Another stupid question

[EUBanana]

Clueless Noob warning - I am clueless. What follows me be in complete error. Correct me! [&o]





I'm not really getting the motivation behind the USSR wanting to claim Bessarabia or the Finnish borderlands. Under what circumstances should the USSR do these things?

In terms of the actual land you get, both seem of pretty minor impact. Bessarabia, surely it's better to be behind the river than in front of it surely. One presumes the USSR is not going to be making moves on Ploesti in 1941/2. The Finnish borderlands, well, there's not even a Ploesti to inch closer towards, seems 100% worthless.

In terms of diplomacy... well, if you don't claim the Finnish borderlands then you don't have to fight Finland. So its worthless land in exchange for another minor for the Axis. Seems like a poor trade.

Bessarabia, if the USSR gets that, then Germany gets to align Romania and Hungary, no? Why would the USSR wish to speed up the process by which the Axis gets its mitts on them?


I admit my knowledge of the nuances of what seems to be quite a complicated subject in a fiendishly complicated game is not up to scratch - hence this post. [:'(]

[Centuur]

Here are some reasons (and you don't ask a stupid question):

First: in Bessarabia there are cities. Those cities become USSR home land cities if Bessarabia is claimed, thus giving the USSR a couple of extra supply bases in the region.

Second: you can't prevent Germany from aligning any of the Axis minors if you don't do anything. So why not be aggressive and make sure you get extra breathing space. Especially the Finnish-USSR border is pretty close to the Murmansk railroad which you probably want to use for transporting resources send by the Western Allies to the USSR.

Third: there is a economic consequence too. Every turn Germany gets 5 normal and 2 oil resources out of the USSR. Now, if you can use some of those resources in your own factories, that means a better build up of the USSR's army. The USSR can keep some of those resources for itself, if it claims the borderlands or Bessarabia or if Germany aligns Axis minors. Sure, it doesn't hurt German economics, but that isn't the goal here. It is to get more resources in your own factories.

The last one is the most important, IMHO, because optimizing your economics is everything for any power in World in Flames.

[bo]

ORIGINAL: Centuur

Here are some reasons (and you don't ask a stupid question):

First: in Bessarabia there are cities. Those cities become USSR home land cities if Bessarabia is claimed, thus giving the USSR a couple of extra supply bases in the region.

Second: you can't prevent Germany from aligning any of the Axis minors if you don't do anything. So why not be aggressive and make sure you get extra breathing space. Especially the Finnish-USSR border is pretty close to the Murmansk railroad which you probably want to use for transporting resources send by the Western Allies to the USSR.

Third: there is a economic consequence too. Every turn Germany gets 5 normal and 2 oil resources out of the USSR. Now, if you can use some of those resources in your own factories, that means a better build up of the USSR's army. The USSR can keep some of those resources for itself, if it claims the borderlands or Bessarabia or if Germany aligns Axis minors. Sure, it doesn't hurt German economics, but that isn't the goal here. It is to get more resources in your own factories.

The last one is the most important, IMHO, because optimizing your economics is everything for any power in World in Flames.

Your very good centuur with your explanations [&o]I think if you keep up the good answers you should be awarded another star next to your name which would make you the first six star poster here [;)] and if I were Matrix I would award you our Medal of Honor, hmm on second thought 99.99% of those who received the honor were awarded it posthumously, [:(] never mind the Medal of Honor, the six stars will be fine with me.

Bo

[paulderynck]

Pros:

Most important, IMO, is each one reduces the number of resources that Germany must lend to Russia. The accumulated BPs from those allow Russia to build more units prior to Barb.

Finland gives a buffer zone for the defense of Leningrad. (In the boardgame, there was also an advantage to be gained in protecting the rail line north to Murmansk, which is an all-weather port for lend lease and easy to defend if a factory or two got relocated there. But that was when playing without the Finland map addition and so in MWiF that stretch of border is Swiss Cheese even if you take the borderlands.) If the German is busy elsewhere, you may even be able to conquer Finland, which is invaluable if Germany does a Barb.

Bessarabia takes away terrain that the axis is more mobile in when setting up for a Barb. More importantly, it takes away many good airbases from the Axis in their initial attack. It also usually protects Odessa long enough for the factory there to get railed out. In an Oil game, the Axis is nuts to fight for Bessarabia. If they do, the Russians can bomb Ploesti out of existence and the Axis just can't afford to lose that oil. If Germany accedes to the demand, it then has the dilemma of what to do about the Hungarian and Bulgarian demands and how that choice affects Rumania. Possibly, Bulgaria can end up aligned to the USSR.

If the Axis sends in Peacekeepers, that removes those assets from attacks against the CW and France.

Cons:

If Russia demands neither and manages to break the Pact and DoW Germany (unlikely unless the Axis player is very careless), then neither can align with Germany (exception: for Rumania, which Germany can still align, but must take Belgrade first).

