The game is over very soon. I just want to understand how Russia is supposed to open a game without getting stomped. I’m just playing to get some experience and so far, that is exactly what it has been… An experience. :-D
The TripleA AI nor any of my friends that play every have done anything like this. In fact, my friends have decided that the game is basically unplayable as the Allies much like the first game was for the Axis. I didn’t even consider that stacking West Russia basically forces Germany to hit it. I refuse to admit I threw away $120 on a copy for me and a friend…
Use my scientifically proven setup of 1942 2nd edition.
If you cant get someone to use additional unit setup… you got to bid… you need 16-24 ipcs for the allies…
If both players are on an equal footing a bomber bid to Russia can be fun, but going up against someone like Cow who digs Axis and has a good grasp of the blitz, I think more hitpoints on the bid would have been advisable.
It’s very hard to back the Germans off W. Russia if you leave both Belo and Ukraine alive. The Baltic states opening I described in this thread calls for 1 inf 1 art and 1 fighter and was noted as a gambit, meaning you’re just trying to trip the other guy up on an equal trade, or a trade at advantage, counting on luck. This allows you to send an additional hitpoint into the W. Russia fight. But even then it can be tight. Your fighter landing choices may have helped sealed the deal psychologically for the Germans, since they were flown out of range of the north.
I think the best use for the bomber is in an attack on Ukraine, so you can hold Caucasus instead of having to trade it ;)
Yeah I just went with the easy win strategy. bomber + 9 guys, next round bring the heat with some armor, round after that start defending against europe drops.
I am still torn as to getting bomber + inf/arty or armor + inf/arty round 1. I like armor so I can hold karelia round 2 even if russia buys some too.
First time for everything, I wanted to give it a try since none of the games I’ve played with my friends have gone more than 3 rounds before the Allies surrender. This doesn’t give a lot of time for developing any sort of strategy for the Allies. My attacks on Ukraine have historically had very poor outcomes. I still don’t really understand how it is to my advantage to throw a round of dice at a group of units which is stronger defensively than than I am offensively in the hopes that I will get good dice and they will get bad? How does it help me to throw away units?
I’ll look for Cow’s setup and see if I can convince anyone to give the game a 2nd look. I play the TripleA AI occasionally however it just isn’t very talkative and doesn’t seem interested in having a beer or two during the game. :wink:
Thanks for the patience…
Yeah the allies do not get to have fun in this map. Russia cant deadzone karelia for long, G2 it is an easy hold. Especially if germany bought 4 armor on round 1. 12 inf aa gun and 14-15 armor, wam bam russia got nothin on that.
Meanwhile the allies do not have any attacks. USA and UK do not get rolling at all, in either theater. USA starts out losing HARD in the pacific half and has to do LOTS of build up in order to get something going in the Atlantic half. So what are you supposed to do? Just roll over and die? Seems that is what the developers had in mind.
That is why it takes such a huge bid.
craykirk: Just so I understand the opening correctly, was Germany hitting the W. Russia stack with everything possible, ie: 6inf, 1 art, 3 Tanks (I understood you killed the baltic tanks in R1?), 4 planes and 1 bomber?
If so that is a really cutsy move by Germany =) Its the kind of move I would hope Germany would do against me in a game without a bid as it is one of the few things that could result in such a huge catastrof that could lead to an allied victory.
Yeah I went nuts. #YOLOSWAG
The allies look depressing now. I never play the allies below 18 for a reason.
@Cow:
Yeah the allies do not get to have fun in this map. Â Russia cant deadzone karelia for long, G2 it is an easy hold. Especially if germany bought 4 armor on round 1. Â 12 inf aa gun and 14-15 armor, wam bam russia got nothin on that.
That is incorrect.
A “typical” R1 buy is 4 inf, 3 rt. So on R2, you are looking at
1-2 inf Belo (since it doesn’t seem like Ger is bleeding any off and is gunning straight for Kar.
7 to start in Wrus
2 inf Arch
Now your rd 1 buy of 4 inf, 3 rt + 1 inf Kaz, 1 novo brings your rd 2 numbers up to:
15-16 inf, 6 rt, 4 arm. Now here’s the difference, Russia gets to see the G1 buy of 4 arm and can counter on its Rd 2 buy with 3 or 4 armor of its own. We will go 3.
SO, Russia has a stack of 15 inf, 6 rt, 7 arm, 2 ftrs aimed at Kar.
