Good catch. It sure does.
For the first question you can only scramble Fighers and Tac Bombers. Like you said it’s only for island defense, but you can choose to scramble 0, all, or anywhere in between at your discretion. You can even scramble a plane so that the opponent doesn’t get to bombard with ships even if you have no navy defending said SZ. The fight goes on until the attacker retreats his/her sea units, or until 1 or both sides have nothing they can attack with.
As for question 2, there are territories which border multiple sz’s. Alaska for example borders SZ1 and SZ2. Any allie bordering Alaska if US has an airport there would get the bonus so SZ1 and SZ2, not the SZ’s touchig the SZ’s that touch the land (if that makes any sense). Soviet Far East also borders multiple SZ’s. It borders SZ3, SZ4, and SZ5.
I would not agree on scrambling into a SZ where no naval battle occurs - the rulebook states the premise “naval battle”.
But another question:
Scramble states island with airbase.
Japan is an island, so OK you can scramble from there.
Australia is NOT an island (its a continent ;)) - so if I do rules lawyering I would say planes can NOT scramble from any territory in Australa (US/ASIA) to join a naval battle - correct?
If yes - is it intentional or just an oversight…?
I would not agree on scrambling into a SZ where no naval battle occurs - the rulebook states the premise “naval battle”.
No, it doesn’t. It says that the air units “defend against attacks in the sea zone”. An amphibious assault is such an attack, so air units can scramble to defend against it whether or not there are defending ships.
Scramble states island with airbase.
Japan is an island, so OK you can scramble from there.
Australia is NOT an island (its a continent ;)) - so if I do rules lawyering I would say planes can NOT scramble from any territory in Australa (US/ASIA) to join a naval battle - correct?
If yes - is it intentional or just an oversight…?
It is intentional.
Australia is NOT an island (its a continent ;)) - so if I do rules lawyering I would say planes can NOT scramble from any territory in Australa (US/ASIA) to join a naval battle - correct?
If yes - is it intentional or just an oversight…?
You don’t have to do any rules lawyering, but you can if you want, sometimes it’s fun :-D. An island is a single territory surrounded by one sea zone. Australia is multiple territories surrounded by multiple sea zones.
Thanks Kriegshund!
I must admit I never saw an Amph assault as happening within the Sea Zone - I always thought it happened in the “land” terry - you never stop to learn ;)
Same here.
But it does make sense to consider it a naval battle… after all, there’s a reason the Germans fought the Battle of Britain as a prelude to any Sea Lion venture.
Thanks Kriegshund!
I must admit I never saw an Amph assault as happening within the Sea Zone - I always thought it happened in the “land” terry - you never stop to learn ;)
If I understand it correctly, the logic is that scrambling can only happen when combat moves have been made that end on the SZ bordering the airbase. Thus amphibious assaults can be intercepted by planes.
An interesting variation or house rule on this would be if airbases could scramble everytime a warship passes by their seazone, on their way to another SZ, either on combat or non-combat movement. Airbases would then be able to block certain naval routes and you’d have to conquer them first before advancing.
I must admit I never saw an Amph assault as happening within the Sea Zone - I always thought it happened in the “land” terry - you never stop to learn ;)
Actually, they’re both a sea battle and a land battle combined.
An interesting variation or house rule on this would be if airbases could scramble everytime a warship passes by their seazone, on their way to another SZ, either on combat or non-combat movement. Airbases would then be able to block certain naval routes and you’d have to conquer them first before advancing.
Or you could just have them fight one round as they pass if the ships are just passing through, similar to fighter interceptors for SBRs.
Now I see the logic of one island (only) per seazone - otherwise someone could scrabmle from two different islands into a battle in the sea zone.
And thats why scrambling from “continent” is not allowed too - you could possibly scramble from Korea and Jaopan into a battle in SZ 6 ;)
An interesting variation or house rule on this would be if airbases could scramble everytime a warship passes by their seazone, on their way to another SZ, either on combat or non-combat movement. Airbases would then be able to block certain naval routes and you’d have to conquer them first before advancing.
Or you could just have them fight one round as they pass if the ships are just passing through, similar to fighter interceptors for SBRs.
That’s more balanced than the my original idea: large fleets might still be able to get through, while smaller fleets would risk being sunk.
Now I see the logic of one island (only) per seazone - otherwise someone could scrabmle from two different islands into a battle in the sea zone.
And thats why scrambling from “continent” is not allowed too - you could possibly scramble from Korea and Jaopan into a battle in SZ 6 ;)
though to be clear, you can scramble from Japan.
Thats clear JAPAN is an Island ;) (surry I am used to rules lawyering … :D)
