I can’t see how the Norway IC is better than the Poland IC.
The Poland IC is automatically defended by infantry from Germany moving toward Russia and, as was said before, is one move closer to Russia.
The Norway IC is isolated and, considering the typical naval buildup by the UK, it must be defended by a significant number of units that are in no way a threat to anyone unless Russia or UK aren’t trading Finland and there are armor in Norway.
For the Axis, you want to be able to pile up your builds, not choose to isolate them. The Egypt IC is an exception because it can be supported by the Italians, which is why I have decided that it is best for the UK to counterattack Egypt if there is one German armor left and even sometimes when there are 2 armor. Lose the UK bomber to make sure you take it, too. Italy can retake Egypt and build an IC if it wants, just as long as Germany can’t. That move carries other benefits but that is for another thread.
The big problem with the poland IC is that it splits the defense of germany. Now Germany has to defend both poland and Germany. Any player would defend germany and that makes a huge gap in the supply lines to the Russian front. By turn 2 the Germans are out numbered or at best on par with the soviets. In games where I have used the poland IC Uk drops on Poland and blam not only did you lose an IC but the whole logistics of the russain front goes out the window. I do like norway and will give that a try. I have used Bulgaria. The argument for Norway is sound.
I think Poland is an ideal location for a G1 IC:
1. It’s closer to the Eastern Front
2. It’s easily defensible (the bulk of your units will march thru there on their way to Moscow)
3. It’s not an auto target for the Allies (like France is)
4. It’s further from the established US/UK sea lanes and therefore less likely to be attacked
5. It’s “safer” from SBR, as it can only take 6 damage
6. You don’t need 16 production capacity (just buying infantry costs 48 IPCs–by that time you’ll have a SU IC)
Further, a good G1 buy would be IC (15), 4xInf (12), Arty (4). That gives you 5 units to start your push East into Poland on G2. Assuming about 45 IPCs for G2, you can then place 3xInf in Pol, and 7xInf and 3xTank in Ger. That means you have 8 ground pounders in Pol on G2 (compared to 10 for the “typical” G1 build of 9xInf, Arty), so you’ve only traded 2 units in the short term for 3 units every turn for the rest of the game.
Also, let’s compare a G2 buy with a Pol IC to one without (and assuming 45 IPCs).
G2 w/ Pol IC: 10xInf, 3xTank
13 units, 19 attack power, 29 defense power
G2 w/o Pol IC: 6xInf, 3xTank, Bmb
10 units (one can’t hold ground), 19 attack power, 21 defense power
A French IC would let you buy 15xInf, but you get 4 less attack power, and only 1 more defense power; plus you will struggle to “max” those production spots, especially once you capture a Russian IC. I’ve ruled out the Nwy IC as too far off the beaten path to be worth it for Germany, and it would be hugely detrimental if the US could capture it (which they could relatively easily.
Just my $0.02…
Once again, I usually don’t agree with an IC strat for Germany. My fear with a polish IC is that it will be much easier for the allies to nab for a turn as you would have to be defending poland, w europe, and germany all at the same time. This in turn would probably slow down any advance. The point of the French IC is for a slow advance and can only be done if you expect to be pumping out 15 or 16 units per turn (otherwise what’s the point). If the AA is a concern it can be taken care of T1 by moving the german AA over and purchasing an AA for germany. But I think this IC would almost have to be built with a turtle in mind. You would gain punch by not sacrificing any armour T1 as well as utilizing your fighters to be able to be much more active on russia.
Another advantage it has over poland (in very rare cases, most likely) is what a wonderful spot it is in to build naval units (subs could threaten any ungaurded trannys instantly, plus it could show a heavy push for africa maybe)
I suppose Norway isn’t impossible, but a IC purchase G1 doesn’t make sense to me. G2 is when Germany has the money. In any case if I were UK I would go after a Norway complex aggressively.
Poland seems reasonable and I will try it–if Poland is low on inf armor can be moved there… However, I still like France especially if USA is KGF. Only drawback seems to be the SBRs.
Here are my thoughts on why the FRA IC is the best bet.
1. It provides ‘soaking’ damage from any early game, non-dedicated SBR over a 3 IPC territory. If you aren’t maxing out all 16 production spots which you most likely won’t as you’ll be building offensive units), you can let some damage sit on your ICs as I have done in some of my games where I’ve built a FRA IC. In two games where I’ve had disastrous G1 and G2, I’ve let 7-10 damage sit on my two German ICs and I just built units wherever I could with the sub 30 (20 IPCs at one point) income that Germany was pulling in until the Russian advance stalled out and I was able to push back. Both FRA and GER were stacked so high with infantry and artillery that they were immune from attack and I was eventually able to hit back into POL and CZE while still keeping GER and FRA safe.
