@nubnumber1 Nope. Since it is a minor factory, the max damage rule of 2x production is in effect, and the damage is immediately reduced to 6.
Factories and Facilties—Where, How, When, and Why?
-
Some rules.
1. Never build MICs ever. Not a single scenario where this makes sense. Maybe you tell stories of games where you build an MIC and won. But I can assure you: You did not win because the MIC but despite of it.
2. Facilities neither take territories nor kill they units. You should try to avoid them and focus on investing into units. You need an immediate and relevant impact on investing into a facility. Investing into facilities too randomly with dubious immediate impact will make you lose.
Good examples for facilities can be:
- AB northern Italy in case otherwise the UK has an overwhelming attack on the Italian fleet
- AB Cyprus because it allows to move figs in 1 turn to Moscow
- NB Hainan in order to threaten India or to move transports and fleet in one turn back to sz6
- IC in Kiangsi, FIC or Malaya (many people underestimate the impact of a Malaya IC. In my opinion it is the most powerful one for Japan, although vulnerable. The potential to build units right into sz37 is a pain for the Allies.
- Any kind of “double move AB” = one power enables the planes of a partnered power to move one extra space. E.g. German planes on Italian soil.
Bad examples are:
Almost ANY IC with Germans (except few examples where Yugo IC can make sense)
The Germans can simply conquer enough ICs in order to satisfy their needs for production. ICs in WUK, Caucasus are usually not worth it.
Germans, Ukraine, Novo and Stalingrad are sufficient. There are few situation where a German IC in Persia can make sense. However as I will mention in point 4, ICs can also turn into liabilities.3. The further the game progresses the more likely it is that a facility can make sense. Early, 15 IPC is a lot. in games where the TUV might stakck up to 3.000 and above, 15 IPCs become less and less relevant. In a late game, 15 IPC invested to give a huge fleet an extra movement and thus extra strategic options can be worth it.
4. Make sure you do not build facilities for your opponent. UK ICs in Persia look neat in the first place, but if the Germans are played well, Allies cannot stop them from moving South and thus capturing the IC which is bad.
Also, when investing into an Egypt IC, make sure you do not lose it to the Italians.In general I see a tendency that players tend to invest into facilities to easily while not utilizing the maximal impact. Those players get into trouble against opponents who simply plan better without facilities and thus have more units on the map.
So I recommend everybody to stay rather critical when it comes to building facilities and only do so in if you have a strong case!
-
@Herr:
…. (which the FEC has typically tried and failed to attack, so it’s a walk-in) …
Just for my information: who are the FEC?
The FEC is the Far East Command, which is another way to refer to the UK Pacific forces.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Far_East_Command-Midnight_Reaper
Thank you!
-
There is a strong case for buliding a majir on romania rather then a minor.
1. More units in russia turn two and three, ( 5 mechs +5 tanks romania turn 2 ukraine if you do an r1?)
2. Second wave. Taking ukraine and stalingrad help, but leave you production divide and thus can be isolated. A major in romania is too far from the russians to do anything about. If you bulid fast movers, then they should reach moscow in only two turns, and with a concentrated force.
3. Far away from london. Persia maybe but ypu would make the allies have to spread out their bombers to cripple you effectively. If they bomb out berlin or western the wg, it wouldn’t damage the eastern front. If they bombout romania, focus your bulids on berlin or east Germany.
4. Protects afainst any incursion into greece. Fast movers can hit that in one turn. Also if your doing a neutral crush, then a major would also help germany set up for turkey in one turn
-
There is a strong case for buliding a majir on romania rather then a minor.
1. More units in russia turn two and three, ( 5 mechs +5 tanks romania turn 2 ukraine if you do an r1?) Units from this factory won’t affect russia until turn three. While you couldve been building units from germany since trun 1 and they will be in the same spot as units from romania by turn 3 anyway.
2. Second wave. Taking ukraine and stalingrad help, but leave you production divide and thus can be isolated. A major in romania is too far from the russians to do anything about. If you bulid fast movers, then they should reach moscow in only two turns, and with a concentrated force.