That is deadzoned. Now it may not be a lot of margin for error, but it is possible. And that is with NO bid and only a 3 arm counter by Russia. Now of course I made some assumptions, but I also don’t think it is just easy to say Germany can put X units here and assume there isn’t a possible counter.
It works out about the same with an 8 inf R1 buy, only your countering force is 19 inf, 3 rt, 7 arm, 2 ftrs. You’re still projected to clear with maybe 2-4 units. I think it is about 60% for the Allies.
If G bought 5 armor rd 1 you will need 4 on Rus 2.
Japan flies air in from sz 34 with the starting bomber from japan and it is a done deal for the axis to hold.
You can deadzone Karelia for a few rounds, not for long if you have to buy armor, which is what Germany wants, easier to kill an armor than 2 inf. As Germany having caucasus dead zoned ruins the total # of units the allies can put on the map drastically. Allies already start the game without being able to put units on the map, they can make boats and oceans sure, it dont matter if you lose Russia because you had to buy tanks for so long.
Plus are you really going to attack that? like that is everything from you. Germany will be fine, Germany will be okay taking that loss.
~
you just reinforced why such a big bid is necessary.
I agree. Germany will take Kar.
My focus as the Allies (Russia) is to try and delay it until G3. I think there is a huge difference from G2 to G3.
At least in rd 3, UK/US have a something going in the Atlantic. By then you can have the BB/Cru and UK Cru (from Aus) off of Afr (token threat to Fra/Ita) and some trns floating around. Plus US AC rd 1 buy followed by US AC in rd 2. So that by rd 4 you can be up by sz 6 comfortably. Unless you are beelining Sz 3 with US from rd 1 on and going with a northern shuck.
That’s if you are going full on KGF. At least they can have something going.
It definitely feels bad or overwhelming seeing G camped out in Kar on G2 and it seems like the Allies are miles away in the Atlantic. So I try to project the threat to Kar and see if I can keep G out until rd 3.
Cauc is never really an issue. Ger tends to go Bal, then Kar. So that leaves Ukr as an early deadzone so Cauc is safe for placement.
You also get a nice supply of UK troops to Cauc once they are forced to evacuate India. Hopefully you won’t have to flee until UK 4 or later, but even on UK 4, you’ll have 3 builds, 9 extra units plus your starting units and it is a decent force to head to Cauc. You should have the 2 US inf from Sze as well. They are good for 2 trades of Russian boarder territories.
It is definitely a challenge though. :-)
It is just not a huge deal for germany to be deadzoned in karelia if he gets caucasus out of it as well. income wise it is pretty good.
As if I couldn’t feel any worse about my play… :cry:
it’s been a real fustercluck. Great moves combined with poor dice mean Game Over Man, Game Over! Where is Bill Paxton when you need him? German defensive dice have been brutal…
It was 5 fighters and a bomber, AA missed and the first German attack was pretty hard. The Russian response was, as they say, meh… :-(
Also nothing stops the G4 holding it down at west russia, at that point you cannot hold both Caucasus and Russia. Allies have to give it up smooth even if they have india in the mix at caucasus.
The allies get rolled really hard. All the bunnies agree.
I feel for you man. It’s like you hopped into the ring with Eye of the Tiger playing over the loud speakers, ready to rock, but then got immediately cold clocked and Xenomorphed straight through the chest!
:-D
Its kind of a bummer to get Cow stomped the first time out. He went Bovine belligerent on you!
No time to chew the cud and ruminate. Alas, no chance to play around with the Red bomber.
I don’t know that many other players would have taken that shot on you right out the gate in the slightly better than 50% range. I guess if it was a roulette wheel, and you bet on red, but he was the house. And anyways, always bet on black, or you might get sniped! hehe
;)
It’s not big deal; if the first battle had gone better for russia, I think I would have played it differently. As it was, I gave away the British navy. i should have taken the same chance and who knows? It might have been different. dice are what dice are… I know through my backgammon plays that we all tend to concentrate on the bad rolls; which we all get more than our fair share of…
Reposted here for safekeeping:
My ongoing case for the Russian bomber, as a set-up change.
:-D
In 1942.2 if you’re going to actually purchase an Air unit with the Russians, it should definitely be a fighter rather than a bomber. I think the best time to do this is in the second round. That’s when Russian income will be at its highest for any point during the early game. But I would only do this if your opening attacks went well, and if the German opening counter attacks went rather poorly. If you collect 26-28 ipcs after your opening, that gives you enough for the third fighter, and still have 16-18 ipcs left over for 5-6 ground units. After which point you buy infantry/artillery for the rest of the game, and use your third fighter for optimal trading. But again I would only do that if Russia opens well, and I would only consider the fighter. From a purchasing perspective Russia benefits more from a fighter than a bomber. They don’t really need the reach of a bomber, since all the territories they can reasonably attack are close to home, and the fighter gives you a better attack/defense ratio for the cost. Given how important defense is for Russia its better to buy a unit with att 3 def 4 mov 4 for 10 ipcs, than att 4, def 1 move 6 for 12 ipcs.
