UK Double IC

It seems to be a popular view that Japan is wasting its money if it buys a complex before it has maxed out the first one (i.e. is transporting 8 units/turn to the mainland).  However, I am of the opinion that 2 tran 1 IC–this is assuming $1 bid to Japan–is the optimal J1 purchase for getting units to the mainland quickly.  There was an old thread (sorry, I couldn’t find the link on my first search and I’m too lazy to look harder) that had some calculations to this effect, but for the short version, consider:
—If you build 3 tran on J1, you can put 8 units in Asia on your second turn.  However, with 2 tran 1 IC you can get 9 units there: 6 from your three transports, and three more from your complex.  With a 2 IC purchase it’s down to 8 again, one from your transport and 6 from your complexes.  (I’m assuming throughout that the UK killed your transport in SZ 59 so that you only have one to start with.)  So if you’re trying to get as many units to Asia on J2 as you can, 2 tran 1 IC is the way to go. 
—4 tran on J1, using a bid of $2, is also a good way to start fast.  However, in this case your capacity outstrips your income; it will be a couple rounds before you can actually get new units fast enough to keep your transports busy.  The 2 tran 1 IC buy is better optimized at keeping your production/transport capacity matched up with the number of units you can afford to produce.  In particular, a 4 tran J1 purchase enables you to put as many as 10 units into Asia on J2 if you clean out Philippines, East Indies, Okinawa, and Wake, but then you run out of island units and can only make up to 8 new ones in Japan.  So you get a lot of inf on J2 but it’s more of an anomaly, where the 2 tran 1 IC buy gives you a smoother and more continuous startup.
—As far as location, I like FIC the best.  Kwang is farther from Moscow than either Fic or Man, so if you’re trying to put pressure on the Russians quickly you want either Fic or Man.  You can supply plenty of troops to the northern area from Japan itself, so the complex is needed more on the southern end.  Plus it enables you to get to Africa, Caucasus, etc better.
—So far I’ve been assuming KGF.  In KJF you should certainly be a bit more hesitant about getting factories up quickly.  However, I’ve found that a FIC complex, which is always where I build on J1 if I build a factory at all, can be very helpful in KJF.  Ideally when defending against an American fleet you want to defend as far out as possible, e.g. with a fleet in the Caroline or even Solomon islands.  However, if you’re forced to fall back, FIC is a great fallback point.  The key thing about it is that it borders all three of your valuable islands.  If you get in trouble you can fall back to SZ 36 and build more ships there to join your retreating fleet.  Often this will be enough to prevent the Americans from taking any of those expensive islands right away.  If your only factory is in Japan you’re forced to keep your navy farther north to incorporate the new builds, and the Americans have an easier time getting to the southern islands.

quite simply, transports have to be defended, and the allies can put have in range alot of threatening airpower before japan’s second turn…  and every ship that’s left defending them reduces your ability to cheaply destroy the various allied fleets that might be making a mess in the pacific on turn one.

Other than that, the additional transports allow for 6 units a turn, similarly to the IC’s.  The additional transports give you the ability to grab guys more quickly from the islands, as well as the ability to push on india and africa faster and harder.  But each of these require some tradeoffs (ideally, mass troops in manchuria, but if india looms you may have to deal with that, slowing the flow of 6 units/per turn.

transports assuming a factory build later also ends up reducing the flow of fast moving armor, if that’s necessary.

Don’t get me wrong, i’m a big fan of transports, but they have their drawbacks too.

I disagree.  Russia will not fall at all if Japan is at the gates of Moscow because Germany will be at the gates of Berlin.

Actually, the BEST game I ever had was when England went balls to the walls against Japan by landing in Archangelsk, through Russia and into Novosibirsk while Russia pushed into Europe and America worked on Africa and landing in S. Europe (as defined as W. Europe, S. Europe, Balkans and Ukraine.)

This maximized Russia’s income because England liberated land while Russia conquered land and it conserved Russian armies by not forcing Russia to trade with Japan.  This allowed me to get 30 Armor with Russia, and if Russia is strong enough to have 30 armor to throw back and forth across the board with impunity (or very near) then it’s game over for the Axis.

With software? Are you sofware? Wait a moment, you are Smith agent from Matrix  :mrgreen:

@ncscswitch:

If Germany is building INF THAT heavilly, then you have lost the offensive against Russia and are trading much closer to the vest as Germany.  That means Russia poses a greater threat, and that Germany has to fight harder just to stay in the 30’s for income.

You cannot BOTH build all INF AND trade at the Archangel/WR/Caucuses frontier turn after turn as Germany.  Sorry, it just does NOT happen  unless MASSIVE dice fracks come into play early in the game (or unless the Allies are playing poorly).

What games are you playing?

I hardly see G trade Arch, except rnd 1, never WRU, and when G starts trading cauc thats bad for allies.

@Dr.:

@ncscswitch:

The thing is, you can pretty much take out the US with a lesser landing than that…
Japan lands in Alaska and WCan from SZ63
Japan lands in Mexico from Hawaii
Germany lands in Panama, Cuba, and ECan.
USA (the 48 states) has not been TOUCHED , but they are effectiely out of it, at least for many, many turns (unless the UK can get the German ships, or Russia can kick Japan out of Asia in the same turn)

How are you going to pull of a landing like that? Germany shouldn’t have a chance of landing t three different territories

It’s assumed that Japan has 5 inf 5 tank in W. Canada, while Germany lands 4 inf 4 tank or so with a Baltic transport buy on G1 followed by move to W. Europe followed by transport to E. Canada.  Following turn allows landing in Panama and Cuba as US is on defense.

HOW COULD U MISS DAT?  LOLZ!

(I’m kidding . . . anyone could miss that.  Hell, I still don’t get it, really.)

@Thorak:

Assume I have loaded 2 UK inf on a US transport and then in the US turn I moved the transport to the seazone next to Ukraine. Can the inf on the transport participate on an attack on Ukraine in the following UK turn together with other UK units? Does it make any difference if Ukraine is empty and the units can take it alone?

The infantry can participate in an attack on Ukraine.

You do not have to unload both infantry during combat, although you may if you wish.

It makes no difference as to whether or not you unload infantry if Ukraine is empty or not.

I’ve seen a German in E. Canada before.  Of course, this was a game to the death and England/Russia had already fallen and Germany was just putting teh coup de tat on America.