Carriers attacking transports to retreat, can they?

[allweneedislove]

bump for kreighund.

great question.

[calvinhobbesliker]

@Wilson2:

Can two carriers attack a transport and then retreat after one round of not combat to get one of them to move 3 (or 4 with NB)?

Can you choose to roll dice with your ships against transports instead of removing them instantly to do the same thing with ships with attack values?

How do you research galactic-canine-paw-smash technology?

Carriers can’t kill transports since they have an attack of 0

[Battlingmaxo]

@calvinhobbesliker:

Carriers can’t kill transports since they have an attack of 0

That says it all. :-D

[Krieghund]

@Wilson2:

Can two carriers attack a transport and then retreat after one round of not combat to get one of them to move 3 (or 4 with NB)?

This one is tricky.  Based on the rules as written, my initial response is no.  However, I’m conferring with Larry on the subject to get a final answer.

@Wilson2:

Can you choose to roll dice with your ships against transports instead of removing them instantly to do the same thing with ships with attack values?

No.

@Wilson2:

How do you research galactic-canine-paw-smash technology?

I could tell you, but then I’d have to kill you.

[allweneedislove]

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Wilson2:

Can two carriers attack a transport and then retreat after one round of not combat to get one of them to move 3 (or 4 with NB)?

Can you choose to roll dice with your ships against transports instead of removing them instantly to do the same thing with ships with attack values?

How do you research galactic-canine-paw-smash technology?

Carriers can’t kill transports since they have an attack of 0

that is what makes the question so interesting.

for example

japan has only a transport in sz6
usa has a carrier in sz26 and a a carrier in sz19

can both carriers attack sz6?
if so then the carriers can retreat to sz19. the carrier that started in sz26 has made a clever move that allows it to move 4 spaces(just like any navy battle that allows a retreat) but without risking damage.

[Zenosco]

I was thinking since there is no real attack there can be no retreat in this instance.  Especially since it was my understanding that a transport can move thru an enemy sea zone containing enemy ships.  Plus it was my understanding that enemy transports could occupy the same sea zone?  If true wouldnt that also be the same for carriers since attack values for both are 0?

[calvinhobbesliker]

@Zenosco:

I was thinking since there is no real attack there can be no retreat in this instance.  Especially since it was my understanding that a transport can move thru an enemy sea zone containing enemy ships.  Plus it was my understanding that enemy transports could occupy the same sea zone?  If true wouldnt that also be the same for carriers since attack values for both are 0?

You’re confusing transports with subs

[Wilson2]

@Zenosco:

I was thinking since there is no real attack there can be no retreat in this instance.  Especially since it was my understanding that a transport can move thru an enemy sea zone containing enemy ships.  Plus it was my understanding that enemy transports could occupy the same sea zone?  If true wouldnt that also be the same for carriers since attack values for both are 0?

But on the other hand if the transport were to not move on its turn the carrier would kill it.

[Wilson2]

@Krieghund:

@Wilson2:

Can two carriers attack a transport and then retreat after one round of not combat to get one of them to move 3 (or 4 with NB)?

This one is tricky.  Based on the rules as written, my initial response is no.  However, I’m conferring with Larry on the subject to get a final answer.

Haha. I stumped the AA Q&A master, and I don’t even have AAP40 yet.  :-D
@Krieghund:

@Wilson2:

Can you choose to roll dice with your ships against transports instead of removing them instantly to do the same thing with ships with attack values?

No.

Too bad
@Krieghund:

@Wilson2:

How do you research galactic-canine-paw-smash technology?

I could tell you, but then I’d have to kill you.

I don’t need your second rate knowledge; I can get the perfected technique once I get my dog a patented UP collar, MWAHAHAHAHA!!!

[WILD BILL]

So I’m confused, forget about the extra movement point retreat thing for now. A carrier (with an attack value of 0) can kill a transport?  I thought the thinking behind a defenseless transport was that you don’t have to roll because at some point you would hit the transport and it can’t escape (def can’t retreat). With no attack value how can that be.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t have a problem w/carrier takeing out a defenseless tpt, I just need clarification that it is allowed (or not).

[Wilson2]

No, I have asked that question before. The carrier cannot kill the transport. Because of this, I wondered if you could use the transport to speed move your ships.

