• Is it worth it for Germany to put an Industrial Complex in Poland? Having an IC closer to the Russian front seems useful for getting land units to the front a bit faster, but I can never seem to justify it. Thoughts?


  • 10 + 3 = 13

    a bad number to some


  • If you built a T1 factory on Poland I think you hurt Germany too much, you may be one step closer to the eastern front, but you will still have to keep probably 6-9 units on poland and 8-10 units on Germany, and x amount of units on France the enitre time now to keep your IC’s and France protected, this doesnt really help Germany I don’t think. Also you spend 1/2 income on a unit that can not take land, defend land, move, or kill enemy units.  This will give instantly give the USSR and UK MAJOR relief for thier T1 strats (particularly if you opening moves were even only mildly unlucky).

    Thus far the only use I have seen for an early german IC is one on france for a turtle or naval strat, and even that is questionable.


  • the ic in poland can very easily become british before you realise it. remember the british would probably very quickly be able to trow 8 units on land + planes. And as mentioned above by dondoolee you should also protect france.
    If you want a german ic, i would recomend one in bulgaria / romania where you can only build 2 units, but it is much more secure from the uk than the poland edition. however, instead of an ic, you can research for some ipc instead and hope for increased factory production or perhaps mechanised infantery which both should help you more than the ic in poland.

    on a sidenote I would say that mec. inf. is THE best tech for germany; especially if achieved early on.


  • i don’t know about the BEST tech for Germany, but I just finished a game yesterday where I got that tech G2. Devastating! Japan was played by a rookie so had little pressure coming but Moscow still fell G4. Being able to build and move infantry with the armor to Moscow in two turns was a game breaker.

  • Customizer

    I’d say the only countries worth building Factories are Japan in Manchuria, Burma, and India, and the UK in Egypt only after all german and italian fleet are dead and there is no more axis in africa, and then also sometimes UK/USA factory in France if they definitely can hold it and have money to fund it.


  • Japanese factory in East Indies is game breaking. UK has to build a factory its first turn if it wants to help the US stall Japan.

    Germany doesnt need another factory, they need to capture one of Russia’s


  • oz– that is my general position on German factories as well


  • @oztea:

    Japanese factory in East Indies is game breaking. UK has to build a factory its first turn if it wants to help the US stall Japan.

    Germany doesnt need another factory, they need to capture one of Russia’s

    your factory in east indies is still very fragile to allied planes if you want to establish a supply line to africa etc.

    plus you would need to get your transporters in place etc, so nut until earliest round 3 would this be possible, so imo you are overestimating the factory. And my argument is implicitly supported by the fact that is not that customary to build the factory in the first place, though probably most have tried it once or twice.


  • @Veqryn:

    I’d say the only countries worth building Factories are Japan in Manchuria, Burma, and India, and the UK in Egypt only after all german and italian fleet are dead and there is no more axis in africa, and then also sometimes UK/USA factory in France if they definitely can hold it and have money to fund it.

    99% agree. i would add that a US factory or 2 in scandinavia can be very helpfull to get germany down, but otherwise I totally agree with you

  • Customizer

    @oztea:

    Japanese factory in East Indies is game breaking. UK has to build a factory its first turn if it wants to help the US stall Japan.

    Germany doesnt need another factory, they need to capture one of Russia’s

    I’m against building Japanese factories on islands.  Half the point of building a factory as japan to me is that the units i build will already be on the mainland, thereby speeding up their deployment to russia, and at the same time, lessing my dependence on defenseless transports.  Japan may be able to threaten africa from the east indies, but I would rather threaten russia from india + burma + manchuria.  Fallen Russia, not africa, = game over.


  • @Fighter:

    the ic in poland can very easily become british before you realise it

    It’s true, I was taking a closer look at it and the IC in Poland puts a glowing bullseye on the best territory for blitzing tanks to the Russian front.


  • @Sgt.:

    @Fighter:

    the ic in poland can very easily become british before you realise it

    It’s true, I was taking a closer look at it and the IC in Poland puts a glowing bullseye on the best territory for blitzing tanks to the Russian front.

    i know that if I am playing UK and the germany player build an ic i poland, then capturing that territory would suddenly be VERY high up on my list of german stuff i had to destroy :D


  • @Adlertag:

    10 + 3 = 13

    a bad number to some

    6 players, 6 technologies on each chart, 6 starting VCs for Axis = 666

    That might also be considered a bad number for some :evil:


  • @Hobbes:

    @Adlertag:

    10 + 3 = 13

    a bad number to some

    6 players, 6 technologies on each chart, 6 starting VCs for Axis = 666

    That might also be considered a bad number for some :evil:

    +1 karma!


  • @Veqryn:

    @oztea:

    Japanese factory in East Indies is game breaking. UK has to build a factory its first turn if it wants to help the US stall Japan.

    Germany doesnt need another factory, they need to capture one of Russia’s

    I’m against building Japanese factories on islands.  Half the point of building a factory as japan to me is that the units i build will already be on the mainland, thereby speeding up their deployment to russia, and at the same time, lessing my dependence on defenseless transports.  Japan may be able to threaten africa from the east indies, but I would rather threaten russia from india + burma + manchuria.  Fallen Russia, not africa, = game over.

