UK strategies

  • What do people think about an IC being built in India on UK1.  If the russian player sends the moscow fighter as added defense I think it would be difficult for Japan to take the territory on R1.  It could help keep Japan from beating down Russias backdoor, but at the same time if Japan takes the territory it is a free IC.  Has anyone tried it with success?

  • I have had great success at turning India IC’s into Japan IC’s, usually on J2.

    That then gives me 3 IC’s as Japan, 1 in Japan, 1 in FIC, and 1 in India.

    Generally, it is a VERY bad move from Russia’s perspective for the UK to put an IC in India.

    And with the Japs having those 2 IC’s, and with a solid German push through Ukraine, Russia loses Caucuses pretty early… a devastating blow for Russia.

  • I have seen the IC in India fall but that was without Russian support.  If the Russians sen the fighter from Moscow and Inf from KAZ that could reach on R2 could India hold off a Japanese attack?

  • Well, that depends on the US…

    Does the US also build an IC in Sinkiang on US1?

    If so, then yes, with maximum Russian support, the India IC can last until J3, maybe J4 with some luck.  Otherwise, an FIC IC, 3 TRN’s, plus a lot of AF and perhaps even a BB means that India will still fall not later than J3, taking a heck of a lot of Allied units with it… units that are irreplacable in the Indian Ocean and Asian theaters of operations

    But the trade off is that those FIGs and INF are NOT in Caucuses, and Germany IS going to pounce on Caucuses on G1 if Russia leaves it weak.  Or the West Russia Stack is far smaller than normal in order to keep Caucuses defended, which means higher overall casualties for Russia in West Russia, as well as far fewer troops there.  That means Germany will be SOLID in Karelia, Belorussia and Ukraine after G1, putting Russia in economic distress and on permanent defense for the entire game instead of trading territories with Germany.

    Also, UK will be abandoning Africa to Germany, relying on the US to take it back (first from the fact that India troops will not be used to liberate Egypt in UK1, then with the economic drain on UK to support that IC, first 15 IPC to build it, then 9 IPC MINIMUM to build INF there).  That gives Germany a massive economic boost (bad combination with a weakened Russia due to force bleed to India), and forces the US to be aggressive in the Atlantic, subject their initial fleet(s) to being sunk (antoher bad combination with the economic bleed to support a Sinkiang IC).

    India is a lost cause, except perhaps with Colonial Garrison NA.

  • It is more important for the UK to hold Africa and put pressure on Germany.  I was just looking for a way to slow Japan but you’re right India is a moneypit. So it’s back to the drawing board.

  • '10


    Well, that depends on the US…

    Does the US also build an IC in Sinkiang on US1?

    If so, then yes, with maximum Russian support, the India IC can last until J3, maybe J4 with some luck.Â

    Switch is right.  In my current game with Malus I am testing a new strat with which I built an IC in India and an IC in Sinkiang.  The Indian IC fell on J4, the Sinkiang on J7.  Without the added threat of the US IC (with Russian support), I believe the Indian factory would have fallen sooner.  In my strategy, the Sinkiang factory was the important one, though…

    I’ll explain more after the game finishes

  • IMHO India IC only good vs n00bs.

    1.  UK has less IPCs to build transports and units to ferry into Europe.  So UK comes into Europe slower.  So Germany has more time to attack Russia.  Bad.

    2.  UK has less IPCs period.  Industrial Complexes cost a good amount.

    3.  Japan captures IC, and look, you just gave Japan a nice little present that cost YOU IPCs.  Saved Japan player IPCs too.

    The last, you think, can be countered with Russian reinforcements?  No way.

    A).  If you fly fighters to UK, those fighters cannot be used in hit and run attacks.  (Let’s say Germany holds Karelia with one infantry; you sent two West Russian infantry and a fighter to attack the territory.  You kill a German infantry, you gain 2 IPCs from the territory, and Germany has to retake the B)country.  But say you just attack with two infantry, your odds aren’t as good.  If you attack with two infantry and an artillery or a tank, even, then you’re commiting 10 IPCs to gain 5 IPCs, you can’t do that for long even given the fact that the trade gives you a small positional advantage.  My belief is that Russian fighters are properly placed in Moscow, where they can attack east or west.

    B)  If you send land units to India, it takes three turns to get there from Russia, two turns from Caucasus.  Either way, you are pulling infantry from the German front, which means Germany takes USSR countries, so USSR makes less money.  If UK loses a few IPCs a turn, it’s no big deal; UK IPCs are relatively inefficient (for cost-effective ground troops, you must first build transports, then you have to make sure the transports are protected, all that takes valuable time).  USSR on the other hand, you pop out an infantry, and that infantry is ready to go; it just has to march to the front.

    C)  Even with Russian reinforcement, Japan can pull infantry off the islands, and run tanks in from transports from Japan.  Combine that with - what - six fighters and a bomber?  Things get very nasty very quickly.  You can’t defend EVERYTHING.

    D)  Out of the box rules, you risk turn 1 Germany goes for long range aircraft and takes UK.  Risky, but doable.  A couple of Russian fighters in London helps a lot.

  • Now, with everything that has been said and posted thus far…

    There IS a way to secure India into J3 or J4, WITHOUT an IC in India.  It is not guaranteed to work, since Japan MAY strike India on J1.