[Make_It_Round]

@WILD:

So I’m confused, forget about the extra movement point retreat thing for now. A carrier (with an attack value of 0) can kill a transport?  I thought the thinking behind a defenseless transport was that you don’t have to roll because at some point you would hit the transport and it can’t escape (def can’t retreat). With no attack value how can that be.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t have a problem w/carrier takeing out a defenseless tpt, I just need clarification that it is allowed (or not).

That’s another good question that’s come out of this thread.

[marechallannes]

What’s the problem? :?

They have to share the same sea zone, if they can’t attack each other.

The carriers can’t retreat, cause there is no sea battle.

[Wilson2]

@marechallannes:

What’s the problem? :?

They have to share the same sea zone, if they can’t attack each other.

The carriers can’t retreat, cause there is no sea battle.

I think that there can be a battle. If I am not mistaken transports alone can attack ships to get themselves killed. I think this would be the same idea.

[BadSpeller]

@Krieghund:

@Wilson2:

Can two carriers attack a transport and then retreat after one round of not combat to get one of them to move 3 (or 4 with NB)?

This one is tricky.  Based on the rules as written, my initial response is no.  However, I’m conferring with Larry on the subject to get a final answer.

@Wilson2:

Can you choose to roll dice with your ships against transports instead of removing them instantly to do the same thing with ships with attack values?

No.

Krieghund, I take issue with this.

Aircraft carriers have an attack value of zero.

They have the right to attack naval units!

Yes, their attack value is the poorest roll possible, but do not limit someone’s strategy when that strategy is in line with the rules.

Please don’t remove that right because it does not seem right in a rarely obscure chance of the ‘AC Transport Bypass Loophole’.

[marechallannes]

Carriers can not attack.

How should the destroy the transports?

[Zenosco]

My previous example in this thread may have been a bit obscure but I will hold to the fact that I felt that since both the carrier and transports attack value is 0, then there is no real sea battle between the two.  Therefore, they would just share the sea zone and there would be no cause for a retreat since there was no battle.

[moralecheck]

@Zenosco:

My previous example in this thread may have been a bit obscure but I will hold to the fact that I felt that since both the carrier and transports attack value is 0, then there is no real sea battle between the two.  Therefore, they would just share the sea zone and there would be no cause for a retreat since there was no battle.

Sounds valid…actually, wait…it sounds more like a non-combat move to me.  To be honest this situation is very unlikely to occur in the game.  Carriers are rarely unescorted.

[WILD BILL]

@Wilson2:

No, I have asked that question before. The carrier cannot kill the transport. Because of this, I wondered if you could use the transport to speed move your ships.

A carrier can attack a convoy zone by itself and cost the enemy 1 ipc if they don’t kill it right. So whats wrong with it taking out a transport. I can see good arguments on both sides. It has no attack value, but it is still a war ship (and common sense would tell you it would be able to).

Ok, so Krieghund has ruled on this already in another post? As I said before I can live with it either way.

[moralecheck]

@WILD:

@Wilson2:

No, I have asked that question before. The carrier cannot kill the transport. Because of this, I wondered if you could use the transport to speed move your ships.

A carrier can attack a convoy zone by itself and cost the enemy 1 ipc if they don’t kill it right. So whats wrong with it taking out a transport. I can see good arguments on both sides. It has no attack value, but it is still a war ship (and common sense would tell you it would be able to).

Ok, so Krieghund has ruled on this already in another post? As I said before I can live with it either way.

Perhaps it’s an issue of realism. In ASL the german tanks have a nifty close defence defence weapon against infantry. The rules don’t allow it to be used offensively because, as powerful as it is, no tank commander would ever intentionally drive into a group of armed enemy infantry and try a shot with this thing.  Similarly, no naval commander would ever send unescorted fleet carriers with no planes to harass transport ship even though the carrier would be more powerful.  The damage they may take is not worth the risk. Carriers take years to build, so they stay at the back.

It does make sense though that a Carrier would disrupt shipping though.  While a carrier would not risk damage by closing in an transports alone, the reverse is even more true. No freighter captain is not going to try to race by a carrier even if he knew it was devoid of planes.  They still have big defensive guns.