Loading and offloading units in the same NON-COMBAT move.

@dazedwit

Agreed.

@andrewaagamer

Thank you!

@hengst

Yes, that plan is the cleverest cheat of the game. My opponents are too smart for that though.

Back to the OP. One other point I’m coming to see is devastating is to land 4 ground units on Kwangsi J1. These units really make a big difference in being able to hold on to Yunnan. While you can’t get the TTs back to Japan J2 unless you combine a Naval base on Hainan or Kwangsi, the main game in Asia isn’t to get Japanese land units on Asia but to deny the Burma Rd. If you can do that, your one step on the way to Axis victory in the Pacific. One of the land units can come from Okinawa, two from Japan so you are only relocating one unit within Asia, the artillery from Manchuria, but in a very advantageous way.

No, you are not missing anything. That is a perfectly legal move. I am assuming that the Allies still control Gibraltar, right?

In fact, in your example, since Gibraltar has a friendly naval base (assuming it hasn’t been bombed), the US fleet could go all the way to Sea Zone 95 and park right next to Italy if Italy had no ships there OR they just had submarines and/or transports. Even if Italy had fighters on their air base, they couldn’t scramble because it is the US NON-combat move.

You can basically move your ships to any sea zone you want as long as there are no enemy surface warships blocking your way, or as in your example you have cleared any enemy warships.
Of course, that US submarine would have to remain in the sea zone just east of Gibraltar since it moved in the combat movement.

I think the idea of smaller forces being effective against an attack is probably most valid when thinking about the USA navy in both the Atlantic and pacific. Having say three small navies in a “V” formation gives then the advantage of options should one be attacked, while having one large navy would be a stalemate for the most part in the Pacific and usually a loss there. In the atlantic it gives the Axis something to worry about, where a UK fleet parked in one zone can be dealt with quickly and decicivly an multi-zone fleet makes you wonder what he’s up to. Just look at all the resources needed by Germany R1 vs UK, and this is a relatively small fleet compared to what USA can produce.

Good points Gargantua.

That’s a Good Idea !

the 2 extra infantry does not appear on the list of national objectives and bonus income on page 23
i assume that page lists the NO’s for europe, since japan is not on the list.

for sovjet union it only says:

+5 ipc if there are no axis warship on seazone 125, SU controls archangel and no other allies present on SU ground
+3 for any original german territory and sovjet controls its own.