Strategy for Israel?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Strategy for Israel?

      I really enjoy the challenge of Israel, and like a bug to a bright blue zapper I keep coming back for more punishment. Just looking for anyone that's had success to share their stories of how they survived the chaos to give the little blue nation a fighting chance.
      For instance, the one game I won as Israel I was able to link up with Greece, France and Spain early on and poured all my focus into Naval units. I was able to enforce the coalitions will on the high seas and take coastal cities and provinces, letting the others do the bulk of the inland fighting while I protected the passages of Gibraltar and the Suez Canal at home and protected the allied landing crafts and beachheads afar.
    • Teburu wrote:

      PerigeeNil wrote:

      I have fun playing Israel too. I've had the most success sticking to the strengths of the Western Doctrine, starting out relatively defensively (obviously expanding, but conservatively), and focusing on urban bonuses.
      But wouldnt crvs be pretty much perfect in that case too? they're armored after all
      Sure. I wasn't really disagreeing. I don't know that I think crvs are ever a bad early idea.
    • I have been tempted to play it as its basically 1 giant city. But have not seen anyone have sustained success really as even doing well early that area ends up being main battle ground between biggest Euro /Asia/ Africa Coalitions after they clear continents. Next time bored would give it a shot.

      High level strategy Id try: ***Disclaimer never played country so have no idea how effective this would be***

      1. Build Strong bunkers stck up with NGs (fast cheap builds)
      2. Get some frigates going asap and station oon ports to block invasion from sea and AA should cover most of country.
      4. Not big Armor player but will have to fight your way across desert so start getting some tank destroyers going (cheaper and faster to build) 5. then maybe assualt vehicle2 for some reason im not a big MTB fan. but that could work too.
      6. Seems like Saudi or Turkey/Egypt best allies... id target Syria first.. could get some quick resources without stretching defense too far versus going into Saudi or Eqypt.

      Seems like need to be patient build defenses and ready offensive stacks would be hard for anyone to attack you early as could rally troops from all cities very fast to out # attackers.
    • when i play israel i play hyper-offensive and super risky as is what i do with any other small country like the koreas, mongolia, etc
      i stack all my troops into two big stacks, use the plane to scout where enemy troops are, then i destroy as many hopes and dreams as i can in the countries near me and hope they defend instead of attack me which is actually surprisingly often
      OR i use one stack defensively and try to defend a city at a time and then rush to the next city to defend, etc and then use my other stack offensively

      basically, try to get the enemy to get defensive because thats the only chance you'll have to at least build some buildings and try to get to mid game without the huge morale debuffs that you get from having your city captured then liberated which is hard to recover from

      good luck! :thumbsup:
    • Interesting thread, and a lot of good contributions. I would add a few things to this. Remember, Israel has Western doctrine. This does not favor tank destroyers. With comprehensive doctrinal analysis, we conclude that a combined arms approach using Western favored AFVs, Attack Helicopters, and MBTs on the ground, along with the usual mot inf and potentially naval marines, with all the usual AA, Artillery, and radar, except potentially with frigate AA initially as has been stated, TDS is the primary Western AA, but early game, I use SAMs and Air Sup with Western to have near total control of the skies. My MBTs can then excel in the wide open desert expanse of the Middle East while my attack helis knock out enemy armor in all areas within radius and the AFVs assist in clearing infantry and take the lead on that in cities. A decent amount of combined arms is critical with a focus on one area and second focus on another, as Sima has said. In one game I beat Israel in, my opponent had superb aircraft and AA, but he diverged from doctrine and combined arms philosophy, with only ASF, SF, mot inf, MAAV (which are not great is Western, almost only good with European), and navy with frigates, all at relatively low research level. If he had some solid ground forces, or even just better research, he could have fought me better, although he managed to conquer the entire Middle East with his build until I came in from Europe as Austria with unified combined arms fire and maneuver from air and land with coalition support in the naval department; hence the two critical concepts: unified combined arms, and coalition support.
    • As to the popular mention of CRVs, I don’t recommend using them beyond early game. They’re not even really worth researching them much further than the first level; my primary use of them is early game infantry damage, but in mid and late game and especially for Western and also for European, the superior effectiveness of AFVs to CRVs cannot be overstated.
    • Stratieon wrote:

      As to the popular mention of CRVs, I don’t recommend using them beyond early game. They’re not even really worth researching them much further than the first level; my primary use of them is early game infantry damage, but in mid and late game and especially for Western and also for European, the superior effectiveness of AFVs to CRVs cannot be overstated.
      agree...since 1st few games gave up on building RCV as the research doesnt advance much at all and at the 4.5 / 1.5 offensive punch is pathetic. I can get more offense from a nat guard unit after a few researches so only benfit is scouting and i personally dont rely on any AWCS; Drone (unless given) etc. Now this radar change makes a little more difficult without; and need to adjust my game a bit; as would use navy to scan coast area and strike fighters to scout from air. If you pay attention to enemy cities and what capable of producing; their past victories/defeats on CON can get decent ballpark idea what they have.