2. FRA is ‘safe.’ Any Axis player in their right mind will never let FRA fall to the allies. If the Allies pull an unexpected naval move or position their fleet so that GER can’t be hit (for example, moving everything to Z12), you don’t need to stack units in GER and can pump 6 units directly into FRA to defend against any possible invasion (or position yourself for a counterattack into ITA if the allies go for that)
3. The extra 3 production spots can be good to use if you are getting all 3 NOs but are not able to keep the CAU/KAR production spot in your hands for longer than a turn to build units there (SU/UK counterattacks).
4. If Germany suffers a bad first turn or two (not getting the Russian NO, not sinking the BB and losing half your airforce, getting decimated in EGY, etc), POL will be put in serious jeopardy as the Russians strengthen and push into Europe. With a naval invasion by UK forces into POL backed up by Russian land units not only do the allies avoid losing the 5 IPC NO for allied troops being in SU territory, but the UK now has a direct production spot on the mainland. Even the more likely scenario of the SU taking it and then getting reinforced by UK/US troops is a big advantage. I’d gladly trade a 5 IPC NO for a 10 IPC NO, a 6 point territory swing, and a factory on Germany’s doorstep. Russia would most likely be making 40+ IPCs a turn which would enable 10 inf to be placed in RUS/CAU to defend against the Japanese push while placing 3 offensive units in POL to finish off GER.
The only downside of the FRA IC over POL IC is that it slows down your advance into RUS slightly for one turn. However, this is mitigated to some extent by the fact that you will most likely have to send some units from GER over to FRA anyways to help defend against a turn 2 UK invasion of FRA. It must be able to hold off 2 inf, 1 art, 1 arm, 2 fgt, 1 bmb and perhaps another 2 land units, bombardment and/or aircraft depending on how GER conducted it’s first turn attacks and how successful they were. That would entail defending it with at least 8 infantry if you wanted to be reasonably certain to hold it. If you defend it with fighters, you cannot push further into the USSR if the SU does not recapture any of the BST, EPL, or CAU.
Another benefit of a FRA IC - you can pop naval units out in Z13. You can use this to stop a UK invasion of Italy from Z12. In the games that I have played so far, Italy is usually strong enough that it can hold off one attack but not a 1-2 punch. Also, by blocking the UK, if the US decides to hit ITA, then both fleets are separate and ripe for an attack by the Luftwaffe (in either zone), or the US fleet by the carrier based fighters from the Jap fleet that is most likely hanging around Z34/Z35 (land in BLK/back in Z34).
I can’t see how the Norway IC is better than the Poland IC.
The Poland IC is automatically defended by infantry from Germany moving toward Russia and, as was said before, is one move closer to Russia.
The Norway IC is isolated and, considering the typical naval buildup by the UK, it must be defended by a significant number of units that are in no way a threat to anyone unless Russia or UK aren’t trading Finland and there are armor in Norway.
For the Axis, you want to be able to pile up your builds, not choose to isolate them. The Egypt IC is an exception because it can be supported by the Italians, which is why I have decided that it is best for the UK to counterattack Egypt if there is one German armor left and even sometimes when there are 2 armor. Lose the UK bomber to make sure you take it, too. Italy can retake Egypt and build an IC if it wants, just as long as Germany can’t. That move carries other benefits but that is for another thread.
The big problem with the poland IC is that it splits the defense of germany. Now Germany has to defend both poland and Germany. Any player would defend germany and that makes a huge gap in the supply lines to the Russian front. By turn 2 the Germans are out numbered or at best on par with the soviets. In games where I have used the poland IC Uk drops on Poland and blam not only did you lose an IC but the whole logistics of the russain front goes out the window. I do like norway and will give that a try. I have used Bulgaria. The argument for Norway is sound.
Are you trying to say that it would be easier to defend the Norway IC than the Poland IC? I think the moral of the story is not that the Norway IC is better(it isn’t), it’s that you don’t defend the Poland IC adequately from Allied amphibious assaults.
