In which version is Russia stronger against the Axis, A2 or A3?

Assuming a typical Sea Lion play from Alpha 2 being converted into a Barbarossa play in Alpha 3, Russia is at severe disadvantages under the new rule set.

A)  The non-aggresion treaty may as well not even exist.
A.1)  No more 12 IPC to be spent as they see fit.
A.2)  No more instant units placed on the German front.
A.3)  The new infantry they do get (6) are generally blown off the map long before they get from Mongolia to the German front.
B)  Germany has significantly more resources facing the Russians now.
B.1)  84 IPC that was being spent on transports to take England is now being spent to take Russia.
B.2)  117 IPC in aircraft that were being reserved to take England are now being redirected towards Russia. (That would be your starting 5 Fighters, 5 Tactical Bombers, Strategic Bomber.)
B.3)  Ground forces you had to assume would be lost taking England are now available for use in Russia.
C)  England is easier to defeat.
C.1) 4 German submarines and potentially a bomber here or there negate income from New Founland, Quebec, Scotland, England and do 3-4 dmg per bomber to British complexes.  Down from 4 Submarines for Scotland/England, 2 Submarines for New Foundland/Quebec and bombers to hit complexes.
C.2) English opponents are at a higher risk of failing to defend London well enough, due to decreased potential of Sea Lion attacks.
D)  Japan is stronger (compared to Russia).
D.1)  Japan has a stronger incentive to attack Russia since Russian attacks on Japan do not garner any increased war making ability any more.
D.2)  Japan has a stronger incentive to attack Russia since Mongolian Infantry are far easier to destroy than +12 IPC to Russia was.
D.3)  Japan has a stronger incentive to attack Russia since Mongolian Infantry can be destroyed before reaching the German front.
D.4)  Kill India First strategy was not impacted from Alpha 2 to Alpha 3.
D.5)  Kill America First strategy has been removed from Alpha 3 to Alpha 3, so there’s no longer a need to set it up.
E)  Italy is stronger in Alpha 3.
E.1)  A strategic bomber in N. Italy gives the Italians the option of destroying a SZ 104 blocker, locking the British fleet in the med.
E.2)  With transports decentralized, England runs a higher risk of getting “diced” in the Med.

That is, by far, not a comprehensive list, but it is a good kicking off point.

Said list is FLUFF.

Russia gets 2 extra AA guns, and since BRITAIN is so much stronger, and Italy isn’t, the Russians are Just as strong as before, the Axis are considerably weaker.

@Gargantua:

Said list is FLUFF.

Russia gets 2 extra AA guns, and since BRITAIN is so much stronger, and Italy isn’t, the Russians are Just as strong as before, the Axis are considerably weaker.

This

Edit: Also, Jenn, I think you’re more trying to convince yourself about your thoughts, you’re pointing too many things. I understand you’re pro-alpha-3 and such.

I’ve read one of your recent A3 games on this website, in order to pursue your bombing and convoy disrupt london campaign you spend more money than a sea lion commitement. In the last turn you bought 70 IPCs of aircraft units to replace the unit you’re loosing to sink the british fleet stationed in sz109.

I totally Agree with Gargantua. The allies are way too strong. Has anyone tried a UK take out of Italy’s destroyer and transport with fighters and moving all fleet that can reach to gilbralter (still in the Med)? Ya Italy’s fleet is safe, but UK has 4 planes (5 if normandy isn’t hit) and 2 destroyers 2 cruisers or whatever Else germany didn’t kill as well as an aircraft carrier. UK can then on Turn 2 kill Italy fleet, or if Italy blocks or moves out of range UK can just move to in range and kill Italy fleet on UK 3 for the loss of very little. This also coupled with a UK build of an IC on UK2 in Egypt Italy is gone from Africa by UK turn 4 or 5, and Italy’s underbelly is under threat from UK with transports and all of UK fleet plus fighters. Buying 7 infantry for UK and 2 mech infs for SA turn 1. and if Germany Builds all transports turn 2 UK can then just build all infantry for UK and defend seal lion, while still killing all of italy’s fleet easily.

There is no rule that Germany cannot do Sea Lion in Alpha 3 either, Mantle.  I am just comparing your stated preferred strategy to my stated perferred strategy.

theROCmonster:  I wouldnt necessarily refer to a game I play with Emperor Mollari as a basis for what I do or dont do.  We do some really nutso stuff to be different.  Fine, I do some nutso stuff and he has to react to it.  Not exactly tournament style play (or league style play) where winning in a necessity and far more important that “fun” is. (My definition of fun, that is, where I do something really crazy and alter the game fundamentally.)

