but what I’m saying is that germany would use too much IPC taking england and would not have enough forces to take russia. In those extra turns russia will have the forces from moscow and Stalingrad on the front and will be a strong force. I was a little liberal with the strategy though. In my opinion if England can buy enough infantry to make it a 50/50 deal, and get the germans to invest the money into a Sea-Lion, than I would think it would be a gamble that the allies would be more than welcome to take. But I agree you should not give your capital too the germans… even though I recently said too… I= fool.
German IC is Finland
-
Someone dared to suggest this in a early thread about German ICs.
Hear my thoughts:
- Good because you can build stuff there
- This stuff can be used to attack SU and help take Leningrad; take back Norway; and shuttle troops via transport to Archangle and Nermetsia. From there, they can potentially divide SU forces, or take some cheap territories, and maybe shut off the two men in Novosibirsk.
I think there is merit to considering this, maybe a G2 build. Gonna give this a chance on the weekend. At this stage, I’ll try anything.
-
Minor IC cost 12 IPC and place 3 units in Finland.
Two Trannies cost 14 IPC and threaten to place 4 units anywhere from UK to Leningrad.
-
If Allies play well 2 trans sink very fast, a IC is easier to def ;)
but i love the big IC in Romania more ;) or Sweeden ^^
-
Yeah. Trannies can become useless at various stages in the game (ie when they get killed).
-
I like threatening sea lion as the germans. UK in the game i am playing now once again has to defend itself against sea lion. Meanwhile germany inches closer to moscow. :cry: :cry:
-
I feel a MAJOR IC in Norway is a still better idea.
I tend to build one in Poland as well: churn out infantry and artillery on turn 3, mech and tanks on turn 4 and so on. From Poland they can go either North or South, from Romania only North…