3. Far away from london. Persia maybe but ypu would make the allies have to spread out their bombers to cripple you effectively. If they bomb out berlin or western the wg, it wouldn’t damage the eastern front. If they bombout romania, focus your bulids on berlin or east Germany. Not really a concern early in the game. Germany has too much airforce to be scared of bombing runs to WG and Ger. Not cost effective for the allies to do. Late game bombing can be a pain but you should already be deep into russia and not need the romainian factory. Your income should be high enough to protect WG and Ger.
4. Protects afainst any incursion into greece. Fast movers can hit that in one turn. Also if your doing a neutral crush, then a major would also help germany set up for turkey in one turn
Its never a good idea for the Axis to do a neutral crush! Greece can be easily defended by Italy or units from Ger.See JDOW’s post above. MIC’s never ever make sense! You will never have the income to fully utilize a romanian major! By the time you do, the factory becomes obsolete because of its postioning. You just wasted 30 ipcs to sit idle. Like JDOW said you are better off spending that 30 on units that can do something. I don’t even like the idea of a minor in romania. Germany does not really need to build any extra factories. The only time they possibly need one is maybe in the middle east if they aren’t able to pry one away from the UK.
-
Some rules.
1. Never build MICs ever. Not a single scenario where this makes sense. Maybe you tell stories of games where you build an MIC and won. But I can assure you: You did not win because the MIC but despite of it.
This is interesting from the Japanese perspective. Do you simply accept the logistical cost of deliverying force via transports with guardian fleet? Or does your note refer only to major industrial centers?
Marsh
-
@Marshmallow:
Some rules.
1. Never build MICs ever. Not a single scenario where this makes sense. Maybe you tell stories of games where you build an MIC and won. But I can assure you: You did not win because the MIC but despite of it.
This is interesting from the Japanese perspective. Do you simply accept the logistical cost of deliverying force via transports with guardian fleet? Or does your note refer only to major industrial centers?
Marsh
I took it to mean major IC’s. Minor ones are almost necessary for Japan!
-
I believe MIC stands for Major IC, while mIC stands for Minor IC. The only difference is the capitalization of the M.
-
That’s a reasonable assumption, but it could just as easily be a typo. Hence my request for clarification…
Marsh
-
Out of curiosity, I looked at the two acronym threads in the Player Help section…
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=7842.0
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27430.0
…and unless I’m missing them somewhere, there don’t seem to be abbreviations given to distinguish between major and minor ICs. There’s simply an IC abbreviation.
The capitalized-versus-non-capitalized distinction mentioned above is clever and short (just 3 characters each), but it’s potentially ambiguous (as the above posts indicated). Adding one character might be a better option – say, for example, MjIC and MnIC.
-
@CWO:
Out of curiosity, I looked at the two acronym threads in the Player Help section…
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=7842.0
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27430.0
…and unless I’m missing them somewhere, there don’t seem to be abbreviations given to distinguish between major and minor ICs. There’s simply an IC abbreviation.
The capitalized-versus-non-capitalized distinction mentioned above is clever and short (just 3 characters each), but it’s potentially ambiguous (as the above posts indicated). Adding one character might be a better option – say, for example, MjIC and MnIC.
Or just say “major” or “minor”, they’re probably easier to type anyway…
-
Or MIC and mic but then you might end up with k-e-y going through your head :)
-
I was never a big fan of a Romanian IC, but Afrikakorps recently outlined a German plan aimed at taking Egypt early. Building a Romanian IC G1 is a key factor in his latest implementation of that plan. See https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=39016.135 for an extended discussion. It may be a better idea than I first thought it would be.
-
I agree.
-
@simon33 said in Factories and Facilties—Where, How, When, and Why?:
There is one time when UK_Pac might want a factory - that’s when Calcutta has been retaken.
Well, the UK Pac won’t be able to use that factory when their Capital has been captured. Usually the British in the Pacific is only struggling to survive. Investing in a mIC therefore seems very contraproductive. The same seems to be the case for ANZAC, which are usually pretty low on funds.
I agree that the Germans are in no need to build any factory themselves, but a Romanian one could have its merits. Generally though I believe it’s a worse buy than troops. Especially early on. And later on the need is less.
