Germany must ALWAYS build IC to win game in Anniversary?

[Jennifer]

I agree that Germany need to put a plane on the board every round, at least until you have 6 planes then you can hold off.  By plane, I mean fighter or bomber, your choice.

[dondoolee]

@bugoo:

If you don’t build ground units G1 your income will not get that high against a half decent allied player.  They can and will stack Karelia with the 2 UK figs / 1 US bomber and everything russia can get there.  So sure, take it on G2 and loose nearly every unit you have left on the board.  Allied players that are going KGF and just give up Karalia on turn 2 are being foolish, esp if germany will not have any more units coming at them until turn 4 at the earliest because she bought an IC.

If you want to threaten the allied navy all you must do is build a plane a turn, or 2 if you can afford it.  Also, German fighters on france are amazing to defend against the allied drop, and to harrass allied shipping.  On G1 buy 7 inf and a fig, or a bomber and 5 inf, 1 art.  On G2 buy another fig or bomber, etc.  That means the allies have to drop more than a cruiser a turn to keep there navy alive.  When UK is only making high 20s or low 30s, that is tough for her.  Now yes they can merge fleets, but then the area you must defend is reduced, best way around this for allies are UK carriers with US fighters but still the more boats they buy, the fewer troops they land.

This sums up most of my thoughts, though I have become increasingly attracted to a merged fleet style of play, particularly if the Western Axis skimp on buying land units T1 (as the merged fleet would allow for a greater number of produced land units, while the axis bought very few).  After testing the French factory twice, I could not produce the number of IPC’s claimed that Germany would be making.

[Butcher]

Don’t forget that the bombers you build can be stationed in Germany to trade territories with Russia. Trading German infantry for Russian infantry (and some offensive units if they don’t have their own aircraft) can thin out Russia’s defenses for Japan, and will help you conserve tanks.

[axis_roll]

@dondoolee:

@bugoo:

If you don’t build ground units G1 your income will not get that high against a half decent allied player.  They can and will stack Karelia with the 2 UK figs / 1 US bomber and everything russia can get there.  So sure, take it on G2 and loose nearly every unit you have left on the board.  Allied players that are going KGF and just give up Karalia on turn 2 are being foolish, esp if germany will not have any more units coming at them until turn 4 at the earliest because she bought an IC.

If you want to threaten the allied navy all you must do is build a plane a turn, or 2 if you can afford it.  Also, German fighters on france are amazing to defend against the allied drop, and to harrass allied shipping.  On G1 buy 7 inf and a fig, or a bomber and 5 inf, 1 art.  On G2 buy another fig or bomber, etc.  That means the allies have to drop more than a cruiser a turn to keep there navy alive.  When UK is only making high 20s or low 30s, that is tough for her.  Now yes they can merge fleets, but then the area you must defend is reduced, best way around this for allies are UK carriers with US fighters but still the more boats they buy, the fewer troops they land.

This sums up most of my thoughts, though I have become increasingly attracted to a merged fleet style of play, particularly if the Western Axis skimp on buying land units T1 (as the merged fleet would allow for a greater number of produced land units, while the axis bought very few).  After testing the French factory twice, I could not produce the number of IPC’s claimed that Germany would be making.

The Franch IC need not be bought G1.  Early game is better, but that IC bought on G2 can make up for less grunts bought on G2 because you can drop the units there on G3.  The IC adds strategic flexibility/options for Germany

[bugoo]

On G2, if you can take Kar and US is going somewhat/mostly pacific then yes, I can see a french IC.  Other than that though I just don’t see it.  In my typical KGF games germany will only make over 50 IPCs for one turn, at most.  After that she struggles for the 40s.

On allied turn 2 is when the UK starts dropping heavy into Karelia, Norway and Finland are lost, and the US will drop in Africa (sometimes on turn 3), and atleast 2 bombers are SBRing you, sometimes 3.  By allied turn 3 Italy is threatened with US landing, france is threatened, Karelia should be secured (almost secured), and if only 2 bombers SBR you that means Italy’s fleet is at the bottom of the med.