General public:  In my table top games I am finding that I can take Russia out of the game by Round 8.  In games where I have to win online (to prove a point for instance) this is normally delayed to round 11 due to superior opponents.  I think the fundamental issue at stake is a lack of imagination.  Do the Russians have a few more guns?  Yes.  But they need them so they have a legitamate shot at all attacking German planes (in theory).  Do they also lend a little extra oomph to the defense?  Yes.  The Germans, meanwhile, have a few more guns than the Russians and given they are generally on the offense, have no qualms about losing them to the Russians, unlike the reverse.

A methodical attack on Russia will cripple it.  The Japanese have no fear of attacking the Russians, as the benefit of the Non-Aggro agreement is removed from the game. (Fine, they get 6 infantry instead of 12 IPC, but as I said, it’s not in a position to help them anymore.)  The Italians might lose more or less fleet, but then, they’re not as gung-ho about Africa if they are dedicated to helping take out Russia (with an attack through Caucasus or Turkey to get to the money).  That’s not to say the Italians cannot recover, they have an equal chance at recovery in Alpha 2 as they do in Alpha 3 when it comes to their fleet, but now they have more incentive to send units towards Russia to help out.  (Italian guns can be moved to Germany/France/W. Germany to dissuade British bombing runs.  A fighter in Germany/W. Germany isn’t a bad idea either, if they are Italian fighters.)

So Russia went from 1.5 nations attacking it to 2.5 nations attacking it.  I would even go so far as to say you have to count Germany attacking it twice, since they are earning twice what the Russians are making it 3.5 nations vs Russia.  As for China, there is even MORE reason to ignore it now, not less.

Jennifer, every single thing you posted about A3 was available in A2.  Everything.  You could have done Barbarossa every game before, you know…  You argued and argued and argued in A2 that Sealion was THE strategy for Germany since Barbarossa wasn’t feasible.  You strongly argued time and again that Russia alone can hold out against the Axis powers until America was done with Japan and could come to help out.  This was always wrong, but you always argued it.

The actual gameplay mechanics and setup have changed almost nothing.  How the hell is 24 INF in the East better for Japan than 18?  How the hell is 4 extra AA gun hits on UK better for Germany?  How the hell is a DD and TRN floating off Malta instead of in a concentrated fleet better for Italy?  How the hell is limiting Japan’s movements in the Pacific better for Japan?  Strategic options have been removed and you pretend this is a good thing.  The game is getting pigeonholed and you think it’s better…no you don’t, you are pretending you think it’s better for some reason only you know.

I was always more gungho about Barbarossa than Sealion throughout A2 and now into A3.  My playstyle and strategies haven’t changed much at all…I’ve basically always used subs for convoy interdiction to keep UK down and attacked Russia.  Nothing has changed to make this attack more feasible.  Nothing at all…except that now the UK player knows that this is my likely strategy.  Don’t try and pretend that you see something miraculous in the changes that somehow makes Barbarossa amazing!!!11…it’s still the same exact fight with minor changes to the detriment of Germany.  I suppose Sealion enthusiasts might be finding the miraculous new strategy called Barbarossa, but to me it’s the same but slightly more difficult to accomplish.  Barbarossa is now harder than before, it’s just the facts.

So to definitively answer the original question…Russia is Stronger now.

Shadow,

Yes, you could have and probably should have done Barbarossa in Alpha 2 instead of Sea Lion, but given the better odds, many people went Sea Lion instead and ended up sapping the Strength of the Germans to the point that Russia became impossible.

Why are 24 infantry in the East better for Japan than 18?  Because they are just infantry, and they are not preventing the Germans, unlike the 12 IPC were.  Japan has 11 Fighters, 8 Tactical Bombers and 2 Strategic Bombers.  That is almost 1 aircraft per infantry Russia has.  The extra guys will also probably not come into play until the Russian stack is decimated either through direct attack or by killing the blitz blockers left behind as it retreats.  I’d rather Russia get 6 infantry in the middle of no where than Russia get 12 IPC to use in directly blocking the Germans!

