Question re subs and transports

@krieghund

Thank you for responding! Yes, America found this rule and lost a strategic bomber for it.

@AndrewAAGamer said in Global 1940 Rule Question re: scrambling and amphibious assaults:

@Panther said in Global 1940 Rule Question re: scrambling and amphibious assaults:

#3.
The American units only watch the scenery, as friendly powers never attack together. As Britain in your scenario is the attacker, the British transports may retreat, if possible.

In this scenario the transports were already in the SZ so they would not be allowed a retreat. However, if they left the SZ and came back in then they could retreat.

Right, that is the way that makes a retreat “possible”.

1 ipc units are too strong, they would replace infantry.

A naval base isn’t needed to load transports. A transport can take 2 units from 2 different territories as long as the territory is adjacent to the transport’s sea zone. It can also take 1 unit, move into another sea zone, and load another unit from an adjacent territory.

And yes, you can use Eastern USA’s Naval base to move the transports to offload in Morocco. Naval Bases serve all friendly ships in sea zones adjacent to the territory that the Naval base is on.

Lanchester’s Law on wikipedia is the game theory I was thinking about.

thanx for clearing that up for me

I thought they had to be at war with japan too

I see the logic now that uk and dutch are at war with germany makes them buddies

Your sub would have to hit his ship/ships for it to matter.

Because if you submerge that does nothing.

Yes, one sub can reach it and that one should be moved there. Combine it with a massive move to Carolines and from there you can pick Hawaii, most ANZAC territories, most of DEI, Phillipines, etc.