Posts made by Requester45

That is the argument in case you haven’t been paying attention.

This strategy has been extensively discussed in the “Bright Skies” forum, and I will start this thread to lay down an explanation of this strategy to be refined and perfected given the right in game circumstances. Afrikakorps began the conversation, extending onto the US strategy of “Bright Skies” a hand in hand strategy for the Russian forces to use with the help of the US strategic bomber fleets. For purposes of separating the Russian tactics and the US tactics, we will call the Russian portion of the strategy “Red Tide.” This strategy revolves around the idea and concept of a Russian force that can both attack axis positions, as well as be mobile enough to defend key positions at any given time.

In order to fulfill the attacking portion of this strategy, the Russians will use the units it has at the onset of the game, as well as additional artillery to have somewhat formidable attacking forces staged in several key location in the Russian territories. When you start the game you have several artillery, as well as several tanks, and planes that can be staged and used in these two primary Russian forces. Given that Germany has weak enough spearheads for their columns, Russia will be able to attack and sometimes entirely destroy these smaller advancing forces. This is meant to slow the German forces down while giving other Russian units the proper amount of time to expand into axis territories (mainly Africa) and gain these all important NOs. The idea is that the Russians IPCs will continue to stay at a steady level and/or increase as the game progresses. This of course will only be a possible strategy if the German player does not entirely commit to a Moscow rush. I’ll discuss this further down.

The speed is the second part of this strategy. Along with the artillery being purchased, the Russian player will purchase Mechanized Infantry and place them in the designated zones, so that they (along with planes and tanks) can reach a large area specifically around the Ukraine, and Novgorod, while also being able to fall back to Moscow in the case that they feel more threatened. The mobility can allow you to take out small German forces that may break away from the main forces, while also being able to combine for an attack on a larger German advancement, slowing them down.

This has been heatedly discussed on the “Bright Skies” forum, with many strong points on both sides. I believe that in order for this combined strategy to work, Germany has to focus its forces in a few other places, rather than a full 100% commitment on the Russian front. This can mean a push on London, a massive naval build, or a larger Mediterranean push. Afrikakorps also discussed the combination of the US strategy “Bright Skies” to support this Russian “Red Tide” stating that the two of these must support one another. Doing so will take away the full might of the US in the Pacific. It will become much more difficult to stop the Japanese, and that can be discussed in an entirely different thread. “Red Tide” can be used in games where the German player is undecided or fully committed to Sea Lion. It is difficult to judge what Germany will do before G3. Afrikakorps has detailed more on this strategy, and has some extremely fine arguments for its implementation. The key will be to watch Germany’s play.

Nice. I love to see this kind of stuff.

I will open a thread soon. To discuss these strategies is great. The different outcomes of the games using these strategies relies on the individual players on both sides of the game. It will be interesting to see these strategies implemented and tweaked into a nice refined workable strategy.

This is part of the reason that I am not totally convinced on purchasing only bombers for the US. You need to be able to hold Japan from expanding. This doesn’t mean that I am opposed to supporting Europe. I think that this is also crucial.

They are in my prayers. Sad day in American history.

I might open a new thread for the Japanese strategy I mentioned. I might also open one for the Red Tide strategy. I’m thinking about testing these two strategies out, and then making videos or just some lengthy articles discussing them. It is nice to extend your playbook with both the Axis and the Allies, however the #1 reason you win or lose a game is your ability to adapt to any situation and take advantage of your opponents mistakes. That being said, it is best to have a strategy planned for any specific game that you play, and adapt accordingly.

Japan can move onto Singapore after they sack Calcutta. It is not going to be a vital territory to them, because they should have the naval base in Calcutta, the Philippines, and Hong Kong, along with one in Hainan if they do the sack Calcutta strategy. Japan would be able to move somewhat leisurely through the Pacific.