This is the reason why I think its better to just give Russia a bomber!
Because I don’t think any serious player would ever buy one. An experienced player can use a starting Russian bomber in many interesting ways, but to suggest that an experienced player would actually purchase a new one is just wishful thinking.
A starting Red Airforce of 2 fighters and 1 bomber is less distorting in my view, than a starting airforce of 3 fighters (because of the way the Russian situation favors defense). An experienced Russian player may purchase a 3rd fighter at some point in the game, but I just don’t see them purchasing a bomber.
Both situations (2 fighters + 1 bomber, or 3 fighters) would be better than the OOB starting Red airforce of ONLY 2 fighters! But the 2 fighters + 1 bomber combo just feels better to me. It accomplishes several things at once, all of which enhance the confidence of the Soviet player. It gives them more opening attack power, the ability to reach farther with those attacks, and the ability to send a defensive pip to critical territories (like Egypt) after an attack. They can also use it for strategic bombing, if the Allies want to pursue such a game. It has flexibility to be used in either theater (either the Eastern Front with Germany, or against Japan in Asia.)
There are also several reasonable options for a starting location for the bomber, Moscow, Karelia, or my personal favorite, Caucasus!
That last gives Russia the most options for their bomber on R1, and it doesn’t currently house an air unit, so that creates a nice 3 way split. Fighter in Karelia, Fighter in Moscow, Bomber in Caucasus.
That would be my ideal, since it has a certain aesthetic appeal as well :-D
Think about it, what other unit could you place for Allies that gives you a dozen round 1 options? None of which are totally distorting or going to break a major TUV swing, but which can still provide a lot of gameplay interest for the Allies?
In the first round, A Russian bomber in Caucasus could, among other things:
Bomb Germany
Bomb Italy
Attack Ukraine
Attack Belo
Attack Baltic States
Attack sz 5
Attack sz 61
Land in Egypt for defense
Land in UK for defense
Land in Szech for defense
Land in Bury for defense
If additional bid units are included beyond the bomber, you might be able to do other things as well.
Such as Attack Manchuria (sub par, but possible with an extra bid, or some additional starting units in the far east.)
And unlike most other units, the bomber is very likely to survive, and play-on in subsequent rounds. So it provides an ongoing benefit.
It can even have a role to play if Moscow is captured, allowing Russia to bomb Berlin or Tokyo during the endgame!
I just think its the best all around option, if you want to make a set up change. I’m not saying it fixes the game, but I think it should be the starting point for the fix, the unit change around which you build the rest of the set up.
Thoughts?
[reposted for safekeeping]
Black_Elk, as you can probably guess, I’m all in favor of increasing the Russians’ ability to wage an offensive war, and a starting bomber is one good way to do that. What I wonder about is how it could be possible to offer the players the realistic option to have Russia go on the offense (against Germany? against Japan?) while simultaneously having the Axis wage an aggressive war against the UK and/or the USA.
I see five main possibilities here:
Russia attacks Germany, and Germany makes attacks based on economic goals, rather than going after a capital. Germany’s extra starting units in the west allow it to conquer all of Africa and maybe even take Brazil, but Japan isn’t in position to deliver a killing blow to either London or Washington, and so the game is slow, at best – the Axis strategy basically involves winning by building up such a big economic advantage that Germany can absorb, blunt, and eventually retaliate against the strong starting Russian attack.
Russia attacks Germany, and Germany directly attacks London while Japan seizes on the distraction to gobble up British possessions in the southern hemisphere. This game will be very short, because if Germany heads west then it won’t take long for the powerful Russian attacking forces to make it to Berlin – either the Sea Lion will work or it won’t, and the game will be decided accordingly.
Russia attacks Germany, and Germany tries to ignore a still-vigorous British empire, cross the Atlantic, and attack the USA, with or without help from Japan. Britain shoots down half the German transports with subs and planes, and then America laughs and easily defeats the rest of the German invasion; meanwhile, Russia enters Berlin and ends the game.
