OK , It is now clear to me , Thanks everyone for taking your time to explain this to me 👍🏼
Industrial Complex in India
-
I believe it is generally agreed in the “Best Allied Strategy” forum currently under discussion that the best way to play a UK Ind IC is with a US Sin IC. With those putting out 5 units per turn and USSR moving 1 inf east to assist it makes for quite a bit of work for the Japan player.
-
The IND IC may cause a Jap player to split his forces between Pearl and IND, meaning that he may not be capable of taking all the territories he normally would be able to take out.
If UK puts an IC in India, and I’m Japan, I don’t even bother with Pearl. Japan doesn’t have to do a Pearl in order to effectively prosecute the war in Asia; in fact, many players prefer to keep the Battleships nearby to assist with the inevitable amphibious assaults.
Personally, I would let the Americans have their fleet in Hawaii… if the American player decides to go heavy in the Pacific that means 1) he’s not sending troops to Europe and 2) Germany is going to keep Africa for long enough so that the British won’t be able to both supply Russia and keep India supplied.
-
or
- America moves its pacific fleet through the panama canal and makes life utter hell for the Germans.
-
- America moves its pacific fleet through the panama canal and makes life utter hell for the Germans.
That’s certainly what they would most likely do with it, if the American player is experienced at least.
It’s a matter of how you like to play the game as Axis. Some feel that it is necessary to strike at the American fleet and knock it out, thus saving Germany from having to deal with both British and American fleets (usually this will result in Africa possibly being taken back sooner).
My point on the “to Pearl or not to Pearl” was that IF UK puts an IC on India, I believe it becomes imperative to take that out ASAP, and especially if USA does one on US1 in Sinkiang… if you let those two get going, it becomes really tought slogging for Japan. Thus, if UK puts the IC I usually abandon Pearl and focus the Battleships on supporting Amphibious assaults and/or taking out the Transport/Sub (Sub if Germany didn’t get it on G1) and later supporting a landing on Australia.
I can always rally the fleet later around India and send it into the Med. if need be (if G owns both sides or I can always help try and take it out).
-
Egypt IC…
This is silly. It’s not defendable by the UK, unless Germany has already been slaughtered in Africa & the Med…but if that is the case, then why are you building it, since Africa is already mopped up?
The notion of attacking SE from Egypt is silly. Attack with what? Undefended trannies? Good luck. What are you going to do? Waste X money and Y turns to build a little fleet there first? Ha. The German airforce will slaughter you for nothing. So you’ll waste how much money building ICs, trannies, fleet defence…for a piddly lil opportunity to land a few dudes in SE? Yikes.
Indian IC…
Not a big fan as previously mentioned in numerous posts. But, it is possible and it is defendable. Quit talking about a J1 attack on India…UK isn’t going to leave just 2 Inf & Ftr there. There will be at least 3 Inf there, the Ftr, possibly the Bomber, and maybe Russkies (but they aren’t necessary). The tranny will be in IndiaSz as well, and the armour from AES in Persia.
Thus, Japan will have to use a Ftr just to clear the tranny. Then land 4 Inf, 1 Ftr & 1 Bomber against the UK defenders. This is a bad attack for Japan, and the odds are poor that you win both of these battles and take India. To top it off, you then have a cruddy attack on China and either US or Russia will take India back.
The point is: if Germany takes AES, you forget about India ICs. If Germany does not take AES, you have that option and can defend it. A J1 attack there then becomes silly, and as UK you can and will be able to stick it out there for 3-4 or more turns if you co-ord properly.
SUD
-
This is silly. It’s not defendable by the UK, unless Germany has already been slaughtered in Africa & the Med….but if that is the case, then why are you building it, since Africa is already mopped up?
I agree it’s not defendable until Germany has been kicked out of Africa (and Japan is held at bay in Asia), and I’m not necessarily defending it as a good choice… but let me tell you something, I’ll put the American fleet in UKSZ, get a carrier/ escort of subs/trans down to the med and start pumping INF from Egypt… in most games I play the German player stacks EEu, Germany and WEu (in that order unless the threat to Germany proper is clear and present). SEu is almost always under-defended. Taking SEu makes the German player attack on the next turn and if nothing else gives UK 6 IPC extra for a turn.
The German airforce will slaughter you for nothing. So you’ll waste how much money building ICs, trannies, fleet defence…for a piddly lil opportunity to land a few dudes in SE? Yikes.
Yes, I’m sure once I send a carrier down there the German air force will be more than willing to engage. Plus, I’m sure at this point in the game Germany has plenty of fighters to spare so they wouldn’t mind if my trannies got in a fluke hit or two and Germany suddenly had no fighter defense for Western Europe. :D
Look, putting an IC in Egypt is not (I believe) the best place to do it, given an average game. But it does give some advantages that I think are worthwhile, even if it’s slapping 2 fighters a little closer to the Eastern Front (vs. Japan). And it does open up a new area for the British to threaten. It’s different and trying different strategies is the key to finding that “new way” to open the game up.
-
the Egypt IC is not intended to be the main assault thrust into Germany. it is simply there to open another front on Germany and divert as many troops as possible from other fronts. the amphibious assault from the me leaves more options than one may think. with trannies from the SZ on the south side of the Suez, outside the med, one can attack the Ukraine, E/Eur, S/Eur. and if you start the assault from the other side of the Suez, you can even reach W/Eur for a 2 coast assault along with troops from the UK/SZ. German fighters cant normally reach the other side of the Suez, without having already taken AES or IEA, which would make the whole buildup impossible to begin with.
-
the Egypt IC is not intended to be the main assault thrust into Germany. it is simply there to open another front on Germany and divert as many troops as possible from other fronts. the amphibious assault from the me leaves more options than one may think. with trannies from the SZ on the south side of the Suez, outside the med, one can attack the Ukraine, E/Eur, S/Eur. and if you start the assault from the other side of the Suez, you can even reach W/Eur for a 2 coast assault along with troops from the UK/SZ. German fighters cant normally reach the other side of the Suez, without having already taken AES or IEA, which would make the whole buildup impossible to begin with.
I agree with M-4_Sherman, an Egypt IC is merely a diversion and simply used to provide a multiple threat to the entire German homeland (i.e. all of Europe). Only German bombers can attack ships in the Red Sea Zone (southern Suez). Also, an infantry push from Egypt into Asia, Caucasus or even Moscow is very helpful as well. In addition, French Indo-China Burma is within striking distance as well … thus, Egypt is a very strategic striking point for the Allies (if properly done and at the proper time).
The whole point is placing troops on the mainland. Whether it’s Europe, Asia or Africa … get as many troops there and as soon as possible.
-
I agree with your logic, MB, but:
Egypt is a very strategic striking point for the Allies (if properly done and at the proper time).
I think these forums have established that not only Egypt, but also India and Spain, can be strategic striking points, etc., etc. and you could argue that any attack could be that way. :)
-
I agree with your logic, MB, but:
Egypt is a very strategic striking point for the Allies (if properly done and at the proper time).
I think these forums have established that not only Egypt, but also India and Spain, can be strategic striking points, etc., etc. and you could argue that any attack could be such an attack. :)
-
I agree there are SEVERAL strategic attacking points … but ANY attack – NO!!
-
Gentlemen.
I submit that you have not thought the IC in Egypt strategy through at all :)
It is easy to say you will just do this or that, but I don’t think you are looking at the economics, fundamentals of strategy likely played by the Axis, and relative combat power and it’s affect on the game.
It seems like you are already presupposing that the Axis have lost, so you can do anything you want.
Consider this:
For an IC and a single tranny it will cost you $23, without even having any men to put in it, although in your scenario you can likely load the first tranny with the surviving troops already there.
For that cost, Germany can essentially build 8 Inf, thus the relative start up cost already puts you in a big hole. Build your IC and tranny. I’ll slap 8 Inf into SE…now what?
So now you’ll need at least 4 trannies, plus the IC, plus a Capitol ship to protect them. Otherwise, you have no hope of even attacking those 8 Inf.
Of course, I’ll scale my actual placements based upon the actual threat.
You cannot simply state…well I’ll divert the trannies from the N Sea. This does you no good, since then Germany does not need to defend its capitol nearly as well, or even EE as well.
It is always cheaper to defend than attack. This is a basic principle of the game. It is also true that when attacking multiple territories it takes more offensive combat power than if you attacked only the single territory, typically even when the same number of total defensive units is unchanged (depends upon total battle size, but you get the point). This is especially true of the UK where the bulk of her offensive combat power comes from her air force.
It is also true that UK attacks on EE are typically softening attacks, designed to set up the 1-2-3 which brings down EE.
It is also true that UK strategy against EE is typically the hit and retreat from Karelia…in order to soften and preserve the UK air on the retreat.
It is also true that amphibious assaults do not have a retreat.
It is also true that the Russkies typically have the largest combat power, but because of turn order you never want them to go first.
Thus, you fool yourself into believing that drawing German troops to SE is in your favour. It is in your favour ONLY if it doesn’t cost you anything.
Instead, you actually weaken the threat of a 1-2-3 on EE. As time progresses and the total number of units increases, there is a greater demand for more offensive combat power on EE. The effectiveness of the Russian army diminshes as they cannot afford the investment in offensive capability.
Thus, over time the drawing of UK forces away from a ground assault from Karelia actually strengthens the relative strength of the German defence.
