Keeping the India factory

Japan HAS to build land forces anyway to attack Russia. But now they can threaten to attack BOTH Russian and India. So, you must defend both. Moreover, with little pressure on Germany, they move up and threaten Karelia more and more. Since lots of resources from all 3 allies go into India to defend it, none of the 3 allies can mount a credible attack on the creeping Germans.

Sure, Karelia is safe until Germany moves into Caucus. Now you must defend, Karelia, Moscow AND India 3 ways instead of really just 1, Karelia, as you should be able to punish as German force split across 3 territories. Since your forces are split you cannot punish the Germans for splitting their forces across EEU, UKR and CAU, indeed, it is the axis that will punish the allies for splitting their forces 3 ways instead of 2 ways or just 1.

With a strong allied navy off England, the Brits can flow forces through soviet territory just as well once the supply line is set up.

BB

I don’t think the end justify the means with an IC in India. Sure your thought of slowing down the backdoor push from Japan is good, but the IPC’s spent putting units down there to defend and attack take away from the UK’s help in helping keep Karelia, and that is the bigger priority IMHO. In all reality the money would be better spent shoving those troops into Karelia, then into Russia proper then out into the backdoor countries, as Japan will be thin for the first couple of rounds I just believe this is a better way to spend the money.

I totally agree with haxorboy. Besides, why does Japan have to get bogged down with India again? Sure, they don’t get the income from India for sure, perisia and syria aren’t easily taken by japan either. Hmm, 5 IPC in income prevention is what the IC in India gets you.

The Japs flow forces to Burma via transport than the brits so they can create a safe island and take/re-take the 2 US territories each round. With lots of air power the japs win the attrition war. They will continue to get bigger and stronger, then when Germany is ready they can both move up against Russia. The japs can leave a few INF behind, go nuts brits, scoop up all the territories you want because once Russia falls all those territories will easily be retaken.

For 5 IPC of income prevention you accomplish you trade the ability to have an offensive punch in Karelia. Now you must defend India, Moscow and Karelia. Frankly, Don should be ashamed of himself for the IC in India ploy.

BB

When people do the India IC, they often overlook the fact that Japan can choose to pretty much ignore it, and continue to push Russia. UK puts all defensive pieces there (INF, FTRs) so it can’t really serve as a base to harrass the Japanese. Then, with Japan ignoring India and hitting Russia, the UK is forced to divert some Indian units (ie. FTRs) to Russian territory to hold Japan off. It all just becomes a big mess, with the Axis inevitably winning.

Plus, as I pointed out in a previous post, Germany might also run wild over in Europe as a consequence of UK’s lack of support in Karelia. I have seen Germany just go to town, sweeping down into Asia without anyone there to stop them. Then they will eventually start to attack India.

I disagree with Guess.
Japan must counter the Ind IC with = or > forces in Chi or FICB to stop UK from taking and holding Sin and FICB with the potential to take/trade Chi and Kwa. Once UK builds 3 arm on Ind the Japan forces must be able to strike IMCO! The UK IC in Ind slows the Japan forces by 2-3 turns in the games I’ve played where an IC is in Ind.

BigBlocky, if UK build the IC on UK1, what would you do? Would you move the 2 trans(with 4 inf) and a BB(for cover against 1 ftr) to reinforce FICB on J1? This would be a good counter force. If you split your trans this early, I think you weaken your attack/defense wherever. I guess you could do the move on J2 after building another tran. Then again, you might wait until J3 and use the remaining Pearl Attack Fleet to cover the trans as you move a tran/2(with inf) to invade Africa.

What say you?
I humbly look forward to your reply.

Point well taken, El Jefe, BUT, you are talking about the Asian theatre as if that is all there is - you forget that while the UK is threatening Japan (which in reality they don’t as much as you think they will), Russia is getting rocked by Germany without the UK to help them.

Also, in my experience what happens is that Japan simply throws fighters and infantry into China and blocks the India forces from doing anything aggressive. This way, Japanese fighters can help attack Russia, then land back in China or Burma after each turn to defend against Indo-British armour. Russia can’t hold off both Germany and Japan, India IC or no.

Hey, maybe it can work, but I have just never seen it work against an experienced player.

I too, read Don’s Essay’s and I disagree with him on his India point. It seems that the entire basis of his English strategy hinges on the success of this complex. Japan has several possibilities to strike early and often from the land, sea, and air in the early stages of the game. I know I can thwart a plan of erratic armor strikes that will supposedly survive for 6-8 turns. In addition, it gives Japan an IC to pump out three more tanks per year into mainland Asia. Russia’s limited force in the north can either be baited or blocked while Japan does their version of the so-called “Shuck-Shuck” tactic between Japan and Burma. In my experience, the American fleet in Pearl Harbor can be destroyed with a minimal force, allowing Japan to gain an entire year by positioning half of their capitol ships off of Burma to cover their transports and stage an assault.

