Brazilian IC

[panzer666]

good idea.I see the IC in brazil will put tranny’s in range of africa and shuck to libya.This gives the tranny’s longer range.I now believe the allies can win with the america building an IC in Brazil …Norway maybe finland,and England building IC in india and SA.Overall the australian navy must meet up the americans the retake islands(american flat top has 2 fighters on it)

[Octopus]

The Brazil IC is an economic trap. Consider the complex costs 15 and the transport is 7, making the total is 22 IPC’s.  The exact same effect can be achieved shucking from Eastern Canada with 2 tranports (1 transport each way) for only 14 IPC’s. The actual liability issue is up for debate but since the Allies would make a big deal of Brazil, I would make it a big deal as the Axis (in the form of a Bomber threat against the transport). The Allies would then be forced to build more fleet to counter the bombers and the economic mismatch grows further.

Personally, I vote down on the IC in Brazil but I imagine there might be an exception for it eventually.

[Corbeau Blanc]

There was a discussion on this on another old thread I can’t find but what I liked of a brazilian IC was if it was used in conjunction with an early sinking of Italian fleet.

UK would buy 3 bomber turn 1, sink Italians UK2

Sea zone 23 can hardly be hit from france based bombers unless they want to land in Africa ( sea zone 22 litterally cannot be hit from France ) so it was a cheap way to keep reinforcement going to Africa.

For me it was great since I could spend most of my income afterward into the pacific and still send enough gear to support Africa without having to maintain an US Atlantic fleet or hold sea zone 12.

[Gargantua]

BRZ complex only has one purpose.  To control Africa.

If G1 and I1 are REALLY good. Britian is hammered and there are tanks free to blitz Africa, a BRZ complex is a good idea.

Outside of that… shucking units though ECA with a fleet in Sz12 to ALG is a superior option (As long as you have control of the rest of the continent)

“Of note”: A BRZ complex in AA-Revised is the golden nie/unbeatable Allied strategy. Combined with close monitoring of aircraft placement and maximization of units on the board.  Because Control of Africa, means Control of enough IPC’s to constantly have more per turn than the Axis.

[jsp4563]

I like the Brazil IC in theory, but rarely get one.  It’s most effective if bought on US1 but that’s when US income is at it’s lowest ($40).  On US1 I always tell myself, hey let’s buy that IC in Brazil, and then after crunching numbers buy ships. :-P :-P

[Butcher]

Yeah, I think that the U.S. is better served by trying to get it’s units into battle asap. Building an IC doesn’t seem to help that objective as much as bulding a carrier or other ships.

[Jennifer]

Well axis, you may ask Botider what he thinks about building an Industrial Complex in France, as Germany against me, but I’m sure he’s going to support my following statement:

If the axis put an IC in France, especially early in the game before the war in Russia is decided, you are begging the allies to go on a major SBR campaign.  With the price of bombers at 12 IPC, even without a tech option, there is absolutely no reason England cannot have two bombers and America put 2 new ones on the board every round.  Eventually you’ll have more bombers than industrial complexes to bomb which is good, because you are covered in case of loss.

With an IC in France, there is virtually no reason you cannot expect 28-32 Damage to Germany and 10-12 Damage to Italy (with the two Brit bombers to pick up slack if the Americans fall short.)

How many rounds can the Axis take of that before they lose?  It is virtually possible for Russia to ignore the Germans and Italians after round 5 and dedicate it’s life to making Japan frustrated while the Americans and British build up forces in Africa/Europe.

[axis_roll]

@Cmdr:

Well axis, you may ask Botider what he thinks about building an Industrial Complex in France, as Germany against me, but I’m sure he’s going to support my following statement:

If the axis put an IC in France, especially early in the game before the war in Russia is decided, you are begging the allies to go on a major SBR campaign.  With the price of bombers at 12 IPC, even without a tech option, there is absolutely no reason England cannot have two bombers and America put 2 new ones on the board every round.  Eventually you’ll have more bombers than industrial complexes to bomb which is good, because you are covered in case of loss.

With an IC in France, there is virtually no reason you cannot expect 28-32 Damage to Germany and 10-12 Damage to Italy (with the two Brit bombers to pick up slack if the Americans fall short.)

How many rounds can the Axis take of that before they lose?  It is virtually possible for Russia to ignore the Germans and Italians after round 5 and dedicate it’s life to making Japan frustrated while the Americans and British build up forces in Africa/Europe.

So 5 less inf for Germany signals the Allied Bomber command to go into overdrive?

5 inf are the key to the allied game plan decision?  In other words, what stops the allied from running an SBR campaign anyways, regardless of an IC in France or not.  Recall that Germany does not NEED to repair those damages to the French IC…

Also, more bombers = less navy = less units for the axis (germany/italy) to need to worry about landing …

---

An Axis IC in France offers some options, like enabling ftrs stationed in Germany to hit an allied navy in sz12.

[axis_roll]

we’re hijacking this thread.  This is supposed to be about the Brazilian complex.  Our France IC’s discussion should continue in the "Germany must ALWAYS build IC to win game in Anniversary? " thread http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=14953.0

[dondoolee]

@Gargantua:

BRZ complex only has one purpose.  To control Africa.

