Jen,
I’d agree 100% here. If the India complex was built on UK1, my gut tells me you’re almost definitely looking at a KJF anyway. So the US is probably planning on dropping a navy in the pacific come US1 even before they watch you suicide half your AF.
I would think that there should still plenty of time to set up properly and take down that complex on J2 much more decisively and still get back and defend Japan before the US comes to play.
The only time to do a Complex on India is R1.
IC on India, 5 Infantry on England to prevent a Sea Lion attempt.
US Follows with an IC on Sink, w Russian reinforcement and at least a carrier; or two carriers and a fighter.
And Germany scrreams to 50 IPC in 2 turns…
i disagree, with a properly executed kjf then uk can wait to build the ic in ind. probably uk 3 is the best timing. this gives you the ability to set up a convoy into norway/africa to ensure the ger ipc count get out of control
By UK 3, you won;t have control of India anymore. Not unless you gave up Africa, AND diverted USSR forces to India in order to keep it…
If UK builds an IC at India and five infantry on UK1, Japan should not take on J1 if USSR has a realistic chance to retake, precisely because of the heavy cost in fighters of attacking a fortified India, and the subsequent fortification. (Note: If building an IC in India, depending on the German build, a UK fighter instead of 5 infantry is often worthwhile). But the THREAT of Japan taking on J1 is enough to divert Allied forces; a continual Japan threat to India diverts Allied forces while Germany grows stronger. It is very hard to make progress against a J1 three transport two infantry build, followed by transport/fighter/infantry builds, so the Allies stall out.
To further explain:
If Germany has a strong Baltic fleet and moved the Mediterranean fleet west, the Allies won’t be going anywhere in Europe or Africa anytime soon, and invasion of London is threatened. So the Allies can unite their fleet southwest of London, and UK London forces of 2 inf 1 art 2 tank 1 fighter (1 tank from W. Canada and 1 fighter) are joined by US forces of 2 inf 1 art 1 tank 1 fighter 1 bomber for total 1 bomber, 6 infantry equivalents on defense, 3 tanks, 2 fighter, 1 AA gun, which is not an entirely robust defense, but sufficient to withstand a decently sized German threat.
This frees the UK airforce to move east, to join the Indian forces. The UK fighter build also allows the UK to lend additional early support to India.
Of course, if the Germans went heavy on transports, the Allies should respond with 5 inf 3 tank, US sacrificial transports to London (the US transports are easily targetable by the Germans if the Med fleet moved west, or from air from W. Eur), and fighters from Moscow. In which case the Allies should definitely go KGF; with so much of Germany’s income tied up in transports, Russia will be very strong and Germany very weak.
–
If you wait until UK3 to build an IC, then Japan will certainly smash the IC. J1 fighters go to Pearl and are out of position, J2 fighters return to Asia, J3 they are in position to hit India. This combines with J2 transports from Japan to French Indochina, also standard in my games.
Assuming a standard German opening, I’d agree. 1 Armor, 1 Fighter, 1 IC is a nice open for England.
Unless you build the IC on Turn 1 or after Berlin falls, then you should not build it at all. Not that you need too. Russia with starting equipment from America and England can handle Japan easily enough against most players. The trick here is to keep Japan from collecting more then 31 IPC a round so America can easily out produce them and then take islands.
(5 Transports, 5 Infantry, 5 Armor is more then enough to take all 5 islands that are valuable.) A fleet placement around Solomons is ideal. From here you can strike at all 5 major island groups simultaniously and you can use what’s left of England to run a screen for your ships against the bulk of the Japanese navy.
Now Japan’s in a quandry. Repel russian advances or build navy to fight off America?
