A simple yes will suffice if your opinion for an IIC & CG is a bad move <edit 12=“” aug=“” -=“” with=“” out=“” of=“” box=“” rules=“” no=“” bid=“”>if “No” can u explain why it’s a good idea. Has anyone tried this National Advantage against a skilled Jap player? My gut feeling tells me… Japan still crushes INDIA… even if the USA puts a Garrison in Sinkiang with “Chinese Divisions” NA.
I’m playing a game on Saturday in a “small” private tournament that will allow each country to take 1 National Advantage. I’m new to Revised but was gonna do the standard 3x3 with USA and UK moves after reading about them. As of right now I’m going to take Joint Strike for UK’s NA.</edit>
That depends on how many VCs you are playing. If only 8 take the IC for UK and go KJF. As a NA i.e. not having to pony up for it. It isn’t as bad an option as buying it in a 10 VC game. You have the 15 to buy a FTR and an ARM and INF to back it up on UK1 plus some units for the Atlantic. But remember you will have to buy 3 units a turn for India to keep it a UK complex.
This comes up a bunch and there are many more learned opinions on this than mine. Switch talked about this in the 8VCs thread. I’ll try to post the link.
Generally speaking an UK India complex becomes a Japan India complex.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=7231.15
This talks about the 8VC and India IC. You need to go at least three pages back for any other India IC threads.
Thanks. I will review it. C_Sub hints that it’s doable strategy when listing the pro’s and con’s of the NA’s
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/Caspian_Sub/files/1PolicyPapers/
Take Caspian Sub with a grain of salt.
They are good for moderate to advanced opponents, but against the most highly skilled opponents, those ideas and concepts often get blown to bits…
They are good for moderate to advanced opponents, but against the most highly skilled opponents, those ideas and concepts often get blown to bits…
I wouldn’t go that far. CSub’s posted strategies are outdated, but it nearly won them the tournament last year. The actual players are quite good, among the very best. They were second place this year in Smorey’s tournament.
All of their strategies are well-reasoned and they even go so far as to show the limits as well. Like the Canadian shield possibility is shown to be a response to all the IIC’s that they saw were being built in tournaments at the time, and is a KJF counter. It never even focuses on taking the US seriously, saying that the threat is enough.
CSub hasn’t posted their newest strategies in a while because they’re saving them for GenCon. Past that we should be benefitting from their skills and experience.
I haven’t read any good comprehensive strategies lately, to be honest. Everything I’ve read like Peter Morrison’s strategies or the CSub papers are excellent starting points, but either contain some flawed information (morrison for instance uses box rules!) or just don’t cover a lot of the basics. In a way that’s a good thing since it forces me to come up with my own conclusions after battling people, instead of reading a prescribed formula of how to counter xxx with yyy.
Well, you really only have four options besides India.
Australia…if you’re feeling lucky, you can risk the Jap attack on your consolidated fleet and try for it here. Since it’s free, it’s no loss…and for Japan to take it, he must divert resources away from the Russian front.
South Africa…two tanks per turn can force Germany to commit more resources than he wants to to take Africa…but if he decides to ignore it and go all out on Russia, you might wish you hadn’t wasted your money on tanks way down there.
E. Canada…if Britain manages to hold onto it’s empire (U.S. help is needed!) and expand into Europe (Norway, Eastern)…this can allow you five fully loaded transports into Europe per turn instead of four.
Egypt…Germany laughs evilly in the background :-P
The first three all have their pros and cons…but in my mind, the Aussie one is best. If you kill the Kwang transport, he’s going to have to dedicate a significant force to kill it, since you can have it decently defended (on the ground) by the time he can get down there with any significant transport force.
And of course, if those trannies are going after Australia, they aren’t sending tanks to Russia.
If Japan ignores it, start cranking out ground troops until you have a fair number, then two trannies a turn and force that fleet to pay attention to you!
Of course, these are only really viable with Colonial Garrison. It’s not really worth it to actually BUY an IC in any of these places (and I’ve tried 'em all except Egypt)…
…but if it’s free! :-D
I think Colonial Garrison in India is not a bad choice. Tanks you build there could flexibly be used to foray into Japanese territories or to support Caucasus. The fact that you get a 1 turn jumpstart at no cost to you makes a huge difference in the viability of the IIC. India is much more defensible with an extra turn to build, and you didn’t spend a single IPC to get it there. Japan could be delayed quite a bit especially if Russia took the Nonaggression treaty, and the US China divisions. Sure, Japan could eventually get the IIC still, but it’s a long road, and you can always just send your troops towards Caucasus and push into Germany from there anyways.
However, if I were to pick just one NA, it would be Joint Strike, hands down. That sucker allows for a massive landing W. Europe very early on. What makes the German defense difficult is that you have to attack individually, but for one time only you get to use both US and UK together wooooo! :-D Just remember that if you’re using the LHTR version, Joint Strike has to be declared at the beginning of the Russian turn, so it gives Germany advance warning. In the box rules, you would declare it during the UK turn, which made it that much harder for Germany to plan.
I’m actually playing a game right now where we had Chinese Divisions AND the Non-Agression treaty AND Britain built an IC in India on UK1
Japan is still doing well :-( …took India, Sinkang is a non-factor, just broke the treaty with massive force in Bury. U.S. has Phillipenes, Borneo and E. Indies, but Japan will have Moscow in three turns, unless Germany falls before then (highly unlikely…not enough U.S. fleet).
Well and IC in India is allmost allways a good Idea in my opinion.
But for you to build it on your own on UK1 you need to kill the 2 Inf´s in french Indo china (and of course that little trn) And USA must follow suit and build an IC in Sinkiang.
And Russia must threthen Manchuria with 6 inf and 2 arm in Yakut.
With National advantage this get´s even better, you still will want to kill French indo china to stop up Japan´s offensive…
And overall i dislike the “screw” india thing… It was a part of the UK, and it was defended.
Thanks for the response. I’ve decided to go with “Joint Strike” since we are using “Out of Box rules”. I dont feel experienced enough to go the “Colonial Garrison” NA. I’ll let u all know how well I do with my first game here. I’m confident with the Joint Stike NA.
I’m a Noob here with the 3rd edition rules. Let’s hope they make a PC “board” version game like Hasbro did with the 2nd Edition game (minus the annoying bugs). I miss playing 2nd ed Zone.com and Spring1942.com but Revised is the way of the future and a much better game imo. I’m glad it’s here… now I dont have to just rely on D&D v3.5 for weekend gaming activities.
@ncscswitch:
Take Caspian Sub with a grain of salt.
They are good for moderate to advanced opponents, but against the most highly skilled opponents, those ideas and concepts often get blown to bits…
Heh :lol:
Switch, I’d like to congratulatie you on having attained sufficient expertise to ascertain who is moderately skilled, advanced, and highly skilled without having played those folks. That takes a real eye for talent, and it is impressive that you have mastered it.
Keep up the good work.
Peace
Much of this topic (that had gone completely off-topic) has been moved
