L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3

@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:

hink the main mistake for Russia was to help out China. It was actually not called for. R should’ve focused on flattening G. I believe that was very possible, but more units were needed. Especially not have to direct some of the central forces south, but using the eastern reinforcements for that purpose.

well, yes , that is true, but in that case japan would get sooner on the walls of india and hawaii.

and that soviet stack was moving slow. to reach eastern poland from novo, well its 5 rounds if i am correct.

but its definitely an option to help russia make a progress. the other smaller are the units u ve sent to middle east, but they were definitely a really good help for the brits

or as u mention u could maybe send those siberia guys via novo and kazahstan to caucasus.

@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:

I think a better player would’ve wiped Germany off the map. I believe it’s very dangerous to let Russia turn into a monster like that.

Well, my point of view is that even with agressive Russia as urs was (buying art from the start, buying tanks), germany can hold off Russia if its able to

• have a good economy
• have an IC near the front (a major in Romania quite help my cause)
• have a large aircraft, especially much bombers which can strike any Soviet stack and combined with land units turn it into ashes

Germany starts with so many units, so much tanks, so much air, land. It plays just before Russia, it has all neceserally to either crack or defend against Russia. It is the UK and USA that must help Russians to make their breakthrough, but if USA goes to heavily in the Atlantic well, then Japan can became a godzilla, so its all so connected and interesting, but i somehow have an impression that the allied bids will grow and grow

a few years ago here people where bidding 8 ipc for axis, now the allies got 8 bid.

@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:

Lets see if we reach +2k posts… ;)

i think we will not xd

@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:

The very reason why a G3-5 Sea Lion totally sucks.

depends how well it is done, and that depends on strategy and dice.

@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:

@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:

@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:

The very reason why a G3-5 Sea Lion totally sucks.

depends how well it is done, and that depends on strategy and dice.

For once, I don’t argue about dice. ;)

No, I beg to differ. Early Sea Lion always sucks against a competent opponent. Even if competently executed. That’s my view.

I have to see it successfully done before I change my mind. Do you want to try it against me? :)

i had it sucesfull in the past. but in one game, i had much problems after it.

well, the thing with sea lion is that u dont go for it at all costs. u watch if uk is doing low defense of uk, and if russia is very defensive, if u have enough air after rd 1, if u took 70 ipc in rd1 etc…

@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:

@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:

@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:

The very reason why a G3-5 Sea Lion totally sucks.

depends how well it is done, and that depends on strategy and dice.

For once, I don’t argue about dice. ;)

No, I beg to differ. Early Sea Lion always sucks against a competent opponent. Even if competently executed. That’s my view.

I have to see it successfully done before I change my mind. Do you want to try it against me? :)

i almost did actually in our last game, in early rounds, and in later ones.

@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:

I think I always build low def in London hoping to lure G into Sea Lion. I might be wrong, but I consider it a trap. :)

then if u play a few games against me, i ll take it. and u ll see its not so easy taking it back, nor taking berlin with russia :P: