Refer to page #38, optional rules, us marines, attack at a 2, first combat cycle!
Siberian Units
-
I was being cheeky. My point is hold both if you can, for as long as possible. I think its v. important to slow Japan down as much as possible. The US and UK can help with Germany, but only Russia can really keep Japan at bay. Germany can’t hold Ukraine early on without getting into a war of attrition with Russia, which will leave it underpowered
But your Eastern Inf can’t be in Ukraine (except the 2 in Kazakh until R3, R4 at the earliest) anyway. So hold Yakut / SFE / Novo / Kaz etc. a few turns longer and you can build extra Inf much closer to the German front.
-
It’s an either or question, Dan. You can either reinforce Sinkiang massively on Russia 1, or you can hold Ukraine on Russia 2.
I would be scared to try to hold Ukraine on R2. Germany could strafe you down a lot! I guess it depends on your first moves. Is the standard still W Russia + Belorussia, or is it Ukraine/W. Russia?
-
It’s an either or question, Dan. You can either reinforce Sinkiang massively on Russia 1, or you can hold Ukraine on Russia 2.
I would be scared to try to hold Ukraine on R2. Germany could strafe you down a lot! I guess it depends on your first moves. Is the standard still W Russia + Belorussia, or is it Ukraine/W. Russia?
There’s some controversy there. IMHO Ukraine is not worth it, but WRus + Belo is pretty solid because taking out the Belo units, rather than spreading you out, actually makes your WRus position more secure because you remove most of Germany’s fodder for the counterattack on WRus.
You can take out Ukraine to kill a fighter, but it likely means sacrificing a few tanks, which are more important to Russia than the Fighter is to Germany. That’s my view anyway. Some players talk about “strafing” ukraine on R1 which I think is silly because then you are taking fire from a Fighter that you are actually not even hoping to kill.
Ukraine is a “trading” territory for the first couple of turns. It takes a while for either Russia or Germany to be able to move in with enough hardware to deter the counterattack.
-
Should have a vote for this:
WRU+Ukr, WRU, WRU+Belo, or something else?
For me it’s always WRU + Ukr.
-
There was already a thread with a voting about possible first turn Russian attack in past threads.
Attacking Ukraine and holding is costly for Russian but allow to cash higher and force German to commit force there.
Moreover it is good in the following turns trading for Ukraine.Strafing Ukraine is not silly. Strafing as always been aimed to kill infantry not tank nor fighter.
Attacking Ukraine with 3 inf, 1 art, 3 tank and 2 fig allows for 21 die points. German defends with 15 die points. It is a perfect strafing scenario. Russia on average will inflict 3,5 hits and Germany will inflict 2,5. The strafing helps in securing West Russia because Germany have only 3 inf from Belorussia to cover the attack there. What is not gained from the strafing are the IPC from Ukraine.Attacking to conquer Ukraine is better then conquering Belorussia, IMHO. You destroy 1 more tank and 1 more fig and take 3 more IPC.
The cost is the loss of 3 tank in the following counterattack.
After West Russia and Ukraine Russia has 29 IPC = 1 Tank + 8 INF, starting to rebuild the tank force.Siberian Units are better employed in Novosibirsk. As Frood said on R2 only 2 inf may reach Ukraine and 4 may on R3. It is better to leave them in Siberia, stacking them for containing Japanese and trying to cashing high against Germany and then buying infantry directly on the German front.
-
Game play has shown to me that going with only 2 tanks in ukraine R1 is a good move.
1 less lost tank, more hits in WRU.You will take ukraine less, but you still kill the german ftr.
-
Axis_roll, I agree if you want to take Ukraine, it is better to go with only two tanks, and use the other two in West Russia.
However if you want to strafe Ukraine, and there are pros and cons for that, you should use three tanks. -
I was a BIG W. Russia/Ukraine girl for a long time.
I was also a BIG 3 infantry, 3 armor purchase girl for a long time.
Now I am more a Belorussia, W. Russia girl (since you can shield more property that way, and preserve your armor for a rainy day, and it WILL rain!) and a 3 Infantry, Armor, Fighter girl.
Whoa, why a fighter?
What Russian player can afford to send her armor into hostile territory to hold it?
What Russian player can’t use a 3rd fighter?I’m actually toying with the idea of a round 2 of 4 Infantry, Artillery, Fighter (26 IPC) so Russia has 4 Fighters. That’s enough to sink the Med fleet if need be, but it’s also enough to cover your infantry on both fronts until England and America can come.
My only worry is not having enough punch to stop the Germans. Might they get too aggressive in an effort to take Russia before America and England can help? Can America and England get there in time to make up for the 20 IPC in infantry missing in Russia now?
-
3 Infantry, Armor, Fighter girl.
I’m 4 inf 3 art dude 8-)
-
I am a Battleship guy :-P
-
@ncscswitch:
I am a Battleship guy :-P
There’s a scary thought.
