IC in China?

Hi black_elk, I will have a look at it today :) Sounds like the strategy I use: Build a huge fighter squadron to protect west-russia, india and china, wherever help is necessary.

Sure, as a matter of combat value, the planes are better. The issue is that America tends to literally run out of combat units in China by round 2 or 3 – all their infantry are dead, so they have nothing to take or trade territories with. Since the point of even a successful Chinese campaign is to delay Japan’s progress west rather than to actually defeat the Japanese army, not being able to capture territories is a huge problem – you can bomb a stack of Japanese tanks to hell, but the tanks will still move an average of 2 spaces per turn. If you can capture a territory, sometimes you can reduce the movement rate back down to 1 space per turn or even 1 space every other turn.

An IC in Egypt can work assuming the opponent is bad. I’m not even sure I would take an IC in Egypt if it were free.
An IC in Egypt doesn’t accomplish much, forces allies to defend it, and costs 15 IPC that could be better spent.

The benefit is marginal. Germany already has a difficult time taking Egypt & Africa without additional naval buys. Often, UK can kill the battleship and transport R1 unless Germany makes a buy. It’s also not fantastic for supporting India since Egypt is only two production and a number of spaces from India. UK can make better use by spending 15 IPC towards 2 fighters.

The risk is great. Germany can threaten Egypt with just 1 carrier buy. Even if Germany never attacks Egypt directly, defending Egypt will divert units from defending India. Japan can easily place naval off FIC. This threat would force UK to defend both India and Egypt. Additionally, the sz off FIC is a great position for Japan to defend even if US commits to the Pacific (KJF).

Okay thanks.  I must’ve seen it in the 1940 Pacific rulebook.

Am I the only one that thinks you shouldn’t be able to reinforce on the same turn as you repair the IC? Seems like a “double move” from a sequencing standpoint…like moving land units then letting them load on transport -or- fighters in combat landing in newly captured territories.

We always play house rule that you have to reinforce the next turn, but also adopt SB interceptor rules, so you can dissuade SB runs.  It also curbs just packing in all your units into VC’s with mindless stacks.

@UrJohn:

I think to make a WWII game that is realistic, balanced, and fun to play and has a historical starting point you need to give it an earlier start and more vibrant political rules and victory conditions. You could start the game something like 1938 and have a buildup & influence period of a couple of rounds. Each major power should have its own victory conditions. For example, if USSR wound up conquering all of mainland Europe, that would be a total victory for the Soviet player, a total defeat for Germany and France, and a defeat for UK and USA.

Wouldn’t you then end up with the USSR attacking Western Allied troops? Otherwise i like the idea, although I guess a 1 September 1939 start date would do fine.

@Hobbes:

@Sean.C:

See I’m not going to DEFEND Borneo.  I’m going to leave my newly built subs in SZ60 and my starting navy of 1BB, 2DD, 1AC, 2FTR, 1CA, and 1SS (assuming SZ37 is mutually destroyed by UK SZ35/39 units) in SZ35 off the coast of India.  Then i wait until US decides where to attack.  Lets say you take Borneo, now i attack with my starting navy, plus 5 subs.  US loses and i still have my entire fleet minus 3-4 subs.

The wonderful thing about this strategy is Japan doesn’t have to defend anything.  I just sit and wait for US to decide where it wants to attack, then i counter and destroy it.

Sean, the US can always block those 5 subs on SZ60 from attacking SZ47 by moving 1 destroyer to SZ48. There’s simply no way for Japan to deal with those destroyer blockers unless Germany brings a fighter/bomber to the Pacific. The US can also skip Borneo and focus on East Indies and then the subs on SZ60 can’t reach the US fleet off East Indies.
Or the US can simply send a single transport with fighter support to take Borneo and then Japan has to react. Lots of ways to skin this cat…

You’re talking about a 25% probability for Allies on round 3.  So i make 5 more subs on J3, you take Borneo on US2, and reinforce on UK3, and we annihilate each other on J3.  I now have 4-5 subs in SZ48 and 4 more in SZ60.  You have maybe 1BB.  US3 you build an IC on Borneo.  J4 buy some ground units and TRN’s and start shucking them to the mainland, and i destroy any leftover US/UK naval vessles and you can keep your worthless Borneo.  All you can do with it at this point is build FTR’s and use them to fortify India/Russia.  You’re US/UK naval presence in the Pacific is now over.

Only way to take Borneo with FTR support is to move an AC into SZ49 which then gets eaten by some subs, or if your entire fleet goes there then we annihilate each other with you having a 40% chance of winning.

Any way you look at it, Germany takes Moscow and Axis wins.

@Frontovik:

china can be wiped out in 1 round…

Priority #1 for the Japanese wrt the continent.