Nit picky German Economizer

@Lucifer:

Previously I said that I would move my German tank to Arch. to put pressure on Russia.
Now I changed my mind…. :-o
I will not leave a Russian inf behind in Kalia either,
no obvious reason, just feels right to stack WRU with all possible units.
Saving one German tank is a minor detail, but many details throughout a game may have big impact
in the end.

In order to learn, one must change one’s mind.  :-D :-D

Sorry I hadn’t followed all this topic [Am I the only where these forum pages load way too slowly ?].

But I have another situation that may be considered a “Nit picky German Economizer”.
Germany has a mass in EEU, Russia in Caucasus. Between them it’s no man’s land.
Germany has only 4 fighters (one lost R1 in UKR, one lost G1 sinking the Med British BB) and no bomber (previously lost to AA in strat bombing) to swap 3 territories.
Suppose Russia has 2 fighters.

A) A neighboring area is empty but enemy-controlled. Is it better to blitz with a tank (and back!) [enemy can do the same] or advance with 1 inf there, or more ? Does it make a difference if it’s UKR for 3 IPC or BEL/KAR for 2 ? That difference is 1 IPC, or less (due to forced enemy reaction that may regain the same IPC) ?

B) All 3 neighboring areas have 1 inf. Is it worth to attack two of them with only 1inf,1ftr ? That’s what I usually and systematically do, and I recognized as “nit picky economizer”. Or attack only two areas with 1inf,2ftr each ? is 2inf,1ftr worth the try ? (or even 1inf,1art,1ftr what I often use as Russia against 2inf) ?

On the other hand, suppose something quite horrific may happen if area remains traversable by enemy (Like an US tank horde in KAR adding to an attack on GER). How mandatory is to use more inf instead of fighters ?

The thing you are saying has been the initial object of topic.
Apparently blitzing in and out of empty territories is better for Russia than for Germany.
Because the only place that may be used for doing that is the Karelia, that is empty in G1. Blitzing to Ark has been subsequently discussed, as a poor economic move that, however, could give strategic and opportunity advantages, if you play it right.
The problem with this blitzing in Karelia is that also Russia have tanks and may blitz in and out Karelia without any loss.
For the other territories (BEL and UKR) starting this move is also more disadvantageous for Germans. They have first to leave empty BEL and UKR if they own them, leaving to Russia a greater advantage: cashing high every turn without losing units.
After three or four of this turn Read Army become huge. Really German also have a lot of units, but he has not bleed Russia, and when Allies landing increases the pressure is again in bad shape. Meanwhile Russia may divert more units to stop the Japanese advanve, being only lightly engaged by the Germans.
The problem is even worst if UKR or BEL are in Russian hands. Conquer them and leaving them open i nthe same turn is impossible.

Regarding the trading and the ebb and flow battles, it dependes from the high level strategy hoe to approach them.

• If Japan is aggressively attacking RUSSIA, I usually raise the bet for the trading territories. That is I made the opposite of what we was saying. I send to each territory a couple of inf and 1 art supportedf by at least 1 fig. This force the Russia to counter with more units, that I will destroy after commiting even more forces. This trading of units bleed the German army but bleed more the Russian, that are also losing income to the Japanese.
  The Russia may react in teo ways. Hold the line on the German front, staying engaged, losing a lot of units and weakening Germans, but leaving more space to the Japanese. Othrwise Russia may disengage from the Eastern Front, countering more strongly the Japan but allowing German to advance toward Moscow.
• If Japan is having an hard time to advance in Asia, then minimizing the losses on the Eastern front is mandatory for Germany. Attacking and holding territories with minimal forces is the rule of thumb. Even risking to not get the IPC is feasible if this minimize the infantry losses. Because in those way Europe may be stacked more heavily. When finally Japanese arrive to Moscow, Germans have to move towards Moscow, fighting their way. So they needs the more units possible to engage Russia while leaving behind a strong defense against allied landings.

Summarizing, I believe that an economic-driven policy for the Eastern front is more advantageous for Russia than for Germany. Germany have to trade unit for unit with Russia, leveraging their superiority in IPC gaining, while preparing to advance when Japanese reach Moscow outskirts.

Switch,

Not complaining about “bad” dice.  I’m stating the fact that Russia this game has had UNGODLY dice!  They sold their souls to the devil to win every engagement where they had even a 1% chance of livng and won them decisively.

