IC placement

@frimmel:

I’d say the Soviets and absolutely not Japan or the UK.

I’d say absolutely not Germany, b/c they will get attacked by 3 powers, at least if the allies conduct an efficient strategy :)

With the US a newb can get to feeling left out by lots of waiting to move something or for a chance to even just roll some dice. And they really need to deal with all of the units and trying to manage some sort of transport system. The US might be best for the team in that game as they supposedly can’t make big blunders (and are you sure about that?) but if you want them to keep coming around you need to give them more to do.

Depends on the newb of course.

I didn’t think of the psychological aspects, but it won’t take more than 1-2 rounds until the US lands in Africa, and from there the US player will see some conflict, or at least get closer and closer to some important dice rolling.

Obviously this is a niche strategy, but there could be some use for it - it may allow the Allies to take one of the money islands as soon as US3. Here’s the plan

UK 1:
Unite Pac fleets in sz 30, build IC Aus

Attacking sz 30 is very risky for Japan, and it forces Japan to either to do Pearl light (with more risk of an unfavourable outcome) or skip Pearl altogether.

If Japan does not hit sz 30, build AC, fig, sub, trn on US1.

UK 2:
Move sz 30 fleet to sz 40, build AC sz 40

This threatens a unification of the UK/US fleets in sz 45 on US2/UK3. This combined fleet would consist of BB, 3 AC, 5 fig, 2 sub, 2 DD, 3 trn. This is too much for Japan to take on. If you add the 6th fig on US3/UK4 (and perhaps a UK sub that you build on UK3), you can take Bor or EI on these turns. Your combined Allied fleet would be so large that Japan has to bring something along the lines of 2 BB, 2 AC, 6 fig, bomber, DD, 5 trn, 4 sub to have a good shot at it, which requires a serious investment in the first few turns.

Without the UK IC, you would not have the extra UK carrier - a loaded carrier can make a big difference, and it may save you one turn in bringing down the Japanese in the Pacific. Of course, it comes at a substantial cost against Germany - that’s why it’s not played in most games, but it’s worth a try perhaps.

Japan can try to thwart your unification by moving its fleet to sz 45 itself on J2. I’d have to double check whether that is a worthwhile strategy.

thanks for the reply

Ok! forbidding ics is nice because that way the axis have a chance and territories are unlimited!!! when they ar ein hands of rightful owner but for the conquerer they do not get the unlimited a know nice tactic!!

I think we need to look at the England complex in a different light.

If England gets a FREE complex, where should they put it? (Prior to Russia 1.)

Why?  Because that’s the majority of complexes England gets.  Not many people are buying Complexes for England until much later in the game when they can put them up in W. Europe or Norway. :P

So, to me the choices are:

And that’s pretty much the order i would put them in.  Unless there are some neat things going on with America and Russia that can help reinforce India faster.  Then it might change.

I like E. Canada over Australia because you can invest in a 5th & 6th Transport (something some of you want to do ANYWAY) with England and be landing 10 troops a round in Asia. 2 From E. Canada to England. 10 From England to North Europe.

I like to build transports first because they can get free units off the islands and also help capture Hawaii, Aus / NZ, India and Madagascar.

yea, I got the AI to work.

Thanks for the links guys

Never.  Never build an IC with Germany.

Two transports cost 1 IPC more.  They can shuttle four units into Ukraine a turn, or can hit Egypt.  Transports make the Allies require more time to hit the German med fleet with pure air, and if the Allies draw within two spaces of the Med fleet, the Med fleet can suicide along with German air to kill the Allied fleet.

Early game, you don’t need an IC, transports are better.  Late game, you can’t afford one.