United Kingdom Factory Placement

[Zhukov44]

Although it’s possible to win the game without building a factory, I find that in most games United Kingdom ends up placing an IC somewhere…unless it is under attack and/or cash poor.

Granted, where you place a factory depends on what’s happening in each particular game.  But even so, what space do you use most often for a UK IC?  When is the right time to place it?

[VonManstein]

I rarely if ever build an IC for the UK. I’ve built one all over the world for UK but the only successful one is Norway. And thats only to apply more pressure to Germany if your income has exceeded the Kindgoms production capacity.

[Zhukov44]

Looks like “I Don’t Build a Factory” is as popular as any option.  So in this case, if/when UK exceeds 40 ipcs, do you simply buy extra air?

I voted Norway because that is where I place the most–it’s difficult for Germany to threaten Norway from mid-game on.  Obviously Western Europe is better but no good German player is going to allow it.

I’m still divided on the India factory question.  I’ve seen it played well against me and I’ve had some success with it myself…but when I’m successful it usually seems like I either 1) got good rolls or 2) was up against an inexperienced opponent.  Still, every once in a while an expert opponent demonstrates a new interpretation… so I’m kinda on the fence.  For the time being I consider India a fun strategy that opens up a lot of options, but sub-optimal against expert opponents because it ties down too much valuable hardware in the sub-continent.

As for South Africa, I never place there as it seems too far away from anywhere useful.  But if I’m playing with bids and Germany takes Egypt in full force, I might try it.  In addition, it might even have potential as a place to build naval units that will combine with the USA Pacific fleet late game.

[d142]

when i play as the u.k. i always build a I.C. at norway, i usually attuck norway at round 1, and build a AA gun and some fighters

[testguy 111]

Hi Iv’e only played a few times, but I build 1 in India to help america. So I can sen more transports to help land on pacific Islands and to help the americans with keeping china, and russia with the east. I only do this If i have enough $$$ to do so. Also I build subs and other things to attack Jap sea units.

This strategy has worked 2/2 times so far (only put another Ic for uk that many times) im  gonna try it again in this game.

Sadly it backfires if they take india (japan) then you could get screwed (happened to my opponent when I was Axis.

[hyogoetophile]

Here’s Caspian Sub’s first policy paper (with some minor formatting to make it more forum-friendly).

It basically says that normally (or even most or all of the time) Japan can smash an India IC on J3. I guess I’ve never looked at possible cases when this India smash plan wouldn’t work, but I always figured that even a nightmare J1 scenario would just mean the India IC goes down not as badly on J3 or is smashed J4 instead.

Isn’t an India IC a bad idea 99% of the time – even if coupled with something nuts like a SAf or Aus IC?

Thank You, Come Again: The India Complex

Caspian Sub PP01, 1v0

Paper Topic
Should the UK build a complex in India as an opening strategy?

Paper Summary
Building a complex in India is a bad idea for the UK.  Japan should overwhelm it even if the Soviets & Americans help.  If the Soviets send a great deal to India it may take longer to fall, but it will be extremely costly for all the Allies as well as leaving Moscow to be taken by Germany.

UK’s best plan:
Rnd 1 – Build India complex, move all available units to or toward India.
Rnd 2 – Build 3ftr in India and complete moving units.
Rnd 3 – Build 3ftr in India.

Japan’s counter:
Rnd 1 – Attack China with 2inf and aircraft, don’t lose aircraft.  Kill Pearl Harbor.  Kill UK transports.  Move everything else toward Frindo.  Build 3tra 1tnk.
Rnd 2 – Move all toward Frindo.  Pearl Harbor attack force moves to New Guinea.  Build 2bmr.
Rnd 3 – Attack India with all available units including battleships.

Details
First, let’s make a list of all the units that could be in India by the end of rnd 3.  We’ll only do Brits and Japs to start.  The available units from every possible source are:
  3inf 1ftr 1gun – India
  1inf - Persia
  1inf - Trans-Jordan
  1inf 1tnk 1ftr - Anglo
  1inf - South Africa
  2inf - Australia
  3ftr - built rnd 2 in India
  3ftr - built rnd 3 in India
  2ftr 1bmr - London
For a grand total of:
  9inf 1tnk 10ftr 1bmr 1gun

Japan can bring a max at the start of rnd 3 of:
  2inf - Frindo
  3inf  - Kwangtung
  2inf  - Manch
  4inf  1art 1tnk - Japan
  1tnk - Japan (built rnd 1)
  6ftr 1bmr from various places
  2inf Philippines
  2inf East Indies
  2btl
  2bmr Japan (built rnd 2)
For a grand total of:
  15inf 1art 2tnk 6ftr 3bmr 2btl

Running that through the dice simulator yields a 70% victory for Japan rnd 3.  But it’s actually much worse than that.  I’ve listed the maximum numbers of units; the real numbers for the UK are very different.

In most games, the UK will be down the troops from Anglo, Australia, and South Africa, and the fighters will be tied up in Europe or dead.  For Japan, the 2inf in Manchuria will likely attack China rnd 1, but little else would change.  That yields:

UK
5inf 7ftr 1bmr 1gun

Japan
13inf 1art 2tnk 6ftr 3bmr 2btl

The result of that matchup is a 99.8% win for Japan with plenty of ground troops alive.  Certainly the UK cannot battle Japan unless it has a lot of help.

FAQ
1. Why did you scope this analysis for a round 3 attack by Japan?

