United Kingdom -underrated in all ways

[Anglophile_Norwegian]

A few days back, I played as the UK, with a very selfish American player and a Russian player who was less than smart (Luckily we managed to convince him NOT to attack Manchuria :P). Anyways, I went for the India gambit, and reinforced it as much as I could in the first turn (Without any help from my allies and with no forces in Africa to draw from). The Japanese player, realizing what a danger an enemy factory in India represented, attacked with everything he got, as most would. However, he had terrible luck with the dices and I crushed him. But he did manage to take Singkiang later on, and when the American played asked me for help to re-take it, I did. However, that weakened India and the Japanese attacked again, and this time managed to take it. At this point, I had lost all of Africa -Madagascar, and the American player, pursuing a policy of completely ignoring Europe and using all his money on a fleet to crush to Japanese, refused me any help. When I tried to build a fleet at home, the Luftwaffe dealt with it swiftly. In the end, the Allies actually won, but it turned out to be an absurd and quite boring game.
So my question is, when the Allies are playing in a manner in which co-operation is very limited (Some would say that is very stupid, but we are very competative and like it that way), how can the UK player do good, without expecting any help from her allies?

[Desertfox]

Go for Afrika (I like spelling Africa Afrika) instead of india. Build an IC in SA, or if possible in AES. Ignore india except to withdraw from it. Afrika is worth more than india and is more easily reinforceable. Build a carrier with one aircraft off of the SA IC and bring the sub and BB in the Med to Cape of Good Hope. From there build aircraft on UK and move your large fleet up to Britain where you can build Trannies and men for D-Day. (Save some money from turn one so you can by the Carrier and ftr on B2 in SA)

[Anglophile_Norwegian]

But wouldn’t the South Africa IC be worthless after I seize Africa, and exposed to both Japanese invasion and strategic bombing?

[Desertfox]

The IC would be proctected by three inf and atleast one ftr by J1. (They would be taken from India.) So UK1 buy 1 IC in SA and 2 inf (to keep an invasion of the British Isles at bay). UK2 buy 1 AC and 1 ftr. UK3 buy another ftr and 2 tanks. UK 4 buy 2 ftrs. Then prepare for an invasion of Europe after Afrika has been protected. (An invasion from Libya into SE with help from America would be nice.) Build 3 trannies UK5 and 4 tanks on UK6 and then launch the Invasion on UK7.

[UKcommander]

Haha, I love Norwegians :D. The British are underrated and I love your strategy. In fact, I’ve seen games when the British flag has flown over Berlin and Tokyo.

[Guest]

Britian is way underrated as they alone on the Allied side can dictate tempo to the Axis. I love getting British HBs in order to take Berlin. When this happens the Uk usually dominates the world.

[Anglophile_Norwegian]

So no-one here sees any problem in Britain abandoning India and using everything they have to secure Africa fast?

[Guest]

Nope why should they its like cutting off a finger to save the hand.

[221B Baker Street]

So no-one here sees any problem in Britain abandoning India and using everything they have to secure Africa fast?

Well GB basically has a choice as to which one they want to keep. I don’t believe GB will be able to keep both, so which to choose? I generally pick Africa for the following reasons:

1. Africa will provide about 3X the ipcs each turn that India will.

2. Once secured after an early German romp, Africa can almost always be kept for the entire game, whereas India will always be threatened (until eventually taken by Japan :( ) This is because a good UK player will sink the German Navy and Germany cannot afford to rebuild it. Japan is too far away from Africa to sucessfully take it as the UK will be able to see Japan coming and can counter. Also this is not the best move by Japan as for the Axis to win, Japan must send almost all of its resources into Asia to help Germany with Russia.

3. By focusing on Africa, the UK player weakens Germany (rather than slowing Japan down with holding India). This will lead to Germanys collapse sooner and the UK will be able to capitalize with taking W. Europe and possibly Germany, S. Europe, and/or E. Europe as well. With this kind of cashflow, the UK player will then have the money to go after Japan, even though Japan is far away.

Of course if you want to play a different game, concentrating on India can be a viable strategy for UK. The US/UK should be able to kick Germany out of Africa eventually anyway and even when India falls to Japan, it does have the advantage of slowing Japan down.

Its just not the most efficient warplan for Britian.

[Guest]

1. Africa will provide about 3X the ipcs each turn that India will.

And don’t forget that the African Ipcs are most likely to be German rather than Japanese. It makes a big difference to have Germany at 30-33 as opposed to 39-42. 3ipcs(India) makes little to no difference to the Japanese in the grand scheme of things. I see big problems with a Japan first strategy primary among these are that Germany can get too big and walk through Ukr, Cauc and eventually take Karelia. If there are no masses of Allied troops preparing to take WEuro/FinNor then the Allies are in big trouble even if the push against Japan is succeeding.