And I don’t see how Germany can get away with not splitting their defenses to defend Poland. Poland is the lynchpin of the German Eastern front. It must be securely held for as long as possible to prevent Russia from taking it and the Allies from reinforcing it. It is the logical choice for an IC for that reason on top of the other reasons I’ve detailed.
There are also a few issues with a France IC that I would point out.
First, no matter what, the Allies ALWAYS build an IC in France when they finally secure it whether Germany builds an IC elsewhere or not. Building an IC in France not only provides them with the IPC savings of not building one but also gives them an extra turn of builds since they can eliminate the “build IC” step in: 1) take France 2) build IC 3) produce units.
Second, too many people are making assuptions about Germany being able to sustain maximum production against a KGF for a lengthy period of time. The France IC is overkill. Against a KGF, if Germany is earning enough money that even the Poland IC is overloaded for more than a few turns then the game is already won. More often than not, Germany earns a bunch of money in the first few turns but then starts to shrink and it quickly gets to the point where Germany has a hard enough time maximizing it’s production from the Germany IC let alone a second one. The ability to build 6 units in France versus 3 units in Poland is a negligible advantage at best.
The allies ALWAYS building an IC in France is a false statement. If the UK takes over France (and secures it) it is only preferable to build an IC if there are major production problems, if not it can just ferry 8 units per turn into France with ease.
The point I was trying to make, is if you build the French IC, you have to assume you will be building at least 15 units per turn (or to really stretch it 14 units) or there is no point in trying it out, other than maybe some type of naval strat or you are used to super heavy bombardments by the allies.
IF the differences between building an IC in France and Poland is negligible, why not play optimisically and build it in France and hope for a few extra units?
For whatever reason if you want to go “Africa crazy” or “Fleet crazy” (due to the Italian fleet) France is your spot
As far as a march towards Russia, you must play NOT to lose any tanks (you will be building a few ARM/ART, just not in bulk) or air. Remember, due to the stronger defense in France, your air units can now focus a lot more on the Russian theater, giving Germany a great offensive edge no matter what Russia buys. If Russia buys 6 tanks, it will soon find out it is trading Russian Tanks for German inf.
This probably works best when Japan is going very heavy on the land instead of the Pacific. More specifically heavy towards India.
4)This is just a strat for those who insist on an IC for Germany (which I seldom find a good idea)
I don’t think I have ever build an IC with Germany in AA50.
The biggest advantage of a need for more than one German factory, is the fact that Germany is making lots of money, and Russia is not, and hopefully for axis, a strong Germany and Italy means also a weak UK. This advantage of high income, is very powerful in itself, you don’t necessarily need to place 16/13 German units to win the game.
With axis, I always hope to hold Kalia, but this is mostly b/c of the extra money using NOs, not the IC, although almost all players who can keep Kalia with Germany buys 12 units, and place 2 in Kalia, but this is not the same as a need for Germany to build any more factories than the one it starts with.
Some other aspects; if allies can keep France secured, it’s usually game over for axis.
A navy strat with Germany is generally suboptimal, like it is in revised. If Germany can afford this in a dice game with no bids, it’s b/c axis are slightly favored.
If Germany can get all 3 NOs for several rnds, Japan should be reduced or allies looses the game.
Germany can’t keep an IC in Norway if allies don’t want it.
@Subotai:
I don’t think I have ever build an IC with Germany in AA50.
The biggest advantage of a need for more than one German factory, is the fact that Germany is making lots of money, and Russia is not, and hopefully for axis, a strong Germany and Italy means also a weak UK. This advantage of high income, is very powerful in itself, you don’t necessarily need to place 16/13 German units to win the game.With axis, I always hope to hold Kalia, but this is mostly b/c of the extra money using NOs, not the IC, although almost all players who can keep Kalia with Germany buys 12 units, and place 2 in Kalia, but this is not the same as a need for Germany to build any more factories than the one it starts with.
Some other aspects; if allies can keep France secured, it’s usually game over for axis.
A navy strat with Germany is generally suboptimal, like it is in revised. If Germany can afford this in a dice game with no bids, it’s b/c axis are slightly favored.
If Germany can get all 3 NOs for several rnds, Japan should be reduced or allies looses the game.
Germany can’t keep an IC in Norway if allies don’t want it.
I tend to agree with this statement, but I think the argument is IF you build an IC for Germany where should it be. Yes I think the Allies in a secured France usually means victory, don’t buy navy with Germany, etc. But, if one insits on buying an IC for whatever reason what would you suggest and why?
if one insits on buying an IC for whatever reason what would you suggest and why?
