UK Double IC

Yes I’m sure everyone has tried an India IC at one point or another but in revised it is basically just a drain from the German front and is too easy for Japan to capture

Actually, with a focused attack on Japan, it’s nigh impossible for Japan to capture it.

On Round 1:

Russia masses 6 Infantry in Bury, 4 Infantry in Yak, 2 Infantry in Sink; Build and Attack as Normal
Japan looses, Borneo and New Guinea to England
England Builds IC in India
America builds 2 Carriers, 1 Fighter to add to existing fleet - maybe counter attacks Pearl if it’s winable.
Russia moves into Manchuria if weakly defended and backs up with 4 inf from Yak

You might not be able to take the Jap islands, but you can do enough damage to them for long enough time to seriously cripple any ability of them to make a serious threat to Russia for the first 6 rounds of the game, thus leaving Germany exposed to the full authority of the Russian armies.

@Jennifer:

Actually, with a focused attack on Japan, it’s nigh impossible for Japan to capture it.

On Round 1:

Russia masses 6 Infantry in Bury, 4 Infantry in Yak, 2 Infantry in Sink; Build and Attack as Normal
Japan looses, Borneo and New Guinea to England
England Builds IC in India
America builds 2 Carriers, 1 Fighter to add to existing fleet - maybe counter attacks Pearl if it’s winable.
Russia moves into Manchuria if weakly defended and backs up with 4 inf from Yak

You might not be able to take the Jap islands, but you can do enough damage to them for long enough time to seriously cripple any ability of them to make a serious threat to Russia for the first 6 rounds of the game, thus leaving Germany exposed to the full authority of the Russian armies.

Well the post was only about another UK IC not a focused attack and India by itself is not a good investment

2 IC’s as UK?

Doing so would invite a Sea Lion attempt by Germany.  Even if it failled, UK would be hard pressed to defend both IC’s and prevent a second Sea Lion attempt… or third, or 4th…

I LIKE a UK IC… as Japan.

One that I get that I do not have to pay for :-)

If you want an extra IC for UK, it will be in India,

IF

You can kill the 2 Inf in french indo china with your 3 inf, 1 fig attack on UK1, if you can ill the fig to that´s a bonus, but if you fail you should never ever put the IC in India.

(you have a really good chance of killing the 2 inf´s, like 70% or so i think)

If you do that you will be a thorn in Japans side for a long time, and i have concluded that the US IC is unneccesary, and it´s better for US to spend all cash to take down germany.

It should ne noted that Nix has had great success with his non-traditional UK open, despite all of the arguments about African income if India forces are not used to counter a G1 Egypt attack.

@ncscswitch:

It should ne noted that Nix has had great success with his non-traditional UK open, despite all of the arguments about African income if India forces are not used to counter a G1 Egypt attack.

I think that retaking Egypt on UK1 seems kinda stupid because Germany still probably has an inf, art and a fig in Libya and can just retake it back and then India is weak as well and everything falls faster … why not just wait for USA to retake it?

It is a matter of speed and income recovery.

While the US is plodding through Algeria and Libya on their way to Egypt… all the while facing German counter-attacks w/ BB shots and air power, Germany is sweeping up all $9 IPC in Africa.

And that kills UK’s economy during the critical period when they are trying to build up fleet and start taking hte offensive to Germany while the US is tied up in Africa.

If UK counters on UK1, then Germany is usually only +$4 at any given tim in Africa.  Without a UK1 counter in Egypt, they are going to be +$9, and able to put up stiff resistance to the US attempts to take it back.

Meanwhile, Germany is facing Russia alone, and Japan is STILL able to start sending troops via the northern and central prongs.

@ncscswitch:

2 IC’s as UK?

Doing so would invite a Sea Lion attempt by Germany.  Even if it failled, UK would be hard pressed to defend both IC’s and prevent a second Sea Lion attempt… or third, or 4th…

Not if Germany built no fleet G1. Then UK air takes out baltic fleet.

Squirecam

@ajgundam5:

Yes I’m sure everyone has tried an India IC at one point or another but in revised it is basically just a drain from the German front and is too easy for Japan to capture

It is not too easy for Japan to capture if you know how to play allies. See Jen’s post for one way. Where do people come up with this stuff???

Squirecam

@squirecam:

Not if Germany built no fleet G1. Then UK air takes out baltic fleet.

Squirecam

A G1 AC is so common that it is now almost a “given”, and Ihave even had some good discussions supporting an AC AND TRN on G1, both in the Baltic…

@squirecam:

@ajgundam5:

Yes I’m sure everyone has tried an India IC at one point or another but in revised it is basically just a drain from the German front and is too easy for Japan to capture

It is not too easy for Japan to capture if you know how to play allies. See Jen’s post for one way. Where do people come up with this stuff???