The limitations on Japan’s movement is probably a bad thing.  I would wager heavily that Larry did this because he is very pro America, continually making it a behemoth in his games and now Japan had a way to take it out early in the game.  By limiting Japan so they cannot get close to America/Central America, this tactic is removed.  I think it’s bad, I liked threatening America and forcing them to both lose W. USA and build ground units.  It was probably the only tactic that saved the Japanese from destruction.  The fall back option just delays the Japanese destruction and the best option so far, in my opinion, is to send all the japanese planes deep into Russia and get them on the German stacks, then over to Europe where you can suicide them into the Allied fleets. (Leaves you very vulnerable in the Pacifc, but the first time I did this it really unbalanced things for the Allies and the Germans were victorious via victory cities.)

I didnt say Barbarossa was “amazing” I said the changes made Russia weaker in comparison to the Germans.  If you only look at changes, then Germany got more added units than the Russians did.  If you want to look at strategies, the Germans were buffed up considerably due to the AA Gun changes.  It is now viable to risk your guns as a strategic move, instead of keeping them in reserve as a tactical decision on a round by round basis.

So to definitively answer the original question…Russia is Weaker now.  Actually the entire Allied game is weaker now.  The allies are in a vice, they have to send aid to Russia asap, or Russia will fall.  A dedicated effort of all three axis powers destroy Russia about 8-12 rounds in, unless the Allies help them turtle.

How is russia ever strong?
They where strong out of box but now you should be able to push em down easliy.

@wrath3:

How is russia ever strong?
They where strong out of box but now you should be able to push em down easliy.

Because many players used Germany to take England on Round 3 or 4, Wrath.  That reduced the Germans to a smoldering pile of scrap metal allowing the Russians early victories in Poland, Hungary and Romania which in turn gave them +9 IPC for the territories and +9 IPC for the objectives.  If you add a Japanese invasion, in Alpha 2, they also got +12 IPC to spend on units in the front rows against Germany.  THat quickly added up and is a major reason why I think Russia should get pummeled early and often.

Because many players used Germany to take England on Round 3 or 4, Wrath.  That reduced the Germans to a smoldering pile of scrap metal allowing the Russians early victories in Poland, Hungary and Romania which in turn gave them +9 IPC for the territories and +9 IPC for the objectives.  If you add a Japanese invasion, in Alpha 2, they also got +12 IPC to spend on units in the front rows against Germany.  THat quickly added up and is a major reason why I think Russia should get pummeled early and often.

This is a silly remark.  The consensus strategy has no impact on the strength of alternative strategies (strategies which I have always argued were better than Sealion anyway, such as my G2 Barbarossa).  Russia is not weaker now, they are stronger, mainly because the UK now knows it doesn’t need to turtle the first few rounds and go actively attack instead of passively defend - Russia should have always prepared for Barbarossa.  You might be shaking in your boots knowing your opponents will be executing Barbarossa on you, but I’m not.  I know the tried and true anti-Barbarossa tactical decisions necessary, and given that UK can now provide some semblance of oomph in the early game now, I believe Russia’s hand is significantly strengthened.  Russia gains all of the following:

1. Confidence that UK will be assisting them from UK1 on, not waiting until Germany has played their hand on G2 before taking the fight to Germany.
2. UK will be much more likely to defend SZ125 to insure Russia gains the +5 NO.
3. Japan has to contend with an additional 6 Infantry if they invade Amur.
4. Italy loses the Caucusus NO.
5. USA and UK have reason to go after France hard due to the American NO.
6. AA guns are of use only in defensive posturing.  Russia is primarily on defense, therefore the rule will primarily help them.  Classic Aristotle logic.

Moreover, it’s quite easy to look back on your comments a couple months ago where you were trumpeting the ‘Sealion above everything’ strategy exclaiming to all who would listen that it’s the only viable strategy Germany has - but nonetheless it’s impossible for Germany to execute in less than 11+ rounds.  Why has your tune suddenly changed?  The alterations are not in Germany’s direction, so I find it odd.  You’re passively admitting that Russia could always have been defeated by Germany/Italy/Japan quite handily before, and therefore your KJF strategy was never truly valid, as I had always argued, because in my experience Russia falls hard without help from UK/USA of some variety (FYI - the trick was a G2 Barbarossa, it made KJF relatively ineffectual since Moscow would have stacks of German, Italian, and Japanese Mechanized Infantry and Tanks rolling over it before America could pivot to the Atlantic).

Because a couple months back it was Alpha 2 and people had not figured out how to stop Sea Lion yet, so it only made sense.

