IC builds for G?
Does it get you to Moscow faster than anything else you can build with 15 IPCs? Anything that Germany buys that can’t shoot and take a hit is a bad idea.
German IC in India. Now there’s a wicked thought!
I prefer a German IC in Central U.S. Because if I make it that far I’m building one there just or fun.
In that case, dear, build it in Brazil. It’s always fun to build 3 inf a round there and freak out the American player! The trick is putting enough in the initial invasion to HOLD it until you can start building. (You also have to time it so Japan can put the screws to the US making him/her decide on Brazil or Pacific.)
Also, a determined American will definately win in Brazil. However, s/he might loose an entire round of spending in the Pacific AND the gain of the IC in Brazil is a liability to the US, now they have to actually defend it. Unfortunately, the US has no need for an IC in Brazil. (Classic A&A anyway.)
Yea, I’d heard of that plan. It doesn’t work well. It’s much cheaper to buy two transports and do a long range infantry shuffle then it is to build an immovable IC
yamamato456 last edited by
I don’t think I have this kind of athority but I think this topic should pretty much be over. I mean you have sixteen… SIXTEEN units you can build just with your beginning ICs. If you actually are rich enough to buy more than sixteen infantry DON’T, buy a tank or go crazy and buy a bomber. If you can build more than sixteen infantry the game is basically over.
The only time I have ever built an IC as Germany was when I had already beat Russia. The game was already won for the Axis and I was just fooling around and put one in Western Europe so that my navy could reach U.S. quicker (total victory).
In my view you should only consider building an IC for one of 2 reasons.
1. Your income exceeds you current build capacity (Usually Japan).Â If Germany (with a 16 unit starting capacity) is in this position the game is already over.
2. Your existing IC’s make it difficult/impossible to get forces to the front line (Usually the US & UK). Germany’s IC placement makes this very unlikely.Â If German forces have pushed that far east then there is already an IC in the Caucasus.
I can’t think of any scenario where I would consider building a German IC (or a Russian one for that matter).
Guest last edited by
As a means of dropping navy direct into SZ7 by putting an IC in Western. Would be a ballsy strat… stalling in the east and going hard core on UK… a means of doing a 2 stage KUKF instead of just the TRN build and sail out of Baltic.
Upon taking and holding Manch as a means of buildign TRNs to land in Japan (late game, Allies would already have won)
I’m still thinking German IC is a waste of 15 IPCs.
However, as I investigate AAR a bit more, I can sorta see strategic value in an IC in Egypt, maybe one in India if Japan doesn’t get it first. Brazil doesn’t even make sense, you cannot go through neutrals anymore and thus, theres no way to build up in Brazil and walk into America.
Aretaku last edited by
I captured a British IC in Egypt once, and it helped quite a bit in allowing me to jointly flank Russia from the south with help from Japanese inf. via India.
Of course, I didn’t have to buy the thing.
I personally like the thought of an IC in West Europe, but only if Russia is being stupid.
newpaintbrush last edited by
Never. Never build an IC with Germany.
Two transports cost 1 IPC more. They can shuttle four units into Ukraine a turn, or can hit Egypt. Transports make the Allies require more time to hit the German med fleet with pure air, and if the Allies draw within two spaces of the Med fleet, the Med fleet can suicide along with German air to kill the Allied fleet.
Early game, you don’t need an IC, transports are better. Late game, you can’t afford one.
If you're having problems, please send an email to email@example.com