Welcome! If you're a returning member of the forums, please reset your password. If you don't receive an email within minutes, it means your account is listed under another, likely older, email address. Contact webmaster@axisandallies.org for help.

Factories on Islands?



  • Although I agree with a previous poster that building an IC in the East Indies is being a bit over the top historically speaking, in gamewise the solution isn’t that difficult: send American bombers to Australia and bomb it (I.e. the East Indies factory) every turn!

    I actually think the game should start with a number of factories an building more shouldn’t be allowed. Sure territories such as the EI were worth a lot econimically, but all those raw materials had to be shipped back to Japan to be processed.

    I a recent game of AA50 I played, in which I also built a Japanese factory in the EI, Japan itself was surrounded by an American fleet, but the Japanese constructed another at the East Indies. That shouldn’t really be possible. Anyway, the game was long lost by then for the Axis…



  • The big problem is that Japan gets to jump the gun kind of.
    J1 it builds some transports and a DEI factory.
    J2 it moves them south and builds some stuff at the DEI factory
    J3 it all slams into India like a wave of meat and metal.

    Now the DEI factory replenishes two transports each turn that rotate with two other transports to persia, or Egypt, or wherever. A funnel of units into the middle east.

    And send US bombers to attack the DEI factory?
    Come now….we all know bombers are a borderline waste of money when used to SBR.
    Especially a factory so small, and distant.


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 '14 '13 Moderator

    I know this is not Global, but I thought an Air Base or Naval one could have been the criterion for building say,  Bombers or Capital ships. Perhaps Islands should be restricted to building only half the number of units per IPC value, or even just one a turn in 1942.
    It is funny, but I think most of us have got used to not building ICs on islands now.



  • I wish in Global you COULD build ICs in islands (minor ICs). It would make the game REALLY different.



  • @oztea:

    There is a difference between changing history, and an unrealistic scenario like Japan turning the wilderness of Java into an industrial powerhouse with equivalent production to the entirety of Caucasus in the span of 4 months (one turn game time).
    I don’t disagree with this comment but the country is worth 4 IPCs. In my view you have a problem with how much the country is worth.
    Thats the problem with 42 setups. Japan starts loaded with cash, and nothing to do….except plop down a factory somewhere and pump units towards Moscow.
    Japan should have to fight for their empire. That was the fear they put into the west in 1941…that they were gobbling up their colonies.
    Part of the decision the Allies need to make. Let Japan put a lot of resources in the South Pacific. USA can build up a strong force and take out the sea of Japan and threaten Japans homeland and it Asian Empire.
    Not that Japan was going to springboard into Egypt from the coffee bean headquarters of the world.

    You never know Oztea maybe that was their goal all along. Greater Cup prosperity



  • Sure, that may have been their goal.

    But it turns Java into a mini-Japan….way closer to the front in Stalingrad



  • @oztea:

    The big problem is that Japan gets to jump the gun kind of.
    J1 it builds some transports and a DEI factory.
    J2 it moves them south and builds some stuff at the DEI factory
    J3 it all slams into India like a wave of meat and metal.

    Now the DEI factory replenishes two transports each turn that rotate with two other transports to persia, or Egypt, or wherever. A funnel of units into the middle east.

    And send US bombers to attack the DEI factory?
    Come now….we all know bombers are a borderline waste of money when used to SBR.
    Especially a factory so small, and distant.

    Sorry, but I don’t think bombers are a waste of IPCs even for SBRs. The US can spare the cash and stand an occasional loss of a bomber. At the very least it slows Japan down.



  • You have to get it to western Australia first……before Japan takes it with units built at Java.



  • Or I guess you could fly to India on and be bombing it on US 3 with just the bomber you start with.

    Oh wait. J3 comes before US 3……and on J2 Japan built a transport, INF and TNK at Java.
    And 3 Transports with 3 Inf, 2 Art, and 1 TNK are floating in range of India for the attack on J3

    So J3 Japan takes India.
    On J4 2 tranports float back to the Java sea zone and you build 2 INF, 2 TNK
    On J5 those units land at Egypt, and your other 2 transports wait next to java for the reaload.

    Now 2 INF, 2 TNK are pumping into africa each turn.

    (Just giving you the rundown of EVERY single game of revised I ever played)



  • And the only reason it works is because Japan only has to make a deep investment on J1 (factory + transport)
    From that point on all it has to do is save about 18 IPCs for the Java factory, and use the rest of its cash to play defensive in the north pacific.
    (Naval arms race with USA, that it has a head start in)

    By the time the US gets the upper hand, Japan has Egypt, India, and Caucasus.



  • @oztea:

    You have to get it to western Australia first……before Japan takes it with units built at Java.

    In AA50 Australia is a single territory. On US turn 1 you can fly the bomber from Western USA there. Possibly also the fighet from Hawai for some extra defense.We use a houserule too that defending units get +1 against an amphibious assault in the first round of combat. If Japan wants to attack Australia, at least it will take a little pressure off of India. But like I said, what would be the most realistic solution IMHO is to start the game with a number of factories and no additional ones can be built. Perhaps with the exception that 1 infantry per turn may be built in any territory with a value of at least 1 IPC. For Japan that’d mean only a factory in Japan.



  • @oztea:

    Or I guess you could fly to India on and be bombing it on US 3 with just the bomber you start with.

    Oh wait. J3 comes before US 3……and on J2 Japan built a transport, INF and TNK at Java.
    And 3 Transports with 3 Inf, 2 Art, and 1 TNK are floating in range of India for the attack on J3

    So J3 Japan takes India.
    On J4 2 tranports float back to the Java sea zone and you build 2 INF, 2 TNK
    On J5 those units land at Egypt, and your other 2 transports wait next to java for the reaload.

    Now 2 INF, 2 TNK are pumping into africa each turn.

    (Just giving you the rundown of EVERY single game of revised I ever played)

    Well, even though historically speaking it doesn’t make any sense, but what you could do is send two tanks from Caucasus to India. Of course you’d have to rush them back quickly, but for a while it helps. As for Africa, ferry some US troops there via Brasil.I do agree, however, that Japan is too potent actually in every single A&A game so far!



  • They are only too potent because the best places for them to build factories are the most illogical and ahistorical (that being Borneo or East Indies)
    These territories are worth 4 (which means your factory gets more bang for the buck, better to build on a 4 than on a 2, because factories are the same price on either)
    And also they are islands, so they have an extra layer of defense. (the water around them means the enemy needs to buy 7 IPC transports before he can attack it)

    Now it wouldn’t be ahistorical for Japan to industrialize somewhere like Manchuria (which was in the process of being industrialized), or wherever Shanghai is in this game because those were already major cities, with railroads and big populations able to work a kiln or press or what not.

    The jungles of Java and Borneo aren’t really suited for the overnight importation of heavy industry.
    But they are in game terms the BEST places to put a factory.
    Because of their high IPC value, added natural defense being an island, and their proximity to the weak underbelly of the UK, the Indian Ocean.
    Their colonial breadbasket is up for grabs from the East Indies. The linchpins of India, Egypt, and Australia are all within range of transported units from mini-Japan.
    All coming to you thanks to the fact that Japan starts with these territories, and can plop down a factory on their first turn.

    I guess the UK going first mitigates this somewhat, but can you really warrant throwing the kitchen sink at East Indies on the first turn?
    Im sure the UK can muster enough to take it, but at what cost? The bulk of their starting offensive power in the Indian Ocean Theater, leaving them particularly vulnerable.

    Japan starts, as usual, at powerhouse status. No longer concerned with gobbling up the west’s colonies. But more concerned with getting to Moscow or Egypt.
    AA 40 really gives us the feel of a 2 theater war. Where Japan’s power comes from it’s sapping power from the western allies in their moment of weakness (confronted with a strong Germany)

    AA 1942 is going to return us to the days of Japan being the “rock” and Germany being the “hard place” that the USSR finds itself between.
    I don’t expect to see people shy away from attacking the USSR as Japan….which is a shame.
    We aren’t going to see a two theater war.
    We are going to see a mad dash for Moscow. US and UK fighters cramming into it, as Orange and Black pieces surround from both sides.

    Will it be fun?
    I suppose.
    But could just a handful of rules have been cherry picked from AA50, and AA1940 and put on the last page of the rulebook as “optional rules”, and the game have allowed to fill in the cracks between it and it’s 1940 counterparts…while still having a bare bones ruleset that is a good 2nd step up from the 1941 beginners game.

    I guess it will fall to us, the community, to hammer out our “house rules”
    Debate after debate, argument after argument. Forum personas trying to each craft their own “Historical Edition”
    And we will end up with a half dozen of them.
    Each playable, each “good”, but none universal, none “tournament approved”

    And we will be stuck with the OOB rules when playing strangers, over forums, or online, that leave room for the cheesy strategies of yore. Like the island factories, and other such glitches in the game that some see as “alternate reality coming to life” and others see as “unrealistic and implausible strategic advantages”

    Such is AA I guess…



  • Japan attacking Russia isn’t even that implausible.Japanese troops in Africa is completely impossible. But that’s what you get in a game without supply rules…



  • No, Japan attacking Russia isn’t implausible, and I don’t really have a problem with it.

    But the problem I see in it, is that as japan….you already have almost all your stated goals accomplished.

    • A weakened US fleet
    • Most of the colonies of the West captured
    • Still no war with the Russians
    • China on the defensive

    So, idle units are the devils plaything…and you just HAVE to do something on your turn.
    So you lash out at Russia.
    I would never want this to be “not allowed” in the rules.

    I just want it to be a bad idea for Japan…
    Like no territories of value up there, or a big stack of 6 INF and 2 AA guns across the border that is a tar pit you don’t want to condemn your men to.
    Instead…we will get a token russian force…that turns tail for Moscow…and Japan is obliged to follow them…because it has nothing else to do.



  • Rewind back to revised.

    If UK builds an IC in india, for starters Japan TOUCHES it, and can take it, and will take it.
    Japan on the other hand goes after England, so they can’t snipe their factory if they build one on Java.

    Also, India is connected to a lot of other areas japan can muster men in to.
    Java needs to be amphibiously invaded.
    So Japan has a lot of time to react and cram it full of infantry and fighters if it sees some transports moving towards it.



  • @oztea:

    No, Japan attacking Russia isn’t implausible, and I don’t really have a problem with it.

    But the problem I see in it, is that as japan….you already have almost all your stated goals accomplished.

    • A weakened US fleet
    • Most of the colonies of the West captured
    • Still no war with the Russians
    • China on the defensive

    So, idle units are the devils plaything…and you just HAVE to do something on your turn.
    So you lash out at Russia.
    I would never want this to be “not allowed” in the rules.

    I just want it to be a bad idea for Japan…
    Like no territories of value up there, or a big stack of 6 INF and 2 AA guns across the border that is a tar pit you don’t want to condemn your men to.
    Instead…we will get a token russian force…that turns tail for Moscow…and Japan is obliged to follow them…because it has nothing else to do.

    Indeed, it should never be disallowed, just very unattractive: add a tank or two and a fighter in the East, as far as I’m concerned. In the game the Japanese can attack the West, the Chinese and the Russians. In the real war they barely had enough force to take on just one of them and have a chance at winning.


Log in to reply
 

Welcome to the new forums! For security and technical reasons, we did not migrate your password. Therefore to get started, please reset your password. You may use your email address or username. Please note that your username is not your display name.

If you're having problems, please send an email to webmaster@axisandallies.org

T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 7
  • 6
  • 6
  • 7
  • 3
  • 15
  • 2
  • 6
I Will Never Grow Up Games

55
Online

13.1k
Users

33.3k
Topics

1.3m
Posts