Agreed.
Does an airbase make a seazone hostile?
-
Bridging units can still move one square away and back. Here’s a better idea though - don’t do it!
Of course, this only applies to amphibious assaults. If you are unloading on NCM, there is no scramble.
-
It’s absolutely an easy problem to overcome. Bop to 109, then down to 104, and then back to 110. Now you have two retreat options. If on the other hand you forget to use your movement and your opponent scrambles, you learn a painful lesson.
Marsh
-
@Marshmallow:
It’s absolutely an easy problem to overcome. Bop to 109, then down to 104, and then back to 110. Now you have two retreat options. If on the other hand you forget to use your movement and your opponent scrambles, you learn a painful lesson.
Marsh
Pretty sure that only allows retreat to 104. If you have a second transport which comes from 109, you then have two retreat options. If you use SZ111, you can then use a scramble to defend assuming you are allies and hold Scotland.
-
If you launch an amphib. attack, your TT’S are locked.
If you retreat the TT’s will still be locked. They finished their movement. -
@aequitas:
If you launch an amphib. attack, your TT’S are locked.
If you retreat the TT’s will still be locked. They finished their movement.The land units are locked. If you retreat from the sea combat then they are unlocked or never become locked, if you like. They remain on board the TT.
-
Yea, you can’t off load your ground units until you win the sea battle, so in the case of a scramble against lone transports it is impossible to win the sea battle. Therefore if the tpts can retreat they take their cargo with them.
I agree that if you bridged (didn’t move the transports in the combat move phase), then you can’t retreat your transports. I also agree that is an easy fix, you just point out in the combat move phase the different paths your transports took to get back to where they started lol.
I have to say that although the rules are in place to deal with this situation, it really shouldn’t come up unless you are just learning the game (maybe your whole group is learning). If I was playing with a newbie and they did this (or something similar) I would defiantly point out the error. Nothing like playing a game for hours (days) for it to come down to some BS where he looses 10 tps because he missed something that should have been obvious.
I just don’t see why you would ever take in lone tpts for an amphib, unless you were facing Japanese Kami’s (exposing surface warships), but you would still flood the sz with air to protect your tpts from scramble. If you can’t get warships in (maybe they are blocked, but can NCM in later for protection) then you still send air units into the sz to combat the possibility of a scramble. I could see getting diced and losing your escorts/air leaving you in this situation, but not setting up for destruction from the get go w/o any cover.
-
Concerning this transports retreat discussion: following the rulebook (General Combat, step 1 & step 6 condition B), only units placed -along- the battle strip could open retreat option. Transports i.e. are placed -beside- the battle strip. So, can transports, if they are the only involved sea unit, create retreat options at all?
-
@WILD:
I just don’t see why you would ever take in lone tpts for an amphib,
I do that a lot. Either a suiciding TT or one I think can’t be reached. Although I’m not really the person to ask.
-
@hecatomb:
Concerning this transports retreat discussion: following the rulebook (General Combat, step 1 & step 6 condition B), only units placed -along- the battle strip could open retreat option. Transports i.e. are placed -beside- the battle strip. So, can transports, if they are the only involved sea unit, create retreat options at all?
Yes transports are allowed to retreat
-
this stranded transport example can happen during a mixed invasion (such as novogrod) when the attacker doesn’t properly augment the attacking force against a scramble. In this unusual case, we have seen the transports run off once the escorts are dead (not destroyed), but then even the scrambling fighters can be killed without reply I believe (as the ground troops successfully destroy Leningrad without the amphibious help) since they cannot both participate in the sea scramble and the land battle.
The loaded, stranded transports get mopped up the next turn, if any allies can reach them.
We did question whether the fighters who scramble defensively are over the SZ or properly seen as physically over the territory, not sure that the “if they can land within one space rule” could apply here since 1) it is on the defender’s turn that they lose their LZ 2) they did not move…they scrambled 3) they cannot scramble AND fight 4) planes have to land during the noncom applys to attacking planes…
-
I don’t think there’s any question about the location of the fighters at all. The airbase rules say that the fighters scramble to an “adjacent sea zone”. This means that the fighters are in the sea zone.
Marsh
-
@Marshmallow:
I don’t think there’s any question about the location of the fighters at all. The airbase rules say that the fighters scramble to an “adjacent sea zone”. This means that the fighters are in the sea zone.
