Lend Lease to the USSR

[John B.]

I'm currently in the middle of several games playing both Axis and Allies and it seems to me that is is too easy for the Axis to cut off lend lease to Russia through both the Persian Gulf and Vladivostok.

1. Persian gulf. All the Axis has to do is plunk a single sub in the Persian gulf and no MMPs get through. Given how it is harder to kill subs these days it takes away 80 MMP per turn from the Russians and can take quite sometime to wear the sub down even with a large commitment of allied naval forces. Even if you require the sub to be on raid and it starts at level 10 supply that's 400 MMP taken away from Russia by the time the sub drops to 5 supply, or 800 if the IJN decides to take it all the way to zero supply.

2. Vladivostok. I've both done it and had it done to me, but once Japan declares war on the US there really is no reason for it to not declare war on Russia. With Russia fighting tooth and nail in the west, it can't spare forces to defend the city and Russia loses 80 MMP per turn once it falls (plus the 5 the city generates). In historical terms, Japan was happy to sign the non-aggression pact because it wanted to fight either the US or the USSR but not both. Perhaps one way to fix this is would be to have points that, if Russia keeps garrisoned, prevent Japan from doing a DOW on Russia. Or a decision event whereby Russia can force a non-aggression pact on Japan but it gives Japan a boost in NM as long as it is in force.

As always, this is a great game and I really enjoy playing it!

[BillRunacre]

I'll have a think about 1. as it might be that we can make it so that the Axis raider only makes the USSR lose (say) half of the total.

With 2. Are the new Fortifications near Vladivostok helping?

I am planning some changes to help the USSR better withstand air attacks, so I don't want to take things too far the other way.

[John B.]

Bill,

1. Even 50% would be better and would reflect what happens on the Murmansk route where it takes a huge commitment Axis naval power to shut down the convoy route. Or, perhaps, put red blockade boxes around Basra, as near Vladivostok, that the naval unit has to to occupy to shut down the lend lease and make the naval unit subject to attack by unspecified forces (as near Vladivostok).

2. The forts don't hurt but it's still very easy to take Vladivostok. All the Japanese really need to do is snip the Transiberian railroad, bombard the port/city to reduce its supply level while attacking the soviet units with a couple of armies and the city falls fairly quickly. It's a huge payoff for the Axis without a whole lot of effort and appears to undercut the effort to help the soviets with the lend lease decision option.

These of course, are merely my observations on how to tinker with what is an addictive game!

John

[petedalby]

I am planning some changes to help the USSR better withstand air attacks, so I don't want to take things too far the other way.

Hi Bill - might one option be to give the USSR a starting chit in air warfare? Russia is so strapped for MMPs it struggles to research this - at least in my experience. If it's fighters were more effective it should hamper the Luftwaffe a little.

[Chernobyl]

Yes the Persian Gulf sub does seem pretty lame. What is the logic behind this special case and not just leaving it a regular convoy route?

might one option be to give the USSR a starting chit in air warfare?

In general you are right: Russia needs more. But I am not a fan of this particular idea. The VVS was pretty poor in skill and tactics and that is the main reason why it performed so poorly in 1941 (not technology). But I am a fan of giving USSR more love in general. A lot more.

[BillRunacre]

Bill,

2. The forts don't hurt but it's still very easy to take Vladivostok. All the Japanese really need to do is snip the Transiberian railroad, bombard the port/city to reduce its supply level while attacking the soviet units with a couple of armies and the city falls fairly quickly. It's a huge payoff for the Axis without a whole lot of effort and appears to undercut the effort to help the soviets with the lend lease decision option.

One option we have would be to make Vladivostok a Primary Supply Center, so that even if cut off is base supply is 10 rather than 5. Maybe that is a way forward?

[Bavre]

I must say I have never seen/done a really meaningful defense of Vladivostok. At this point China is usually already neutered, so if need be the Japs can bring very experienced troops + HQs to bear plus artillery and air support if necessary. At least in my matches the leaderless infanterie defenders always just get slaughtered, even at full supply.
As SU I've stopped to even try and as Axis I sometimes deliberately leave the rail open, so that the Sowjets can convert more of their troops into Jap XP...