I’ll take a bomber, or a fighter and 2 armor, over an IC that will likely end up being a liability.

Now yes, the extra IC lets you avoid repairing SBR damage.  So for 15 IPCs you get 6 more units to build, or you could have repaired for 6 IPCs, so in that sense it is pointless.  And on turns 2-4 you want to produce units with G that have some punch to keep Russia honest and to threaten allied fleets, inf cannot do that.  Let Italy build the inf to help you defend and tell Japan to hurry it up.

[Jennifer]

@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.

No, what signals the allies to go heavy bombers is the 32 IPC dmg count on Germany.  Very significantly higher than 20 IPC damage count you can do starting out.  If you can only do 20, then America only needs 3 bombers to do significant.  But if the Axis are just going to blow money on an IC, make them really PAY for it.

15 IPC to buy it
12 IPC a round to use it!

Instead, Germany should be focused on TAKING a Russian IC.  After all, without one, you are only earning in the 40s anyway.  (Italy has Africa right?  It should!)  When you get one, that’s when Germany bumps up over 50 and near 60, and that’s when you start needing increased production.

[dondoolee]

The Franch IC need not be bought G1.  Early game is better, but that IC bought on G2 can make up for less grunts bought on G2 because you can drop the units there on G3.  The IC adds strategic flexibility/options for Germany

Even though I still doubt I would want to buy an IC after T1, my main argument is against a T1 purchase.  That is something I think that should be a big no no. And I would still fear a massive SBR campaign even w/o a T1 purchase.

[axis_roll]

@Cmdr:

No, what signals the allies to go heavy bombers is the 32 IPC dmg count on Germany.  Very significantly higher than 20 IPC damage count you can do starting out.  If you can only do 20, then America only needs 3 bombers to do significant.  But if the Axis are just going to blow money on an IC, make them really PAY for it.

15 IPC to buy it
12 IPC a round to use it!

I think you missed my point, that is that Germany doesn’t HAVE to repair the French IC if they don’t want to… so now the allies have built all these bombers as a result of a German IC build only to yield the same SBR results as a Berlin only IC.

So are you REALLY making the Axis pay for the $15 IC (or 5 inf as I pointed out)?

---

There are no ABSOLUTES in this game.  If Germany has a different strategic direction (like pressure Russia as fast and hard as possible), then yes, an IC in France is probably not a good as 3 tanks….

But if your Axis premise is to play a safer European game plan, creating a very strong fortress Europe situation where their goal is to buy the time needed for Japan to threaten/attack/take out Russia, then an IC in France might be the better choice.  Already I am seeing more of the same game plan from Revised:  Pressure Germany first.  USA trying to go toe-to-toe with Japan can be an uphill battle.  Which is why I advocate waiting until G2 to decide on the France IC:  What did USA decide to do?  Are they splitting forces?  Are they putting all their efforts into Attacking Germany/Italy?

[dondoolee]

@axis_roll:

@Cmdr:

No, what signals the allies to go heavy bombers is the 32 IPC dmg count on Germany.  Very significantly higher than 20 IPC damage count you can do starting out.  If you can only do 20, then America only needs 3 bombers to do significant.  But if the Axis are just going to blow money on an IC, make them really PAY for it.

15 IPC to buy it
12 IPC a round to use it!

I think you missed my point, that is that Germany doesn’t HAVE to repair the French IC if they don’t want to… so now the allies have built all these bombers as a result of a German IC build only to yield the same SBR results as a Berlin only IC.

So are you REALLY making the Axis pay for the $15 IC (or 5 inf as I pointed out)?

---

There are no ABSOLUTES in this game.  If Germany has a different strategic direction (like pressure Russia as fast and hard as possible), then yes, an IC in France is probably not a good as 3 tanks….

But if your Axis premise is to play a safer European game plan, creating a very strong fortress Europe situation where their goal is to buy the time needed for Japan to threaten/attack/take out Russia, then an IC in France might be the better choice.  Already I am seeing more of the same game plan from Revised:  Pressure Germany first.  USA trying to go toe-to-toe with Japan can be an uphill battle.  Which is why I advocate waiting until G2 to decide on the France IC:  What did USA decide to do?  Are they splitting forces?  Are they putting all their efforts into Attacking Germany/Italy?