For Japan the naval base in Hainan is definitely worth it’s weight in gold. Not always needed, but the extra flexibility for the fleet is very valuable. Japan thrives from its transports and just threatening a heavy amphibious assault from sz 36 is great to suppress the British initiative and more or less forcing them to turtle in Calcutta. Also being able to go to Tokyo or the Carolines in one move is wonderful.
I’d say Japan needs about 2 mICs on the mainland. Building 3 might be ok, but they are actually not so easy to fully utilize because of the need to mobilize fleet. I prefer Malaya and FIC for being closer to the heat, but Kwangtung is also viable. I guess Kiangsu, Shantung and even Manchuria are possible, but lose the territory and the factory goes down with it. They’re also a bit far off. I usually go with transports early with Japan and only build mICs the round after having DOWed.
I have thought about an idea for Germany, which I haven’t tried yet, but probably will. The basic idea is to make the British have to choose between a much needed Taranto and wiping out Bismarck. With an aircraft carrier buy for Germany in r1, UK can usually easily choose both. With an airbase in Holland along with 3 fighters, they should have to atleast choose.
-
@trulpen Holy thread necromancy Batman!
Re-read what I said. “Retaken”. Meaning the allies have liberated it from the Axis. I haven’t often seen the allies being able to build in India after losing it and even less often that they could have built more than 3 units (not sure if I ever have), but nevertheless it is possible and the hypothetical situation I was referring to.
I’ve built German factories in Caucasus to pump more units into the Middle East and push the allies back but as JDOW points out, you need to be pretty sure you aren’t going to be losing it. Last time I did this I think the Brits already had about 100 units in the Mid East and Egypt so the single extra factory would only make so much difference but I still think it was worth it.
As for Japan, I agree that 2 mICs is about right but they need to be built really early. Turns 1 & 2 is what I normally do. Kiangsu and FIC respectively. Kwangtung & Manchuria are too far out of the action. I suppose Kiangsu & Shantung together might be an option but I have found Shantung by itself, being 1 turn closer to the Soviets, this is actually a liability rather than an advantage. Malaya can be useful as a third mIC if there is a late DOW but otherwise its largely a waste of money and can be captured after India’s fall.
-
Ah, of course, you’re right. My bad. Having the MIC in Calcutta reduced to a mIC might very well give rise to the need of a new mIC close-by if Calcutta have been liberated.
FIC is certainly a sweet spot for a japanese factory. If built really early, I guess Shantung and Kiangsu are good, but I usually go with transports instead, being able to be flexible between islands and mainland.
When doing JDOW3, I simply build up on transports, having 5 by FIC and 3 by Japan grabbing all key spots (Philippines, Kwangtung, Malaya and all DEIs) in one slam, if possible.
This might invite US to Caroline, if I want to protect my transports, which I usually want. But the japanese threat to the Carolines should be rather strong the next round.
-
8 transports? Wow. Do you have trouble keeping them supplied with troops? If you do the math, you can buy 3 less transports and put down ICs J1 and J2 and it only costs you 3IPCs more. More importantly, the troops get into battle sooner. Buying the troops on Tokyo slows down Axis expansion in the time lost in ferrying troops around. I tried this idea once and I found that I ran out of production slots on Tokyo. I guess your problem though is that you don’t like the available locations on the first turn. I think Kiangsu is fine. It’s really good for fighting China. It’s not very easy for the other allies to take out. Not really useful for attacking India of course but you have transports and FIC for that.
-
Not all of them go back to re-supply at the same time. Actually just a few once in a while. But you’re right it takes time and momentum.
Might be better to buy that mIC in Kiangsu along with two transports for J1. And settle for a total of 6 or 7 transports. Can’t do a grand swoop on everything J3, but usually it’s tough to get it all anyway. The next mIC should probably then be in FIC.
-
@AxisAndAllies1940 i don’t believe i have ever thought of the egyptian ANZAC patrol scooping up persia for a factory…
-
@Charles-de-Gaulle said in Factories and Facilties—Where, How, When, and Why?:
Does anyone ever consider upgrading the minor IC on Rome to a major? I usually find that it is not necessary until late in the game, and by that time I don’t want to do it or lack the IPCs.
Nope. I can’t ever fill the 13 units the the Mic and the mic allow, and its too much wasted income the I ties need elsewhere. if italy needs to produce more than 13 units, i feel the game should be over…
Suggested Topics