[kaigab]

I raised these points in another thread unfortunately none cared.

Persia: yes it is very easy to cut it. I also think (not sure though) it gets cut when land connection between caucasus and stalingrad is cut from germans. This to say that considering the joke that is SU in this game, even fixing the persia convoy route would only fix the problem till Summer '42 at the latest, then Germans steam roll Stalingrad and Caucasus (if they didn't already) and that's about it.

[kaigab]

I must say I have never seen/done a really meaningful defense of Vladivostok. At this point China is usually already neutered, so if need be the Japs can bring very experienced troops + HQs to bear plus artillery and air support if necessary. At least in my matches the leaderless infanterie defenders always just get slaughtered, even at full supply.
As SU I've stopped to even try and as Axis I sometimes deliberately leave the rail open, so that the Sowjets can convert more of their troops into Jap XP...

Same here. As SU i railroad all units as soon as i see the first Japanese unit deployed there. It is simply impossible to defend against Japanese...in spring '42 japanese can bring 2/3 armies + 2/3 bombers + strategic bomber to reduce supply. In 2 turns is taken and there is no way russians can do anything.

[kaigab]

With 2. Are the new Fortifications near Vladivostok helping?

I am planning some changes to help the USSR better withstand air attacks, so I don't want to take things too far the other way.

The issue is how effective is air power on units in fortifications/cities/forest/mountains imo. The whole issue with SU (and China as well....pretty easy to take all China as Japan) all comes from that.

attacker just needs to bring a couple of medium/tac bombers and then you can obliterate any unit at zero cost regardless of terrain, entrechment or anything else.

If you are going to change air power to make it less effective maybe no other modification is required. I hope modification is not just going back to no fly on bad weather though. Best would be to force significant axis losses (land or air) when attacking a unit in city/fortification/forest/mountain. Other solution would be to double the cost of bombers forcing the axis to have less.

[John B.]

[/quote]

One option we have would be to make Vladivostok a Primary Supply Center, so that even if cut off is base supply is 10 rather than 5. Maybe that is a way forward?
[/quote]

Bill, given how isolated Vladivostok and how desperate the USSR is in 41/42 I don't think minor changes will help rectify how easy it is for the Japanese to cut off the Lend Lease. Historically Japan showed about zero interest in declaring war on the USSR after the incidents in Mongolia and its decision to attack the US regardless of how weak Stalin was in 41/42. A couple of options that I can think of would be (a) Japan takes a big NM hit if it declares was on both the US and the USSR with an ongoing reduction as long as it is fighting both powers or (b) a decision for the USSR that would force the non-aggression pact. This would give Japan a NM bonus and perhaps a few MMP (sort of like 5 MMP for wolfram from Spain). To keep the pact in place the USSR would have to keep certain points garrisoned. It would also prevent a USSR DOW on Japan until Germany surrendered. So, it would not be cost free for the allied side.

[BillRunacre]

One option we have would be to make Vladivostok a Primary Supply Center, so that even if cut off is base supply is 10 rather than 5. Maybe that is a way forward?
[/quote]

Bill, given how isolated Vladivostok and how desperate the USSR is in 41/42 I don't think minor changes will help rectify how easy it is for the Japanese to cut off the Lend Lease. Historically Japan showed about zero interest in declaring war on the USSR after the incidents in Mongolia and its decision to attack the US regardless of how weak Stalin was in 41/42. A couple of options that I can think of would be (a) Japan takes a big NM hit if it declares was on both the US and the USSR with an ongoing reduction as long as it is fighting both powers or (b) a decision for the USSR that would force the non-aggression pact. This would give Japan a NM bonus and perhaps a few MMP (sort of like 5 MMP for wolfram from Spain). To keep the pact in place the USSR would have to keep certain points garrisoned. It would also prevent a USSR DOW on Japan until Germany surrendered. So, it would not be cost free for the allied side.
[/quote]

I like the ideas, but unfortunately they would require engine changes that aren't likely to become a possibility in the near future. Otherwise they would help a lot.

