Matrix Games Forums

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.

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.

This is nice improvment and as a bonus the risk of a "hail marry attack" in the current clearhex where the warlord sits is reduced. I like the first plan since the 5-4 JP Inf has outflanking possibilites.

Sure - remove the

3-2 AT to Kiev
1-4 to Cernauti

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.....

Soviet Union
No declarations of war

Rail
ENG to Vilna

Land
3-3 Sian MIL to the hex northwest
1-4 to Cernauti
6-6, 5-3 and Zhukov all one hex west.

Re-base
Pe-2 to west of Cutatea-Alba

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.....

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.

Italy just transported a HQ from Africa to Italy and that suggests that the Italian efforts in Africa is at end. Germany transfer its armour to Poland. They do not even seem interested in Greece or Yugoslavia. And with Vichy I think Spain is out.

Every Soviet unit in the garrison area is equal to 4 Germans. So if we want to keep the Germans from declaring war the entire USSR air force needs to transfer to the pact area. Almost all units except those needed against Japan. So with this alternative I think IRaq is out of the question.

And if we let Germany declare war on USSR then all the Soviet units needs to defend against Germany. Iraq is then out of the question.

Therefore I think the Soviet armour, airforce, and HQ should redeploy from Persia towards the west front.

I think we should do our impulse. Partly because it is likely that this is the last impulse anyway. And partly because if they end the turn then the impulse marker will not move in their direction.


Edit: Germany is currently 7 units away from a DOW on USSR. Two rebasing aircraft to the common border and they are 15 units away. USSR now has decent production so I think it will be good for us to keep Germany out of a war with USSR. Especially if this costs them time while they do no major operations.

The most I will concede is as per below. Its up to you if you want to risk the Chinese Communist move. Personally I like it because we can get one of the reinforcements to Sian next turn (assuming they don't go for a suicide attack and throw a 10).

Soviet Union
No declarations of war

Rail
ENG to Vilna

Land
3-3 Sian MIL to the hex northwest
1-4 to Cernauti
5-3 in Persia one hex west.
6-6 to Zhukov hex
3-2AT to 53,54

Re-base
Pe-2 to west of Cutatea-Alba
Pe-8 to Cutatea-Alba

At all costs prevent a 1940 Barbarossa. I have never seen one that was not an Allied disaster.

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?

ORIGINAL: 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?

warspite1

Why not add the MIL to the HQ - unless there is an immediate use for the HQ, I think we should keep the Germans busy in France as much as possible. But of course all this is subordinate to what you need the TRS for. If the HQ is left then of course we need a TRS on hand to remove him if things get hairy.

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.

ORIGINAL: 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.

warspite1

Personal opinion? NO TRS in French ports - they are bound to get port struck.....

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: 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.

warspite1

Personal opinion? NO TRS in French ports - they are bound to get port struck.....

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.

That 2-3 ART looks tempting.....

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. [:(]

Opening up Sian for the garrison reinforcement looks safe enough.

ORIGINAL: Orm

That 2-3 ART looks tempting.....

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. [:(]

warspite1

No - that is why in my orders list I have not gone ahead with it [:)]

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?

ORIGINAL: 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?

warspite1

That would be acceptable - and I will hold units near Iraq in the meantime for as long as there is a chance of stopping a 1940 Barbarossa. Unless we are unlucky with turn end the Soviets should be able to stop a German declaration of war this turn and the start of next at least. I will bring units from Karelia. What about Japan? Should the Soviets encourage a Japanese attack for US Entry purposes or try and defend against it?

Should the Soviets encourage a Japanese attack for US Entry purposes or try and defend against it?

Defend against it. A double attack on USSR is a real pain.

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

At all costs prevent a 1940 Barbarossa. I have never seen one that was not an Allied disaster.

Thank you for the advice. [:)]

ORIGINAL: Orm

Should the Soviets encourage a Japanese attack for US Entry purposes or try and defend against it?

Defend against it. A double attack on USSR is a real pain.

warspite1

Its a pain not having the computer calculate the garrison - but presumably until the Japanese get units in Manchuria then the USSR are okay.