Guess
Guest,
Au contrare. I do not forget Germany threatens USSR. In this scenario UK’s objective with a Ind IC is never to threaten Japan. Its objective is to SLOW the Japan advance. UK builds inf on the IC in Ind beginning UK2 leaving approximately 15 IPCs plus any left from UK1(some players who build the Ind IC on UK1 save the remaining 15 IPCs to spend on UK2)to build a fleet in the UK sea zone. If Japan attacks this force(2 inf Ind, 1 inf from Syr/Irq via tran, 1 ftr and 3 inf(per turn)will delay the Japan forces for a time.

If Japan ignores the UK Ind force, not reinforcing southeast Asia(Chi or Kwa) for two turns , then UK should build 1 inf and 2 arm(or 3 arm)to attack or threaten(if Japan responds it takes pressure off USSR.) If no response then UK will pick up a few IPCs, slow Japan’s build and possibly threaten Japan’s military pipeline.

In the above scenario the majority of IPCs should still be spent on a UK fleet(in UK sea zone) and invasion forces(in UK.)

I do not usually build a UK IC in Ind as I believe in attacking Germany directly. An attempt at delaying Japan is an attempt to give Axis powers an IC.

I believe the UK and US’s main objective is to get inf(en mass)to Karelia by turn 4. After Kar has enough forces on hand Normandy may be a possibility.

A second objective is to put enough forces into Africa to push Germany
“Out of Africa”(as the movie title goes.)

As someone who bought the pc version a couple months ago (but had played the original lots of times in college, many years ago) and just got into the online play, here’s my observatoin on the india ic.

I’ve played like maybe 5 games online total. Four times as the allies, once as the axis, all with russia restricted as the only added rule. As the axis, i played against a guy probably as noobified as me, and ended up taking russia with germany on a serious tank push after about 5 or so turns with just one tank left, and no possible counter attack from the russians, so it was a gamble that paid off. Not really what i guess you guys would call “good play” as i forced the attack, when i probably should have called it off after some strafing, cuz i lost my entire airforce as a sacrifce to take russia with my last land unit. He attacked me and opened up karelia early, and didn’t know much about dead zones. I know very little, about them as i just read dons essays for the first time a couple of days ago, but i knew more than opponent did. And that was clearly the difference in that game.

The other four games as the allies, however, haven’t ended so well. One guy attacked karelia early and when the attacked failed horribly, he just quit after g1. So that one really doesn’t figure into the mix.

The other three, i tried the india ic thing, and have gotten my ass handed to me every time. Japan buys a couple of transports, and can ferry in waaaaaaaay more inf than the brits can keep up with from the measley 3 unit limit on the ic. Now i will admit i didn’t read don’s essay closely enough to notice that on my last game, when egypt was taken on g1 with no losses to the g’s, i should have built the SA ic. But i didn’t. And got thrashed. I see why the india ic is clearly NOT the option in that case. But the others, were not “egypt falling on g1” scenarios. And japan STILL can unload way more fodder than the brit can possibly kill. And if they add in their jap planes and tanks, there’s no way that ic can hold, even for a few turns. And if it does, its at such a cost, that it negatively impacts uk’s ability to shore up karelia, which imo, is the bigger of the two needs for the allies. Meanwhile, germany is IPM’ing and builidng the odd tank here and there and massing in eastern europe.

My noob opinion? The india ic is a lost cause for uk against a mainland-minded japanese player. Whether egypt is taken on g1 or not really makes no difference.

I’ve got the basics of the shuck shuck down, i think. My question is how many transports should you eventually be using in the shuck shuck, both uk and us? I’ve gotten like 4 us and 2 uk, but i think that might be a bit light. Especially if i forgo the ic in india, uk could build a couple more. And maybe the us could go with 5 or so transports. Is this right? I figure with +/-30 ipc, the us can eventually manage 10 inf a turn, so 5 tr is right. With the uk down to about +/-25 that would be around 8 men. So is 4 tr for uk and 5 for us about what i should be using???

wvfoos,
That works for me.
If you built a Royal Navy Fleet on UK1, UK 2 or had enough fleet left after Germany attacked on G1 to start building trans, 3 to 4 trans is good for UK depending on how much of Africa Germany took (4 to 9 IPCs lost leaving UK with 21 to 26[unless Japan has(God forbid!) taken Ind, Aus and/or NZ, though that is unlikely]).

Building US forces, moving them the next turn to E Can and shucking them on the following turn to UK, Fin/Nor or W Eur with UK/US naval protection(Alg or W Eur is the same if UK fleet has move tothe West Spain sea zone)let’s you do it with about 5 trans.

Extra trans give you an attack buffer and the option to move in two directions with protection and/or a buffer.

Is wvfoos short for West Virginia fools? :) Just axin’.