Since Germany is bottled, they have no intention of actually attacking Karelia…instead they await the Japs. The Allies can out-number the German 1.5 to 1 or even 2 to 1, but if no single nation has sufficient combat power to launch the first assault…well you won’t be attacking will you.
If the UK trannies are in the Med…then Germany itself is not under threat from the UK, and the US alone is not enough, and EE can be drawn down a little as well. You no longer have the option to directly shuttle to Karelia and setup up for the UK 1-2-3 attack, and your attack is much more perilous because you can’t retreat…meaning you need even more combat power.
So, you will need trannies in both the NSea and the Med, plus the IC, plus the men in the Med, plus a Capitol ship.
What is the cost now? And how many German Infantry is that? Basically, I don’t care how much you send/build there…the cost/benefit will always be in the German favour…unless your income is so high that the game is actually already over…you are just playing it out.
The net effect on WE is none. You have as many trannies as you choose to build, it doesn’t matter whether they come from the Med or NSea.
The net effect on Ukraine is none…since Germany is already bottled and defensive, so at most you are trading Ukraine every turn with an Inf or two, which can easily be done from Karelia.
You might have a spare Capitol ship to send. But if its a lone BB with some trannies, I will indeed sac it with either Ger or Japan. Since it needs at least 2 turns to move…I easily see it coming.
If it’s an AC, now you have to keep more Ftrs aboard. A split fleet normally requires more Ftr defence, since two smaller fleets are more susceptible to a sac, than one large one. Typically, one large one frees all the Ftrs to go to the mainland, since you’ll have 8-9 trannies together.
UK Ftrs pinned on AC defence in the Med are actually less flexible than UK Ftrs free to roam Asia/Europe from Russia.
UK fleets in the RedSea is a dream…unless the game is already over. The RedSea is a Jap pond…anything UK there dies.
The moment I sucker you in to leave Egypt and take that risky attack on SE, is the moment I also take your IC with Japan. You’ll need not only an attack force, but a defence force as well. Japan moves after UK remember.
Speaking of that IC…what a nice target she is for Japan…not only can I easily reach it with massive combat power if I want, but I can also roam Africa, build units directly there…and best of all, I can build my Jap fleet directly in the Med. You can be sure it will be the Japs pushing through the canal, building more fleet there and then hunting in the Atlantic.
I guess, you will need to send even more Allied troops down to Africa then…what’s the effect on combat power in EE of that?
I can think of a million reasons why an Egypt IC is a bad idea for the UK. And I cannot think of a single advantage that can not be gained by simply dropping a load in Africa and marching to Egypt then Asia, or through Karelia then Caucusus.
All of this wasted, so you can ‘threaten’ SE, which is almost certainly in Germany’s favour because of the cost.
Shaking my head.
SUD
-
If you are going to take the time to post something that well laided out, why not spend an extra minute and register? Just a thought… :D
-
I don’t have the map in my head at the moment…. but the black sea does border to EE AFAIK… so, you could use any UK troops sitting there for the 1-2-3. The weakening probably is not that big. It is much more risky though, as SUD mentioned, but the airforce could retreat from the attack.
I guess the most striking point is that Japan is offered another nice foothold. From my point of view: any factory that is build close to the Indian Ocean or Pacific Ocean is an invitation for Japan.
(oh… i was just defending the IMHO weak strategy of an Egypt IC… shiver)
-
If you are going to take the time to post something that well laided out, why not spend an extra minute and register? Just a thought… :D
dude - can’t you tell? That’s SOON YOU DIE!!!
Get with the program.
He’s like . . . he’s like “the cook” - you know - when Steven Sea-gull is lurking as a ship’s cook and yet is a a$$ kicking seal? That’s what SUD is to A&A.
And i like F_alk’s line of thinking.
but not a bad line SUD. -
Yeah I read all of that in a 16 hour work induced haze, sorry SUD…I should have known…I will promise to do better next time ;)
-
Talk about a road warrior, when I was doing sales the most I would go out on the road was 2 weeks, and that was pushing it for me. Hope you are enjoying yourself.
-
at the risk of taking this off-topic, i did sales for 2.5 years and left home for 3-4 weeks (usually just 1-2 weeks tho’).
-
Reading the loooooooong Guest post I had the feeling this was a force to be aware of I reached the end and the SUD clicked a switch! :o Having read lots of the old fora…
It is an honor to kneel in the presence of greatness. 8) I finally get to meet…uh…see the feet of a legend.
SUD, welcome back from a new dweeb on the block!
WOW! I thought all the masters were gone, but…
( :oops: LJ gets all choked up and emotional. Embarassment sets in and he leaves rather than seem like a wuss.) -
Poop! I thought I was logged in. I don’t think my computer likes me. Well, at least I left a clue in the text sos you know it was me. I think I’ll leave my initials like SUD…learning from the best!
LJ
Suggested Topics