If germany can build somewhere between 8-10 units on that turn AND bulid an IC and then build 14-16 units for the next turn or 2 it may be worth it.  It is still not a T1 build though, that seems suicidal.

As far as SBR’s.  If the Allies shut down France and Germany doesn’t repair it, the extra SBR’s can go into Italy, while the Allies would then plan on being in a position to double hit Germany.  The Allies can probably shut down France before Germany would get a chance to use it as they would probably have at least 3 bombers in position by T2 which means Germany would be in no position to turtle.

[Zhukov44]

I don’t see how the French IC is a liability given Axis can hardly trade France and expect to win the game.  I’ll agree it’s vulnerable to SBR though.

Methinks taking and holding Karelia is not realistic against a skilled Allies.  Cauc is probably the more realistic goal but that can be tough to grab early.  So the choice is basically between buying the IC (G2…NEVER G1) or spending the extra cash on planes or a tank rush.

[dondoolee]

@Zhukov44:

I don’t see how the French IC is a liability given Axis can hardly trade France and expect to win the game.  I’ll agree it’s vulnerable to SBR though.

Methinks taking and holding Karelia is not realistic against a skilled Allies.  Cauc is probably the more realistic goal but that can be tough to grab early.  So the choice is basically between buying the IC (G2…NEVER G1) or spending the extra cash on planes or a tank rush.

The Cauc is a target that can get triple hit by the Axis.  If things go wonderful for Germany in Egypt, Japan can eliminate the rest of the UK troops lying about central Asia unless Russia makes a large comitment to Persia, meaning Russia is in serious trouble by R3.

The French IC is probably not a MAJOR liability if it is built on G2 and Germany has enough spare cash to build the IC and produce a significant number of military units. I still prefer a more aggressive Germany building a decent amount of air units though, with Japan able to supply some defensive backup with air/carriers/ harrasing Africa and USA when convienent.

[Jennifer]

@axis_roll:

@Cmdr:

No, what signals the allies to go heavy bombers is the 32 IPC dmg count on Germany.  Very significantly higher than 20 IPC damage count you can do starting out.  If you can only do 20, then America only needs 3 bombers to do significant.  But if the Axis are just going to blow money on an IC, make them really PAY for it.

15 IPC to buy it
12 IPC a round to use it!

I think you missed my point, that is that Germany doesn’t HAVE to repair the French IC if they don’t want to… so now the allies have built all these bombers as a result of a German IC build only to yield the same SBR results as a Berlin only IC.

So are you REALLY making the Axis pay for the $15 IC (or 5 inf as I pointed out)?

I damage the IC for 10-12 the German one for 12-18 and the Italian one for 10-12.

You choose NOT to repair France (probably because you cannot afford too.)

You wasted 15 IPC on a complex you cannot use.
I spent 36 IPC on 3 bombers I am now using to prevent you from building in France, prevent you from building ships, to support attacks and to force you to dedicate more units to the defense of France, Germany and Italy against amphibious invasions.

Who comes out better?  Because to be honest, I’m probably going to end up with 6 to 7 bombers even without you building an IC in France, I’m only adding 2 to 3 more if you do build one.

[axis_roll]

@Cmdr:

Who comes out better?  Because to be honest, I’m probably going to end up with 6 to 7 bombers even without you building an IC in France, I’m only adding 2 to 3 more if you do build one.

Germany spends $15 on an IC, I am sure it’s not going to be a total loss.  Similiar to the bombers capabilities you mention, it will be used.
USA is now building an ADDITIONAL $24 to $36 in bombers to counter the $15 in an IC build.  That’s $9 to $21 more invested in planes instead of navy/ground units to land in Europe than Germany spent on it’s IC.

Exactly one of my points I made ealier.

So who comes out better?  Do the bombers get shot down on their first or second SBR?  That’s important. 
However, now we’re turning the game into Yahtzee…. Can the axis_roll alot of ones?

