Is "scrambling" to powerful?

[Bob_A_Mickelson]

I feel that scrambling in its current form is too strong and creates a situation where players typically buy far more air units than navy. Since I enjoy playing with and against diverse unit forces I am somewhat opposed to the implementation of this rule as I feel that it is too powerful. Yet I still like the concept of scrambling. Do any of you feel that the current scrambling rule should be altered so that only a limited number of planes (perhaps 3 minus any damage to air base) may be scrambled from an island air base?

[Uncle_Joe]

I voted ‘dont know for sure yet’ but I definitely see how it is a radical change from earlier A&As and will take some time to adjust to. But even as powerful as it is, it certainly doesnt replace having a navy at all. You still need to get boots on the ground to win IMO. And that requires navy OR a string of ‘island hopping’ bases with airfields (which I have no problem with).

One thing I really like about the way it works now is that you can move smaller elements of ships around to islands which are protected by friendly land-based air. For example, if I want to reinforce Truk as Japan, I can often do it with just a TR or two and a small escort force (maybe a DD and/or a CA) and trust that my planes on Truk will protect against all but the most powerful attacks. To me that allows for more strategy and more freedom of movement.

I think the trick is simply going to be to threaten the enemy in more places than he can afford to heavily commit land-based air. Pick away at the edges and use subs to force enemy ships to come out to play.

The only place I’m not really caring for the airbases is the Japanese home waters. I dont like that a handful of planes on Japan can easily protect that entire giant seazone. It means that the Japanese player can effectively ignore defending that area since 4-6 planes laying around Japan (not a huge commitment for Japan by J3 or J4) can easily hop out to defend any new purchases. One of the dynamics I REALLY liked in AA50 was that you had to protect your home ports if you didnt want the enemy to be able to kill fresh builds piecemeal. For Japan, that quandry is largely gone and I think it is one of the things that is currently making Japan feel so powerful. She can safely mass up her fleet anywhere she wants without much thought given to defense.

[Tavenier]

I like the idea of scrambling. I see it is very powerful, but also it makes the need for having aircraft bigger.
One thing one can consider is to have fighters use their attack value instead of defense value when scrambling. Or have every friendly destroyer support only one fighter for anti-sub warfare. That way you must buy more DD’s, otherwise a steady flow of subs will access Japanese waters.

[RJL518]

i like the idea of scrambling fighters to defend sea zones…

To me…it makes it a little more difficult to attack sea zones around islands that have enemy ships in it…

example: USA  (2) Battleships and (1) Destroyer
attack
                Japan: (1) Destroyer and (1) Transport

Phillipines sea zone…

now lets say Japan has two fighters on the island…

Japan has the option of scrambling to protect his ships in the zone or letting them stay on the island to defend against an Amphib assault…

Plus…knowing aircraft on an island with an airbase can scramble…might make you change your strategy a little…

remember…the island must have an airbase in order for aircraft to scramble…and the territory must be an island in a sea zone…not a coastal territory…

I believe thats the rule…

[Flashman]

Interesting to see how it affects the Atlantic war; I’ve always believed there should be a “killing zone” in mid-ocean which is out of range for land-based aircraft, but will the sea be wide enough?