@Cmdr:

Switch,

Not complaining about “bad” dice.  I’m stating the fact that Russia this game has had UNGODLY dice!  They sold their souls to the devil to win every engagement where they had even a 1% chance of livng and won them decisively.

Okay, now I KNOW that you just make stuff up. The only bigger battles for Russia were R1, where I took both WRus and Belo without loss. Then you complained so I gave you the No Luck result for those battles, so that cancels those dice right out.

And since then it’s pretty much just been trading territories, where I recall you describing victory for the attacker as the “expected outcome”. What are you talking about, “Ungodly dice”? The only Russian engagements that were not just straight trading had me attacking 3 Inf 1 Arm with something like 3 Inf 1 Art 2 Arm 1 Ftr. Hardly a “1% chance” of victory. Maybe you can show me a battle where I had a 1% chance of victory. Considering that I usually go for overkill, me going for a battle with 1% odds of success is pretty unlikely.

Sure you had bad luck in Bury (where I had a 15% chance of surviving unless you were willing to sacrifice Ftrs), but I never told you that you had to attack a stack of 6 Inf with only 4 Inf of your own plus all air in range, thus forgoing Pearl. That Pearl Fleet is now smack dab in the middle of the Atlantic, replacing the units I lost killing the German fleet.

I think your problems this game (which you say you are winning) have more to do with putting German units (land and sea) where the Allies can kill them, and not having enough transports for Japan, giving Japan limited mobility / tactical options.

A key part of strategy in war is controlling the circumstances under which your forces will encounter the enemy. You can’t control the dice, but you CAN avoid putting a lone armor unit (or Arm+3 Inf), right next to a  big enemy stack that will eat it for breakfast.

Uh, you forgetting the very slim odds you had in Buryatia?  How about the R2 reclaimation against 9 infantry, 3 armor with the loss, if I remember right, of 1 attacking infantry?

Russia’s been outright damn lucky and I can only hope the luck turns and you get 0 hits defending Moscow or Caucasus in a major engagement to bring the game back online.

England and America, however, have had neutral dice.  Germany and Japan have had neutral dice.  Russia, unGodly, unholy dice because they sold their souls to the devil! :P

You are talking about two battles in which Russia got lucky on defence - and not for strategically vital territories like Egypt or Eastern Europe or something like that.

I could say the same about my attacks on the German fleet - you got lucky with those dice, and those cost me Fighters, not Inf. So I don’t think luck is the main factor in our game. But I’m sure people here are tired of hearing about our game… let’s just play it out, the point about the Arc blitz has been made.

No, of course, +4 IPC for Russia on round 2 isn’t vital at all!  I mean hell, that’s nothing!  Especially when added to -4 to Japan AND the loss of a major portion of the Japanese army to an inferior defensive force with almost no damage done to that defensive force.

Then couple that with very good (not extreme, since you did lose a whole infantryman) series of attacks on Russia 3 resulting in superior outcomes in Europe.

Nope, the dice have had no effect.  :roll:

Dice whiner.

Your lucky dice in defending your exposed fleet netted you a relative benefit of tens of IPCs. I’m not saying I haven’t had any good luck. We’ve both had good luck and bad luck. The trick is dealing with it.

+4 IPCs is not “strategically vital” - I’m talking about a battle that nets you an enemy IC, opens/closes the Suez canal, or allows a large body of tanks to move through in NCM. These little battles are just a sideshow, a jockeying for income. The real game is in moving your armies around.

So you had some bad dice. Deal with it! (strategically and emotionally)

@Ender:

So you had some bad dice. Deal with it! (strategically and emotionally)

Working on it.  Just need you to get a set of bad dice with Russia so I can get the tables leveled again. :)

Huh. Never thought you’d actually attack Ukraine, or that you’d at least divert a few units off to Karelia. Instead you attacked with full strength and got pretty good dice. However, you left Berlin exposed too.

Good dice: you survived with 7 more Arm than the median result. With the median result, Russia would have made an economic gain in that battle - eg. it would have been a pyrrhic victory. As it is however Russia’s now in a tight spot. But so is Germany.

Good thing it wasn’t a league game. Sounds like you don’t want to play anymore.

@Bean:

Erm just curious, who wound up “winning”? It sounds like you both quit, but I’m not sure…did someone give in to someone else or just a mutual quit or what? lol  :lol:

It wasn’t a matter of winning or losing.  It was a matter to demonstrate that the Blitz of Archangelsk was in Germany’s long term favor.

