Well I like an American Pacific offensive more and more because I find that Japan cannot keep pace in the fleet wars and build up a land force to threaten Moscow at the same time. Either it loses the fleet battle (which means Japan will lose half its income) or it can only send a token force against the Russians. So I go Pacific whenever I can. But if USA starts with a disadvantage in the Pacific (this will be most games), it is not the best strategy. The best players will adapt their strategy to what is happening in the game.
US IC in Norway?
-
Yeah I see your point mr AJ, that’s what I’m used to doing as well. I just saw this move recently and was like hmm, does it have merit? I think it’s a toss-up if both forces are available to take it, but you might be “forced” to default it to one power when the other power has to do something else.
-
Bean, it seems your questions are, 1) US vs. UK taking Norway and building an IC there, and 2) Norway IC vs. just shucking with boats. On #1, it really depends on Axis strategy and the dice, to some degree. If Germany falters early in Africa, British income could potentially reach the mid-30s by turn 5 or so, in which case, Britain will have a little extra income to support a Norway IC. In some games, though, America ends up taking Norway through a weird set of circumstances, and when that happens, I am more than happy to build an American IC there. And why bother shucking over an American AA? Why take up the transport space? Just move over Britain’s and build another to replace it, if needed. If the German bomber is dead, though, don’t bother. So I guess in most games, I prefer UK to take Norway for income reasons. I don’t really go out of my way to let America take it unless, as you say, Britain is tied up elsewhere.
As for buying an IC versus just shucking, I look at it this way. To get 3 units from America to Norway, America must invest in 32 IPCs worth of boats (2 to get them to UK and 2 to get them to Norway/Karelia). Granted, that actually gets 4 units over, but that’s the investment that’s required. Compare that to 15 IPCs for the factory, and the fact you’re building on the front, and it’s an easy decision.
-
Thanks mr gamer. I do already realize that it’s better to buy the IC vs transports, from the very first post. I was wondering however if you should try to set it up such that the US takes Norway, or just let the UK have Norway, given that they both could take it without stressing any other attacks.
And why bother shucking an American AA? Because you may not have enough men to fill all of your transports early on anyways, very common. Why spend 5 IPCs to make an AA gun when you have freebies? That’d be like strategically bombing yourself for 5 IPCs, not to mention you can only make 7 men on UK if you made an AA for the 8th slot.
-
I also agree that an US factory in Norway is much more effective than 2 transports, and more like 4 ! (3 tanks vs 2inf 2tanks)
But it’s not always possible, if Germans have a counteroffensive force ready in Karelia, strong enough to wipe the US if they come alone. But two Allied waves are much more solid defensively: not only the British troops, but also the US planes that may arrive on the airfields captured by the British.UK 4inf, 4tnk US 4inf, 3tnk, 4fig, 1bmb, 1AA
OR: it’s possible Norway was swapped by light forces between US and Germany; then one time, Germans fail to recapture it (say 1inf,1art,1fig vs 2inf, quite possible) and the flag remains US. THEN would be the time for UK+US to come in force, with all UK planes too.
-
Basically:
US IC in Norway is great IF YOU CAN GET IT, but because of turn order and other various factor, it is very difficult to get in practice.
-
I think it is a good option,
It should provide indeed 3 units, and not being attacked after you got a nice cover from USSR or UK, at least not from Karilea, since you keep the pipeline going into that country.
I think it is worth it, but ah well, I doubt wether UK or US should build it, US is btter I think, they need to travel way more then UK.
-
Or America builds it in Norway, leaves it empty, Germany takes it, and England takes it away so England gets a free IC? :P
And, for the record, Algeria dies on Round 1. I don’t want to wait until Round 2. That’s more time for that solitary Transport to put annoyances in my way for my war for oil!
-
What if US builds the IC in Norway, UK lands as many troops as possible to protect it, and US starts building ships in the Baltic? (Like a BB and 2 subs). Germany would have to fight them or move, right into range of the Atlantic Fleet, which if built right, could destroy them. A quick way to expose more German shoreline to protect.
Interesting, but would need thought out in detail to work.
/Yes, I use to many apostrophes. -
I think building a fleet there is not going to lead anywhere,
Germany retreats (well I would at least) when you build an IC in Norway from the Atlantic, and keep all units focuses now on the entire Russian line, with additional US forces,
Building this IC, would you still build the one in Sinkiang?!
-
I think building a fleet there is not going to lead anywhere,
Germany retreats (well I would at least) when you build an IC in Norway from the Atlantic, and keep all units focuses now on the entire Russian line, with additional US forces,
Building this IC, would you still build the one in Sinkiang?!
who builds in Sikiang anyway? YOu need an indian IC there first
-
I think building a fleet there is not going to lead anywhere,
Germany retreats (well I would at least) when you build an IC in Norway from the Atlantic, and keep all units focuses now on the entire Russian line, with additional US forces,
Building this IC, would you still build the one in Sinkiang?!
who builds in Sikiang anyway? YOu need an indian IC there first
I was aiming on the US. ;)
-
I think building a fleet there is not going to lead anywhere,
Germany retreats (well I would at least) when you build an IC in Norway from the Atlantic, and keep all units focuses now on the entire Russian line, with additional US forces,
Building this IC, would you still build the one in Sinkiang?!
who builds in Sikiang anyway? YOu need an indian IC there first
I was aiming on the US. ;)
in order to have an IC in Sink, the UK should build an IC in India first. that way you have 2 ic pumpiong out units and makes it harder for Japan to take wither one of them
-
Me for US playing, I would only build anything there indeed when UK did India IC, and Russia is supporting from behind with inf.
But that is another story, lets stay a bit on topic. :)
-
An IC in Sinkiang can be very useful, if you are moving to reduce Japan to only an island. Of course, it necessitates an IC in India and China and possibly another in Manchuria.
However, if that’s the case, I’m not building one in Norway. :P Actually, I’m not building one in Norway anyway. I prefer to build it in W. Europe. :evil:
-
I think whoever and everyone who said it before is right - the US IC is a benefit vs transports, but the UK may have 8 units with nowhere else to go for the turn, so it may not be worth it to let the UK waste a turn (buying airforce or extra tps) just to let the US have Norway.
-
I like to let Russia have Norway - that’s one extra Inf per turn where it really counts. This can work if Germany left Norway totally empty, and the UK takes or clears out Karelia. Just blitz a tank from Arc / WRus, and Presto: +3 to the most cash-starved ally.
-
I concur, Russia is better off with Norway. However, most German players will attempt to ensure that England or America gets it instead of Russia for that very reason. Notice, I said ATTEMPT TO ENSURE because it doesn’t always work out that way.
-
Russia has to over extend itself to take Norway. its usually fighting to keep karelia, and sometimes Archangel if they attack belo R1.
-
I like Russia to get it as well, and round 1 is, IMO, the best time to get it. Just throw everything you can at it, and pray for the best. It is risky, but the benifits are well worth the attempt. First, it means you have eliminated one German fighter plane. Secondly, You have reduced the German front line infantry by 3! Which means Karilia will have that much less coming at it. I also suggest a strafing run on the Ukraine for good measure, as well as the mandatory attack on W. Russia.
Germany will want to invade to get it back, but it will stretch their resources thinner along a much already too wide of a front.
If Germany does get it back, UK can soften it up enough so that USA can then take it firmly in round 1 to build your IC there. Just be sure that you have a sizable Russian army to take Karilia on R2 and hold out the Germans long enough for UK to reinforce Norway.
Crazy Ivan -
3 attacks on R1, even if one is pre-determined to be a strafe, is 1 attack too many.
Suggested Topics
