Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB

[trulpen]

Bryansk is not so important, but I want to have the chance of Italy risking a tank by taking it. Maybe should go in with 2 inf then, but want to be economic with units.

[trulpen]

I’m very happy to see that G got a bit defensive now. Means the push towards Moscow will not be as strong as feared.

[farmboy]

@trulpen Stalingrad is certainly a must but I’d consider hitting Novgorod too. You deny him the use of the factory for another turn. But it might be difficult to do that safely without committing both air.

[trulpen]

Yes, don’t want to have to use too much land in Stalingrad. Also, the figs will be displaced if they hit Leningrad.

[trulpen]

I believe we’ll have to settle with SBR of Leningrad.

[trulpen]

I think I’m actually a little light on Stalingrad. Can easily fizzle. At the same time going in with 3 inf, 1 art feels bad from a greedy point of view.

[trulpen]

With an italian can-opening we have to be able to protect Moscow from 18 mech, 15 tank, 2 fig, 2 sb. A lot less air than before, which is good. I’ll aim to keep the capital safe, while having some inf in Vologda and main stack in Samara.

[farmboy]

I’d hit Stalingrad with enough land to be sure. 3 inf and 2 figs Even if it is inefficient, it trades against him building 3 units there. And you should be able to keep a stack in Samara as well so that you can trade for it at least one more time.

Bryansk isn’t essential at this point.

[trulpen]

Some inf in Kaz would also be good.

[trulpen]

It’s a bit better than 2 inf, 1 art, 1 fig that I aimed there now.

[farmboy]

@trulpen British can deal with Caucasus for now I think. Those inf are probably better in Samara or Vologda

[trulpen]

Yes, air will have trouble reaching there anyway.

[trulpen]

Point of hitting Bryansk is the attrition, but it is rather risky.

[farmboy]

He is probably going to be swinging the mechs and tanks south and go for NWP. But he might not have the units to actually hold it safely from the British.

[trulpen]

The British are coming!

[farmboy]

@trulpen it is a trade of an inf for an inf and since he will be attacking that inf is more valuable to you than to him.

[trulpen]

What do you think of the build?

[trulpen]

@farmboy said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:

@trulpen it is a trade of an inf for an inf and since he will be attacking that inf is more valuable to you than to him.

In a way true. At the same time it’s not the full story, I think. If his pool of inf is reduced, it means less protection of his valuable units when attacking. G has a harder time replenishing the slow-movers.

[farmboy]

@trulpen I’m for it. You need the air and this is only one unit less than you could build.

It will be worth checking what his odds are in two turns if he focused on Moscow, but I expect you should be fairly safe and that a fighter instead of 2 land units is not going to be a significant difference. That will matter more for where UK/US air would be placed.

[farmboy]

@trulpen Yeah. And if I could commit two air to it, I would take the risk. But not with just one. Especially since you are either committing an extra inf to Stalingrad or making that battle riskier.