A Wild Japan Strategy

@ajgundam5:

4 Units in EI not FIC at least thats what I think he is talking about since he said he decided to put it in EI instead of FIC

sometimes i SWear i’m an idiot.
thanks

I dont like it, yet i wouldnt call it a disaster.

Actually, I like to put an American IC in East Indies, so if Japan builds one for me, great!

I have mentioned before that I follow the Clausewitz  theory of strategy.  Chose a goal and spend every dolar yo uhave to push that goal.  Even to the point of some sacrifice.  I think a EI IC while probably a lot of fun, is probably not in the best interest of victory.

I once let Japan take Washington DC so that Russia could have Berlin.

That’s a bit more extreme than I am usualy willing to go, but I supose if it works…

The industrial complex costs 15 IPCs.  You need to commit transports to the Indian Ocean to utilize that 4 unit producing industrial complex.  You will not utilize Japan’s industrial complex to its fullest.  You will not have IPCs to purchase air and/or naval units to counter a light US push in the Pacific.

It’s okay as a counter to an Indian IC, but if there is no Indian IC, I believe there is usually no point to that 4 producing industrial complex.  (Actually, I believe that not only is there no point, it’s a waste of IPCs, and forces Japan to commit to the Indian Ocean, and slows Japan’s advance in general because of the IPCs required to build the complex and transports were not used for early tanks.)  That is to say, if the Allies have a KGF going with units going to Africa and Europe, Japan will have to commit a decent sized force of infantry to Africa, meaning that the Japan attack on Russia will be far weaker.  If the Allies have a KJF going, the Japanese industrial complex does not help defend against a US navy/air force (Japan does gain a positional advantage with that industrial complex, but the cost of the industrial complex, combined with the need to continue the battle in Asia, combined with the need to defend multiple targets against US invasion, makes for a difficult game for Japan.)

You can force the Russians to withdraw from Ssinkiang AND force the UK to retreat from India with a tank force at Kwangtung combined with moderately sized infantry forces in China and French Indochina (respectively), plus a couple of loose fighters.

That is, in brief - I think it’s a viable tactic in certain situations, including some situations in which UK does NOT have an Indian industrial complex.  But I would generally recommend against the industrial complex.

I’ve been seriously considering that IC myself. I think it is GOOD for defence against the US because if the US suddenly starts expanding into the Pacific, you can instantly build navy right in the middle of the valuable islands (Borneo, EI and Java is it?)

In my current Tournament game I have 6 Jap transports, so I can have 4 to unload Japan’s 8 production and 2 to unload EI. Plus, as noted, you can get to Persia or Africa in one turn from there - takes a lot longer from Japan! Because of the shape of the seazone it is close to both east and west - Australia too if the allies try to re-take that. Once Jap production is at 48 you can build 6 Arm 6 Inf and fully utilize both ICs. It’s close to Caucasus too so I don’t see how it slows down the Jap advance on Russia.

Put it this way: as the Allies, are you more concerned about

a) 2 Inf 2 Arm that can land in Persia or Egypt next turn
or
b) 2 Inf 2 Arm that can be in FIC or Bury next turn
or
c) 3 Arm that can be in Caucasus next turn?

Maybe c), but a) is at least a close second. Ideally, I’d like FIC, India and EI ICs - I don’t care if I’m not utilizing Jap’s IC to the max, all that does is strand units in a backwater (unless it’s KJF of course). But once the Allies are well into KGF, it’s not so bad to tempt them into switching strats with a provocative little IC in EI. Right now I face NO allied units in the Pacific or the Indian ocean, so I just want to be able to bring units to Russia/Africa with maximum speed and responsiveness.

Responsiveness often gets overlooked as a value - if you have to build your units three turns before they arrive for combat, you have to guess what you might need then. If instead you can deliver in one round, you have much more flexibility. So I like to build ICs - people think it detracts IPCs from building actual combat units, but it can actually bring more units to the front more quickly if that IC is 1.5 turns closer to the front than the units you would have built back at your starting IC.