And yea, I left Germany exposed.  I really didn’t put any thought into that round, just wanted to demonstrate the point that Russia was a paper tiger at that point.  Though, it was nice to finally get some average or better (in this case much better) dice against Russia.  They’d been so uber frackin lucky in every battle on both offense and defense it wasn’t even partly funny.

Russia had pretty avg. dice. The allies had the game sewn up except that Jennifer decided to hang the whole game on an all or nothing attack against a big Russian stack in the Ukraine, and got really lucky.

Ordinarily I would not have moved my Russian stack into the Ukraine at this point but I was gambling on two things:

1. That Jennifer would send a couple of units into Karelia, leaving her with not quite enough stuff to attack Ukraine and
2. That Jennifer’s typical superstition re: dice and esp. Russia’s dice in this game would hold and dissuade her from attacking Ukraine.

Jenn surprised me on both accounts, and committed to attacking Ukraine while declaring that she didn’t really want to continue anymore, and so she wasn’t even going to build. I think that she expected this battle to confirm yet again that Russia had insane dice, and give her a good excuse to walk away from it. Instead, she got really lucky, so she quietly placed a build and posted a map “just in case I wanted to press it farther”. So I think if she had been intending to continue to play, she would not have attacked Ukraine.

However, that was the play she needed to make, and she made it. I really regret my Ukraine move now, I should have just traded at least one more turn, because Allied reinforcements were just one turn away and with those in place I really would have had Europe locked up. In the meantime, Japan still did not have a hold on India, and it’s biggest forces were in Manchuria and Burytia, so Japan was still a good 3-4 turns away from really putting pressure on Russia.

So it’s hard to say who would have won. Russia had lost a lot of units, but the Allies were about 26 in production still at Round 5 - generally the Axis are in trouble if they have not equalized income by the time the Allied fleets are in full shuck. In addition, Germany only had 10 Inf and nothing else on it, so the 7 allied TRN + BB and air in range probably could have taken it.

So:
-Russian stack wiped out
-Berlin vulnerable
-Allies 26 ahead in production
-Allied shipping almost in full gear
-Japan still not controlling India (UK about to retake it w/ 2 Arm + 1 Bom, as Ind held w/1 Jap. Arm)

about sums up the basics of where the game was at. But for the purposes of the Arc blitz, just review the first two rounds of the game.

I’d be willing to resume the game from the beginning of Round 5, before both of us made big silly moves, but it’s up to Jennifer.

As it stands though no one can claim victory. I suppose I could, since Jennifer threw up her hands first, but what would be the point? It’s not very satisfying to end a game in that manner though.

@Cmdr:

@Bean:

Erm just curious, who wound up “winning”? It sounds like you both quit, but I’m not sure…did someone give in to someone else or just a mutual quit or what? lol  :lol:

It wasn’t a matter of winning or losing.  It was a matter to demonstrate that the Blitz of Archangelsk was in Germany’s long term favor.

And yea, I left Germany exposed.  I really didn’t put any thought into that round, just wanted to demonstrate the point that Russia was a paper tiger at that point.  Though, it was nice to finally get some average or better (in this case much better) dice against Russia.  They’d been so uber frackin lucky in every battle on both offense and defense it wasn’t even partly funny.

Russia was not a paper tiger. Russia had maintained income of about 30 throughout the game. True, Russia was not as big as Germany, but it was doing pretty well considering it was dealing with both Japan and Germany and had not really had much help from the other allies yet.

Russia was stupid to move its stack into the Ukraine, that’s all Russia was. And like I said above, ordinarily I wouldn’t have done it facing another player, but against you I thought you would be afraid of my Russian dice and would leave it alone. I’ve just learned yet again that it is never a good idea to base your strategy on expecting your opponent to make a mistake.

If you had had normal or worse than normal dice in that battle, you would have lost more IPCs than Russia, but there was a chance that you wouldn’t, so it was a bad move in that it gave you a chance to level the game.

It seems that you wouldn’t have attacked either except that you felt the game had lost its point, so if you had still been meaning to play the game out you wouldn’t have attacked.

@Bean:

Jenn surprised me on both accounts,

No one surprises Ender, Ender always wins! You’re a fake  :evil:

Does that mean you’re out of my jeesh?

Actually, Germany had a significant chance to win Ukraine with 7 out of 9 tanks.  That they won with 9 tanks is not that exceptional.

However, how many battles did Russia win when they had an 8% chance to even have a surviving unit?  Like almost all of them and with almost perfect survivability rates to boot.  That’s why Russia is said to have had exceptionally lucky dice in this game.

Also, you asked me for an attack on Ukraine, which is why I did it.  You wanted to hang it on that battle, I didn’t.  I just complied with your request.

And furthermore, if England and America had even half the luck that Russia had that game, Tokyo would have been conquered on Round 3 and Berlin on Round 2.  That’s how nutso those dice were.  Only reason round 1 was “average” for Russia’s ATTACK was because the dice were so ridiculous even YOU couldn’t stomach the results.  The DEFENSE of Russia in Round 1 was game breaking, IMHO.  6 Infantry do not beat 4 Infantry, Artillery, Armor, Battleship, 2 Fighters and a Bomber in any reality.  Likewise, your perfect defense of Ukraine.  It was like a nutso ride, it really was.  Like giving an 8 year old the remote control to your car and then getting into it without a seatbelt on.

It’s a testament of my skill at the game that Germany not only survived Russia’s luck but also destroyed the Russian offensive machine with enough force to push on and turn the tide of battle.

All of which is irrelevant, the relevance was in Rounds 1 and 2, not 3, 4 and 5.  And I, personally, still think the blitz is the better move even if I had near 0 defensive hits in both rounds 1 and 2 of that battle with Germany.

@Cmdr:

Actually, Germany had a significant chance to win Ukraine with 7 out of 9 tanks.  That they won with 9 tanks is not that exceptional.
The median result was 2 tanks surviving. So 9 is pretty good.

However, how many battles did Russia win when they had an 8% chance to even have a surviving unit?  Like almost all of them and with almost perfect survivability rates to boot.  That’s why Russia is said to have had exceptionally lucky dice in this game.

You keep citing these very precise percentages, but I don’t see which battles you are talking about. Apart from your attack on Bury, pretty much all the Russian attacks were trading battles. Can you please cite some specific battles where I had these supposedly amazing dice?

Also, you asked me for an attack on Ukraine, which is why I did it.  You wanted to hang it on that battle, I didn’t.  I just complied with your request.

I didn’t ASK you to, I said “care to try your luck against the amazing dice of Russia” or something like that. Whatever

And furthermore, if England and America had even half the luck that Russia had that game, Tokyo would have been conquered on Round 3 and Berlin on Round 2.  That’s how nutso those dice were.  Only reason round 1 was “average” for Russia’s ATTACK was because the dice were so ridiculous even YOU couldn’t stomach the results.  The DEFENSE of Russia in Round 1 was game breaking, IMHO.  6 Infantry do not beat 4 Infantry, Artillery, Armor, Battleship, 2 Fighters and a Bomber in any reality.  Likewise, your perfect defense of Ukraine.  It was like a nutso ride, it really was.  Like giving an 8 year old the remote control to your car and then getting into it without a seatbelt on.

That whole paragraph is nutso. First, Russia 1 I survived with 3 more Inf than expected, which is hardly huge, esp. compared to the 7 extra armor that you had surviving your Ukraine attack. Again, please cite some battles other than the Bury one where I had this supposed luck.

It’s a testament of my skill at the game that Germany not only survived Russia’s luck but also destroyed the Russian offensive machine with enough force to push on and turn the tide of battle.

Umm actually no. That’s a testament to the fact that I gambled on your superstition re dice and lost in that you actually attacked, and further a testament to the fact that luck tends to even out, as you got pretty lucky in that battle. With average luck, that battle actually should have been a loser for you in terms of units/IPCs lost. The only reason the attack was a good move was that you were behind anyway and had to gamble to have a shot at equalizing, and hence it was a mistake for me to create that opportunity for you. In other words, it was a single mistake by me, not testimony to your skill.

All of which is irrelevant, the relevance was in Rounds 1 and 2, not 3, 4 and 5.  And I, personally, still think the blitz is the better move even if I had near 0 defensive hits in both rounds 1 and 2 of that battle with Germany.

Indeed. I think the game showed that the only result of the Arch blitz was that

1. Germany gained 2 IPCs for Archangel
2. Russia killed a German tank (for free in this case but in 50% of games it would be in exchange for an Inf)
3. Russia was not hampered by having any units “out of position”

That’s what happened in the game. But I know that Jennifer is impervious to Facts, so this will be my last post on the merits of the Arc blitz, and I heartily invite her to try it against me every game we play.

@Ender:

But I know that Jennifer is impervious to Facts

Or maybe she just PRETENDS to be impervious to Facts.

Dun dun dun!