    On UK 1, move your AC, DST, and TRN from SZ35 to SZ38.  Move your TRN and SUB from SZ40 to SZ38

    Use your FIG to kill the Kwang TRN, then land in China (making China that much harder of a target for J1)
    Move 1 INF from Persia to India.

    Then, if your fleet, or a portion of your fleet, lives, TRN 3 INF from Australia to India.  Added to 4 INF already there, and fly your FIG back from China (if it lived) to India.  If not, one of your UK FIGs that went to Russian territories in UK1 can move to India in UK2.

    Now you have a force with a defense of 18 in India, plus an AA.  That is an average of 3 kills per round of combat.  Japan will pay dearly to take India at this point.  They WILL take it eventually, but it will take some time (or the loss of their AF) to do so.  You are also poised (if your fleet lived) to make a major counter-strike in Africa in UK3 and then pull back your remaining India forces to Persia, perhaps reinforced with the Trans-Joradan INF, or forces from Russia.

    It is a delaying tactic at best.  But against Japan, delay is the name of the game.  The longer you hold back Japan WITHOUT drawing forces away from Germany, the better off the Allies are.

    There is another delay built into this move… Australia sitting there empty is entirely too tempting for Japan in most cases.  So a TRN will set sail from Japan to Australia, taking 2 turns to get there.  That is 2 turns that TRN can;t be used to ferry troops to Asia for use against Russia.  That is also an INF that will not make its way to Asia for at least 3 turns.  And also perhaps some support ships…

    If you combine this with a US IC in Sinkiang, and a Russia force mass in Bury that falls back to Yakut before it can be attacked…  Japan is looking at several turns before they can make a break out from the Asian coast.  And THAT time should be enough to start crippling Germany (US will have to go to Africa to prevent Germany from amassing IPC’s, and UK will have to start landings in Norway ASAP).

  • There are two very important factors I didn’t mention.

    1.  If the UK reinforces India, it will very likely lose Africa.  It is impossible for both Africa and India to be defended early in the game unless Russia is sacrificed.  UK’s Africa holdings are worth 9.  India is only worth 3.  In most games, I will deliberately leave India open on the very first turn in exchange for retaking Anglo-Egypt Sudan with infantry and fighter.  I think it’s worth it.

    2.  Transports from Japan can get reinforcements to French Indochina every other turn.  That’s four infantry and four tanks.  Japan’s invasion of eastern USSR isn’t even slowed; on the turns the transports move away from French Indochina, they move infantry and tanks into Buryalia.

    I believe that even trying to defend India is a bad idea.  A beefed up China combined with beefed up Buryalia and beefed up UK Indian navy sounds good.  But really, it doesn’t work.  The sub, destroyer, carrier, battleship, and two or three fighters hit the UK fleet, five infantry and fighter/bomber hit China, three infantry, tank, and two fighters hit Buryalia with battleship support shot.  Japan crushes the UK fleet, will very likely gain China, and will probably get Buryalia too.  In noncom, Jap carrier joins the battleship and transport in the waters east of Japan, puts fighters on, and Japan places its bid of three transports and a tank.

    Tradeoffs - sometimes the China or Buryalia attack will fail, and the US Pac fleet is strong.  Japan’s holding in China is weakened.  French Indochina is lost for a turn.  In exchange, though, the Axis can rip through Africa unopposed for a while (German tanks in Anglo-Egypt and Japanese transports take it all very fast), India falls anyways, the Soviet east is wide open, and USSR lost six infantry.

  • placing an Indian IC is a very good move… AS JAPAN  8-)
    but as UK, nah, better keep your money out of there!

    some say it’s better to put an IC in South-Africa…
    if G doesn’t buy an extra trannie (or his med fleet gets shot even) - you can defend and regain Africa with much ease…

    leaving USA for giving the biggest punch to G ever, since they do not need to ship for Africa.

  • 2007 AAR League

    Have you ever considered taking 2 IND infantry from on the TRN in 35 to SZ 48 with the fighter from the AC and landed them all in Borneo on UK 1?

  • 2007 AAR League

    Only place an IC in India on Uk1 if you clear the 2 Inf in French indo china, if you don´t succed in doing that, then for the love of god do not place an IC in India.

    And another note is that if your going with an Ic in India you must go with a IC in Sinkiang.

    This is in my opinion a good way to keep japan in the ocean, especially if you get the assamble 6 inf in Buryatia and 2 Arm in Yakut on R1., then only 2 russian Inf is needed in Sinkiang.

  • @Shining:

    Have you ever considered taking 2 IND infantry from on the TRN in 35 to SZ 48 with the fighter from the AC and landed them all in Borneo on UK 1?

    There is an entire thread in the Revised area (back a few pages) on the pros and cons of a UK1 strike on Borneo.

  • @Nix:

    Only place an IC in India on Uk1 if you clear the 2 Inf in French indo china, if you don´t succed in doing that, then for the love of god do not place an IC in India.

    Is our game STILL haunting you Nix?  LOL

  • 2007 AAR League

    Yes….  And im hunted by the sad fact that i have lost 5 games in a row…  Somehow i see my credability disipate when discussing strategy  😞    😢

Log in to reply

Suggested Topics

  • 12
  • 18
  • 60
  • 54
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2
  • 23
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys