Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Orm

Punchy? Sorry that is new to me. Unless you offering a drink of punch?

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Orm

We get this line with three Soviet land moves.

Maybe USSR should demand the Borderlands after all. This leaves 2 land moves for the Finnish front.

And one upside if there is a war is that if Germany is distracted by Finland then there might be less pressure on CW.

warspite1

That's pretty punchy Ormster. Trouble is its not as simple as the next impulse. If the Axis luck continues then this will be another long turn with fine weather. Another lucky dice throw and the Communists, already in dire trouble, could be toast this turn.

Think too about our land throws. If the Soviets get unlucky (as per China and France) in Finland that could be game set and match. If I thought the Germans needed to make sacrifices to place PeaceKeepers in Finland I would probably (maybe) go for it, but they can place 2,3 or maximum 4 corps/Mil/Garr around Helsinki and the Soviets are not taking Finland any time soon - and will take losses in failing.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Orm

Punchy? Sorry that is new to me. Unless you offering a drink of punch?

warspite1

Sorry matey - your command of the English language is so good I sometimes forget I'm talking to a Swede. In this context:

Punchy = bold, aggressive

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Orm


Maybe USSR should demand the Borderlands after all. This leaves 2 land moves for the Finnish front.

And one upside if there is a war is that if Germany is distracted by Finland then there might be less pressure on CW.

warspite1

That's pretty punchy Ormster. Trouble is its not as simple as the next impulse. If the Axis luck continues then this will be another long turn with fine weather. Another lucky dice throw and the Communists, already in dire trouble, could be toast this turn.

Think too about our land throws. If the Soviets get unlucky (as per China and France) in Finland that could be game set and match. If I thought the Germans needed to make sacrifices to place PeaceKeepers in Finland I would probably (maybe) go for it, but they can place 2,3 or maximum 4 corps/Mil/Garr around Helsinki and the Soviets are not taking Finland any time soon - and will take losses in failing.

The Chinese Communists can indeed be toast. Not much we can do to stop it except moving the units to the best to our ability. As long as that is done then a war with Finland matter not. And if they are lost then more moves for USSR in Finland.

If they are lucky with a long turn then we have more impulses in Finland.

If we think we never will have any luck then we are doomed. I am thinking that luck comes and goes and we can not plan our game after it. Of course we can avoid risky attacks and so on. But now we are talking Grand Strategy and I do not think that we should let bad luck demoralize us so much that we alter our plans after it. If Germany and USSR take equal losses and Finland is conquered then I am a happy camper.

And getting 4 units to Finland will take, at least, some effort. They have two transporters so that is two units this turn.

I think killing Finnish units will have some worth even if we do not knock out Finland at once. Murmansk front should be secured.

But mainly I think we are letting Axis dictate this game. USSR can not attack Japan. The Chinese Nationalists can not do much because the attack weakness. CW is stretched to thin to do mischievous things to throw Axis off balance. Sure, they have seen the attack on Finland coming. But it forces them to react. At least it feels like we are doing something. US has enough markers in the entry pool, or at least I think they have enough. Allies have been playing it nice. I suggest that we stop being nice now.

What do you think about this?

Previously I thought 'wait and see until next impulse' but now I think we gain nothing by waiting. Just losing a couple of land moves.

But with all of this said I do not want to force you into it.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I'll sleep on it.....

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Soviet moves:

Land Moves:
3 x Commie moves you made in a previous post
Zhukov and 3-3 to (35,55)

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Soviet moves:

Naval:
Kirov to Baltic Sea and picks up 1-4

Rail:
4-3 Cernauti to Novgorod

Land Moves:
3 x Commie moves you made in a previous post
Zhukov and 3-3 to (35,55)

I don’t think there should be an attack on Si-An.

Re-base:
Pe-8 to Novgorod
SB-2RK to south-east of Leningrad

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Soviet moves:

Naval:
Kirov to Baltic Sea and picks up 1-4

Rail:
4-3 Cernauti to Novgorod

Land Moves:
3 x Commie moves you made in a previous post
Zhukov and 3-3 to (35,55)

I don’t think there should be an attack on Si-An.

Re-base:
Pe-8 to Novgorod
SB-2RK to south-east of Leningrad

Can I take the liberty and send out a BB (Marat) instead? The cruiser always has the option of sailing later on since USSR will do combineds for a while longer.

----

Do not forget to replace the partisan hunters in Persia.

, I can order the second bomber to Finland once an INF takes its place.

ORIGINAL: Orm

No real difference. But with the cruiser and division in port USSR has a tiny bit more flexibility. USSR can then opt to send out the division, or not. And we get to see how Germany place the Finnish units before we make the call. If we decide to go, that is.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I haven't got it - but I'm quite happy for you to do it as I can blame you when we get surprised again......

ORIGINAL: brian brian

You can't blame the loss of Si-An totally on luck. The ChiComms abandoned the excellent defensive terrain in front of the city, thus giving the Japanese the chance to try their luck. Perhaps the Japanese attack the mountain hex and roll a '10' - but the Chinese would still hold Si-An.