That’s what I thought. Thank you! :)
Factories and Facilties—Where, How, When, and Why?
-
I’ve built a factory in West India with Japan to help pressure the middle east, usually a late game tactic. I’ve seen a naval base at Midway. Makes it tough to block for Japan. After a neutral crush, Spain is a good place for the US to put a factory. I recently played a game where my opponent did the neutral crush and built factories in Turkey and Saudi Arabia with the UK. (I would not recommend building both) I built a factory and naval base in Brazil once with the US. Probably not very cost effective and it was slow developing but it allowed me to build subs and destroyers and get them into the med in one turn. It wasn’t too much of a worry for the Axis player but it was fun to do. I’ve built the air base for fortress Java. And I have also built a naval base there for a one time use that helped turn the tide in the pacific. I love building the Queensland factory for ANZAC.
-
in my most recent game i had my opponent build airbases in both Gibraltar and Morocco… I think he did it jsut for the scramble purposes… I ignored them and did other things… Italy did get very big though – it was tough.
-
in my most recent game i had my opponent build airbases in both Gibraltar and Morocco… I think he did it jsut for the scramble purposes… I ignored them and did other things… Italy did get very big though – it was tough.
I’ve considered the same, but usually decide that a carrier is more flexible and about the same cost, even if it only gives you two planes instead of 3.
-
I do like the flexibility of airbases where you can choose to scramble if the odds are reasonable, and choose to remain hidden safely on land if the opponent sends overwhelming forces. Being able to scramble 3-6 fighters to protect a lone destroyer in the Med forces the Axis to invest a huge amount into clearing it out each round. A loaded carrier would not achieve the same outcome earlier in the game when the Allies don’t yet have total superiority in the Atlantic and Med.
Having said all of this, I agree with AA Gamer that later in the game the loaded carrier is usually a far more flexible choice.
-
Does anyone ever consider upgrading the minor IC on Rome to a major? I usually find that it is not necessary until late in the game, and by that time I don’t want to do it or lack the IPCs.
-
@Arthur:
I do like the flexibility of airbases where you can choose to scramble if the odds are reasonable, and choose to remain hidden safely on land if the opponent sends overwhelming forces. Being able to scramble 3-6 fighters to protect a lone destroyer in the Med forces the Axis to invest a huge amount into clearing it out each round. A loaded carrier would not achieve the same outcome earlier in the game when the Allies don’t yet have total superiority in the Atlantic and Med.
Having said all of this, I agree with AA Gamer that later in the game the loaded carrier is usually a far more flexible choice.
We sometimes buy an airbase for Italy in Africa so Italy and or Germany can scramble 6 planes to protect Italian fleet in med if need be.
-
CDG it lets you reach Egypt or Norway, which could be a key part of your KGF.
I wouldn’t forget the scramble though, it lets you protect both sides so you can skonch Italy’s bonus with 1 DD at the same time you make SZ91 untouchable. Still, I don’t recall building it in any recent game.
I’m trying this in a current game and it didn’t work out as well as I’d hoped. Of course part of that is that the Germans are going mostly naval and moved ALL their airforce down to the newly captured Algeria after torching my UK/French fleet in 92.
-
Build American IC in norway, iraq, persia, korea.
-
There is one time when UK_Pac might want a factory - that’s when Calcutta has been retaken.
Otherwise, Japan wants a factory on FIC and Shantung (Kiangsu is nearly as good). Malaya, Kwangtung and Manchuria are not ideal for their own reasons, although a third factory can be required.
UK needs at least one factory in the Middle East and Persia is the most flexible because it can help India best.
USA likes factories on Korea and Norway if possible.
That’s about all really for factories.
Airbases: Gibraltar + situational
Naval bases: off SZ36, Midway.
-
Reading most of this already, I agree with all these.
I have never thought of a Naval Base in Midway before. Thats interesting, I might try that.
The Airbase on Gibraltar can be very annoying. I personally use that all the time, it annoys Germany and Italy to no end. Having a huge fleet and a 3 plane scramble can make the Axis think twice before jumping on the fleet.
I like to take Persia as ANZAC, then build an IC. You get a permanent +2 to your income and you can put 3 dudes there a turn and save/spend the rest in the Pacific.
-
As ANZAC, I like to use my 2 Egyptian infantry to attack Iraq (which the FEC has typically tried and failed to attack, so it’s a walk-in). Then, I build an IC. This is especially useful if the Germans are hitting Russia hard.
-
…. (which the FEC has typically tried and failed to attack, so it’s a walk-in) …
Just for my information: who are the FEC?
-
@Herr:
…. (which the FEC has typically tried and failed to attack, so it’s a walk-in) …
Just for my information: who are the FEC?
The FEC is the Far East Command, which is another way to refer to the UK Pacific forces.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Far_East_Command-Midnight_Reaper
-
@Herr:
…. (which the FEC has typically tried and failed to attack, so it’s a walk-in) …
Just for my information: who are the FEC?
The FEC is the Far East Command, which is another way to refer to the UK Pacific forces.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Far_East_Command-Midnight_Reaper
:roll:
-
Some rules.
1. Never build MICs ever. Not a single scenario where this makes sense. Maybe you tell stories of games where you build an MIC and won. But I can assure you: You did not win because the MIC but despite of it.
2. Facilities neither take territories nor kill they units. You should try to avoid them and focus on investing into units. You need an immediate and relevant impact on investing into a facility. Investing into facilities too randomly with dubious immediate impact will make you lose.