Do you offer the German’s Caviar and Vodka when the walk into Moscow?
-
I have gravitated toward 5 inf, 1 art, 1 arm for the Russian purchase. And almost always Belo/WR. The problem with the WR/Ukr attack is that the WR attack carries less weight and is likely to result in more Russian losses there and very little armor left after the Ukr counterattack.
-
OK, My joking aside…
Leaving Germany with 6 FIGs is a problem for Russia.
Losing ARM in order to reduce that number of FIGs is usually a good decision, as it reduces Germany’s G1 attack options (usually reducing the force load for Egypt and increasing the odds on a UK counter) and removing a FIG from the mix when trading Ukriane/Belo/Karelia, which in the LONG RUN is beneficial to Russia.
-
I’ve rarely seen a very big difference between Egypt with Germany having 6 fighters and a bomber, and Egypt with Germany having 5 fighters and a Bomber. Those Brits are ONLY getting 1 round anyway, so their going to inflict the same amount of damage most of the time regardless of the over kill.
Meanwhile, Russia not losing 3 armor is huge. 15 IPC out of 24 IPC is 63% of their starting income. If you can save that, then you’re all the more stronger defensively then otherwise.
It’s my contention that Russia just cannot afford Ukraine in Russia 1. It’s not like those German units are going to be detrimental since you are effectively doing the same damage to Germany, minus the fighter, as you would with a W. Russia/Ukraine attack (well, you also don’t kill an artillery or armor.) while saving lots of infantry and all your armor. Germany saves 19 IPC. Russia saves 25 IPC (3 tanks, 2 infantry, artillery because you sent that equipment elsewhere.)
-
@ncscswitch:
OK, My joking aside…
Leaving Germany with 6 FIGs is a problem for Russia.
Losing ARM in order to reduce that number of FIGs is usually a good decision, as it reduces Germany’s G1 attack options (usually reducing the force load for Egypt and increasing the odds on a UK counter) and removing a FIG from the mix when trading Ukriane/Belo/Karelia, which in the LONG RUN is beneficial to Russia.
Switch made a good point favouring the Ukraine attack.
It is not only 1 FIG less, but Germany have to send something in Ukraine, and if German send a FIG there then there are only 4 FIG to attack UK! German may send a Tank, it will be killed on R2.
Moreover why send three tanks in Ukraine? Three tanks are needed if one want to strafe Ukraine, srtipping away inf and retreating.
But to conquer Ukraine 2 tanks and two fig with three inf and 1 art (with Axis bid in Lybia naturally) are sufficient. Ukraine should be conquered with 1 or 2 tank left, and the other 2 tanks attacks West Russia. With a build of 3 tanks and 3 inf I think that this opening is a good start for Russia. -
I’m getting more undecided on this issue all the time now…
-
Likewise, it is a loss of 3 Russian armor, not one in Ukraine. You know Germany’s going to make it her mission to destroy those armor because Germany can afford replacement armor, Russia cannot. At least not as readily.
If I have the chance to reduce Russia’s offensive and defensive punch by 9 and lose some infantry to do it, I’ll do it.
Meanwhile, if Russia hits W. Russia and Belorussia, you’ll get 1 or 2 tanks if you counter attack and you’ll sustain some losses to get it. Russia’s already recovered that with a 3 inf, 3 arm purchase, maybe surpassed it with a 3 inf, arm, fig purchase.
-
Germany is in some ways more strapped for units than Russia - Germany has to defend against allied landings in WE, SE, Ger and EE, while also sending some units to Africa, - that often doesn’t leave much for the attack on Moscow, and Russia may actually be able to out-produce Germany on the Russian front even with lower income than Germany. Japan can offset that by similarly distracting Russia on the Eastern front.
So I honestly don’t know between the two who can afford to trade units. It depends on the game I guess. If the allies have stayed out of the Med, and the Baltic fleet is still there or the Allied fleet is not in range of it b/c they are landing via Z4 into Arc / Kar, then Germany can more easily afford to trade units with Russia. But if the UK/US are threatening major landings in Europe, you need to hunker down eventually.
Ukraine G1 / R1 happens before the Allied landings become a real possibility though, so that doesn’t help.
-
Germany’s got a pretty free reign for 3 or 4 turns before they have to worry about landings in E. Europe, W. Europe or S. Europe. (Obviously England could hit W. Europe on UK 1, but what British player is outfitted for that and what German player doesn’t have a few infantry and a couple fighters there to defend it?)
Russia doesn’t have that luxury. From Russia 1, Russia’s got to worry about probes in SFE, Buryatia, Karelia, Archangelsk, W. Russia, Ukraine and Caucasus.
-
I just think that Germany has to save units for those “rainy days” after round 4 or so. If you only start then, it’s too late.