Now we are in Alpha 3.  I see a much different universe than you do, evidentally.  In my universe England is castrated being raided to death with no fleet of any significant size.  Italians are forging a path to Moscow while the Germans sap Russian strength.  Japan is removing valuable IPCs in the east making it much harder for Russia to survive.

The only thing I have not yet determined is if a G3 attack on Russia is superior to a G4 attack.  Or if G5 is better for that extra 5 IPCs.

G2 is and always will be the best.  G2 Barbarossa –-> G8 assault on Moscow with ~ 40 INF, 15 TANK, 20 ART, 20 MECH, 20 Aircraft.

Purchases (most conservative IPC amounts possible)
G1: 7 ART
G2: 10 ART, 10 INF
G3: 7 TANK
G4: 10 Mech
G5: 10 Mech
G6: 4 TAC
G7: 3 STR
G8: Defensive builds for D-day and/or offensive to go after Cairo

Italy also has a good buy plan to assist and keep the supply lines open.

Yeah Jenn, I agree with Shadow on many things but you want to attack Russia early, not late.  That is what made Russia such a beast after Sealion, they had 4 rounds to build and position an army.  Attack early if you want to win.

@JimmyHat:

Yeah Jenn, I agree with Shadow on many things but you want to attack Russia early, not late.  That is what made Russia such a beast after Sealion, they had 4 rounds to build and position an army.  Attack early if you want to win.

Hmm.  I will most certainly try it.

Shadow, you are attacking France I assume?  Could you, please, post what you are attacking on Round 1 and with what?  So I have some sense of where units are coming from and going too?

@JimmyHat:

Yeah Jenn, I agree with Shadow on many things but you want to attack Russia early, not late.  That is what made Russia such a beast after Sealion, they had 4 rounds to build and position an army.  Attack early if you want to win.

Most people who complained about Russia were allowing them 3+ rounds of free purchases and the ability to position units anywhere they desired.  Of course Russia is hard to defeat in that circumstance.  Hit them hard, early, before they consolidate - pierce holes north and south to prevent the linking of units.  Every Russian unit NOT in Moscow on turn 8 is not in the fight.  You only need to capture 3 zones to attack Moscow (there are six possible paths - take the road less defended).  By G8, USA has had exactly 3 combat movements while at war - only the final round could possibly give them access to put land units into Paris or Cairo - they have had a maximum of two rounds to put land units into Rome.  You simply need to delay invasions of those three VCs until Leningrad and Stalingrad are secured (if they aren’t already by Germany or likely Italy).

Understood.  Here are my assumptions, tell me where I am off:

Germany attacks: Yugoslavia, France, W. France, SZ 112, SZ 111, SZ 110 and SZ 106. (or do you pull back your submarines?)

G1 (Purchase 7 ART)
–--------------------
2 SUB to Canada
2 SUB to 91
6 INF, 2 ART from Southern Germany to Yugo, 1 INF from Slovakia to Yugo, retreat all to Slovakia after one round of fighting
3 INF, 1 MECH, 1 TANK, 2 ART to Normandy
4 TANK, 4 INF, 1 ART, 3 MECH, 2 TAC, 2 FTR to France
1 BB, 1 CA, 1 FTR, 1 TAC to 112
1 SUB, all other aircraft to 111
I don’t bother attacking 110 - not worth it and they have no DD there.

NCM 4 INF to Finland
NCM 1 INF to Bulgaria
NCM 9 INF to Poland

G2 (Build 10 ART, 10 INF)

Everything from front attacks Eastern Poland.
Aircraft threaten Britain
NCM everything else to Poland (except token defenders

From here on in, check the number of zones you need to move to assault Moscow on G8…build accordingly.  Once Art/Inf cannot make it, change to Tank/Mech, once they cannot switch to TAC, then on G7 build STR.  Move everything into Moscow G8.  If Russia turtles and pulls everything into Moscow, you can just capture everything…if they don’t turtle you have enough concentrated might to capture Moscow anyway, and mop up afterwards.  Ignore Leningrad.

Nice.  Do you have Italy break the ground and Germany reinforce then?  That way Germany loses nothing while Italy loses a few men to Russian pickets?

@Cmdr:

Nice.  Do you have Italy break the ground and Germany reinforce then?  That way Germany loses nothing while Italy loses a few men to Russian pickets?

Yeah Italy does the standard can opener actions, and claims all peripheral territory that isn’t a VC. Italy also has to defend Europe along with all German purchases above those allotted to Moscow G8. Italy may or may not take Cairo…this becomes the critical fight if they failed.