If G1 and I1 are REALLY good. Britian is hammered and there are tanks free to blitz Africa, a BRZ complex is a good idea.

Outside of that… shucking units though ECA with a fleet in Sz12 to ALG is a superior option (As long as you have control of the rest of the continent)

“Of note”: A BRZ complex in AA-Revised is the golden nie/unbeatable Allied strategy. Combined with close monitoring of aircraft placement and maximization of units on the board.  Because Control of Africa, means Control of enough IPC’s to constantly have more per turn than the Axis.

While I haven’t really played with it too often, it does seem like it would be an option on the table to counter a great axis open.  I am always hesitant though to allocate that many resources away from Europe,  particularly if Germany is buying aggresive builds and Japan is focusing on south Asia.

[critmonster]

I can see the Brazilian complex in a US pacific heavy campaign where UK is putting everything into europe and needs help liberating africa. The additional bonus would be getting ground troops (USA) to persia to slow the Jap advance while your pacific builds forced jap navy investment. that being said, the build limit in Brazil would most likely doom this strat.

[Panzer Leader]

I like the idea of a Brazilian IC, but to me it takes away that needed money for the Pacific. I
n my opinion the US should buy a Pacific fleet on turn one. UKs T1 moves it fleet from Australia to the Solomon islands and then US moves its ships to Solomons as well. Turn two they move their new purchased fleet to join the Solomons or move the whole thing to Carolines if availble. This puts immediate pressure on the Japanese right on turn 2. This is more important then Africa which will take several turns for the Axis to capture all the territories if played correctly by UK. UK can even hold the southern Africa countries if played they move back from Egypt.

So I would say an IC in Brazil is not a necessary thing. I agree with Octopus that Eastern Canada is a better way to bring across troops to prepare for landing.

[cymerdown]

You can’t move anything to Solomon Islands with the allies on turn 1… Japan has the fleet at Philippines and 6 Fighters in range, that’s deadzone there buddy.

[cymerdown]

As for the OP, I’m not sure what a Brazil IC would accomplish that a SA IC wouldn’t… if I was going to make a stand in Africa I would either do it that way, or more likely building Atlantic fleets.  I don’t find AA to be a slow enough game (turns-wise :P) for something like a Brazil IC to exist.

[Panzer Leader]

@cymerdown:

You can’t move anything to Solomon Islands with the allies on turn 1… Japan has the fleet at Philippines and 6 Fighters in range, that’s deadzone there buddy.

I am talking about AA50 41 set-up. Japan does not have Phillipines yet it still belongs to US. If US move there fleet forward Japan has to decide to attack or regroup. It can slow them down and interfere with going after India.

[cymerdown]

Well, right, but Japan goes first, and takes Phillippines on J1, which is a fairly standard opening move.  With my J1, I end the turn with 1 CV in SZ37, 1 CV in the Okinawa SZ, and 1 CV in the Japan SZ.  UK and US have 2 DD, 1 CV, 2 FIG, and 1 TRN left between them after the J1 massacre to bring to Solomon, and I have as many as 8 FIG (with the J1 I use, there are 2 sitting on FIC that can make it also, because I can dictate that the Okinawa CV will catch them in the Solomon Islands SZ, and the FIGs on the Okinawa CV can land in Caroline).

Just don’t forget that any surface ships 3 spaces away from CVs can be hit.  Those 8 fighters in range make the Solomon Islands deadzone for the Allies on turn 1, which is part of the reasoning behind that careful J1 Carrier positioning.  It takes a good while before the Allies can make substantial progress in the Pacific, which is why KJF doesn’t really work in '41 - it’s a bit too slow.

[Panzer Leader]

US has to react to Japan’s moves of course. It may delay the US push until turn 2, 3 or 4, but US should consolidate all ships including UK and hastle Japan so they do not have free reign over the Southeast Asia area. Japan cannot be left unchallenged is all I’m saying.

[cymerdown]

I disagree.  After much analysis, I would argue that Japan can, and should, be left unchallenged in the Pacific in AA50 '41.  Just like most previous versions of the game, and much to my chagrin, AA50 '41 is a race to Berlin and Moscow, when played optimally.

[Funcioneta]

The problem is Japan runs faster than any country. They could choose run for WUSA in early game under some circumstances, choose run for both London and USSR (and SBR them to Stone Age), run to Africa to ensure/abuse of new feature of axis economic advantage or simply make a no brainer tank rush to Moscow. West allies still have to make a fleet able of hold against Luftwaffe and kill the italian navy

I think the best approach for Japan, specially if allies surrender one theater by default, is expand for all places they can: trade Alaska and toast Pacific (if ignored) and toast Asia (always: broken setup leaves few choice), eat Siberia and eat Africa (where Japan could have a opposition in case of KGF). Just let axis economic power do the work slowly

[panzer666]

I do not believe in the Brazilian complex anymore.It’s not efficient.However ,I do believe the japs must attack the amaricans in the first round for sure.