To build or not to build? British IC In India, what do you say?

[calvinhobbesliker]

It is somewhat viable to put ic on Australia, pull fleet to sz29 and put down BB+sub for 2 rounds get a US build in pacific and go joint island hoping.

Do you mean 39?

[Col. Ty Webb]

If putting an IC in India, I think the best strategy is to not compound an error.  I would suggest an attack, with everything against FIC.  That's 3 inf 1 ftr and a bombardment vs 2 inf 1 ftr.  You have only a 60 percent chance, but over 2/3 of a chance of clearing the square.  That's most of Japans counter attack troops, and most importantly his only land forces, provided you took out his transport with the carrier. 

If this battle goes horrible, I would forgo the factory in India and instead place it in Safrica.  Using it to build a redoubt to keep the axis in Africa busy.  If it goes well you guarantee holding the India, lower the attack troops against China, and you make another 3IPC's from FIC. 

That being said, I don't think it is a winning strategy.  I would prefer the IC in Safrica and a counter on Egypt UK1. 

I thinks that's your best chance if your thinking about a UK1 IC. Depending upon rolls, buys and location of attacks if the Japanese have no ground forces near india on turn 2 it might be worth it.

[JimmyHat]

I doubt very much that an IC on round 2 is a good idea.  At that point just be glad you can and are holding India, and concentrate on Germany.  The point about getting it out there early is for the early production.  By round 2 UK should already have another direction that it is concentrating, most likely the Atlantic.

[Nix]

It is somewhat viable to put ic on Australia, pull fleet to sz29 and put down BB+sub for 2 rounds get a US build in pacific and go joint island hoping.

Do you mean 39?

Nope actually do mean sz29 with india fleet, australia fleet stays put, join in sz 39 with a Naval build on UK2

[Advosan]

If J dedicates enough resources, they can roll the IC by J2 or J3 at worst, and there is no way for the Allies to retake it, unless enough Russians are stationed in Persia for a counter.

UK imho should'n build IC nowhere (not untill UK4 or 5), only maybe in SA in UK3 if the Germans still have a foothold in Africa by G3 and UK can't launch a serious counterattack.

[Nix]

So Advosan your thoughts on Australian IC?

[Advosan]

So Advosan your thoughts on Australian IC?

Even if considered relatively safer, an Australian IC needs resourses to become dangerous, resourses that the UK simply doesn t have. My IC choises are either EC or NOR or AES, but always on a latter game phase, never UK1..

[dustwhit]

I agree about the Aus IC, unless you think the J player would over-react to it, and divert more resources to counter it than necessary, thereby gaining a turn or so at the cost of 15 IC.

What are the thoughts about an IC in AE around UK4-5? That seems to me to be the best UK location if you can spare the IPCs: it threatens SE, Bal, Ukr, Ind (from Sz34); can resupply Cau, Per; and deter J from retaking Africa.

[Advosan]

I agree about the Aus IC, unless you think the J player would over-react to it, and divert more resources to counter it than necessary, thereby gaining a turn or so at the cost of 15 IC.

What are the thoughts about an IC in AE around UK4-5? That seems to me to be the best UK location if you can spare the IPCs: it threatens SE, Bal, Ukr, Ind (from Sz34); can resupply Cau, Per; and deter J from retaking Africa.

If the Japanese take over an AUS IC, africa is as good as gone for the Allies. Japan will be able to launch an immediate assault in MAD and they will just keep on coming, landing exactly where the Allies can't reach, south africa.

I agree with the AES IC. If the UK has the resources to spare (that is more than 32 IPC/round) by UK4, an AES IC is dangerous for the reasons you said for the Axis, given that NOR might just not be safe enough for the British to set an assisting production line there. Even if a SE landing is not possible, Japan will definitely feel the heat in FIC and continental Asia in general. Not to mention that you can take Japan's soft belly (EIN and BOR) by surprise, totally crippling the Empire's war efforts..The options of an AES IC are pretty much endless.

[Nix]

Thing is there is no way Japan can take Aus IC if UK1 puts one there and sens India fleet to SZ29 and UK reunits fleet SZ29 to australia fleet, and puts down either a carrier+fig or battleship+destroyer. This coupled with an initial US build and japan is in full turtle mode.

Then UK2 Uk builds mostly in Europe to put pressure on Germany. US go island hopping.