Good examples for facilities can be:
- AB northern Italy in case otherwise the UK has an overwhelming attack on the Italian fleet
- AB Cyprus because it allows to move figs in 1 turn to Moscow
- NB Hainan in order to threaten India or to move transports and fleet in one turn back to sz6
- IC in Kiangsi, FIC or Malaya (many people underestimate the impact of a Malaya IC. In my opinion it is the most powerful one for Japan, although vulnerable. The potential to build units right into sz37 is a pain for the Allies.
- Any kind of “double move AB” = one power enables the planes of a partnered power to move one extra space. E.g. German planes on Italian soil.
Bad examples are:
Almost ANY IC with Germans (except few examples where Yugo IC can make sense)
The Germans can simply conquer enough ICs in order to satisfy their needs for production. ICs in WUK, Caucasus are usually not worth it.
Germans, Ukraine, Novo and Stalingrad are sufficient. There are few situation where a German IC in Persia can make sense. However as I will mention in point 4, ICs can also turn into liabilities.3. The further the game progresses the more likely it is that a facility can make sense. Early, 15 IPC is a lot. in games where the TUV might stakck up to 3.000 and above, 15 IPCs become less and less relevant. In a late game, 15 IPC invested to give a huge fleet an extra movement and thus extra strategic options can be worth it.
4. Make sure you do not build facilities for your opponent. UK ICs in Persia look neat in the first place, but if the Germans are played well, Allies cannot stop them from moving South and thus capturing the IC which is bad.
Also, when investing into an Egypt IC, make sure you do not lose it to the Italians.In general I see a tendency that players tend to invest into facilities to easily while not utilizing the maximal impact. Those players get into trouble against opponents who simply plan better without facilities and thus have more units on the map.
So I recommend everybody to stay rather critical when it comes to building facilities and only do so in if you have a strong case!
-
@Herr:
…. (which the FEC has typically tried and failed to attack, so it’s a walk-in) …
Just for my information: who are the FEC?
The FEC is the Far East Command, which is another way to refer to the UK Pacific forces.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Far_East_Command-Midnight_Reaper
Thank you!
-
There is a strong case for buliding a majir on romania rather then a minor.
1. More units in russia turn two and three, ( 5 mechs +5 tanks romania turn 2 ukraine if you do an r1?)
2. Second wave. Taking ukraine and stalingrad help, but leave you production divide and thus can be isolated. A major in romania is too far from the russians to do anything about. If you bulid fast movers, then they should reach moscow in only two turns, and with a concentrated force.
3. Far away from london. Persia maybe but ypu would make the allies have to spread out their bombers to cripple you effectively. If they bomb out berlin or western the wg, it wouldn’t damage the eastern front. If they bombout romania, focus your bulids on berlin or east Germany.
4. Protects afainst any incursion into greece. Fast movers can hit that in one turn. Also if your doing a neutral crush, then a major would also help germany set up for turkey in one turn
-
There is a strong case for buliding a majir on romania rather then a minor.
1. More units in russia turn two and three, ( 5 mechs +5 tanks romania turn 2 ukraine if you do an r1?) Units from this factory won’t affect russia until turn three. While you couldve been building units from germany since trun 1 and they will be in the same spot as units from romania by turn 3 anyway.
2. Second wave. Taking ukraine and stalingrad help, but leave you production divide and thus can be isolated. A major in romania is too far from the russians to do anything about. If you bulid fast movers, then they should reach moscow in only two turns, and with a concentrated force.
3. Far away from london. Persia maybe but ypu would make the allies have to spread out their bombers to cripple you effectively. If they bomb out berlin or western the wg, it wouldn’t damage the eastern front. If they bombout romania, focus your bulids on berlin or east Germany. Not really a concern early in the game. Germany has too much airforce to be scared of bombing runs to WG and Ger. Not cost effective for the allies to do. Late game bombing can be a pain but you should already be deep into russia and not need the romainian factory. Your income should be high enough to protect WG and Ger.
4. Protects afainst any incursion into greece. Fast movers can hit that in one turn. Also if your doing a neutral crush, then a major would also help germany set up for turkey in one turn
Its never a good idea for the Axis to do a neutral crush! Greece can be easily defended by Italy or units from Ger.See JDOW’s post above. MIC’s never ever make sense! You will never have the income to fully utilize a romanian major! By the time you do, the factory becomes obsolete because of its postioning. You just wasted 30 ipcs to sit idle. Like JDOW said you are better off spending that 30 on units that can do something. I don’t even like the idea of a minor in romania. Germany does not really need to build any extra factories. The only time they possibly need one is maybe in the middle east if they aren’t able to pry one away from the UK.
-
Some rules.
1. Never build MICs ever. Not a single scenario where this makes sense. Maybe you tell stories of games where you build an MIC and won. But I can assure you: You did not win because the MIC but despite of it.
This is interesting from the Japanese perspective. Do you simply accept the logistical cost of deliverying force via transports with guardian fleet? Or does your note refer only to major industrial centers?
Marsh
-
@Marshmallow:
Some rules.
1. Never build MICs ever. Not a single scenario where this makes sense. Maybe you tell stories of games where you build an MIC and won. But I can assure you: You did not win because the MIC but despite of it.
This is interesting from the Japanese perspective. Do you simply accept the logistical cost of deliverying force via transports with guardian fleet? Or does your note refer only to major industrial centers?
Marsh
I took it to mean major IC’s. Minor ones are almost necessary for Japan!
Suggested Topics