Instead we're going to have to implement other suggestions, possibly an accumulation of small changes.

[Chernobyl]

1. Persian gulf. All the Axis has to do is plunk a single sub in the Persian gulf and no MMPs get through.

How exactly do you do this? I'm having some trouble getting any event to trigger no matter where I place the sub. Does it need to be in hunt mode?

[firsteds]

1. Persian gulf. All the Axis has to do is plunk a single sub in the Persian gulf and no MMPs get through.

How exactly do you do this? I'm having some trouble getting any event to trigger no matter where I place the sub. Does it need to be in hunt mode?

It is really simple and the target hexes are clearly marked, so I suspect you are having a different issue or the convoy is not actually operating yet. Is the US at war? Is Persia in allied hands yet? What is happening in Iraq? The Persian convoy is different to the Vladivostok convoy - it doesn't automatically start with Barbarossa. If you can see the target hexes in the gulf, then the convoy has started. You can also look in reports and check USSR convoy income. I hope this helps.

[firsteds]

I have seen some success in PBEM games in defending the convoys. I don't think it is all doom and gloom:

1, Vladivostok

The new forts help if they are used wisely. An AA upgrade can be used on the forts, town and port. I have also seen a strength 11 army operated to Vlad and entrenched. Some players back it up with an AA unit or artillery on the hex North of the city. The city doesn't hold for ever but it is slow / expensive, for Japan and USSR gets the income and NM for a bit longer. For some reason an entrenched Russian SF unit works very well in the Northern fort.

2. Persia

Most players send a couple of destroyers, but these take a while to reduce subs since the last patch. However, a naval bomber (e.g. the Canadian maritime bomber) is great for both recon and attack. An escort carrier is also a very cheap option to defend the convoy and will be useful later in the Pacific. I agree the land leg of the convoy is hard to defend against Panzers and paratroops, especially if Turkey is Axis. However, by the time the Axis get close enough for a land attack you will have received a fair bit of income.

I am just sharing these tips because players could be waiting a long time for a patch or any changes to game balance, and both convoys have become proper battlegrounds in the PBEM community.

[BillRunacre]

1. Persian gulf. All the Axis has to do is plunk a single sub in the Persian gulf and no MMPs get through.

How exactly do you do this? I'm having some trouble getting any event to trigger no matter where I place the sub. Does it need to be in hunt mode?

The presence of an Axis naval unit is more to prevent income than trigger an event, and its mode does not matter, solely its presence.

That said, it will trigger an informational Pop Up message that says:

Axis Vessels In The Persian Gulf Prevent US Supplies From Reaching Persia

[kaigab]

I have seen some success in PBEM games in defending the convoys. I don't think it is all doom and gloom:

1, Vladivostok
The new forts help if they are used wisely. An AA upgrade can be used on the forts, town and port. I have also seen a strength 11 army operated to Vlad and entrenched. Some players back it up with an AA unit or artillery on the hex North of the city. The city doesn't hold for ever but it is slow / expensive, for Japan and USSR gets the income and NM for a bit longer. For some reason an entrenched Russian SF unit works very well in the Northern fort.

Japan in PBEM usually bring 2/3 armies + 3 bombers + strat bomber + HQ.

At a small cost (300/400 MPP in reparing units + operating units there ?) in 2/3 turns Japan can take the city regardless and make Russia lose 80 MPP for turn for the rest of the game and any unit moved there from Russia is also lost so still the cheapest option for Russia is to leave it undefended imo as soon as you see Japan gathering there.