Marsh
I’m with Marsh, you scramble to the sz. If the territory you scrambled from is taken that turn you have 1 move to find a landing spot adjacent to that sz (territory or carrier). So if you scrambled from Novgorod into sz 115 in the Baltic and Novgorod was taken then you could land in Vyborg, Baltic states, Finland or Sweden (if activated), if any are friendly to you. You could also land on a friendly carrier in sz114 if it had space. If not the plane is lost.
-
This was discussed a while back in the FAQ thread IIRC.
There is no question. In the event that a fighter scrambles from Novgorod to SZ127 and defeats the navy but Novgorod is lost, the fighter can land in any friendly territory of Archangel, Netensia, Karelia or Finland. The only way it is lost is if none of those territories adjacent to SZ127 are friendly to the defending nation, normally meaning the USSR.
As WILD BILL points out a carrier with space is also a valid option.
Interesting point about Sweden from SZ115 - hadn’t noticed that.
-
Interesting point about Sweden from SZ115 - hadn’t noticed that.
Nobody does, because Sweden is rarely brought into the game. The whole true neutrals band of brothers all for one, and one for all is pretty lame (I blame the French).
Both sides wanted control of Scandinavia, and had plans drawn up to invade both Norway and Sweden, or at least take over the iron ore regions and ports up there. Before the Germans invaded Norway/Denmark the the allies tried to get the Norwegians and the Swedes to allow them to move troops through their countries in the name of reinforcing Finland (Winter War). This was a hoax though, because the allies true intentions were to move in and take control of the Swedish iron ore mines, and the Norwegian ports that were being used to ship war materials (the port of Narvik was especially important in the winter when the Baltic ices up).
Germany invaded Norway for obvious strategic purposes, but also to protect their access to the Swedish iron ore and keep these trade routes open along the northern Norwegian coast line. Both sides actually invaded Norway at roughly the same time. The allies (w/Norwegian troops) moved into Navik and pushed back the Germans (they were interned in Sweden), but the allies were recalled once the Germans successfully invaded the Low Countries and France.
-
Thanks for the answer Mr. Marsh and Bill
-
Very interesting is the fact that neither the germans nor the Allies knew anything about each others invasion plans of norway for that day. The germans arrived only a few hours earlier.
-
I disagree. I think the transports get to load, offload for free in this example. Attacker has to announce their combat moves. If there is no threat to the transports present in adjacent sea zone there is no combat there. If there is no combat there how can defender scramble fighters to sea zone?
And, if presence of an air base made a sea zone hostile, transports could not even load their cargo. If this were true it would change the game, dramatically.
-
The scrambling rules explicity allow a scramble in response to an amphibious assault. Scrambling takes place after combat movement and before combat, resulting in a naval battle which (in this case) only allows the defender to roll.
The rules are quite clear.
EDIT (added excerpt from Pacific 1940 SE rulebook page 15 “Scramble”): “They can also be scrambled to resist amphibious assaults from adjacent sea zones, whether or not the territory being assaulted is the territory containing the air base.”
Marsh
-
…
And, if presence of an air base made a sea zone hostile, transports could not even load their cargo. If this were true it would change the game, dramatically.Marsh is correct.
The presence of an Air Base does not make the seazone hostile, indeed.
It is the defender’s scramble of a fighter that initiates a sea battle.The attacker - when planning/doing his Combat Moves - always has to take into account that a potential scramble could occur.
-
That brings up some interesting questions for me.
- if I am the Japanese and the US attacks me in the Carolines with 2 loaded transports, a fighter and a tac bomber (carrier to be moved there later in non-combat movement) all I have to do is declare I am scrambling a fighter and then what? I have to roll to hit, or both of his loaded transports are dead for free? And round one survivor can flee?
1a) Lets say he brings the carrier. I still scramble. US is the attacker so he cannot attack my scrambling fighter with his carrier. Is that carrier now defenseless too? Or does he absorb a hit on carrier, transports and carrier retreat, no matter what happens in battle of Carolines fighters are destroyed?
Marsh, I read the rule you posted before I posted my initial reply. I seriously do not think it applies to amphibious assaults without accompanying prior sea battles.
Read rules of defenseless transports, page 20 Europe Rulebook. Mentions only the “defender” having only transports. Are you saying roles are reversed now? Bottom line is I do not think a scramble can stave off an amphibious assault.
Another, somewhat related question.
- If as Germany I want to attack all the surface ships around the UK can I declare a strategic bombing attack against his air base with a lone strat bomber, knock it out and he cannot scramble later? That assumes he does not intercept on that particular attack. Am I reading it right that there is a certain sequence in combat?
Suggested Topics