If the Axis sends in Peacekeepers (which is harder for them to do in the case of Finland because it requires Germany to make naval moves) they can tie up the Russians, cause casualties, and even have the minor country units ZOC the Russians so they don't count for the Nazi-Soviet Pact garrison, while meanwhile, the Peacekeepers do count for it. This can actually result in the Axis being able to break the Pact much earlier than otherwise.

If forced to DoW, the Allies can lose US Entry chits and if careless could even result in the US not being able to enter the war in Europe.
---------------------------

In my own case, since I always play with the Oil option, when I'm playing Russia, I usually demand Bessarabia but leave Finland alone.

[composer99]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

Clueless Noob warning - I am clueless. What follows me be in complete error. Correct me! [&o]





I'm not really getting the motivation behind the USSR wanting to claim Bessarabia or the Finnish borderlands. Under what circumstances should the USSR do these things?

In terms of the actual land you get, both seem of pretty minor impact. Bessarabia, surely it's better to be behind the river than in front of it surely. One presumes the USSR is not going to be making moves on Ploesti in 1941/2. The Finnish borderlands, well, there's not even a Ploesti to inch closer towards, seems 100% worthless.

In terms of diplomacy... well, if you don't claim the Finnish borderlands then you don't have to fight Finland. So its worthless land in exchange for another minor for the Axis. Seems like a poor trade.

Bessarabia, if the USSR gets that, then Germany gets to align Romania and Hungary, no? Why would the USSR wish to speed up the process by which the Axis gets its mitts on them?


I admit my knowledge of the nuances of what seems to be quite a complicated subject in a fiendishly complicated game is not up to scratch - hence this post. [:'(]

We all start as noobs somewhere, so no worries.

As Centuur notes (indirectly), it's actually the case that the Germans can align Finland and Rumania even if you haven't claimed their borderlands; the difference being that there are slightly different hoops.

Otherwise, Centuur has, I think, adequately summarised the positive (economic) consequences of claiming the borderlands.

I should like to elaborate on the defensive benefit of claiming Bessarabia by noting that the river line doesn't mean much in a surprise impulse, which is what you can usually look forward to if Germany aligns Rumania and you haven't claimed Bessarabia. By contrast, the two cities in Bessarabia can slow a German-Rumanian advance, often long enough to get the Odessa factory out.

[EUBanana]

Much is explained, thank you all. I didn't realise that making those claims reduces the amount of resources sent to Germany, that's an obvious Good Thing.

And an interesting point about the river on the Bessarabia border and the fact that it'll be a surprise attack, too, which makes the cities preferable.

I've only played up to 1942 three times now so not all that experienced. The first time I had the Russians recreate the Winter War, and it just dragged and dragged and dragged, so I was wondering why any USSR player would subject themselves to such torture. Now at least I know that there is a point to the suffering. [:)]

Though presumably a smart Russian would make it the Summer War in a real game.

[paulderynck]

If playing with Divs that can invade from SCS, and since Russia can still only take Combineds, threatening an invasion from the Baltic with three Divs (2 from the TRS and one from an SCS), supported by Artillery firing from Estonia plus aircraft ground supporting - you can give the Axis player a lot to worry about should he choose to fight for Finland. Plus with the MWiF map, the Russians have Hango.

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

If playing with Divs that can invade from SCS, and since Russia can still only take Combineds, threatening an invasion from the Baltic with three Divs (2 from the TRS and one from an SCS), supported by Artillery firing from Estonia plus aircraft ground supporting - you can give the Axis player a lot to worry about should he choose to fight for Finland. Plus with the MWiF map, the Russians have Hango.

Don't you need AMPHs or marines for that?

[paulderynck]

No, Inf-class Divs (if playing with Divs) can always invade from a TRS (or, if not motorized, from an SCS if playing with that option).

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

No, Inf-class Divs (if playing with Divs) can always invade from a TRS (or, if not motorized, from an SCS if playing with that option).

Okay, learning a lot of things on this thread. Thanks!

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

If playing with Divs that can invade from SCS, and since Russia can still only take Combineds, threatening an invasion from the Baltic with three Divs (2 from the TRS and one from an SCS), supported by Artillery firing from Estonia plus aircraft ground supporting - you can give the Axis player a lot to worry about should he choose to fight for Finland. Plus with the MWiF map, the Russians have Hango.

I did this in the AAR. I had the USSR fleet at sea, transport filled and a division ready to invade together with the whole USSR airforce in the Baltics and some good units with Zhukov on the border...

Now, there is no way a German player should refuse to give up the borderlands if that happens. If you don't make these kind of preparations, you might get stuck in a nasty war with the Finns. And they've got quite a good army to fight with.

[Ur_Vile_WEdge]

Yeah, when/if I demand the Finnish borderlands, I don't do it in 39, I usually wait until M/J or J/A 40, and I build the para on the first turn, which forces the Finns to keep some guys back to defend Helsinki from me just hopping in with the para and divisions.

Make the demand when the weather's good and you have lots of planes you can throw at them. And of course, if you're intimidating enough, they'll probably just give you the borderlands, which lets you off the hook for the resource, and none of that pesky risk or USE issues.