What is your objective with Germany?
Turtle up and wait for Japan to win the game (again)?
Then I like France. You can directly help italy with their fleet, you can drop inf right in France as needed, and the units you drop in Germany never go backwards to cover France… they march forward.
If you want to get inf closer to the Russian front, Hungary or Bulgaria might be a good choice.
This IC is not subject to the UK home fleet (which Poland might be).
I am not so sure about a Poland or Norway IC….
if one insits on buying an IC for whatever reason what would you suggest and why?
What is your objective with Germany?
Turtle up and wait for Japan to win the game (again)?
Then I like France. You can directly help italy with their fleet, you can drop inf right in France as needed, and the units you drop in Germany never go backwards to cover France… they march forward.
If you want to get inf closer to the Russian front, Hungary or Bulgaria might be a good choice.
This IC is not subject to the UK home fleet (which Poland might be).I am not so sure about a Poland or Norway IC….
Yes, the turtle with Germany. The French IC can actually accomplish that, at least in theory, better than any other method. Also the potential to help Italy is once again nice in theory at least.
It’s generally not a good place for an IC in TTs worth less than 3. This might be different for Japan, but the IC in Norway can’t be held by Germany, so this means either France or Poland. Both France and Poland is very important for Germany, so if it’s lost Germany is greatly reduced.
I haven’t tried a German factory yet, there’s so many new and complex matters in AA50, but I think a G IC can be viable. At least it’s too soon to know for sure if a G IC is a good or a bad strategy.
So far the factory hasn’t proven itself to me as the best option, but it has shown itself capable of yeilding interesting results. It seems like it can be used for odd variations. I could also see the turtle turning into Japan pumping out a lot of planes and sending them to France while boring very predictable play would ensue.
So far the factory hasn’t proven itself to me as the best option, but it has shown itself capable of yeilding interesting results. It seems like it can be used for odd variations.
Yes, Germany can help keep the italian navy alive in sz13, if the axis want to play a naval game in the med.
I could also see the turtle turning into Japan pumping out a lot of planes and sending them to France while boring very predictable play would ensue.
Yes, agreed, especially since Japan usually still has 8-9 left after J1. They have plenty to spare. Plus the game turn order really helps Germany in the sense that the Japanese ftrs can protect German thrusts before UK attacks (assuming Russia can not hit that same square first).
So far the factory hasn’t proven itself to me as the best option, but it has shown itself capable of yeilding interesting results. It seems like it can be used for odd variations.
Yes, Germany can help keep the italian navy alive in sz13, if the axis want to play a naval game in the med.
I could also see the turtle turning into Japan pumping out a lot of planes and sending them to France while boring very predictable play would ensue.
Yes, agreed, especially since Japan usually still has 8-9 left after J1. They have plenty to spare. Plus the game turn order really helps Germany in the sense that the Japanese ftrs can protect German thrusts before UK attacks (assuming Russia can not hit that same square first).
I guess it is kind of the point for very boring predictable play when playing a turtle. But even if Japan is down to 6 or 7 planes, its income is usually so high and foreign resistance so easily dealt with, it can be building air support for Germany without batting an eye or missing a beat (barring maybe a KJF).
That is one nice thing about a Japan IC in FIC, bombers get to rome in 1 turn for some atlantic fleet sinking or London bombings :-D
Although I would be careful of how many units that Japan sends to germany from her navy, as it is not at all uncommon for the US to drop a fleet on turn 3+ if the pacific is empty, esp if she has fighters to spare.
Re. ICs….I like them on G2 as part of a specific strategy that takes account of what the Allies have done. It’s not always the best move to buy a factory. That’s why I don’t like it G1, though I imagine I’ll try Norway sometime, which must be built G1.
The France/Poland debate is interesting–I need to test it out before weighing in.
I want to say it for a second time. Romania is a good place to build a German IC.
1. It is immune to non-Russia based SBR.
2. It allows to send troops to support those already there faster.
3. With the capture of Karelian IC and this one, Germany can produce 14 cheap land units a turn, which is helpful to devellop a better turtle if the Allies go KGF.
When I play Germany, I use this strategy half of the time and it works well.
i just finished a three game series of 42 where i was axis. all three games i built an IC in Bulg/Romania. won 2 out of 3. IC in romania is nice to get some men to caucusus quicker, and i built a few transports, with italian fleet for def, to make africa a little easier and to give his US bombers something to do. i agree totally with the romania IC.