[Advosan]

Thing is there is no way Japan can take Aus IC if UK1 puts one there and sens India fleet to SZ29 and UK reunits fleet SZ29 to australia fleet, and puts down either a carrier+fig or battleship+destroyer. This coupled with an initial US build and japan is in full turtle mode.

Then UK2 Uk builds mostly in Europe to put pressure on Germany. US go island hopping.

Imho, the SZ29 coglomerate will only end up in a total destruction for the UK Indian-Pacific navy. The Japanese can strike with a formidable battlegroup of 1 BB, 1 AC and 2 fgt that will leave none alive, maybe only the SS if it submerges.
Plus, the British have a million more importand things to do to the Atlantic with an AC+fgt or a BB+DD than to play hide and seek with the Japanese in the South Pacific. UK simply cannot afford to dedicate those UK1 (build IC) and UK2 (buy BB, DD or w/e) resources against Japan; Germany will be left unchecked and will inevitably crush Russia. True, Japan will probably turtle, but this will be without any significance if Germany crushes Russia, an inescapeable reality unless the UK helps them anyway they can...   
UK is racing against time to build up in the Atlantic and start relieving Russia (ARC, KAR, NOR, maybe even WE and EE). And don t forget, an AUS IC means that you will have to support it in EVERY round, or it will be exposed.
Truth be told, any UK1 IC (except  maybe an EC IC...) is a safe trap for the Allies. Undersupported, remote and helpless, it will be a matter of time untill it becomes an Axis instrument.

[dustwhit]

Imho, the SZ29 coglomerate will only end up in a total destruction for the UK Indian-Pacific navy. ... ...don t forget, an AUS IC means that you will have to support it in EVERY round, or it will be exposed. ... ...
Truth be told, any UK1 IC (except  maybe an EC IC...) is a safe trap for the Allies. Undersupported, remote and helpless, it will be a matter of time untill it becomes an Axis instrument.

I think that makes a lot of sense, Advosan. Nix's thoughts would make for an interesting play when you're wanting to mix things up though.

I'm intrigued about an IC on EC. I don't see how that is an advantage for the UK.

[Nix]

Imho, the SZ29 coglomerate will only end up in a total destruction for the UK Indian-Pacific navy. The Japanese can strike with a formidable battlegroup of 1 BB, 1 AC and 2 fgt that will leave none alive, maybe only the SS if it submerges.

Thus us incorrect.

If you look at map you see that sz29 is 3 spaces away from SZ37 so only 2 figs can attack.

[Nix]

I also want to add that the additional IPC uk and US will have from Island hoping in japans territories should tip the initial lack of ipc into europe.

For example, india won´t be taken anytime soon by japan, africa is safer etc.

[Advosan]

I'm intrigued about an IC on EC. I don't see how that is an advantage for the UK.

Allow me to elaborate on this one. UK 's primary-by far- target is to press hard G on Europe. By the time UK has recreated a strong atlantic fleet they can begin assaulting Europe. The optimum assault package is a 32-cost 4 inf 4 arm, and the question is what to do with any additional IPC. Obviously, another IC is needed to divert some IPC, increase production and escalate the pressure. Three places are candidates for this "secondary" production line: AES, NOR and EC. NOR is the best choise, with land borders with Europe and 3 units per turn is the optimum spot; problem is that usually it is not safe. Second candidate, AES. Relatively safer than NOR, but with lesser building options (practically only bmb, unless you can spare a Mediterranean fleet...). Third option is EC. With 3 units per turn and at supreme safety, you can pop additional land units and immediately land them on NOR if you can spare a couple of TTs, or have NOR within bombing range. My first choice is NOR, my second AES, but if I have not completely pacified Japan, I prefer EC.

Imho, the SZ29 coglomerate will only end up in a total destruction for the UK Indian-Pacific navy. The Japanese can strike with a formidable battlegroup of 1 BB, 1 AC and 2 fgt that will leave none alive, maybe only the SS if it submerges.

Thus us incorrect.

If you look at map you see that sz29 is 3 spaces away from SZ37 so only 2 figs can attack.

You are right, UK1 can conglomerate its indian-pacific fleet only in SZ30, not 29. And in SZ30, UK fleet is within range of the japanese EIN armada. If you ever want to try the AUS IC strat we can set up a match and see how it works!