Super Stack or Stupid Stack?

@Cow:

There is nothing a russian player can do to save itself but pray.

Communists don’t believe in God.  But thats ok God doesn’t believe in communists either.

Nope, you are wrong, Cow.

Haven’t you been to sensitivity training?

If this were D&D, you’d be -3 Diplomacy…  :-)

@Stalingradski:

Nope, you are wrong, Cow.

Haven’t you been to sensitivity training?

If this were D&D, you’d be -3 Diplomacy…   :-)

Whats the point?

In an earlier post he said to someone “nope, you’re wrong”… something very few people would say if they were face to face with someone. But in forums, there are few social consequences. It’s just a pet peeve of mine. I tried and failed to deliver justice. It felt good in the moment, though.

That was the point.

Plus, he disagreed with me about building more than just infantry with Russia. I apparently hadn’t gotten over that yet. Russia needs artillery, and a few armor. Cow is wrong - it’s clear. I’m right. That’s clear too.  :-)

Hey Stalingradski,

You’re wrong! :P

Seriously, though.  It’s totally OK to say someone’s ideas are wrong, bad, or even badwrong.  That’s what we do here.  If you have a problem with it, bring it to the table- prove them wrong.  Now, if Cow were saying that “That guy’s a moron” or something along those lines, I’d see your point, but he’s just saying the ideas are wrong.  I say that to people’s faces all the time.  What’s odd about that?

Now, back on topic, I agree with Garg’s main point about stacking up in Russia and ignoring everything else being a poor strategy.  It was actually an opponent of mine that inspired the thread.  The thing is, though, sometimes that’s the one strategy available!  If Germany bought heavy land  right from the start, it doesn’t even matter if you put a few guys in his way.   He’ll roll right over them.  You’d need 3 Inf to kill one of his, and you don’t slow him down at all unless he bought a lot of Tnk/Mech.

Yeps, I gave up on russia a long time ago. I just don’t see russia surviving, when I am axis and when I am allies… unless some serious threat looms over europe from uk/usa and in those games Japan ends up winning. If Japan comes to play there is only so much USA can put in the atlantic. If UK/USA don’t deal with italy while they have an upper hand then a 30 ipc italy will take over the defense of europe while Germany pushes russia anyway. So Germany has enough breathing room to rush for russia. It’s one of the reasons I like the pacific first plan. If I still have calcutta, I have a second russian power, it can make 30 ipc if things are going well, that’s 10 inf, which is like what russia would have made.

Still sometimes russia can be saved with fighters flying in. If Germany can’t get russia it up to Japan to win. That’s global is so Japan centric.

What I like to do with Russia is put a stack north and one south, then retreat the one where the main German stack goes and attack with the other. If Germany splits his stack up as well you can reinforce one of yours and in a few turns have enough to kill it. The main goal of Russia is to defend itself, but it needs money to do so, which means you can’t just retreat everything every turn.

I’m quite impressed with the reactions to the minor border skirmish we almost had, and I mean it. Cow, you just kept moving forward, like a shark!  :-D

All is well.

I’m over my minor irritation, and I hear what you’re saying Shin Ji. We settle this in the arena! I’m cool with taking things less seriously. It is a fault, I have.

Cow - I hear what you’re saying. Russia is able to be taken by a solid and determined Axis player, almost no matter what, barring crappy dice. However! I really like to make the German/Italian player have to pause, and worry, and think. Garg’s premise was that the Russian player who builds all infantry, and fails to counterattack, and relies on the stack, will lose… and I agree. I also think that  Russian player who builds less units, but builds teeth, causes more sweat for the Axis. More sweat = more chances to make mistakes, or hesitate. We all know that a single turn of hesitation can mean the difference between winning and losing.

You guys realy dont help Russia out at all with US,Anzac,British airfoce then I assume? The 3Anzac fighters MUST be in India/Russia, elsewhere is just a waste of potential.

Russian units in middeleast can be a good thing. They can:

1. Take Iraq and Africa (+3each)
2. Swing up to prevent Japan from airstriking china. (trow Axis of balance is good)
3. Swing down to make India hold vs Japan. (to bad Cow ;))
   Send 1mec and 1tank to Kazakhstan and 1mec Turmekistan round 1, good base.
   Make sure your planes can be used to save India if needed.

Its not like your going to stop germany anyway… Units reach back before the final battle r5-7. If Russia saves India first then India can save russia later :)

Russia always falling is just wrong and those who play allies good know that :-D

if germany is going sea lion, sure I’ll hold romania, hell my last game I attacked berlin with russia with 18% odds, sure I lost that battle, but was good fun.

Anyway. The point is, axis are very focused in global, germany just needs to go take russia, luffewaffe some naval early on but nothing serious in terms of air casualties. just count the spaces, everything has to hit round 7 if inf don’t make it, start getting mech and armor, when that don’t make it,get bombers.

It is not hard dude.

As the Axis I usually go after the USSR, BUT the games I’ve lost as the allies the Axis have not taken the USSR.  I can’t say if that is due to my skill, but in those games the German offensive peters out around bry and a stalemate ensues.  This has caused me to focus on Western Europe with the consequence that Japan is allowed to win.

My point is that I think the USSR can survive depending on the amount of Axis attention it gets.  All out Axis push from both sides and the USSR will fall.  Anything less, I think, the USSR has a shot to survive.

Ok, I will go with that.

As axis you need to considder also the focus allies are giving Russia into the eqation. Allies should be able to calculate the total attack force long way into the future. You’ll basicly see how many units Germany can attack you with turn 6 already turn 2-3, and how many soviet units are in place to defend. Then you must calculate the needed amount of US,British and anzac support Russia needs to hold.

If Japan goes for STB on Russia youll need alot of fighters there, but that should not be a problem since Japan should be loosing in Pacific very fast. Carriers and fighters is a good US buy because they have the strongest defence and yet their able to defend (russia) and attack land (japan). Goes without saying that you buy carriers first and fighters later.

A good amount of trannies is also the way to go, as bringing the land units stationed in US (8 trannies needed with Brazil), Australia (3trannies) and Canada (1tranny, might be better of in the pacific in some games) into play is vital for winning the game.

US can sail tranny from z101 to z51 turn one, then take Brazil turn 2 or sail to New Zealand (good tactical place to be). I also use cruiser in pacific.

Example of US buys can be:

1. 2carriers, sub, 2trannies (good hybrid, gets your land units into the sea early)
2. 3carriers (maximum fleet strengt against japan)
3. 2carriers, destroyer, 2subs (sink german subs atlantic)
4. carrier, 3bombers (defend against sea-lion)

At least make taking Russia as expencive as possible. If germany have 60-70% its bad news for them.

I do the carrier buys with usa often. It is not for saving russia specifically.

It gives you the option of sending fighters into Russia though :)

depends on japan.

Im thinking of the senario where Japan goes after Russia…

Prefer pacific wins with japan. Europe is just a back up plan.

Im going to troll on with you…

Then there is less need for units in Russia and more need for them in pacific, but thats no problem as the units is flexible.