Can transporter carry 1 infantry?

@Funcioneta:

@Subotai:

The KGF strat is not about ignoring Japan, no countries can be ignored, it’s just that allies cant do much against Japan for the first 2 rnds, and Japan can be partially ignored early in the game. The KGF strat involves slowing Japan down as much as possible, but most resources goes against Germany.
The reason why KGF is most popular among the best players is because a good axis player will make a too strong Germany if only Russia and UK tries to stop them.

And there is no such thing as KGF fanmania, it’s about the-most-effective-strat-fanmania :)

There is not really a KGF for many (99%) Revised games. A true KGF will include some US naval units to Pacific to distract Japan and force fight it … I only had seen a true KGF once in my PBEM games and it was in AA50. 99% of players do a Try Ignore Japan strat that includes sending all stuff to Europe and Africa, even the starting Pacific fleets. Most (99%) of players will counter this making a JTDTM, while some others will counter with a Polar Expres, that’s why I call the “so-called KGF” a “Try Ignore Japan (if you can)”
Allies can do a Ignore Japan strat only if Japan lets them. In my games I noticed that Polar Express is, at least, as good as JTDTM, and I’m pretty sure that Polar Express can improve because it has been used less (many play by memory with TIJ-KGF)

The funny thing is when in some games Japan gets diced J1 and anyway allied player lets Japan breath and TIJ just because they think that a Pacific Fleet is useless

My point is that in this or any future A&A games many players will never stop from trying ignore Japan, no wonder how bad idea is, how many income have Pacific Ocean and mainland Asia, how bad gets Japan diced, how good can be Polar Express or how boring can be ignoring Japan. KGF is a religion

If they try that in Global 1940, Japan will destroy everyone with its 2 BB, 3 CV, and lots of transports/income.

@LT04:

That does sound like fun but I have never really got into navy battles b/c they are costly and when its all said and done you don’t gain an IPC space.

I understand all countries but maybe Russia need a navy in some form or another but thats my reasoning for just getting by in the ocean.

LT

Agreed.

As I said above I’m not that keen on sea lion myself. and if the conditions are unfavorable (like Russia took Ukr) than to hell with it.

Additionally I want to remind you that I would spend only 1 die on tech so germany can build new troops on G1 for 35 ipc.

@ncscswitch:

He meant on the prior turn as a back-up just in case…

he wasn’t clear on the WHEN part of the a/c movement

@Thorak:

Assume I have loaded 2 UK inf on a US transport and then in the US turn I moved the transport to the seazone next to Ukraine. Can the inf on the transport participate on an attack on Ukraine in the following UK turn together with other UK units? Does it make any difference if Ukraine is empty and the units can take it alone?

The infantry can participate in an attack on Ukraine.

You do not have to unload both infantry during combat, although you may if you wish.

It makes no difference as to whether or not you unload infantry if Ukraine is empty or not.

Your just not good enough to take America from me Doug…  I keep luring you in and step on your greedy hand…

There’s a factor no-one considered though. When 3 people play, we usually set it up with 1 axis vs. 2 allies, with each allied player picking a country, and sharing the third. That way coordination is forced, and most importantly: everyone gets 2 turns a round, instead of one player getting three and the other two getting one each.

Before, transporting a tank was a joke, something you didn’t do unless you had extra transports.  It was a 3-2 unit, so a 2-2, 2-2 artillery infantry combination was better.  Now, tanks are on par; amphibious invasions are much more like land attacks.  So the end result of the increased defense and transport ease is that the artillery is what it should be: a supplement unit both amphibiously and not.  I applaud avalon hill’s new rules on land units because it is both realistic and feasible.  I don’t really see that one of the poll options adaquately shows my view.  I would say “it’s all about the money”, but when in this game is it not always about the money?