@cernel That’s quite a loophole you’ve discovered. It’s things like this that made LHTR necessary. You are correct about point 1. Regarding point 2, I see nothing in the rules that would disallow attacking an unoccupied enemy-controlled territory with only air units.
How to use America effectively in KGF?
-
3 x 3. 4 x 4 no good.
3 x 3 leaves you the economy for early tanks. You can use tanks to reclaim Africa quickly, then send the tanks back up through Africa to hit Persia. I usually do the E. Canada to Algeria route too, then switch to 3 x 3 if necessary.
-
I prefer 3X3 to Asia and 2X to Africa.
That’s 30 IPC a round in infantry to fill all transports. Leaving America with 7 or 8 depending on Hawaii (or more if you were mean and didn’t let England have Algeria and Libya.)
-
I think no matter what you do, it takes turn 5 to fully stabilize a 3x3 or 4x4.
Wes, you have been away too long. Darth (and others) have already perfected the 4X4 LONG before USA5.
-
How long? By like USA2? :-D
What does 4x4 mean? 16 TRNS?
-
4 x 4 is 4 by 4…
This means 8 TRNs for the US that can move units forward to UK or Algeria (4 TRN) and then into Africa or Europe using 4 more TRN.However, in common usage, it is any 4 TRN direct offload set-up, so that only 4 TRN are required to get 8 units into Algeria per round, but that is still called a 4x4 TRN, though the same 4 TRN are doing the “out and back” into Algeria.
-
The US can actually produce 10 ground units / turn, so why not a 5x5?
-
5x5 would limit you to Algeria insertions, and no additional AF.
3x3 or 4x4 allows for AF/Naval purchases in addition to the land units being transported.
-
I don’t see how that follows - you can have 5 TRNS going ECAN - UK, and 5 TRNs going UK - Mainland. or split of 2-2 to go to Algeria. All kinds of options.
-
Wes, you have been away too long. Darth (and others) have already perfected the 4X4 LONG before USA5.
How does it work?
I’ll have a 3x3 up by Turn 3.
Round 1: Buy 3 Transports
Round 2: Buy units and move fleets around.
Round 3: 3 Transports East of England, 3 Transports West of England.Maybe I wasn’t being specific enough. What I’m talking about is actually having it in full gear; i.e. there are 6-8 units in England ready to go and 6-8 units in W. Canada. Your shuck is ready on Round 4. I too can have the transports ready earlier than round 5 but it’s a question of having 4 inf 4 tank in both E. Canada and England before then and still having built a carrier and landed enough units in Africa to dislodge the Germans.
But let’s assume US has to buy a carrier?
-
Which the tactic I use the progression is:
US1: 2 TRN to Algeria + 2 TRN Bought
US2: 2 TRN to Algeria - 2 TRN back to sz10 + 1 TRN Bought
US3: 3 TRN to Algeria - 2 TRN back sz10 + 1 TRN Bought (Shuck 3x3 fully working)Buying;
US1, 42 ICC: 1 AC, 2 TRN, 2 tanks (move two units from CUS to fill the two TRNs)
US2, assuming 40 IPC: 1 TRN, 4 inf, 2 Tanks, 1 fig
US3, assuming 38 IPC: 1 TRN, 5 inf, 1 tank, 1 fig
US4, assuming 38 IPC: 3 inf, 3 tank (24), 14 IPC for saving and/or spending: in Atlantic and/or Pacific, or to aim for another set of 3 TRN in order to switch landing to Norway or toe threaten WE or SE without disrupting 3x3 shuck move.I have discovered the hot water and I am calling it “not cold water” (in the sense that seldom I have optimized my move someone else already done this)
:-D
Moreover, it is viable shuck move? Or it sucks completely?
:? -
If all your stuff goes to Algeria, you surely have secured Afr for UK, Romulus.
The logistics will come naturally, more games, and this will be routine.By rnd 5 US should have 8 trans, at least.
