“I dont follow! I get the point that FTRs can retreat and never land in the territory just captured.
The cost of 6 IPCs for INFs are wrong, two INf per territory (2), that is 12 IPCs that will for sure be lost in a counter attack! Germany will loose at least two INFs that is 6 IPCs. The gain of 5 IPCs (2+3) for the terrotories just captured are just trading IPCs with Germany, since they will gain it back in a counterattack! I dont think that trading IPCs on one-for-one basis with a economical stronger enemy like Germany is wise for Russia! The on who think so will loos for sure! The tank thing you use in your scenario is very odd, I dont follow at all. USSR spend 11 IPCs on what? I thought two tanks cost 10 IPCs! No, I think you need to be more precis here! Fighters are not costeffective for 10 IPCs in a ground based combat. It all depends how much the movement is worth. As it is now it is worth some 4-5 IPCs for two additional movements for both land and sea! I hardly find that a good buy. But if the air supremacy rule would be included, then there would be a strong incentive to buy FTRs. Just deny an enemy air supremacy as well as giving an extra punch in an attack!”
No, there is also the IPC gained from the surviving USSR infantry killing attacking German invaders. In addition, USSR also gains a positional advantage by trading infantry produced two turns ago for infantry produced four turns ago. Also, if Germany takes too long to take Russia, the Allies will win. The alternative is NOT attacking German held territory, in which case the Germans simply gain 2-3 IPC per turn. Do you understand what I mean?
Two USSR infantry and a USSR fighter attack a territory worth 2 IPC held by one German infantry. If the USSR takes with one infantry and one fighter surviving, the USSR gained +3 IPC from killed German infantry, -3 IPC from lost USSR infantry, +2 IPC from the territory, and +1 IPC from the 1/3 probability of killing a German infantry when the German infantry invades next turn.
If Germany sends a TANK, that is BETTER; the expected payout becomes +5/3 instead of +1 IPC. If Germany cannot send anything to attack, that is good too; the territory is held at no cost.
" I dont think that trading IPCs on one-for-one basis with a economical stronger enemy like Germany is wise for Russia!"
So LOSING IPCs to the Germans is a better strategy than trading IPCs? Think about what you’re saying! Or are you saying that you have a strategy for Russia to consistently perform attacks against Germany that will GAIN IPCs?!! If you have something like that, you should really explain it. There’s the first turn attacks against West Russia and Ukraine or Belorussia, and that is it, unless the German player sucks or the USSR gets truly lucky.
–
USSR spends 11 IPC on two infantry and a tank. I thought it was clear in my earlier post. If USSR uses 2 infantry and a tank to attack a German territory held by 1 infantry, USSR will likely win, but the German counterattack will kill the USSR units. The attack then becomes too costly for USSR to make in the first place. On the other hand, if USSR attacks with two infantry and a fighter, the USSR has only commited 6 IPC worth of units.
Fighters are cost-effective for land combats for the reason previously given. You do not want to commit your forces. The fact that fighters are also used for naval attack and defense makes them a truly excellent unit even at the cost of 10 IPC.
