Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
5 Posts

Axis & Allies: 1942» Forums » Strategy

Subject: R1: Norway rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Christian Kalk
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmb
Ah yes, perhaps one of the most powerful moves for Russia on turn 1 is the drive into Norway in an attempt to permanently reduce Germany's income and, more importantly, save the British Home Fleet by eliminating the Norway Fighter and occupying the Bomber's landing strip.

But just how good is the Norway Offensive?

Pros:
1) Save British Home Fleet
2) Provide convenient drop point for UK/US ground troops for defensive aid.
3) Can be difficult for Germany to retake, unlike mainland conquests.
4) The British Home Fleet can now be used to shelter US transports dropping troops into Norway or Algeria, or staging for D-Day.
5) May encourage Ger to bleed out the Luftwaffe in a later turn to eliminate the threat of invasion by sea.

Cons:
1) Sending troops to Norway reduces the defensive presence in West Russia, putting Morcow at graeter risk.
2) Even if victorious, a surviving fighter must land in Karelia, where it might well be destroyed on G1
3) If only 1 fighter is used (to avoid #2) the attack if quite risky, and a defeat could be catastrophic.

My assessment is that the Norway invasion is a risky venture, but very powerful if successful, making it a good choice if you're looking for a quick game. The game as a whole may well hinge on the results of this one battle.

Comments?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
TheBeast TheBeast
msg tools
KamikazeJohnson wrote:


My assessment is that the Norway invasion is a risky venture, but very powerful if successful, making it a good choice if you're looking for a quick game. The game as a whole may well hinge on the results of this one battle.

Comments?


You almost said it all, Mr. Kamikaze, which is why no one has replied.

What about USSR build on R1 ? A defensive 8-Infantry USSR R1 build can help stave off disaster if R1 attack on Scandinavia fails, but is poor service for China and especially for India, which needs USSR Tanks ASAP. A higher risk build on R1 is 6 Artillery, to deliver offensive punch and take early pressure of Britain, but this is no help for India. Higher risk still is 4 Armor, 1 Artillery, good for relieving India but bad for Moscow, Karelia, Archangel.

Whether the Bosporus & Dardanelles are open is another important factor affecting USSR decisions. If it's open, USSR needs to be more cautious and strongly protect Caucasus on R1.

How decisive is the Moscow fighter to the defense of India on J1 or J2?

Another question is, how risky is the weak, one-fighter version of the R1 attack on Scandinavia?

Germany defends Norway with 3 Infantry + Fighter = 4 units and 10 points on the dice. USSR attacks with 3 Infantry + Tank + Fighter = 5 units and 9 points on the dice.

If Round 1 of the combat brings a result worse than a 1:1 or 2:2 infantry exchange, Karelia then falls next turn, but should be able to kill a couple of Axis Infantry going down. USSR can call off the attack. If it brings even losses in Round 1, USSR can press the attack on Scandinavia and probably win.

The fact there's no one obvious best move for USSR shows the set-up was well-designed.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christian Kalk
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmb
Aardvark2 wrote:

Another question is, how risky is the weak, one-fighter version of the R1 attack on Scandinavia?


I ran 60 simulations, and arrived at the following numbers, assuming USSR goes all out (no retreat):
72% chance of killing the German Fighter
64% chance of being conquering Norway (this uncludes cases where the Fighter dies to preserve the tank)
48% chance of both conquering Norway and preserving the fighter (total victory). Adding the second Fighter increases the occurrance of this result to aboout 74%, with over 90% chance of killing the German Fighter. (Note that even without the Norway Fighter, Germany has almost a 50-50 fight against the UK Home Fleet, as long as he has a place to land the Bomber. UK has an edge only if the Russian Sub hits on the first round.
Note also that as far as I could tell, the German Fighter hit less than 50% throughout these tests, so the results may be somewhat optimistic.

Aardvark2 wrote:
How decisive is the Moscow fighter to the defense of India on J1 or J2?


I generally role-play USSR as being completely insular: they don't share space with their "allies", they merely have common enemies. As such, I never send troops to help defend India or China. (I've always felt that should be a solid rule, to represent the political tension between them and the rest of the world at the time.) USSR has other uses for the Russian Gold.

Aardvark2 wrote:
What about USSR build on R1 ? A defensive 8-Infantry USSR R1 build can help stave off disaster if R1 attack on Scandinavia fails, but is poor service for China and especially for India, which needs USSR Tanks ASAP. A higher risk build on R1 is 6 Artillery, to deliver offensive punch and take early pressure of Britain, but this is no help for India. Higher risk still is 4 Armor, 1 Artillery, good for relieving India but bad for Moscow, Karelia, Archangel.


I usually go 4Inf, 3Arty for a balance of numbers vs offence, and reserve my starting tanks for attacks where I expect to hold the territory, or for when they are absolutely needed. The Fighters become critical in this case, providing Russia with much-needed high attacks and mobility.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nate Martin
United States
CAMAS
WA
flag msg tools
designer
"...but only slightly less well known is this:
badge
...never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line!"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
R1 has to depend on what the Allies are going to do. A KJF R1 into Norway is probably a waste of resources needed for defending Rus & Cac. A KGF R1 into Norway is probably required. We usually go KGF, so I usually R1 into Norway.

If I see R1 into Norway, my G1 is either going to be a lot more cautious: 1car 1tra in the Baltic, 1ftr 3inf for Germany; OR it's going to be Russia-oriented: 1car 1tra in the Baltic, 6inf save 1IPC. OR it could be totally anti-Russia: 1tra 1cru in the med, 3tnk 2inf for SEu and Germany.

But either way, what Norway really takes from Germany is initiative, not $$: Germany probably just retakes Norway on G1 using the Baltic trans + Luftwaffe. How does this strategy 'permanently' reduce the German paycheck?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christian Kalk
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmb
Late reply here but...

R1: Norway is basically USSR declaring KGF. If UK/US don't pursue that strategy, they're clearly inexperienced players. Or German spies...

Norway may not be a permanent loss to Germany at R1, but it does take a major commitment from Germany to retake it, especially if USSR successfully hits Ukraine as well. This reduces the Luftwaffe to 4 Fighters 1 Bomber, and those planes have a LOT of jobs to do. Depending on how much forcs USSR has remaining in the conquored territories, those planes may be more needed elsewhere. Plus, given the chance, UK will at least attempt to secure Norway: reinforce if Ger doesn't retake, or invade if Ger does retake. If UK lands in Norway, the Allies will likely hold it until the game is decided.

Then again, I've never seriously explored the early Battle of Britain in this edition, which makes all the other uses of the Luftwaffe G1 more or less extraneous.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.