If Russia moves there an army and an AA (plus keeping at least one corp unit) and keep reinforcing them during the 2/3 turns of the attack, Russia probably spends just 200 MPP in reinforcing just to hold the city for 3 turns plus the total cost of the units which will be encircled and killed (so a cost >700 for 1 army 1 corp 1 AA with upgrades + operating). So basically Russia would spend 900/1000 MPP only to hold Vladivostock for 3/4 more turns (240/320 MPP income)...not worth it.

Best would be at least to leave the allies the possibility to use the arctic convoy also for the MPP shipped through vladivostok in case of loss. Same for Persian one.

[John B.]

One option we have would be to make Vladivostok a Primary Supply Center, so that even if cut off is base supply is 10 rather than 5. Maybe that is a way forward?

Bill, given how isolated Vladivostok and how desperate the USSR is in 41/42 I don't think minor changes will help rectify how easy it is for the Japanese to cut off the Lend Lease. Historically Japan showed about zero interest in declaring war on the USSR after the incidents in Mongolia and its decision to attack the US regardless of how weak Stalin was in 41/42. A couple of options that I can think of would be (a) Japan takes a big NM hit if it declares was on both the US and the USSR with an ongoing reduction as long as it is fighting both powers or (b) a decision for the USSR that would force the non-aggression pact. This would give Japan a NM bonus and perhaps a few MMP (sort of like 5 MMP for wolfram from Spain). To keep the pact in place the USSR would have to keep certain points garrisoned. It would also prevent a USSR DOW on Japan until Germany surrendered. So, it would not be cost free for the allied side.
[/quote]

I like the ideas, but unfortunately they would require engine changes that aren't likely to become a possibility in the near future. Otherwise they would help a lot.

Instead we're going to have to implement other suggestions, possibly an accumulation of small changes.
[/quote]

Bill,

Obviously I am no help when it comes to what requires significant changes and what does not. But, here are some other potentially less significant proposals. 1. Make Vlad a Sevastopol type fortress and primary supply center 2. Make the Vlad garrison an army with an experience dot. 3. Give the Soviets extra units if Japan declares war on the USSR. 4. Historically not all supplies went through Valdivostok in the summer some went along the northern route (as well as planes being flown from Alaska) so perhaps drop the US to a normal 40 if Vlad is taken. In other words, Vlad doubles the normal 40 to 80 but the Russians still get 40 if Vlad falls. You could do the same sort of thing for Persia. An Axis naval unit does not eliminate the MMP, it just eliminates the doubling.

John

[Chernobyl]

The presence of an Axis naval unit is more to prevent income than trigger an event, and its mode does not matter, solely its presence.

That said, it will trigger an informational Pop Up message that says:

Axis Vessels In The Persian Gulf Prevent US Supplies From Reaching Persia

Thanks, maybe it's possible the AI declined to set up this route in my game

[archmache]

Bill, given how isolated Vladivostok and how desperate the USSR is in 41/42 I don't think minor changes will help rectify how easy it is for the Japanese to cut off the Lend Lease. Historically Japan showed about zero interest in declaring war on the USSR after the incidents in Mongolia and its decision to attack the US regardless of how weak Stalin was in 41/42. A couple of options that I can think of would be (a) Japan takes a big NM hit if it declares was on both the US and the USSR with an ongoing reduction as long as it is fighting both powers or (b) a decision for the USSR that would force the non-aggression pact. This would give Japan a NM bonus and perhaps a few MMP (sort of like 5 MMP for wolfram from Spain). To keep the pact in place the USSR would have to keep certain points garrisoned. It would also prevent a USSR DOW on Japan until Germany surrendered. So, it would not be cost free for the allied side.


I really like the idea of japan getting something if they don't attack ussr. Currently axis goes so hard against russia in ostfront that troops are needed asap and defending vladivostok isn't worth it (short term). It is advantageous for japan b/c it also prevents ussr from attacking japan early and requring japanese troops to leave china.

I think there should be a DE event that say renew non-aggresion or something and if renewed then russia also has to keep certain garrision (smaller) and japan gets a economy boost or something. Once germany falls then russia can reneg on the event.