Factories and Facilties—Where, How, When, and Why?

The Japanese have probably lost in their side of the board if Malaya or Hong Kong are solidly in the hands of the Allies.  At that point China probably can maintain control of mainland Asia with just a bit of reinforcement from British planes and a few ground units.  There is no need for a new UK Pacific factory, IMHO.

Hi all,

Some thoughts

Russian naval base on Soviet Far east opens up some shenanigans for US Navy. Esp if planning an invasion of Japan.
US factory on Korea if you can get it and hold it.
UK building factories in Persia-Iraq gives a ton of options for helping Russians or India
Japan of course on the mainland because factories can’t be sunk. (even major on Korea if going after Russians)

That’s about it. I just can’t see anybody else needing them in the first 5 turns when things are tight. I usually find that by the time Germany is thinking about it they have to be watching the back door and so will get more use out of french factories or captured russian ones than needing to build.

Maybe late game there are opportunities for allies to build greece, spain or turkey or something like that to get more tanks rolling into Europe

Probably a one time use…but a naval base on java let’s you hit Sydney from the top or bottom in one turn. End game, if Anzac has one blocker, this is a possible move to get the win before possible USA reinforcements arrive. Totally situational gambit.

@thespaceman:

Hi all,

Some thoughts

Russian naval base on Soviet Far east opens up some shenanigans for US Navy. Esp if planning an invasion of Japan.
US factory on Korea if you can get it and hold it.
UK building factories in Persia-Iraq gives a ton of options for helping Russians or India
Japan of course on the mainland because factories can’t be sunk. (even major on Korea if going after Russians)

That’s about it. I just can’t see anybody else needing them in the first 5 turns when things are tight. I usually find that by the time Germany is thinking about it they have to be watching the back door and so will get more use out of french factories or captured russian ones than needing to build.

Maybe late game there are opportunities for allies to build greece, spain or turkey or something like that to get more tanks rolling into Europe

American naval base on aleutian islands provides much the same as an far east russian base with the benfiths of america paying and repairing it. It provides a fun twist to the game if Japan navy is busy in DEI and out of position

There are a lot of times where an airbase would be necessary on Egypt or the Persian Gulf just because you are trying to protect whatever blocking fleet is over there.  But a superior move would probably be building better units earlier, and more UK factories early, if you can afford that because the airbase probably isn’t going to be saving you just delaying the assault.

The defensive geometries of the ME are awkward, you cant get defensive flyers to Egypt from India, or vice versa.    You cant reach Moscow from Iraq without one, or from Moscow to India.    Even the airbase on Egypt is 1 move short of Moscow.  That means that an airbase doesn’t remedy most of your movement issues, it would be for scrambling and defense.

I often build a minor IC with Anzac in Queensland in round 3 or 4

Malta is usually too easy to take over, but I think in the earlier editions there was one there.  It doesn’t help Italy too much, if you want them to fight over Malta, Cypress, Sicily etc. make them each worth $.

The uk lurks over by Egypt and US over by gib so they typically don’t form up in that SZ.  If they can form up, its by standing on Italy’s $$.

For what it’s worth. Games I play have a naval Base in Java and 2 UK inf. 1 fort and an airbase in Malta. Italy always tries to take Malta turn 1 to deny a UK N.O. Of 5  Icps.
UK never gets to use it in games.

my last game i put an air base on Persia so i could build fighters there to send to Russia and they could also attack with mech inf from persia as well.

@AAGamer:

my last game i put an air base on Persia so i could build fighters there to send to Russia and they could also attack with mech inf from persia as well.

You don’t need an air base to fly a fighter from Persia to Russia. It’s only 4 zones away.

yes you do if you want to attack rostov and caucausus and volgograd and not just send the fighters to moscow.

CDG it lets you reach Egypt or Norway, which could be a key part of your KGF.

I wouldn’t forget the scramble though, it lets you protect both sides so you can skonch Italy’s bonus with 1 DD at the same time you make SZ91 untouchable.  Still, I don’t recall building it in any recent game.

I’ve built a factory in West India with Japan to help pressure the middle east, usually a late game tactic.  I’ve seen a naval base at Midway.  Makes it tough to block for Japan.  After a neutral crush, Spain is a good place for the US to put a factory.  I recently played a game where my opponent did the neutral crush and built factories in Turkey and Saudi Arabia with the UK. (I would not recommend building both)  I built a factory and naval base in Brazil once with the US.  Probably not very cost effective and it was slow developing but it allowed me to build subs and destroyers and get them into the med in one turn.  It wasn’t too much of a worry for the Axis player but it was fun to do.  I’ve built the air base for fortress Java.  And I have also built a naval base there for a one time use that helped turn the tide in the pacific.  I love building the Queensland factory for ANZAC.

in my most recent game i had my opponent build airbases in both Gibraltar and Morocco… I think he did it jsut for the scramble purposes… I ignored them and did other things… Italy did get very big though – it was tough.

@AAGamer:

in my most recent game i had my opponent build airbases in both Gibraltar and Morocco… I think he did it jsut for the scramble purposes… I ignored them and did other things… Italy did get very big though – it was tough.

I’ve considered the same, but usually decide that a carrier is more flexible and about the same cost, even if it only gives you two planes instead of 3.

I do like the flexibility of airbases where you can choose to scramble if the odds are reasonable, and choose to remain hidden safely on land if the opponent sends overwhelming forces.  Being able to scramble 3-6 fighters to protect a lone destroyer in the Med forces the Axis to invest a huge amount into clearing it out each round.  A loaded carrier would not achieve the same outcome earlier in the game when the Allies don’t yet have total superiority in the Atlantic and Med.

Having said all of this, I agree with AA Gamer that later in the game the loaded carrier is usually a far more flexible choice.