Russia attacks Japan with help from the United States and the UK, as in a standard KJF. Russia is presumably able to seize the valuable territories of Manchuria and Shanghai (otherwise it wouldn’t be much of an attack!), meaning that Russia can afford to let Germany win some territory in eastern Europe and Russia can still build a successful infantry wall. Germany can try to take Moscow before Tokyo falls, as in a standard all-out KJF, but will have a much harder time than usual because Russia has more income, and Germany’s extra starting troops need time to shift over from France and Italy to the eastern front.
Russia attacks Japan with help from only the United States, leaving Britain to help defend eastern Europe. Japan can probably hold out for several turns while still defending Manchuria and Shanghai. Germany is probably forced to gamble on an early blitz to Moscow, because it has no other plausible options for linking up with Japan or relieving the siege of Tokyo.
I have to say, I’m not wild about any of these scenarios. What do you think?
Thanks Black_Elk for these write ups on the Russians.
I am really trying to figure out what the game needs for more balance.
The Axis seem to just be too strong on both fronts.
Ive started using TripleA to test that, and I can easily beat the Hard AI with Axis… but I cant win with Allies, even with a 13 bid for Russians. I can hold past 8/9 rounds, even with American bases on the money islands but cant overwhelm either Japan or Germany.
What are your thoughts on that… can you beat the hard AI as Allies?
Maybe you could share some thoughts on how?
It definitely seems to me the Axis need a few less starting units… they just have too much.
Yeah there are still some exploits that allow you trounce the AI, things that the AI doesn’t fully understand yet. So even playing vs Axis I find that I need to give them an income bonus to make the experience really challenging. The best place to find the sorts of things I’m talking about is in this thread…
Most of the more recent 1942.2 saves I posted vs AI Axis are around page 40, but the jar has been updated several times between now and then.
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/AI-Development-Discussion-td7585227.html
Using the latest stable, I think it is much more challenging to play against the AI Axis than it is to play against the AI Allies. Keeping Russia alive is difficult, for sure, but I find that the AI is particularly vulnerable to projected air power at sea. They will often withdraw their fleets rather than remain to defend vs air pressure, so usually that is my approach. Air wall to the center, then back the Axis fleets away from the important locations. I try to put every aircraft I can in range of India, and then just bounce them between Moscow and India, as needed until Moscow collapse. I’ve found that it is generally easier to mess with Japan than it is to mess with Germany early on, but also very hard to kill Japan outright (harder than Berlin because there is no double hit option UK/USA). So the shock Japan early and redirect can be particularly useful vs the AI. German AI can stack ground very heavy right from the outset, and also trades heavy vs the Russians, so Moscow seems destined to die though I find you can prolong this a bit if you send enough aircraft right away. The USA repeating drop into Finland can be pretty effective for the endgame, and also positioning a threat on Italy, which the AI will attempt to defend in ways that a human might not. I don’t SBR against the machine, because it does know how to retaliate, but that is another way to overcome the AI if you are relentless with it.
In general I’d say the most challenging thing that the Japan AI has in its bag of tricks right now is the mass bomber build. Whenever you start pushing Japan into a corner, I find that they just start buying a ton of bombers and stacking infantry on their capital. I’ve had my US/Brit fleets smoked a number of times, by ruthless AI bomber strikes that I didn’t see coming (after they sneakily build up for a few rounds). This can make it near impossible to take Tokyo, but also gives you a way to manage Japan if you know what to expect, while you put your main effort into Europe. AI Japan doesn’t hit pearl, so you start with some extra units than you might otherwise have. Basically I like to hit the AI Axis early in the Pacific and trip them up, then redirect on Europe. Its not too difficult to get something going with the USA if you are able to keep your income in the 40s, but when you go full Europe usually you start dropping down pretty quickly, on account of the way Japan likes to run up into Alaska. It’s kind of gimmicky but you can hold Japan for a long time on that northern route if you let them in, but once you stack that area they like to swing south. Little things like that to take advantage of the AI’s current “personality.” It will trade tanks on the ground till the cows come home, and air for ships if given the chance, but is also very cautious and risk averse on the water with the IJN, that’s what I’ve found so far. It hasn’t been uncommon for me to see the IJN back all the way off their production centers, and try to trade positions with the USA near panama. Or even run an end around down by South America. Which is a little ridiculous, but something you can kind of control, if you overtake them with the Air wall. I really like bombers for UK/USA vs the AI, just like vs a human, but the AI can be easier to trip up.
Each time Redrum posts in an update things get better though, so hopefully there will come a time when I can’t beat the AI Axis at all.
