Does Germany ever build ICs?

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

Australian IC is a great idea
and personally i favor it
i can say its my standard move, altough i must say UK play depends( a lot or not ) upon the G1 move

so Australia IC can be put in round 1

even in round 2 if its a surprise

but i agree with Emperor Mollari without USA going forcefully in Pacific, UK forces down there are doomed

and altough this strategy is great, if Australian IC falls to the Japanese, it leads Allies to almost certain defeat, since UK spent a lot of IPC on their fleet here and (partially) egnored European theatre, so overall

i would say anyone go for it

and dont be dissapointed if it fails, even a few times, find a way to improve the strategy, it can be done, but it requires a good coordination, USSR and USA are (very) important here altought it doesnt seem that way on the first look

thats my view upon this…

@Nix:

But im all for the hit Japan first thing (not neccesarily killing him), but he can´t be let free to roam Asia/Africa/Australia-new zeeland…   it´s devestating for the allies, and more importantly the Russians.

If russia stacks Buryatia, puts 2 arm in yakut, UK kills the kwang trn (witch i failed to do twice in a row…), UK attacks FIC with 3 inf, 1 fig, lands fig in Sinkiang), Assembles UK Pacific fleet in SZ30.

USA can then choose how to do things, same for Russia and UK on turn 2.

Germany and Japan have allready shown their hand, and with 1 Trn Buryatia attack is risky, even if Pearl is ignored, if Fic was wiped, China will be harder, Sinkiang IC would look tempting.

If japan ignores pearl US have got a free carrier/sub/fig that can be nasty in the long run…

But my bottom line is Japan can´t be set loose unrestrained.

If anyone wants to monitor this in action see the league game between Nix and myself. ;)

In my two recent games however Russia has kept nothing in the East anyway. I guess you would still have to build more TRN anyway. Maybe the EI IC is a better build later on.

yea, I got the AI to work.

Thanks for the links guys

In one of my games, I had staged UK in Karelia with about 15 units…

at one point of the game, I also had 5 trannies in SZ 4…
I pulled 10 units out of Karelia and put them into an amphibious assault in Western Europe!
Germany didn’t see that one coming, I can tell you!!!
USA could easily reinforce W-E massively as well, so G ended up looking at about 20 units in W-E.
I can tell you: the next round G was taken and my adversary resigned :-P

But is it even possible to hold off a British / U.S. invasion in Europe while attacking Africa, all the while getting bombed? I would think not, unless one had lucky rolls. And if Russia was smart they would take advantage of the situation and pick apart any scattered German positions. In this situation, I think Japan has to do its part flawlessly, whatever that may be. Annoying U.S., trying to help roll up Russia, taking NZ Australia and India?

Sounds like a tough decision to make.

@Raarrne:

Well, in the version i put forward, i think that only the armor should be allowed to continue-bringing the infantry for a second strike may be a bit too strong (i really don’t know how it would play out-but Russian Buffers could end up failing (miserably)).

Anyway, if it gets some testing, then definately let me know how they work!

Also, expect more constructive criticism as you put more of these great creative topics forward.

Hi Raarne,
I have tested your rule variant and found it too complicated! For example if you want to attack a second turn with the panzers then one might ask one self if is possible to use these tanks together with other units attacking from another territory? All units must do there combat movement at the same time! So any panzers wont be able to make a second combined (with other units) attack! Hmmmm…… I will stick to the Panzergrenadiers advantage instead! :wink: