No, Manchuria is considered to be an originally Chinese territory. The only valid territories for the British NO are Japan, Okinawa, Formosa, Iwo Jima, French Indo-China Thailand, and the Caroline Islands.
The UK in the Pacific
-
Well, the way i play Japan it does. You take the east indies and borneo with two inf and 1 inf respectively, dump 3inf and 1 art from the loaded transports in burma, and land 1 inf and 1 tank in FIC. park a carrier by the burma coast with two fighters, and land 3 fighters from your china fights in FIC.
kaboom!
-
it all depends on the Japanese player. last '41 game i played, UK destroyers from Australia and India, respectfully, destroyed two lightly defended Japanese transports and re-took most of the islands it had lost on J1. the Japanese fleet was too busy with the USA, so these same forces then moved up and added to the defence of India
i didn’t choose any option, as you didn’t leave a ‘use what forces are there to your best advantage’ selection in the poll :-P
-
In my games with the 41 set-up japans fleet is usually centered around the Philippines with just a couple of transports and infantry around the East indies and Borneo, so Britain can usually get a factory out and at least 3 units before Japan can position to take it. Just looking at the placement of japans units and the map japan needs to spend J1 setting up for a J2 attack in which case Britain can see that coming and not build an IC there
-
Well, the way i play Japan it does. You take the east indies and borneo with two inf and 1 inf respectively, dump 3inf and 1 art from the loaded transports in burma, and land 1 inf and 1 tank in FIC. park a carrier by the burma coast with two fighters, and land 3 fighters from your china fights in FIC.
kaboom!
You can’t get to East Indies J1.
To make this work for Japan you have to go all out J1 for the J2 attack. If that happens then UK should NOT build IC but if Japan does not setup for it then I say build it. IMO the best route of action is to take Borneo and New Guinea J1 with a planned attack of Austrailia J2.
Russia could build 4 tanks also on R1 then R2 goto India.
-
@Flying:
You can’t get to East Indies J1.
Yes, you can. You have two transports off the caroline islands.
-
I agree with Volkov. Since UK now goes after Japan, she has the hindsight of seeing if a factory in India is viable or not. If the Japan seem to be focused on USA, China, or Russia – then a factory in India can be a good setup move.
-
@Flying:
You can’t get to East Indies J1.
Yes, you can. You have two transports off the caroline islands.
New Guinea sea zone connected to East Indies sea zone? Map is at in laws. I thought it wasn’t connected there.
-
it all depends on the Japanese player. last '41 game i played, UK destroyers from Australia and India, respectfully, destroyed two lightly defended Japanese transports and re-took most of the islands it had lost on J1. the Japanese fleet was too busy with the USA, so these same forces then moved up and added to the defence of India
i didn’t choose any option, as you didn’t leave a ‘use what forces are there to your best advantage’ selection in the poll :-P
I probably shouldve done that instead of the canada option since i dont think any1 does that
lol -
non of the above
Try to retake an island with Australian fleet
Try to join US Navy (if there is a US Navy in the Pacific)
Try to push on the middle east would be great… but, can England do that? -
@Flying:
New Guinea sea zone connected to East Indies sea zone? Map is at in laws. I thought it wasn’t connected there.
Yes SZ40(NG) and SZ38(EI) are connected. Looking at it right now.
I can see missing this though.
-
IC in India: ensures instant ground pressure on japan as well as a decent naval base, it can be devastating if lost
IC in Australia: lets you flank the japanese navy and unite with the american fleet, hard to use ground troops though….
IC i Canada: Only worth it if:
A) you reeeally don’t wanna lose your IC
B)the japs are going all out on alaska and californiaDo nothing: keeps pressure on the germans, US might get overwhelmed
Push through ME: lets you use spare troops in North Africa and the Med. , might be a very small force though…
-
I think its annoying that the Russians are always required to defend India for the British. Revised was essentially the same way, usually requiring 2 inf and at least 3 tanks in range out Caucasus, to prevent the all out rush by Japan.
It seems like we have basically the same pattern going on here, at least in 41. The ‘Rush’ might take another round, which buys the British 3 more tanks, but the Russian commitment makes it just that much easier for Germany to put early pressure on Moscow. Right now I’m going to have to vote No to the India complex.
In 42 the IC is a bit more viable, still pretty costly though.
-
I think that an IC in Australia with an American player who is taking an active role in the Pacific would give Japan more to think about than blind expansion into Asia. A combined fleet between the two means that both the UK an the US can threaten Japan without expending all of their IPC’s on a KJF strategy. If time is truly the Allies friend then slowing down Japans expansion in anyway is a good thing.
-
@Danger:
I think that an IC in Australia with an American player who is taking an active role in the Pacific would give Japan more to think about than blind expansion into Asia. A combined fleet between the two means that both the UK an the US can threaten Japan without expending all of their IPC’s on a KJF strategy. If time is truly the Allies friend then slowing down Japans expansion in anyway is a good thing.
This might be true, then again, it is all the less pressure that is put on Germany, which means all the more pressure that Germany can put on Russia, which means that Japan needs fewer guys to take down Russia.
Speaking in such generalizations is rarely useful.
-
This might be true, then again, it is all the less pressure that is put on Germany, which means all the more pressure that Germany can put on Russia, which means that Japan needs fewer guys to take down Russia.
Speaking in such generalizations is rarely useful.
So its just KGF 100% of the time? zzzzzzz…
-
@Heavy:
So its just KGF 100% of the time? zzzzzzz…
Maybe? I dunno. I am merely contending that putting presssure on Japan does not automaticaly = good.
-
they’re all valid points. i think it just comes down to your own individual games. most of us are experiences enough to know if and when placing an IC is worthwhile. you just have to watch what the enemy does closely
i’ve seen games where it was worth UK building an IC in India, and i’ve seen games where it was a bloody terrible idea
-
they’re all valid points. i think it just comes down to your own individual games. most of us are experiences enough to know if and when placing an IC is worthwhile. you just have to watch what the enemy does closely
i’ve seen games where it was worth UK building an IC in India, and i’ve seen games where it was a bloody terrible idea
i gotta agree with u, it all depends on how japan wants to play their game, there is no end-all-be-all perfect strategy
-
they’re all valid points. i think it just comes down to your own individual games. most of us are experiences enough to know if and when placing an IC is worthwhile. you just have to watch what the enemy does closely
i’ve seen games where it was worth UK building an IC in India, and i’ve seen games where it was a bloody terrible idea
Seconded. There is no hard and fast answer that applies to any game state – especially when you’re the Allies.
-
Would anyone say though, that is in fact a good idea to let Japan take India? I mean really. The initial UK setup in India is not good enough to last over the span of even a few turns if Japan is funneling forces in. You can say that building an IC there is not a good idea, but what is the alternative? An IC in Australia? The Imperial Navy is far to strong to pretend that you can send your 2 inf/1 tank 1 infantry a turn over to SE Asia. I think that the UK is best used by causing problems in North Africa, strat bombing Germany, harassing the Japanese in the Pacific, and massing for Overlord. I just dont see a viable alternative to an IC in India. It is something that can be done in turn 2 (after watching Japans turn one) that can have an immediate impact on that theatre. It is either that, or basically admit that you wont have a say in the Pacific.
I guess I am a frustrated player who’s is tired of the watching the UK player do nothing(in most games i have seen). Sitting there building 10 infantry a turn, and fighting a delaying action in Egypt is not an effective use of the difficult to use, yet profitable UK.
Suggested Topics