You could do this, however the Japanese navy would just be too much of a monster for the smaller allied force in the Pacific to deal with. I think without US help, Japan would have free reign. I would even go as far as to say that after sacking Calcutta Japan could make a move on Sydney considering they would have a formidable navy and air force left. They wouldn’t run into much opposition if the US was focused on Europe. Japan could also use the strategy that I have mentioned before called “Divine Dragon Operation #2” in which the Japanese make a push onto the African east coast resulting in a loss of IPCs for the French and British, and liberation of some Italian territories. This kind of strategy would only be made easier by the sacking of Calcutta and the lack of US navy given they do “Bright Skies”

Right but you had touched on the German Luftwaffe not being able to land in the territory that Germany is taking, which wouldn’t be an issue if you use Italian can openers as pointed out by Ozymandiac. I like that we are discussing some alternate strategy options for Russia, but these types of conversations only lead to a positive strategical outcome if the steps that are discussed actually take place in the game. For instance, if Germany does not make the proper advancements, or have the Italian can openers, then the strategy may work. If Germany commits to a Sea Lion attack then Russia can afford to purchase some offensive units. The entire strategy relies on Germany not being completely focused on Russia for one reason or another, and you will not be entirely aware of what Germany is doing until G3. I do think we should change the strategy name, considering we haven’t really talked about the inclusion of American bombers. This is a whole other part of the strategy that I don’t agree with. If Japan is left unchecked in the Pacific, we could foreseeabley have a quick Japanese victory.  They only need 6 capitol cities, and Hawaii would be wide open. Once Japan sacks Calcutta, it would be a cake walk. Russia needs to be able to hold Moscow to save Europe, and the US needs to be able to contain Japan. I think we need to label the two strategies desperately.

Bright Skies: the US strategy of only purchasing bombers to destroy naval fleets and or devastate Europe.

Red Tide: Russian strategy of purchasing fast moving units, and artillery in an attempt to take preventative attacks against the Axis, while being able to move more quickly than standard infantry in order to relocate i both defensive and offensive means.

So the result was this way because the German play didn’t commit 100% to the Moscow push. This to me sounds like a German player who couldn’t make up his mind as to whether he wanted Russia or London. That is why the game resulted in an allied victory.

This still doesn’t answer my question.

The box lid for a dice tray brings back some great memories.

This is a great explanation of the points I have been trying to make since the beginning of this argument. Russia cannot play an aggressive game unless Germany is playing nonsensically.

Like I said, we will just have to give it some play time, and see where it can or cannot be improved upon.

Nobody will argue that Hitler was crazy haha.

Well that is the point I have just touched on. Your hypothesis has been tested over the course of thousands of AA games by the AA community. The Russian strategy has been refined down to what it is now, with the exception of the occasional outlier. Your small scale purchases may not consist entirely of infantry, however the importance of stacking Moscow has been proven to be what makes or breaks an allied defense.

Right, so some of these you don’t achieve until late game. The Scandinavia gambit is controversial because if the German player is skilled, they will not lose Scandinavia, or if they did, it’s because they wanted Russia to waste time and units from defending Novgorod and or Moscow. I feel as though the reason most players play a conservative “boring” game with Russia is because of trial and error. When I first began playing AA years ago, everyone wanted to play an aggressive Russian game including myself, because in human nature. You want to have some fun battles and out maneuver the enemy and out smart the enemy. However through trial and error we find that Russia cannot keep up with the ever expanding German forces. Germany rapidly gains IPCs and Russian territories, while Russia is slowly losing IPCs and retreating. Russia cannot compete in this way, and instead are forced into a shell (Moscow). The only way that Russia is going to be able to compete in a way in which you describe is if the German player has dedicated their game strategy to taking out the UK both in the Atlantic, and the Mediterranean. Which is not the case most of the time, because Russia is a sleeping giant. If you look into the war in real life, Hitler realized this too late. He knew that he would have to attack Russia and have a two front war and by waiting too long he allowed for Russia to gain too much momentum.

Yes but you have to account for the loss of territories throughout time, as well as the ability to lose some of those bonuses like sz125. I don’t think Russian IPC income can become a monster. It is difficult for Russia to obtain some of these, and it would take some time to grab the Mediterranean and African territories for the bonuses. You also have to think about the amount of resources it would take for Russia to obtain all of the bonuses that you listed. How would you plan on gaining this very large amount of IPCs?

I agree with Imperious. A basketball style bracket. I now I was’nt there this year, however I feel as though I would want to play against the best competition possible.