Squirecam

You can know how to play a powerful KGF and still not know how to protect an Indian IC.  That should properly be “It is not too easy for Japan to capture if you know how to play an Allied KJF”.

An Indian IC slows down the building of a  UK transport fleet to Europe.  It also drains the front against Germany.  It is hard to use the Indian IC to go on the offensive, because French Indochina is in range of four transports.  Japan may not be able to CAPTURE a well-defended Indian IC, but it should be able to drain the Allies.

“Russia masses 6 Infantry in Bury, 4 Infantry in Yak, 2 Infantry in Sink; Build and Attack as Normal
Japan looses, Borneo and New Guinea to England
England Builds IC in India
America builds 2 Carriers, 1 Fighter to add to existing fleet - maybe counter attacks Pearl if it’s winable.
Russia moves into Manchuria if weakly defended and backs up with 4 inf from Yak”

This risks Japan forgoing Pearl Harbor to hit Burytia.  Attacking Borneo and New Guinea is risky, and spreads the UK fleet out, and leaves the UK fleet open to counterattack (goes well with ignoring Pearl).  A Japan transport build allows French Indochina to largely be abandoned; units can be transported there next turn from Japan.  America builds 2 carriers and a fighter which is excellent defense, but not much good for offense, especially considering a Japan transport fodder / carrier / battleship navy that can be reinforced with fighter builds from Japan.  Meanwhile, Germany faces far less pressure and expand.

• in not so many words, an Indian IC is viable, but it’s hardly an automatic win for the Allies.

@ncscswitch:

@squirecam:

Not if Germany built no fleet G1. Then UK air takes out baltic fleet.

Squirecam

A G1 AC is so common that it is now almost a “given”, and Ihave even had some good discussions supporting an AC AND TRN on G1, both in the Baltic…

Perhaps “here in this forum” it is common. It is not as common in others (Caspian for instance). I know at Gencon I havent seen many others use it, though I have.

But I wouldnt think because it happens alot here it happens everywhere.It doesn’t.

As for AC+ buys, if you know how to play Germany you can utilize several AC buys. AC+T, AC+3T, AC+2T+S. Depending on circumstances all can be effective.

Squirecam

Seeing as this thread is horribly derailed…

What about a German AC/2 TRN, 2 Artillery purchase on G1; placeing the fleet in SZ 14 and the Artillery in S. Europe.

You’ll own Africa forever and you can quickly shift units from S> Europe to Caucasus by passing stacks of Russians in Ukraine if you so wish…anyway, it’s a lot faster then walking from Italy to Stalingrad by way of Greece and the Ukraines.

@Jennifer:

Seeing as this thread is horribly derailed…

What about a German AC/2 TRN, 2 Artillery purchase on G1; placeing the fleet in SZ 14 and the Artillery in S. Europe.

You’ll own Africa forever and you can quickly shift units from S> Europe to Caucasus by passing stacks of Russians in Ukraine if you so wish…anyway, it’s a lot faster then walking from Italy to Stalingrad by way of Greece and the Ukraines.

Because this does nothing to save the baltic fleet. You lose valuable IPC’s that way.

An AC purchase there with the med fleet going west will put a stronger fleet out there to protect africa.

Squirecam

An AC purchase may save the Baltic Fleet for one round.  2 or 3 Rounds in a unification scenario.  However, it does nothing for pulling the allies out of position to help Russia.  If anything, it forces them to be as slow as they should be, so they are prepared to make a strong move against Germany.

However, an AC/2 Transports in the Med are very secure (considering you also have a BB/Trn to start with).  It threatens/protects T-J, Egypt, IEA (if Canal is open), Madagascar (If Canal is open.), Kenya (if Canal is open); Gibraltar, W. Europe, S. Europe, Balkans, Libya, Algeria, Ukraine, Caucasus, Fr. W. Africa and Brazil all from the 4 sea zones in the Med.  And you can bring a significant invasion force with you. (4 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Armor w/BB shot and 2 Fighters.)  Should you need to assault an allied position.

At worst it slows allied progression in Africa, givng you more assets longer.

At best it destroys allied progression in Africa, makes your southern fleet viable and prevents the allies from getting the Suez closed allowing Japan to float in and set up a 1/2 punch on allied shipping if need be.  At least, it offers a method to platform 6 fighters (2 German, 4 Japanese) well in range of the E. Coast.

Dunno though.  I don’t know if leaving Russia unmolested for the most part on G1/G2 for all those benefits is worth it.  Not that the extra 2 Transports are that huge of a difference in price, considering the Baltic fleet dies on G2 with 1 AC, 2 Fig, 2 SS, 1 Trn, 1 DD anyway, which is much more expensive then the loss of 16 IPCs for 2 transports….