    I allways build a Jap factory on East indies turn2, turn 3 i build one in India, thats 7 units going to Southern russian front every turn. To supply this i use the transports used to take Australia turn 2, after they have moved surviving units in australia to take India turn 3 they are free anyway, to protect them i use the carrier that needed to go to z37 turn 1. Then its all about what the US does in the pacific if i need to reinforce that fleet with other starting units or if i need to build new ones.

    For the northern flank i use Japan as factory if US doesnt threaten trannies working in z62, if they do an IC in Manchuria is worth it. (this demands a T1 buy of 1/2 trannies, i do change a lot between 2tran 1inf buy and 1tran 1dd buy)

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I have some experience here:

    1)  Poland:  Poland is easily defensible for Germany and is relatively high in the IPC count.  Also, it is low enough in the IPC count that it’s not valuable enough to be SBR’d by England/America if you put an AA Gun there. (Do the math, you’d expect to lose between 2 IPC and 2.4 IPC per round to do 3.5 IPC in damage.  Not a stellar use of that bomber, eh?  Not when you can bring it into a battle to kill a defending infantry that costs 3 IPC and costs the enemy the opportunity to use it against you later. Note:  Some like to determine the loss of the bomber over 6 rounds {2 ipc/rnd} some over 5 since the bomber can be considered lost on the 6th {2.4 ipc/rnd} so I listed both.)

    2)  France:  Aweful!  Yes, it’s worth 6 IPC so you could build 6 units there.  BUT!  16 Infantry = 48 IPC, therefore, if you want tanks and artillery and ships and planes, there is strong odds you won’t use the full capacity of your two territories (Germany/France).  On top of that, it’s an extra space away from Russia.  Are you going for Moscow, or Washington DC?  Worse still, you put an IC in France, I’m going heavy on the bombers because I can now do 32 IPC in damage to you each round.

    3)  Bulgaria:  This has worked for me, but lately, people are getting smart too it.  It’s nice because it’s closer to Caucasus and because Germany has a hard time getting units down there.  It’s bad because it’s not adjacent to either Germany or Italy and thus hard to reinforce.

    4)  Norway:  This has worked for me as well, good way to keep Russia from getting the big NO, but you really have to dedicate yourself to keeping it out of the hands of the allies.  It’s been distracting sometimes.

    That said, honestly, I’ve been moving away from German complexes.  I like the following:

    Japanese Complex in Sumatra
    Japanese Complex in Manchuria
    Japanese Complex in Burma
    Italian Complex in Egypt
    Italian Complex in S. Africa
    Italian/German Complex in Brazil

    Note, I don’t mean to build ALL of those complexes, but those are the territories and nations I tend to build complexes in.

    America could have one in Brazil, Norway and/or France.  Even put one in Philippines and Hawaii once.
    England could have one in S. Africa, India, Australia and/or Egypt, France, Norway
    Russia could have one in Poland, Bulgaria, Novosibirsk

    Again, not ALL of them, and not necessarily early in the game, could be towards the end, but definitely as needed given the position on the board!


  • @Veqryn:

    I’d say the only countries worth building Factories are Japan in Manchuria, Burma, and India, and the UK in Egypt only after all german and italian fleet are dead and there is no more axis in africa, and then also sometimes UK/USA factory in France if they definitely can hold it and have money to fund it.

    south africa, if you wanna keep it?

  • '16 '15 '10

    I still prefer France over Poland…if I buy an IC…as someone pointed out above if Germany can capture Cauc or Karelia…then that works better.

    The argument for France is that NOs dictate that I hold onto France for dear life, and if I can place infantry there directly that’s pretty awesome, plus this allows me to reinforce Italy easily and plop naval units all over the place if I feel like it.  The drawback–SBRs–is substantial.  Sometimes I will leave France burning for awhile if the Allies are all into bombers.  But is really the 16 land units a turn in rounds 3-6 that make France so tempting for me…after those rounds Germany’s defensive position rawx.  Keep in mind, I would only advocate for France in response to specific Allied tactics (ie KGF) and only on Round 2, never on Round 1.

    The open undecided question is whether the potential for Allied SBR tactics makes Poland a better choice than France.  Jen makes good arguments for Poland above–she may be right.  Let me play the devil’s advocate though.

    One objection to Poland is it means I have to defend Poland every turn, which means I’m stretched to defend Poland, France, and Germany all at once…but with wise use of armor this isn’t so difficult…but it can be annoying sometimes.  The more substantial objection is that the Poland IC will eventually be captured by the Allies.  What I mean is that in a KGF scenario Poland ought to fall before France.  Once that happens, Allies can stack it with all 3 Allies and now they are building 3 more units a turn.  If I build the France IC and it is captured…well the game is over for Axis anyway unless Japan is right around the corner.

    Bulgaria is also a nice alternative with interesting possibilities, but if I’m Allies I’d try to snag it with the USA…not ez but not impossible.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

43

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts