@MrMerguez:
(I could post my own topic, but i fits in quite nicely in this discussion).
Say UK1 retakes Anglo-Egypt with 3 infantry (1 from trans-jordan, 1 from persia, 1 from india) + fighter+ bomber + cruiser. Only 2 infantry remain in India. He takes lone transport with CV (and builds atlantic fleet, say). (Under what further conditions, if any) would you consider taking india on J1 with 2 infantry from fr.-indochina + air?
Should UK always leave 3 infantry on india then?
Do you ever take out cruiser+transport in sz. 34 on J1 (e.g. with Battleship from sz. 37?).
Next time post your own topic. It’s better for you and better for the thread, rather than going off topic.
The answer to your question hardly has anything to do with Japan anyways. It is really a question about the Allies, and I don’t mean that just because you’re asking a question about UK.
I already actually posted on the subject of India infantry some time ago, but sadly it was not clearly stated. Not clearly stated, much like you would think there would be clearly stated signs on your Droid Razr phone. “Do not use to cut meat and vegetables”. I mean, look at those commercials, you would think those phones had gosu knife functionality. You can do so many other things with your phone - watch movies, listen to music, play video games, send threatening emails to your bookie - would some simple functionality in the kitchen be too much to ask for? I mean, look at those commercials, seriously. But anyways dinner is absolutely ruined, I tell you. Everything’s mashed all to hell, and that’s not how you make beef Wellington. Now if they would just clearly state that those phones are not to be used for meat and vegetables, things would be so simple. But they didn’t say that. Now who’s going off topic? I can threadjack anyone, even myself. :evil:
Leaving infantry on India at end of UK1 is almost always wrong. The more you leave on there, the worse it usually is. There are specific exceptions - there are almost always exceptions - but if you have any question about whether or not a specific case is an exception, then it isn’t an exception for you, because anyone asking such a question wouldn’t know how to follow through anyways.
Why is the question of UK infantry on India a question for the Allies instead of the Axis? How to put this. Let’s say you’re a captain of a team of soccer players. Now let’s say you come up with some strategy that involves leaving your goal completely undefended (say everyone on your team just lays down) when the opposing team has the ball. If the other team has any sort of skill, they’re just going to score, and not worry too much about looking a gift horse in the mouth.
So you understand, it isn’t a question of how Japan and Germany will respond to a UK1 India stack, as much of it is a question of how badly they will hurt the Allies, and why the Allies would consider a UK1 India stack in the first place. Typically, the Axis will hurt the Allies rather a lot, so the Allies had better have some good reason for laying down on the job.
Like, let’s say you’re that soccer coach, and everyone’s laying down, and your opponent’s about to try to score a goal, when suddenly one meter tall aliens in flying saucers appear and vaporize everyone taller than they are. Since your whole team is laying down, the aliens ignore them. But the opposing team is vaporized. So you win!
(Again, that explanation of exceptions - clearly this would be such an exception. But if you didn’t know of an impending alien attack, then your strategy of laying down suddenly would probably not work so well, you see?)