      This past game I have been using attack FV and way better .. amd can research the amph fight veh really cheap after (which people think can only be used with Marines) but also provides scout feature so like a super RCV.
    • Buckeyechamp wrote:

      Stratieon wrote:

      As to the popular mention of CRVs, I don’t recommend using them beyond early game. They’re not even really worth researching them much further than the first level; my primary use of them is early game infantry damage, but in mid and late game and especially for Western and also for European, the superior effectiveness of AFVs to CRVs cannot be overstated.
      agree...since 1st few games gave up on building RCV as the research doesnt advance much at all and at the 4.5 / 1.5 offensive punch is pathetic. I can get more offense from a nat guard unit after a few researches so only benfit is scouting and i personally dont rely on any AWCS; Drone (unless given) etc. Now this radar change makes a little more difficult without; and need to adjust my game a bit; as would use navy to scan coast area and strike fighters to scout from air. If you pay attention to enemy cities and what capable of producing; their past victories/defeats on CON can get decent ballpark idea what they have.
      This past game I have been using attack FV and way better .. amd can research the amph fight veh really cheap after (which people think can only be used with Marines) but also provides scout feature so like a super RCV.
      the interesting thing about crvs tho is their synergy with tank destroyers as well as that they seem to soak insane amounts of damage compared to other units
      I am the basline for opinions
    • agree... all things relative to point in game and/or what enemy has. If enemy had rocks and you had a slingshot ...the slingshot is an advanced weapon ;)

      I dont mind using them but my disadvantage in my opinion is large Supplies they take to build.. rather build inf and getting better research bonuses down rd and by level 6 mot inf not that bad to attack with stacks. also try to save supplies to keep research going as having max tier units at Day X of game to me is big advantage. especially Strike Fighters (they erase a lot of mistakes) and once Mot inf 6 basically get a whole lot of short range rocket launchers for free ;)

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Buckeyechamp ().

    • Uhm... I don't really see any CRV synergy with TDs; all the CRV stats are miserable except perhaps for their terrain versatility, although that's marginal. CRVs are basically a vestigial unit at this point, anything they can do, something else can do better. Armored damage? Please. Virtually nonexistent. Infantry damage? Meet the AFV and SF group. Air assault? Meet the TD and SF. Damage soaking? Not really, but i guess? They have the same hp at max as most infantry. If you're talking about infantry's meager armor damage, that's not much of a plus, as there are many other units that give decent damage soaking and actually have substantial combat capabilities. If you look at the acronym's letters, they are superseded in all areas. Combat? Miserable stats there. Recon? Meet the ACV and drone. Vehicle? Okay, I guess they're sort of fast ish? Doesn't matter much against things that have decent speed and an actual punch in combat. Conclusion: Besides early game, the CRV is now essentially useless in CoN.
    • Stratieon wrote:

      Uhm... I don't really see any CRV synergy with TDs; all the CRV stats are miserable except perhaps for their terrain versatility, although that's marginal. CRVs are basically a vestigial unit at this point, anything they can do, something else can do better. Armored damage? Please. Virtually nonexistent. Infantry damage? Meet the AFV and SF group. Air assault? Meet the TD and SF. Damage soaking? Not really, but i guess? They have the same hp at max as most infantry. If you're talking about infantry's meager armor damage, that's not much of a plus, as there are many other units that give decent damage soaking and actually have substantial combat capabilities. If you look at the acronym's letters, they are superseded in all areas. Combat? Miserable stats there. Recon? Meet the ACV and drone. Vehicle? Okay, I guess they're sort of fast ish? Doesn't matter much against things that have decent speed and an actual punch in combat. Conclusion: Besides early game, the CRV is now essentially useless in CoN.
      Im talking about the fact that they can airassault together with TDs and basically tank dmg for them since they seem to soak up such a high amount of dmg
      they're cheap and fast produced so they can fit that role kinda welli guess? :D
      I am the basline for opinions
    • Teburu wrote:

      Stratieon wrote:

      Uhm... I don't really see any CRV synergy with TDs; all the CRV stats are miserable except perhaps for their terrain versatility, although that's marginal. CRVs are basically a vestigial unit at this point, anything they can do, something else can do better. Armored damage? Please. Virtually nonexistent. Infantry damage? Meet the AFV and SF group. Air assault? Meet the TD and SF. Damage soaking? Not really, but i guess? They have the same hp at max as most infantry. If you're talking about infantry's meager armor damage, that's not much of a plus, as there are many other units that give decent damage soaking and actually have substantial combat capabilities. If you look at the acronym's letters, they are superseded in all areas. Combat? Miserable stats there. Recon? Meet the ACV and drone. Vehicle? Okay, I guess they're sort of fast ish? Doesn't matter much against things that have decent speed and an actual punch in combat. Conclusion: Besides early game, the CRV is now essentially useless in CoN.
      Im talking about the fact that they can airassault together with TDs and basically tank dmg for them since they seem to soak up such a high amount of dmg they're cheap and fast produced so they can fit that role kinda welli guess? :D


      Ah. Okay, that makes sense. Essentially the ngs of armor. Personally, I prefer TD+SF, but TD+CRV is decent also, just SF is so incredibly versatile and a much more effective combo before accounting for resource cost. Air assault is a relatively substantial redeeming quality though, albeit I still wouldn’t want really want to use CRV for that once I had decent income and could produce SF in substantial quantities.
    • In my estimation, CRVs are too much of a niche unit to be useful; they can provide air assault-capable decent armor hp and infantry damage for a moderate price, but that’s about all they can do. Anything they can do, something else like special forces can do better while also being more versatile, making CRV investment, at least for me, a waste beyond the early game because AASLT is essentially the only role they can be used in.