I find that people oftenly advocate that either US or UK should get Norway.
But I find it more advantageous if Russia can get Norway instead.
UK claims LEN on UK2 or UK3. Then on RUSSIA3 or RUSSIA4, Russia blitzes a tank WRU-LEN-NWY, and claims it.
Of course it only works if Germany empties NWY on G1-G2, but I find that they oftenly do so anyway.
I was actually just going to mention russia as a good alternative to own Norway. However, im not sure what your suggesting, as germany probably isnt swapping norway if their fleet is dead in sz 5, and Uk is landing in Karelia. But i guess if germans stack in karelia and/or you leave their baltic fleet alive, they can swap. But I like UK can opening karelia for russia to blitz a tank. Baltic fleet must be dead for that option.
As for a norway IC. For one, Is it useful pumping US tanks? I think id be building alot of infantry there as well. A stack of tanks can’t do a whole lot by itself, except increase the threat on dead zones. I like 2 Trans much better than an IC, anyway. As flexibility is the key to turtling germany. My prefered route with allies lately is a triple threat TWICE!! I secure sz5 for the British, and I like 5 tranports min. I can now threaten WE, GERMANY, and EE with 5 trans of units from the North. Now I have the USA having 8 -10 trans shuck in africa, with the tail end of the shuck in the med. Now I can threaten WE, SE, and BALKANS in the south the 4 -5 trans of US gear. When germany is facing that much pressure threatening 5 territoires in europe, due to the flexibilty of the allied shucking systems in both the north and the south, they are pretty much rendered ineffective in pushing toward moscow.
It seems to be a popular view that Japan is wasting its money if it buys a complex before it has maxed out the first one (i.e. is transporting 8 units/turn to the mainland). However, I am of the opinion that 2 tran 1 IC–this is assuming $1 bid to Japan–is the optimal J1 purchase for getting units to the mainland quickly. There was an old thread (sorry, I couldn’t find the link on my first search and I’m too lazy to look harder) that had some calculations to this effect, but for the short version, consider:
—If you build 3 tran on J1, you can put 8 units in Asia on your second turn. However, with 2 tran 1 IC you can get 9 units there: 6 from your three transports, and three more from your complex. With a 2 IC purchase it’s down to 8 again, one from your transport and 6 from your complexes. (I’m assuming throughout that the UK killed your transport in SZ 59 so that you only have one to start with.) So if you’re trying to get as many units to Asia on J2 as you can, 2 tran 1 IC is the way to go.
—4 tran on J1, using a bid of $2, is also a good way to start fast. However, in this case your capacity outstrips your income; it will be a couple rounds before you can actually get new units fast enough to keep your transports busy. The 2 tran 1 IC buy is better optimized at keeping your production/transport capacity matched up with the number of units you can afford to produce. In particular, a 4 tran J1 purchase enables you to put as many as 10 units into Asia on J2 if you clean out Philippines, East Indies, Okinawa, and Wake, but then you run out of island units and can only make up to 8 new ones in Japan. So you get a lot of inf on J2 but it’s more of an anomaly, where the 2 tran 1 IC buy gives you a smoother and more continuous startup.
—As far as location, I like FIC the best. Kwang is farther from Moscow than either Fic or Man, so if you’re trying to put pressure on the Russians quickly you want either Fic or Man. You can supply plenty of troops to the northern area from Japan itself, so the complex is needed more on the southern end. Plus it enables you to get to Africa, Caucasus, etc better.
—So far I’ve been assuming KGF. In KJF you should certainly be a bit more hesitant about getting factories up quickly. However, I’ve found that a FIC complex, which is always where I build on J1 if I build a factory at all, can be very helpful in KJF. Ideally when defending against an American fleet you want to defend as far out as possible, e.g. with a fleet in the Caroline or even Solomon islands. However, if you’re forced to fall back, FIC is a great fallback point. The key thing about it is that it borders all three of your valuable islands. If you get in trouble you can fall back to SZ 36 and build more ships there to join your retreating fleet. Often this will be enough to prevent the Americans from taking any of those expensive islands right away. If your only factory is in Japan you’re forced to keep your navy farther north to incorporate the new builds, and the Americans have an easier time getting to the southern islands.
So the best way to counter the Australia IC is to b**** out?
No really though, I understand. Thats kind of a good strategy for any nation though, just a bit hard to execute because Japan is spread out through islands.
Australia is an awesome naval base that gives the Allies a great deal of freedom in the Pacific. But either US or the UK must come to the fight with some naval units. While they build naval units, Japan and Germany press the attack on Russia.
Japan’s position degrades very quickly after Australia gets going, but it is almost impossible for the Allies to capture Japan itself. Far before Japan is in any real danger (with a stack of infantry and fighters on it), Germany and Japan should be able to make Russia fall. From that point, it’s really Japan and Germany vs. UK and US. In a 9 VC game, that means that Germany and Japan together have a deathgrip on 8 VCs (all in Europe and mainland Asia, probably including India, Karelia, and Moscow), but have probably lost the Phillipine Islands.
Since Japan cannot be broken, and Germany cannot be broken, the victory should go to the Axis, with a navy and air force fueled by Russian IPCs, and a positional advantage that allows Germany to threaten London itself as well as threatening Africa and Brazil with only minimal IPCs invested.
Of course, the Allies are not locked into defending Australia, but any IPCs spent there are IPCs not used elsewhere in those important early turns.