Nit picky German Economizer

@ncscswitch:

I am a big fan of spilling Plastic Blood, so I don;t mind units dying  :lol:

u monster

@ncscswitch:

I am a big fan of spilling Plastic Blood, so I don;t mind units dying  :lol:

I remember from the games we played that it was much more of a slug fest than I usually play. I usually play more conservatively but what was I going to do when you kept sticking your units where I could kill them?

For the most part I agree with Frood. Blocking an armor blitz or vacating a territory to prevent an infantry being smashed by a BB is smart. But, attacking a territory with only 1 inf+fig’s is risky, especially Karelia and Ukraine, because if you lose the inf and leave the territory under Allied control they can reinforce usually with a large quantity of ground units and, more importantly, land all of their combined fighters. Germany has to be careful to not let the Allies combine their forces in one territory, especially in one bordering Eastern Europe because that signals the beginning of the end of Germany’s ability to trade Kar-Belo-Ukr.

@ncscswitch:

You’ve got it Romulus.

Leaving that 1 INF forward in Karelia…

• Preserves 2 IPC in Archangel
• Makes Germany commit forces to taking Karelia instead of it being free (forces that could be destroyed by a Russian atack from West Russia on R2)
• Can potentially kill 1 (or more) German attackers in Karelia
• Prevents the need for Russia to fight in Archangel on R2, freeing up 2 INF and 1 FIG for other duties.
• Reduces the German Build on G2 by $2, with no need for an SBR :-)

In the case of leaving Karelia open to allow a German armor blitz into Archangel, the best solution for Russia is to attack Arch with 1 inf and all of their armor. The Russian armor can still threaten Belo-Kar-Ukr, you’re fighters can be used elsewhere, and at best you’ve only pushed 1 inf into Arch which still can be used in Kar next turn. It makes it a wash for Germany in IPC’s if they’re lucky and an IPC loss if they aren’t. Getting the bonus territory and killing a Russian inf in exchange for the armor is the best you can hope for there because you can’t count Karelia’s income in that equation because moving an inf or blitzing an armor up and back from Eastern gains that income anyway. I would be more than happy, as Russia, to let Germany expose an armor in that case.

@U-505:

For the most part I agree with Frood. Blocking an armor blitz or vacating a territory to prevent an infantry being smashed by a BB is smart. But, attacking a territory with only 1 inf+fig’s is risky, especially Karelia and Ukraine, because if you lose the inf and leave the territory under Allied control they can reinforce usually with a large quantity of ground units and, more importantly, land all of their combined fighters. Germany has to be careful to not let the Allies combine their forces in one territory, especially in one bordering Eastern Europe because that signals the beginning of the end of Germany’s ability to trade Kar-Belo-Ukr.

That’s partly what I meant when I referred to the possibility that the territory may have tactical value, in which case I will use 2 Inf. So I think I totally agree with you :D

Ok. Yes. I forgot about that line while I was posting. But, when there are all kinds of Allied units flying around Europe it can sometimes be hard to judge whether or not a territory is of tactical importance when you have multiple territories to consider so I usually err on the side of caution and go for the take in Ukraine and Karelia.

No Wes…

It is as I stated… TWO THIRDS of the time, the German gain is 2 IPC OR MORE

+2 for Karelia
+2 for Archangel
5.8% of the time you DON’T lose 5 for the ARM (it lives)
44.3% of the time +3 for 1 INF killed
13.4% of the time +6 for 2 INF killed

So…
The +4 for the IPC’s of Karelia and Archangel are automatic (if left vacant), I think you agree with me that far.
Then you have 5.8% that the ARM lives, 44.3% to kill 1 Russian INF, 13.4% to kill 2 Russian INF.
5.8 + 44.3 + 13.4 = 63.5

63.5% rounded to the nearest third is 2/3

So 2/3 of the time, you get the +4 from the territories, and then from +2 to +11 IPC MORE (with +11 being exceedingly rare, +2 being pretty common, assuming the Russians preserve their FIG and retreat once the INF are dead; otherwise you have a VERY small (2.1%) chance of Germany being up by as much as +21:  4 for the territories, 5 for the surviving ARM, 6 for the dead INF, 10 for the dead FIG…).

1/3 of the time you are -1 IPC (ARM dies without getting a defensive hit in Archangel).

The odds are in favor of a positive IPC and unit value exchange for Germany by sending an ARM to blitz a vacant Karelia and Archangel with the MOST COMMON result being Germany Net +2 in combined IPC and Unit Value.

And then the positional advantages of making Russia use their AF on a battle they otherwise would not have to fight at all, and sending 2 INF out of position to the north…

This analysis should be a hint for meditation.

I say again one little infantry in Karelia may avoid more problems even if is for sure a loss for Russia!

I try to do an analysis similar to the one made by Switch, but considering for sure the lost of the territory:

1/3 of the time defending russian infantry should kill one attacking infantry (+3), then die(-3) and losing the territory(-2), net: -2
2/3 of the time inf die without killing nothing: 2/3 * -5

net loss for Russian: (1/3 * -2) + (2/3 * -5) = -0,66 - 3,33 = -3,99 on average -4 IPC

Am I right?

So we should retreat that inf to stack it with other inf (very likely) or move in Karelia more forces to take it (very very unlikely).

But… the possibility for German of blitzing a tank give them the following advantages:

So 2/3 of the time, you get the +4 from the territories, and then from +2 to +11 IPC MORE (with +11 being exceedingly rare, +2 being pretty common, assuming the Russians preserve their FIG and retreat once the INF are dead; otherwise you have a VERY small (2.1%) chance of Germany being up by as much as +21:  4 for the territories, 5 for the surviving ARM, 6 for the dead INF, 10 for the dead FIG…).

that usually are not taken in account!

Result?
Is it not worthy to reason in terms of economy about trading of territories?
Is it more important to reason in terms of opportunity negated to the enemy?
Is it more useful the dispersion of own forces (1 inf alone) that cause more dispersion for the enemy (2 inf and 1 fig attacking)?

I know that units are the more important asset of a nation in A&A (units are the actual power of a nation, IPC are potential power still to be concretized) but I am starting to think that dispersion of forces is useful when aimed to force a consequent dispersion of the enemy and when used to reduce options and lessening the optimal attack of the enemy.

You are negating the value of giving the Russians FOUR needed attacks on R2 instead of only 3… and having only 2 FIGs (MAYBE 3) available for the attacks.  That leaves Russian ART and probably some ARM hanging out on the front, against Germany’s 5 FIGs and BOM…

You start spreading Russia’s initial forces THAT thin, and Germany is going to make some substantial LONG TERM gains, especially with the increased losses of Russian forces going for 4 attacks on R2, and the smaller number of Russians for the Germans to attack in each territory on G2.

If Russia pickets Karelia on R1, Archangel never changes hands ($2 lost to German coffers)
Russia still has only 3 attacks for R2:  Karelia, Belo, Ukraine… all of which would STILL be there, PLUS a 4th Archangel attack if you let the German ARM blitz to Archangel.

Also, the picket in Karelia prevents Germany from blitzing Karelia in the first place, which negates one of your advantages above.

In short, Russia is NOT going to abandon Karelia, they SHOULD picket it with 1 INF.
If they do not, then the likely 2 IPC advantage for Germany of running up on the Russian Border with 1 ARM is indeed VERY worthwhile.

I have no problem leaving Kar empty on Russia 1.

Whether I leave it empty or not depends on my losses in Wrus.  If I take Wrus w/out loss or lose only 1 inf then I’ll keep the guy in Kar.  If I take maybe 2 or more losses I’ll move him to Wrus for added defense and use on R2.

I always leave Karelia open on R1.

If the Germans blitz to Archangel, hurrah, thats a 5 IPC tank mobilized at the front for 2 IPC of territory and 1.5-2 IPC on the retake.  Good deal for Russia, especially since the Germans can’t possibly retake Archangel in force.

As far as leaving even 1 infantry in Karelia - well, the Germans have no problem kicking Karelia’s ass.  I’d rather save my infantry for when it can make a difference.

@trihero:

Leaving Karelia open gives the Germans the opportunity to spend 0-1 infantry to take it. If you leave an inf there, they have to stick out 2 inf, which is what you want - the turtle coming out of its shell.

That’s why my approach for attacking a territory with 1 Inf in it is 1 Inf + 2 or more Ftrs. Save those Inf until you have a big ball of them.

I always play with the theory that,
“Your best defense, is a damn good Offense!”
Not a foolish offense, but a well calculated strategy, that intices your opponent to stick his neck out, again and again to take out those 3 infantry pickets so you can crush their remnants with rebuilds next turn. makes for a fun game too, Attack, attack, attack! (wait, that’s another game).
But anyway, Germany has to keep the pressure on Russia for as long as possible to help Japans growth. Then Japan can save their butt in the end.

And Ivan that is how I view the ARM blitz to Archangel.

It makes the Russians stick their neck out… in Karelia, Belo and Ukraine.  Then I cut that head off, and have Russians shoved back and start trading a territory closer to Moscow.

First:  Start with a “traditional” Russian openning of WR and Ukr w/ typical dice.

Then the German counter in Ukraine, and the blitz to Archangel
Combine with a Karelia Stack, and the Med Fleet in SZ15…
Now look at the board at the start of R2…

Do you see it yet?

A good solution to this, if Germany do the “Angel-blitz”, UK can take Archangel.

Peace folks  :wink: