UK opening move - factory in India?

Flying the fighter to the US Carrier? Ooh, never actually considered that.

Although, I think no matter what you do, you must kill the defenseless Japanese transport, slowing their onslaught into Asia.
I tried Borneo, but in all honesty, the UK can’t hold it, so is it going to work in the long term?

I am thinking about this for my next game…

Amphibious assault into French Indo-China with 3 infantry & fighter & cruiser bombard. Carrier destroys transport. Fighter lands in China, optionally with the one from Russia for 2 infantry & 3 fighter defense. US factory in Sianking.

In our games, we are in a trend where the US builds a factory in Sianking with Russian (two inf.) support, which is making the games more even as it stops the Japanese steamroll to Moscow.
I am sure three planes in China will be taken as a sure sign of a US factory in Sianking.
Even if the amphibious fails, wiping out the French-Indo infantry leaves Japan with 2 fewer men to attack China. Manchuria needs some defense from the Russians, and they need something to attack French-Indo, if the attack was successful.

Japan may retaliate with an all-in to China, which is 1 Bomber, 4 Fighters, but assuming at least one man is left behind for Manchuria, only 4 infantry going in.
With three fighters (one US, one Russian, one UK) the Japanese may take enough losses so that it: a) cannot not take China, b) take with one or two men.

It then would have very few if any men actually on the land territories of Asia, and Russian, English and American troops able to challenge the three 3 IPC territories.
Japan may even hold off on a factory purchase if it thinks it may lose the factory?

In any case, this is taking a lot of attention away from attacking the US, and any attempt to do so would result in an even stronger hold of China.
The US can observe what Japan does, and possibly even hold China for a 2nd factory there, if things go horribly on the Japanese open.

Only the power that controls a territory an industrial complex is in can place units at that industrial complex (or naval units in a sea zone adjacent to that IC, and/or new fighters on new carriers placed near that IC).

US cannot produce new units at London.=

@Hobbes:

A trick I’m willing to share that I think is a game changer that I don’t see discussed on here is to take your Australian trans with sub, bring an Aussie and the INF in NZ and head to africa the long way. You’ll get there in 3 rounds/ Japan may come after you but it will be at the expense of doing other, more important things.

To me that move is risky. The Japanese can attack it with their sub with better odds. And you’re leaving Australia/NZ easier to be conquered by Japan, which means less 3 IPCs per round for the UK permanently. The 2 Inf can help on Africa but if Japan goes for it then you will need more units (usually the Americans to deal with the situation).

It is risky but for some reason when me and my friends have gone after it, we either got sunk, or it was mutual and the trans lived. It must be a cursed square on our board. They don’t do much staying in Australia. If Japan really wants it they can send whatever they need. They’ll still be in range of India so it’s not that far out of their way.

Also, it’s not a bad a idea to leave Norway for Russia. Those plane purchases can pot shot the germans in Karelia and Russia can blitz a tank round 2, assuming there’s only one or two germans in Karelia.

@dustwhit:

@Advosan:

Att.
-CHN with KWN and MAN inf, ftr + JAP bmb
-SZ52 with BB CC SS AC 2 ftr
-Clear all UK surface vessels with the remaining BB AC and 2 ftr
-Unload to MAN inf and arm and land ftr+bmb to MAN, place 2TT and DD in SZ61, 2art in JAP obviously.

As R, I would be incredibly tempted to take my 6 inf in Bury and attack Man at roughly a 50/50 chance of winning, and if not, likely to destroy a fgt or bmb. I consider Bury a loss by J2 anyway, so I’d go on the offense and if I loose, I’d have a tank rdy to retake Yakut when J got in range (with an inf or 2 in Nov by that time) to reestablish the choke point. Why not send 2 fgt, bmb, Kwn, and 1 inf from FIC (particularly if B sent trans back to Egt leaving 1 inf in Ind) or only 1 from Man to Chi. A minor change, but safer for Man.

Imho, J1 CHN invasion must be massive, because the real objective is a J2 XNG invasion that cannot be delayed no matter what happens in FIC or MAN. That is why I need all that inf and airforce in CHN and that one arm in MAN. And if IND is almost empty, I would prefer to add a FIC inf to CHN assault and leave 1 inf in MAN, but I would never attack with less than 5 inf 2 fgt 1 bmb (a total 2.5 hits avg)…
The R 6 inf stationed in BUR can always try and assault MAN, especially if supported by 1-2 fgt. But what happens if that fails, what happens if J scores 4 hits and R only 2 (assisted by the 2 fgt, that is…)? Will there be a second round? Can R risk a total collapse of its eastern borders? Can R afford to be so reckless, just in order to kill a fgt or 2? Because MAN cannot be conquered with 1 bmb, 1 inf, 1 arm and 4 fgt stationed there, not even by 6 inf and 2 fgt, which is pretty much all that can possibly reach there by R2.

@Imperious:

40-50 not more

I don’t think I paid much less for it.  :-D

@Malekith:

Just wondering: I didnt think you could put troops on a ship and off load on same turn? Or am I misunderstanding? Or is this a new rule, I have the 2007 version with no cruisers

@Derek77:

As far as Germany turn one is concerned, I think a lot of players use the battleship to kill the med destroyer and land 2 units in Egypt with the transport from Italy and kill Egypt turn one with one plane from Balkans and 2 units adjacent to Egypt.  The one game I didn’t do this, the allies made short work of me……  the med cruiser can be killed with just planes.

You could always do that.