IC in India?

[FighrFly]

I was wondering if it would be a good idea for the UK to build an IC in India on the first round. In doing so, the UK would be able to distract Japan’s land forces long enough so that Russia could focus primarily on Germany. In order to defend the IC, you would maybe need to condense the American and British armies into India (also transporting two infantry from Australia). I’m a n00b at this game but I was wondering what you guys thought about this. Thanks! :D

[Guest]

I believe the category was called indian IC. It is a crap shot. I am not in favor of it.

[Commissar Adam]

you need america to sacrifice their territories and send all of their forces to defend it long enough to start doing any good, but if japan gets its hands on it your screwed :-?

[Poobaloo]

This is a tough gamble.

It really depends on how R1 & G1 went. If Germany did poorly or average, then UK should go the usual route of trying to build a navy, retake Africa from the west, and invade France / EE.

If however, G did particularly well, and maybe killed all the UK boats, then it’s tough for UK to buy a Navy, if it could just get blasted again… then they have to come up w a new plan.

The India IC is risky… UK has to go all out to hold this, including putting their tranny off FIC (French Indo-China) to block the Phillipines tranny.

2 UK infantry, and 1 fighter tho is risky. Japan can hit that on round 1. (2 inf from FIC, plus 2 fighters & a bomber can all reach India!). If you knew ahead of time this was your plan, then you could play for it by hitting Manchuria hard with Russia on R1, and landing the other R fighter (after using it to attack Ukr) in India.

So R kills one J fighter by capturing Manch. That, combined with the 2nd R fighter going to India can allow UK to hold India on its first turn.

On the 2nd turn, Russia will have to hit Manchuria AGAIN, with the infantry that moved out from Evenki, and 2 fighters. The UK fighters from the UK on UK1 went to Russia… then on UK2, they can attack FIC, or just fly to India for defense. UK will now build 3 inf in India, plus 3 ftrs defending, and they’re pretty strong.

Russia tho is now paper thin on their eastern front, so it didn’t come cheap. Also, Russia has to send all future builds (and eventually pull back their fighters, too) to fight Germany, who will be threatening Karelia from G2.

Combine this with a US IC in Sinkiang, or a US navy / pacific strategy, and it can be quite strong…

[Blitzkrieg]

This has been my strategy with the U.K/U.S when I have ended up controling them. Take Manchuria on U.S.S.R. round one, using the armor and infantry units from Soviet far East and Yakut. Throw in the fighter from Russia to tilt it in your favor a little more. This forces the Japanese player to retake Manchuria on his turn which helps U.K. Build the IC in India, move the transport to Indochina to prevent an amphibious attack from the Phillipines. Then on non-combat move one or both of your two fighters in England to Russia, then into India on your next non-combat movement. You can then build units in India to fight Japan there or send to Russia. One other thing, if Japan really has a tough time retaking Manchuria or fails somehow to take China, build an American IC in Ssinkiang and start churning out fighters to help in the defense of Asia, this usually works pretty well, but it still all hinges on what Russia does against Germany. If they fall, forget it the Allies are finished.

[cystic crypt]

Poob - a couple things

1. if i’m UK and building an IC then i’m moving between 1 and 2 inf from Africa to help out. Now Jap is facing 4 inf, 1 ftr. Also depending, Russia may drop a ftr there as well.
2. in RR, Russia does not attack Manch (although i’ve done it, and enjoyed the experience - briefly until my armies got smashed). Also if she does and becomes a paper thin paper tiger, then Japan has a funner time marching on her . . . .
3. I like the idea of the US ic in Sin - i’ve never done it before, but it was used with effectiveness against me before, if only to leave me to take it and suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous SBR’s (see Zero’s strat . . . ).

[Guest]

Why not go ahead and spend the 5 ipc$ to purchase a AA on it after you have taken it?

[EmuGod]

@Anonymous:

Why not go ahead and spend the 5 ipc$ to purchase a AA on it after you have taken it?

Because some people just aren’t that thoughtful……

[Yanny]

If you think a Japaneese player is going to put down ICs instead of Transports, build the Indian IC, and an American Sinkang IC. Otherwise, don’t bother.