This is a good strat, but this may not be the most effective use of US resources.
It depends on the map. If G does not try to take Afr, then UK moves to Italy and kills the German fleet.
Not often G player let you do this, but if…
And Afr may be secured by rnd 2, and if allies make a stand in Anglo, or Persia, then it’s better for
US to land in Norway or Kalia.
From EC to UK/Nor both UK and US threaten Berlin.
I think US should take SE asap, without losing messing up logistics to Algeria.
That could be rnd 4-5, if G is strong…
UK should trade WE, and move stuff from Norway, or to/from Kalia.
Most conservtive players do this as UK.
3x3 with pure inf+ftrs may secure whatever TT’s Russia and UK can occupy. -
I came up with a weird way to start - build 5 tran with the US. This way you usually don’t need a carrier when you link off of Algeria O_o
-
The 4 Tran option to North Africa is a great way to save money. Problem is, it takes 6 turns to get to Europe. (Algera, Libya, Egypt, Trans-Jordan, Persia, Caucasus, now you can attack Europe!)
A faster route is 4 transports from E. Canada to England and 4 more transports from England to Karelia/Archangelsk (depending on if you are winning or losing.)
-
If Germany is heavilly invested in Africa, or if Japan is moving in to Africa, the “extra turns” to Europe are not an issue, sicne the Americans are still engaging and destroying Axis units along the way…
-
And those units going to Africa are NOT going to Russia!
-
And, for the record, I’d gladly trade 4 American infantry to save 1 Russian infantry. Especially if those 4 Americans are in Africa and that Russian ins in Euro/Asia
-
As the Axis I’m usually happy to see big hordes of Allied units parading around in Africa. They are denying Germany income of 5-6 IPCs for a few rounds, but in the meantime it’s keeping 50 IPCs of units far away from me. Even better if I was able to sneak a few units to South Africa and they spend a few more turns going down and back to kill those.
I’m intrigued by the 5 TRN buy. Hmm…
My usual approach is 3 TRN the first turn with the US, then 1 or 2 TRN per turn after that until I have 8 or more. I often over-buy TRNs - whatever will let me move the max number of units each turn, because the only units that count are those at the front.
-
No such thing as an America with “too many transports.” That’s like saying you’re having “Too much fun!”
“Extra” transports can always be used as fodder in naval engagements. Also, “extra” transports might be useful if you want to land 1 unit invasions all over North Africa and South Europe. wink
-
With a 5 tran USA buy, you can have a total of 12 tran, 2 dest, 1 bb, 1 sub off of Algeria at the end of US2 O_o! (well I overbuild with UK so I have 5 transports, then add US’s 7 transports lmao) That’s an average of roughly 4 hits. Definitely worse than using 1-2 carriers, but if you can get by with 5 tran, then you haven’t spend a dollar on defense that you don’t need in the future. Usually if you use SZ1/2 for the shucking from E . Canada to London then you don’t need more defense than the US BB (to guard against a bomber in W. Europe), and the main shuck is combined with the UK’s bb/tran so you don’t need a carrier there either.
-
Yeah, transports are a “force multiplier” I think - money spent on transports is not really wasted from land units, because it greatly increases the options you have with your land units, as if you actually had more land units.
For example, UK only “needs” 4 transports to unload the 8 units it can build every turn. However, if UK has 6-7 TRN, and units waiting in Norway in addition to the ones in UK, it makes Germany have to add a lot more defence to WE, Ger and EE. That’s a lot of bang for the buck on 16-24 IPCs of naval units.
However, I’m not a fan of using TRNs as fodder in naval battles. Navies exist to protect TRNs, not vice versa. Rather, use subs if you need some cheap fodder. They have the advantage of being able to hit back. I will take hits on TRNs first, but I won’t build TRNs just to be fodder.
And I rarely build a US AC, and try to avoid building a UK one too. Land units and transports all the way!
Suggested Topics