1. A Yankee complex built round 1 could conceivably fly fighters to India round 3 so Japan’s attack should happen before rnd 4.
2. If the US is building a Pacific fleet, it will start to be effective rnd 4.
   If Japan can beat the power curve in round 3, it will have gained the upper hand in Asia.  That is not to say it couldn’t happen later or earlier, merely that round 3 will be the last turn with little US help.

2. How does the scenario look with Japanese complexes instead of transports?

1. In the long term, the complexes will out produce the Indian complex.
2. Japan will have less flexibility.
3. Japan will have less fodder to defend against a naval assault by the US.
4. Japan will move less material to the mainland.
5. The Russians can threaten complexes; the transports can move around the Russians.
   Build transports first, not complexes.  See the Caspian Sub Policy Paper on production.

3. What about help from the Russians? 
The question revolves around how much help they can send.  To put the battle in the UK’s favor the Soviets would need to send 9inf 1ftr.  Can Russia afford to send those troops?  Only if the Germans become a peace-loving nation.

4. What help can the Yanks bring? 
Based on geography, only the US bomber and 1ftr are certain to be alive to help.  If the Pearl Harbor carrier survives in the north east corner of Australia at the end of round 1, then a maximum of 3 US fighters could make it to India.  But that is unlikely; the likely help is 1ftr 1bmr.  Those units certainly help, but not enough.

5. Can Germany help Japan?
Currently, many games I play see two transports in the Med at the end of Germany’s first turn.  If the complex in India goes up on rnd 1, Germany can take Trans-Jordan rnd 2 and then move the fleet through the Suez rnd 3 and kill a couple of units to soften India up for Japan.  That strafe can certainly become a factor.  Another option is for Germany to drop 4 or 5 transports in the Baltic.  That would likely take the UK’s mind off of India.

6. What about the Russians in the north coming from Buryatia? 
Japan can ignore them.  Rnd 3 they’ll be in Kwangtung, harming no one.  On rnd 4 they can attack Frindo, but they won’t have much offense so they’re not much of a threat.  If the Allies do not expend aircraft and Russian troops to defend India, then Japan will be able to kill the Russians rnd 2 or 3 because they will have extra force available.

7. What about a US complex? 
As mentioned in the first question, a US complex is built rnd 1, produces units rnd 2, and the units move rnd 3, after the India complex has fallen.  Tanks could not even liberate the complex rnd 3; the complex is 3 spaces away.

8. What about the mighty US navy? 
As mentioned in the first question, the fleet can’t do much until rnd 3 in the best of circumstances, and that is also after India has fallen.  Due to geography and turn order, Japan should be ahead of the United States in naval building at least through rnd 4.  See the Caspian Sub Policy Paper on the ‘Crazy Straw’ for this analysis.

9. What if the UK builds something other than fighters?
Then the UK gets beat up much worse.

10. What if the UK builds a second complex to help India?
What complex can protect India in rnd 3?  Anglo probably won’t belong to the UK rnd 1.  A South African complex couldn’t send anything to India except bombers by turn 3.  A complex built rnd 1 in Australia could fly 2 planes to India on rnd 3, but you would be spending 15 IPCs to build 20 IPCs of defense which could be destroyed before the fighters even fly to India.  And how would the UK have so much money to build two complexes and a great India defense by rnd 3?

Wrap Up
It is possible to coordinate all 3 allies to help the UK defend India, but a good Japan player will still crack it.  More importantly, Germany will be hosting Oktober Fest in Moscow while the other Allies defend Bombay.  Look for a different strategy.

Version and Unresolved Issues
1v0 Date: 2/21/05
Unresolved issues:

[Funcioneta]

That paper assumes many wrong things. I never buy figs to defend India IC, it’s way better buying tanks or inf. 2nd, Japan cannot send all to India J3 and even if they manage take it, it will be at cost of many aircraft: Japan will take the IC with 2-3 land units as much, and a couple or soviet inf at Persia plus some tanks in cau can retake easily. Also, it’s too much assume Eind jap units will attack India because UK can sacrifice aussie sub there (or even better, sacrifice aussie trannie plus 2 aussie infs to kill eind troops (with valuable aid of UK bomber). If really needed, you can even attack Eind and still sacrifice aussie sub to z35 to prevent bb support

There are many tricks that that paper ignore. However, I’m not saying that you can build India IC always: if germans take Egypt with too much units (2 or 3 tanks), it’s not a good idea build India IC because germans will get too big. Of course, african bids usually make India IC not good, and also attacking Ukr with soviets can cause them having not enough force to assist UK

My record with India IC is about 50% of wins. It’s playable if you know when do and when not do

[Lucifer]

For those interested in empirical efficient strats, regardless of C-Sub papers, an IC in India is generally not an efficient strat. But you’re welcome to try it against me.

[Zhukov44]

Func has it right, that C-Sub paper is super old and makes alot of bad assumptions….it needs an edit.  Obviously if Japan drops absolutely everything to deal with India than the Russians should help out.  In any case, if the Japs put everything into a J3 attack and lose some planes to the aa then sometimes the Russians can simply liberate it and UK can build there on the same turn.

I’m not really big on India for the reasons outlined above–it ties down valuable hardware in an area of secondary strategic value, and if Japan plays it right UK is forced into a defensive posture there.  Still, it is fun to play and every good A&A player should give it a try–just preferably not against your toughest adversary.

These days I hardly buy any UK factories unless its late game and UK has the cash to spare…but if you are going to go with a factory UK1 then India is probably the most interesting option.