It seems to me like you’re going to buy the bombers either way.  Which is not a bad allied strategy. 
In fact, I think SBR’s are broken in this game.  I am an advocate for the fighter escort rule on SBR’s.

[bugoo]

Ok let me state a few things about all these theories.

1. French IC lets me mitigate SBR damage
   -Wrong, you pay 15 IPCs for an extra 6 build slots so to speak.  If your main factory gets bombed for 6, and you decide not to repair it because you have a france IC you just spent 15 IPCs to repair 6 on your factory, so to speak.

2. French IC lets me SBR G for more
   -Wrong, they could just pay to repair either factory to regain there build slots.  It does allow you to increase the upper limit of bombing you can do, but it is still G’s choice to build units there or not.  If your taxing them 20 IPCs a turn to begin with, typically they can barely afford to repair to full and build 10 inf as that would cost 50 IPCs.

3. French IC helps when playing G turtle
   -Wrong, if your going turtle how on earth are you making enough IPCs to use said factory.  Even if built turn 2 you get at most 1 turn where your income can support that many inf being purchased (16x3=48 IPCs).  While those 15 IPCs could have upgraded 2 of your inf into fighters and 1 into an art instead, which is much more useful on defense (more mobile) and offense (threatening allied shipping when based in france, or making the can opener threat against moscow greater).

[axis_roll]

@bugoo:

Ok let me state a few things about all these theories.

3. French IC helps when playing G turtle
   -Wrong, if your going turtle how on earth are you making enough IPCs to use said factory.  Even if built turn 2 you get at most 1 turn where your income can support that many inf being purchased (16x3=48 IPCs).  While those 15 IPCs could have upgraded 2 of your inf into fighters and 1 into an art instead, which is much more useful on defense (more mobile) and offense (threatening allied shipping when based in france, or making the can opener threat against moscow greater).

I disagree with your #3 premise.  Why?

There is no cheaper defense than inf, so your idea of a FTR being better than an inf is not true (based strictly on the idea that Germany is turtling).  Based on that fact, anytime Germany has more than $30 IPCs to spend, and Germany does not have another IC to use other than the original Berlin, then they are not investing in the maximum turtle strategy: inf.  You do not need to produce maximum units at your IC’s to be in turtle mode.

My thoughts are based on the fact that I would rather have 10 inf instead of 3 ftrs when Germany is turtling.

[Jennifer]

@bugoo:

Ok let me state a few things about all these theories.

1. French IC lets me mitigate SBR damage
   -Wrong, you pay 15 IPCs for an extra 6 build slots so to speak.  If your main factory gets bombed for 6, and you decide not to repair it because you have a france IC you just spent 15 IPCs to repair 6 on your factory, so to speak.

Correct, it allows you to ignore some IC damage for a while, but only for a while.  I don’t know if it is worth the purchase price for that one or two round ability though.

2. French IC lets me SBR G for more
   -Wrong, they could just pay to repair either factory to regain there build slots.  It does allow you to increase the upper limit of bombing you can do, but it is still G’s choice to build units there or not.  If your taxing them 20 IPCs a turn to begin with, typically they can barely afford to repair to full and build 10 inf as that would cost 50 IPCs.

**Yes, but they have to chose between repairing or building units.  If I can swap 20 damage for 32 damage to Germany each round, i think that is pretty darn significant and very valuable.  Sure, I am putting a few less ground units on the board (literally, as axis_roll pointed out, America has exactly 3 less infantry in Africa/Russia than normal) but Germany has 4 less infantry a round to put out too.  HUGE boon to the Allies.  It even lets Russia turn back and pound on Japan since Germany is basicaly earning 20 IPC now (Less than England.) and that assumes he is only repairing the one complex.

