How about this triangle movement? This, however, use up two of the Soviet land moves.
Edit: Maybe the cavalry should move to the forest hex SE of Tianshui instead? There it might be in supply, depending on weather.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Orm
I would like to withdraw the Nationalist cavalry from the frontlines. This because it is out of supply and Japan seem to focus on disorganizing it.
How about this triangle movement? This, however, use up two of the Soviet land moves.
Edit: Maybe the cavalry should move to the forest hex SE of Tianshui instead? There it might be in supply, depending on weather.
![]()
I think Germany wants to have a go at USSR during 1940. And I think we can stop this if we want. Either way I think USSR has to abandon the plans to attack Iraq.ORIGINAL: warspite1
So what is the plan Ormster? Do you want to pass? limited pass? or play on? The Soviets of course could use a move - but nothing vital.
On the other hand - we still get an 80% chance of ending the turn if we do the turn. That 2-3 ART looks tempting.....

warspite1ORIGINAL: Orm
I haven't looked at the Chinese situation yet.
If USSR has given up on Finland then I think that the HQ (along with other units?) in Karelia should relocate.
Any thoughts on France? Just replace the HQ with a militia?
warspite1ORIGINAL: Orm
Last impulse I landed a garrison in the same hex as the HQ. So now I have the possibility to replace the HQ. Or send forces to Bordeaux. The down side is that most units will be disorganized. And that there will be ship, and transporters, in French ports.
Pretty much my opinion as well. Although this might be an exception to the rule. Axis has no port striking capability in range. And I do not see them getting that before I get a opportunity to abandon the port. But they might try to intercept the TRS if they get a sub there first.ORIGINAL: warspite1
warspite1ORIGINAL: Orm
Last impulse I landed a garrison in the same hex as the HQ. So now I have the possibility to replace the HQ. Or send forces to Bordeaux. The down side is that most units will be disorganized. And that there will be ship, and transporters, in French ports.
Personal opinion? NO TRS in French ports - they are bound to get port struck.....
That looks like a 1:1 attack to me. If I am right then we have a 20% chance to destroy the artillery but it is a 70 risk that our warlord is history. I do not like those odds. [:(]That 2-3 ART looks tempting.....
warspite1ORIGINAL: Orm
That looks like a 1:1 attack to me. If I am right then we have a 20% chance to destroy the artillery but it is a 70 risk that our warlord is history. I do not like those odds. [:(]That 2-3 ART looks tempting.....
warspite1ORIGINAL: Orm
Instead of attacking Iraq we have the option of CW attacking Syria. The downside is that Vichy then becomes active. The positive is that there is no land units in Syria and the US entry penalty is lower than for Iraq. The Vichy oil is in Syria so capturing, or destroying it, is a bonus.
It is also a bit negative that CW do is not in the position to knock out more Vichy colonies at the same time. CW, unfortunately, has no divisions on map at the moment.
Anyway. It is a alternative. And I am not that fearful of combat with Vichy.
Thoughts?
Defend against it. A double attack on USSR is a real pain.Should the Soviets encourage a Japanese attack for US Entry purposes or try and defend against it?
Thank you for the advice. [:)]ORIGINAL: Courtenay
At all costs prevent a 1940 Barbarossa. I have never seen one that was not an Allied disaster.
warspite1ORIGINAL: Orm
Defend against it. A double attack on USSR is a real pain.Should the Soviets encourage a Japanese attack for US Entry purposes or try and defend against it?