Basically i would not write the double ICs strategy completely off, but for the UK India IC to be build the UK2 only. The reason is that I think the right time to decide whether to go agressively after Japan is right after J1. The agressive game might actually include under special circumstances given to positioning of Japaniese units the two ICs. Say Japan screwed Pearl, or what was left there appears to be an easy prey. Say India is kept by UK and FIC is weak. Say China did not go very well. Say Bur stack is intact. Why not to build sink IC, some ships off LA, a bmb with Russia, and an India IC. I would not like to face all of that if i am japanese player.
So in this case the decision to KJF is dependent on the J1 dice?
I agree playing like this is safer and will probably win more games for you than buying the IIC Round 1.
But I doubt I would play this way against an expert, and this goes back to a preference for either going full KJF or full KGF (for reasoning on this, see my article on KJF and the discussion from Uffish’s article on Jap navy in the Revised strat section). USA navy alone may not get the job done in time–not against a skilled Jap navy. Without being able to place those 3 UK units on UK2, it should be tough for Allies to kick Japan off the mainland before Moscow falls. Once Moscow does fall, the success of the KJF typically comes down to whether Allies can hold onto FIC and India…and this depends on how quickly Japan was taken down.
But to be sure, when I was playing Revised, I definitely had more wins waiting until after J1 to decide what to do then I did going for KJF from the start with the UK1 IIC. So from an experience perspective, I must agree with you, even if i disagree somewhat in theory.
Also, there is also the possibility that Uffish’s (very good) article on Jap tactics no longer applies with the new units, and that an air and sub heavy USA Pacific navy strat could emerge that destroys Japan’s navy earlier than Axis can afford. If such a strat is possible, then we should probably forget about the Sink factory and have USA focus on killing Jap navy. But in that case we are no longer talking about the twin land factory strat.
@Bunnies:
Let’s say US has contained Japan. Japan has a pile of air and ground on Japan.
Now what?
I’d think US leaves a pack of subs to control Japan’s waters, but then I don’t know what you’d do with the rest of the fleet. I’d guess you’d try to push west, control the Suez, then go into the Mediterranean. But the question is how to get boots on the ground (i.e. infantry) to Moscow. Naval builds at Atlantic to join UK fleet there? Factories on Asian coast? Shuttle through Alaska to Soviet Far East? All are slow.
Granted, tank builds on the Asian coast are good. I think that’s best. But looking for extra tricks to play.
First priority is capturing the mainland coast, seizing any Jap mainland factories. You also want to take the money islands asap, sacrificing transports if you have to.
At that point it depends on the variables….you can
I agree, tanks on the Pac coast are the best case scenario. If you go with #2…the critical thing is holding Fic…if Allies hold FIC and Africa they should win the game eventually.
In standard KGF you do not send more then 8 US units a round to Europe anyway and it takes four rounds to get them to Europe usually. It is definitely not slower to get them on the front from Asia then through the standard four rounds taking way EUS, EC, UK, chosen landing spot in europe.
Say you produce 4-5 in mainland Asia (2sink, 2china or 3 FIC) and you produce 4 Borneo or EI using 2 sets of 2 trannies to move them India/Persia. And you use your fleet the protect the trannies. Here you are in the worst case on R4 in cauc for borneo but much earlier with the mainland units.
I have never got that far in my games, but this is what I tought I would do and it does not look as a too much of a problem to me.
It The thing is that it should take at least 6 turns for the islands (there is no way the US fleets starts going forward before turn 4. So the fastest possible (and we think Japan doesn’t even use a DD to slow you down) would be turn 6, IC on turn 7. Russia is already dead at that point. And against a good player you are for sure slow down one more turn (he’ll do something with his fleet) so that make the IC on turn 8 and the first builds on turn 9.
As for Asia, what usually happens is building on turn 2, trading on turn 3 and taking some countries if you brought LOTS of Russian help, turn 4 likely secruring Chi and Man (or like Japan can only take one back), turn 5 final attack in Asia, likely needed your newly builded tanks. Turn 6, the 5 tanks you built are going to Caucasus… oh Caucasus already as a stack of unit on it… ok I’ll move my tanks to Kazakh. And turn 7 well Moscow is already fallen.
And I’ll have to say that I played about a dozen of games with Axis where my opponent played the double IC strategy, they ALL went the way I said in the previous post (except I usually don’t lose the islands, I’m quite good dealing with naval fights).