Oh yea, and for the record, that would be 15 IPC for the Complex + 4 less infantry a round vs America having 3 less infantry period.  Maybe 7 less infantry if they go with the extra.  Not a huge dent in a nation earning 50 IPC a round.  However, 27 IPC from 45 IPC a round is a large dent.**

3. French IC helps when playing G turtle
   -Wrong, if your going turtle how on earth are you making enough IPCs to use said factory.  Even if built turn 2 you get at most 1 turn where your income can support that many inf being purchased (16x3=48 IPCs).  While those 15 IPCs could have upgraded 2 of your inf into fighters and 1 into an art instead, which is much more useful on defense (more mobile) and offense (threatening allied shipping when based in france, or making the can opener threat against moscow greater).

I agree.  If you are starting with the position of turtling, you need the 5 infantry more than a complex that will net you maybe one turn of building.

[axis_roll]

@Cmdr:

Oh yea, and for the record, that would be 15 IPC for the Complex + 4 less infantry a round vs America having 3 less infantry period.  Maybe 7 less infantry if they go with the extra.

HUH?
How does Germany have 4 less infantry A ROUND, let alone for ONE round?
Did you forget that Germany doesn’t HAVE to repair the French IC?

---

Again, you are discussing the strengths of an Allied SBR heavy game plan.

I would say the additional potential damage to another German IC is offset by the flexibility to drop units elsewhere besides Berlin or to place more than 10 units on a German turn.  Bombers also tend to be lost to AAA fire every now and then, too.

I think our discussions are going back and forth, and the bottom line is:
1).  Playing style (some people like to run allied SBR campaigns, some like the Russia rush with Germany, etc)
2).  the game situation dictates if an IC is a good move for Germany:

• Can they take Karelia/Caucasus?

• Is USA triple teaming Europe?

• Will Germany have a 35+ income for several rounds?

3).  Thus far, there is no one prescribed ‘best’ move for either the Axis nor the Allies.  Therefor, there can be no absolutes about specific moves.

[bugoo]

@axis_roll:

@bugoo:

Ok let me state a few things about all these theories.

3. French IC helps when playing G turtle
   -Wrong, if your going turtle how on earth are you making enough IPCs to use said factory.  Even if built turn 2 you get at most 1 turn where your income can support that many inf being purchased (16x3=48 IPCs).  While those 15 IPCs could have upgraded 2 of your inf into fighters and 1 into an art instead, which is much more useful on defense (more mobile) and offense (threatening allied shipping when based in france, or making the can opener threat against moscow greater).

I disagree with your #3 premise.  Why?

There is no cheaper defense than inf, so your idea of a FTR being better than an inf is not true (based strictly on the idea that Germany is turtling).  Based on that fact, anytime Germany has more than $30 IPCs to spend, and Germany does not have another IC to use other than the original Berlin, then they are not investing in the maximum turtle strategy: inf.  You do not need to produce maximum units at your IC’s to be in turtle mode.

My thoughts are based on the fact that I would rather have 10 inf instead of 3 ftrs when Germany is turtling.

I am saying the 2 inf upgraded to figs instead of just the factory.  So its 2 figs OR 2 inf and potentially more build slots, which would require an income of 48! IPCs to maximize.  How many times is G making 48 IPCs after repairs when allies are going KGF?  And if there not going KGF why are you building 16 inf instead of killing Russia?

[critmonster]

@axis_roll:

I think our discussions are going back and forth, and the bottom line is:
1).  Playing style (some people like to run allied SBR campaigns, some like the Russia rush with Germany, etc)
2).  the game situation dictates if an IC is a good move for Germany:

• Can they take Karelia/Caucasus?

• Is USA triple teaming Europe?

• Will Germany have a 35+ income for several rounds?

3).  Thus far, there is no one prescribed ‘best’ move for either the Axis nor the Allies.  Therefor, there can be no absolutes about specific moves.

excellent points! everything is fluid and the meta game becomes critical for seizing the initiative on your opponent.

[Jennifer]

Correct, they do not have to rebuild the IC after it is bombed into oblivion.  But then, what did it do for you?  You sacrificed 15 IPC in units, got nothing and pulled pressure off Russia early when you need it.

I, of course, assumed you were going to repair it after it was bombed so you could actually use the complex.

---

BTW, I disagree that there is no one best move.  We have not found one yet for Germany.  We have one for Japan, IMHO.