… not to mention the US complex in Sinkiang! 8 American tanks in Asia on US2? Done!
~Josh
Through the course of history (and even today) invaders / defenders made militia unit where ever they went. I like the idea that INF can spawn from where ever you want not to exceed the locations IPC index. To bad thats not a rule :cry:
I actually did the IC in E. Canada trick once. Then again, I lost none of my fleet to the Japanese and only the DD and BB in the Med you can’t defend before Germany goes. That means I started the game with 4 Transports and only needed 2 more (1 for SZ 1 to SZ 2 and 1 for SZ 6 to SZ 5) to move 10 units a round into N. Asia/Europe.
Now, Switch is going to chime in with a quote of mine taken completely out of context where I say that 3 transports is enough. Yes. When you have England ONLY to produce units and ONLY because 4 transports makes you want to produce 8 ground units every round, to maximize and not waste their transport capability. Then it is good to go with 3 transports, 6 ground units and 1 or 2 air/sea units a round.
UK IC build is never a recommendation of mine. I would always say to maximize production in the UK and focus on Germany.
However, if you build that IC in India, you’d better buy US navy in the pacific to keep it UK.
As the UK on UK 1 I buy 2 IC. I put on in India the other in S Africa. After that I buy 3 INF for India and 2 ARM for S Africa, and maybe a fighter for England. I don’t do any thing in Asia for at least a turn or 2. I use the ARM to clear out Africa fast then move them to reinforce India. With the FTR’s I move them to the Russian front line, then the next turn I move them to India. Don’t know if there is a flaw in my plan I don’t play any one very good mostly teach people how to play hoping they want to play again and not run away kicking and screeming. (little success as of yet.
As the UK on UK 1 I buy 2 IC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scream
If BOTH the US and USSR are total retards, UK will need ICs. But NOT two on the first turn, because there is a good chance of London falling to Germany.
Seriously, though, 2 ICs is only something you should ever do if US and USSR are both retarded. It is, I think, almost certainly not an efficient strategy. South Africa is too easy for Japan to overwhelm (if you just beef up at South Africa, there’s almost no point in putting an IC there in the first place). You could build a fleet and army at S. Africa/India, but that leaves Germany free run of Europe, and USSR will have far more pressure applied against it.
I guess I left a wee part out the US player on US1 starts to mass a Navy in the Atlantic thus making an expensive buffer to break.
I guess I left a wee part out the US player on US1 starts to mass a Navy in the Atlantic thus making an expensive buffer to break.
The US does need a fleet. But going India/S. Africa is FAR more suited to a KJF than a KGF.
The UK is gallivanting off in India and South Africa, while the US is building a fleet in the Atlantic. And meanwhile, the Russians are - where? No reinforcements.
The Germans and Japs don’t need to break that Atlantic buffer. All they need to do is make a beeline for Moscow for the win.
Lots of armor
RE: to the KJF comment,
I don’t use UK to KJF, I use them to pacify Japan until I done with Germany. 3 INF and maybe 2 ARM per turn isn’t going to slow down Japan if they want the mainland.
Nah, no point to actually KILL Japan. Too much work to get theri capital. But, if you can take Borneo, East Indies and Philippines with England and Manchuria, Kwangtung, FIC with Russia, you are miles ahead of the game. Even if you only take with England, that’s a massive coup for the Allies, and it’s very hard to protect against with Japan.
Everyone keeps saying that Japan can’t be cracked. It’s not fiscally feasible. Honky tonk! Don’t let the Switches out there force you into THEIR game. I’ve taken lots of islands with England before, especially if Japan is watching America build fleet and ignoring England!
RE: to the KJF comment,
I don’t use UK to KJF, I use them to pacify Japan until I done with Germany. 3 INF and maybe 2 ARM per turn isn’t going to slow down Japan if they want the mainland.
Yeah, I actually think that was pretty well implied. I don’t think there’s any way in hell that you can use India and South Africa to KJF while America’s building an Atlantic fleet. It would be pretty ridiculous to expect Japan to actually fall.
I understand that you are NOT using the industrial complexes to KJF. What I wrote was that I think you perhaps SHOULD be using one of those for a KJF plan. (I don’t think the second should be built, but if it HAD to be, I think only a KJF would be good).
If you’re building an Atlantic fleet with the US, and are messing around in India/Africa with UK, Russia is going to take a beating - if you have skilled Axis opponents.
Nah, IC in India, IC in East Indies maybe an IC in Borneo. That’s 11 Units a round into the Pac with England. Ignore Germany other then reinforcements to Russia. Let Russia slow Germany, and crush Japan. Reduce them to their mainland, take their navy away, then go whole hog on Germany. (Russia should be under risk of falling at this point, but with the ability to stack up in SFE you can walk to Moscow with America and England taking the land for yourself until Moscow is liberated and push the Germans back.)
Nah, IC in India, IC in East Indies maybe an IC in Borneo. That’s 11 Units a round into the Pac with England. Ignore Germany other then reinforcements to Russia. Let Russia slow Germany, and crush Japan. Reduce them to their mainland, take their navy away, then go whole hog on Germany. (Russia should be under risk of falling at this point, but with the ability to stack up in SFE you can walk to Moscow with America and England taking the land for yourself until Moscow is liberated and push the Germans back.)
Putting the wagon before the horse?
Exactly how is UK supposed to afford three ICs AND capture all those territories without any support from US?
NO nation should EVER build 2 IC’s in turn 1.
