but AnA will never have a version where each unit has its own attack against certain units. I do think about AA guns should have the ability to shoot at infantry on defense. Each nation in WWII AA guns could be aimed at the ground and I am sure you can find evidence of everyone doing it at some point.

AnA will never try to have a unit that can do better or worse against different units. IE fighters rolling a 3 against other fighters but a 1 against a battleship and G40’s rules for fighters on strategic bombing doesn’t count.

Submarines (and Destroyer somehow vs Sub) and AAA got special targeting. And these units saw various changes.
I saw no outright evidence against more room about special targeting. Do you ?

It’s point 1 which matters.

Point 2 - well you still deny the Leningrad NO and potentially gain the Lend Lease NO. You have to lose the Lend Lease NO while giving up the Caucusus and Stalingrad NOs to be on a loser here.

shove a carrier in 109

Thank you for analyzing that statement for me. Odds favor a scramble, but my experience with it is okay. My decision depends on my mood and what I feel like doing. :)

When I am germany I throw that battleship. I don’t want to lose fighters, I will lose a battleship.  In which case the uk scramble odds are on average less than 1 fighter for 1 fighter… the battleship UK gets to kill anyway. So yeah I like that better.

Third round games in the Gargantua tournament of Death and PAIN are being played with the Soviet bomber house ruled in.  The third round started this week and they should be worth watching!

We haven’t tried this in global but my dad tried it in Europe. It worked really well against russia but the lack of pressure on Britain let them take all of Italy’s land in Africa. After that I build a minor in Egypt and started send tanks to Russia who had fallen back to Moscow and Stalingrad 3 turn after Britain sent tanks there was British armor in Moscow after that the German lost there hope of wining.

@Ruanek:

@Xandax:

@MarkHC:

Bottom line, I’ve played multiple games as the Soviet Union where I didn’t let anyone attack my units except an infantry I left as a road block.  Even when Japan invades Russia turn one/two and tries to keep pushing, it still didn’t make much difference because they can only take a territory a turn.  So when Germany finally reaches Moscow, almost every single unit I’ve built as Russia is there defending my capital.  Sure, if time weren’t a factor, it’s a bad strategy, but I know that the Allies are going to be landing in force by turn 5 or so, so the Axis is not able to deal with the Allied pressure and overcome a huge Moscow stack.

If the allies are landing in force in turn 5 Europe is lost regardless of a large stack of inf in Moscow.
Nothing is gained in the game by removing USSRs chance to defend and making a German attack on Russia go faster. On the contrary.
The huge stack isn’t an automatic win.

Well, not having the huge stack gives the Axis a bit more of a chance to blitz and take the necessary 8 victory cities quickly.

Well - of course. And removing the Russian troops entirely would equally.
You cannot remove the turtle. You shouldn’t IMO make it easier to take Russia.
We should however figure out why turteling is so strong and address that cause instead of just the symptom.

If you make it any easier to take Russia, you’ve effectively turned Germany into a one trick pony and removed most strategy from the European board.

I use this strategy every time I play Russia.  In additon I build Mech Inf. in Calcutta so as to link up with Chinese and Russian forces as quick as possible.