IC's ???

If i build an IC in a captured territory, and I lose that territory, and another ally takes it over, its now their IC.

Thats not even a question, I just feel its the answer to one of the next ones to be asked.

LOL… since you mentioned it… BAM!

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.

@Cobert:

So the best way to counter the Australia IC is to b**** out?

Gotcha.

No really though, I understand.  Thats kind of a good strategy for any nation though, just a bit hard to execute because Japan is spread out through islands.

Mm hm.

Australia is an awesome naval base that gives the Allies a great deal of freedom in the Pacific.  But either US or the UK must come to the fight with some naval units.  While they build naval units, Japan and Germany press the attack on Russia.

Japan’s position degrades very quickly after Australia gets going, but it is almost impossible for the Allies to capture Japan itself.  Far before Japan is in any real danger (with a stack of infantry and fighters on it), Germany and Japan should be able to make Russia fall.  From that point, it’s really Japan and Germany vs. UK and US.  In a 9 VC game, that means that Germany and Japan together have a deathgrip on 8 VCs (all in Europe and mainland Asia, probably including India, Karelia, and Moscow), but have probably lost the Phillipine Islands.

Since Japan cannot be broken, and Germany cannot be broken, the victory should go to the Axis, with a navy and air force fueled by Russian IPCs, and a positional advantage that allows Germany to threaten London itself as well as threatening Africa and Brazil with only minimal IPCs invested.

Of course, the Allies are not locked into defending Australia, but any IPCs spent there are IPCs not used elsewhere in those important early turns.

whoa ho ho - touche’

You would honestly be saving 1-2 turns by producing fleet out of India rather than SA. Good counter point Jen.

@ncscswitch:

The remaining fleet off Kwang is a nuisance to Japan, and requires that they do something about it… and with 2 rolls of 3’s, it has to be a fairly substantial something (at least 1 BB plus some air power or other navy).

There is no difference between a UK fleet near India or a UK fleet near Kwang when I play J…
their defending roll is still the same and both will perish someday…
Only nuissance they give?
you have to pay attention that no trannie goes unguarded…
but you always have to keep the latter in mind :-P
(with or without a UK fleet nearby)

come on, now,…

less than 200 IPC’s for the most expensive battle?? that’s not much!  :roll:
I’m sorry to inform you, but I CAN’T believe this is true!!!
I had the vote counters set to zero again, 'cause I really think people who vote should make at least a calculation rather than an estimation
you can be fooled pretty quickly the way battles get really expensive…
and please give the people some feedback on how that battle got so expensive…
THX :-)

200 IPC’s?
that’s 20 armors (totalling 100 IPC’s) against 20 infantry and 4 figs (totalling 100 as well) for example…

204 IPC’s?
that’s 2 bombers, 6 figs, 10 inf and 6 art (totalling 144 IPC’s) against 20 infantry (totalling 60 IPC’s).

204 IPC’s?
that’s 9 subs and a BB (totalling 96 IPC’s) against 3 loaded AC’s (totalling 108 IPC’s)

I can’t believe at all that my opponent and I had the most expensive battle ever…  :-o
how do you guys manage to capture Russia if there is not something near 200 IPC’s at stake (see example 2)??

Yes, you are entirely correct.