United Kingdom Units After One Capital Falls

@flyingbadger said in Loading units onto allied transports in the same round that the ally unloaded them:

… even though the US transports have already loaded/unloaded on that round?

During US turn rules concerning movement and loading/unloading transports apply to the US. So restrictions apply to US turn, see rulebook’s Transport rules. They do not apply to the entire round. In your scenario it is France’s / UK’s turn.

This is why the rules that you quoted say “You (as French or as UK) move land units aboard”, and “You (as French or as UK) offload your units.”. The US transport has no active role here, as it is not US’ turn.

@taamvan:

You could even do a house rule for that, such that 1-3 US destroyers would be able to cross ATL and join/protect UK/ally fleets during defensive combats on turns 1-4.

I am currently working on a house rule where one can do that with Lend-Lease that US can transfer equipment.

I am also trying to set up a different rule for declaration of war where you can declare war but if you don’t have just cause, then you take a penalty for attacking but if you have just cause, then of course you’re free to declare war.

I was going to changed the let up of all units, try to get it to reflect actual WWII in 1940, for example USSR will actually have a Pacific Fleet as an example.

I was going to something crazy like put in merchant ships for Lend-Lease that will make convoy zones more useful and for pain in the A$$ to disrupted. So I had an idea setting up fighter units closer to real numbers ( I am making this number up to make an example) Let’s say I put ten fighters on London, I was going to make one of them a US fighter to represent Eagle Squadron, US will be neutral however because Eagle Squadron is in London, this is a “just cause point” for Germany and Italy to go to war with US.

I have other examples but this makes the point.

Right, that’s what I meant.

a losing battle does not become better by standing, there has to be a very narrow margin if standing with 7 extra inf and dying is better than retreating. For one thing, He might relocate his airforce allowing you back into moscow.

I think you seriously underestimate the strength of infantry on attack, if you have two inf stacks, then the attacking stack need to be 1.41 times the defending stack for it to be an even fight. with some artillery and planes, you should be quite formidable on the attack. Once you realise you will have to retreat the next round, you could always do a 100% art build if you have too many infs.

You will almost always be able to bind up more german resources by leaving than you would kill by standing.

by all means if he has a 55% shot at winning, sure you can stand, but when he has 70% chance of winning, and 60% chance of not losing planes, then you will always lose more IPCs compared to what he will lose.

Hello  AA  community…… Can  anyone tell me  if China  can place it’s  new units  in newly captured  territories that it takes  on  it’s  turn?  I  believe  this was the rule  in AA 50.

Yea, I suppose it’s unlikely for allied units to be trekking across Russia. Still it is a bit odd that in the same round a Russian fighter can land on a US carrier in the Atlantic but not in the Pacific.

I guess the rule is the way it is in the interest of simplicity. It did sort out the whole Russia going to war with Japan in order to take neutrals in Europe thing.

@Krieghund:

Yes.

Oh that is SOOO sweet! Wish I had known that previously.  I had not attacked a French Destroyer for fear of losing the non-Aggression NO for letting FIC be free (figured it was all or nothing.)  Ah well, my fault for not checking first!