[yourbuttocks]

In the end, the fifteen IPCs slow Britian down to much

[cystic crypt]

@EmuGod:

@Anonymous:

Why not go ahead and spend the 5 ipc$ to purchase a AA on it after you have taken it?

Because some people just aren’t that thoughtful……

et tu EG?
for one, i’d get bombed that first turn i’d hold it by both UK and US,
for another that’s another $5 on top - could easily add up to 12 ipcs or so by now
3, if it’s retaken then i’ve just lost the $5 ipc AA.

jerk.
:)

[CaveDog]

Yes. I always do it. I also drop one in south africa. It’s worth defending them because between the two, if you keep dropping in U.K. tanks it can turn the tide.

[alamein]

I personally don’t do it because this does two things:
1- geermany gets to use it’s fighters against russia instead of loosing a few more with an aircract carrier (and us plane). this basically forces the allies to grasp at africa- for all intents and purposes a one front war.
2- japan has a much higher localised army. as japan I go all out to capture the IC when it’s here. mainly because I can then stop buying as many transports and buy more tanks. however the US can easily afford the IC. if you don’t feel confident in the USA’s ability to stop japan from using it’s tranports- I do it with bomders from midway or my navy from okinowa- then I’d suggest sacrificing india temporarily to prevent the japanese from taking singklang and putting an IC here. british bombers and fighters as well as the aussies will easily be able to help you recapture india on the follwing turn by which time the Ic should be safe.
Isolating japan is the easiest way to insure easy allied victory. unfortunately it means that russia gets all the glory but we’re allies right?

[CaveDog]

If Japan doesn’t capture the IC in India, you’ve got an advantage. If they do, the Allies really ought to have a firm grip on Africa by T3 anyway so it’s a lot easier to run SBRs against Japan between africa and India than to bomb Japan proper. Either way I see it as an advantage.

[StrongBad1988]

but if japan captures it, they’re pumping out 3 tanks per turn to wreak havoc in russia/middle east/asia/africa

[CaveDog]

@StrongBad1988:

but if japan captures it, they’re pumping out 3 tanks per turn to wreak havoc in russia/middle east/asia/africa

Doesn’t bother me. If the UK dropped an IC on south africa as I mentioned above, they’re already countering with two tanks per turn. If I have my way, the US has already taken the few IPC loss of taking venezuala, is parking transports off Brazil and running tanks from the western US down to Brazil and across to Africa by the time Japan takes India. Japan is going to save dropping the extra transports, but chances are they’re coming anyway. They’ll need a lot more than three tanks to stop me so those tanks will be busy unless Germany manages to get in my way, which takes pressure off the other end of Russia and taking pressure off Russia is all that matters.

If the IC in India baits Japan away from Russia, that’s good. They can fight whatever Britain drops and if they capture it before the forces link up from Africa, it just means I get to bomb Japan with SBRs for rental.

[StrongBad1988]

but during this whole time germany will be going 1on1 w/ russia, without UK or US’ help, and thats never a good thing

[alamein]

I agree with strongbad, time is the axis’ enemy, if you eliminate the uk and us’ roll in the second front ( which is a win if all you do is keep the German fighters in the west) than by the time the tanks from S.A. can reach the middle east germany owns moscow and japan owns everything else on the continent. however, if the allies keep the axis boxed in they cannot loose. russia (with very little help from the US, and minor help from UK) can occupy Germany on T4 IF they don’t attack in T1 (which is a gamble). and the US can shut down japan one on one( but you have to sacrifice planes on a continual basis to ensure that no transports are allowed to send troops to the mainland). if the allies play in this conservative style I just can’t see them being beaten. you can dissagree if you like- I KNOW some of you will. but email me some play by play. I try to check my email every day. I’d have to see it to believe it.

[StrongBad1988]

in many games i’ve seen US UK and USSR all go for germany (which falls then by the latest at turn 4) and then only japan is left, but they have become quite rich (certainly not enough for the IPC victory) and then all 3 go for japan and then its over