After further consideration I no longer feel the fighter escort/interceptor rule needs any fine tuning. In my previous posts I expressed the view that the rule nerfed strategic bombing too much but I’ve since changed my mind. After all, bombing raids over inland German targets without escorts was near suicidal, especially during the daylight. It wasn’t until the Allies had deployed long range escort fighters and had outnumbered the defending Luftwaffe aircraft, that the Allies were able to conduct bombing missions without terrible loses. The same is true with the fighter escort/interceptor rule as it stands now and it should stay that way.
Dumb Question about Rule
-
Say I want to invade Manchuria as the US. In the sea zone surrounding japan is one destroyer. Can I have 2 separate battles one for the Sea and one for the invasion. So i send my cruiser to take out the destroyer meanwhile my transport ignores the destroyer and delivers a tank/guy to Manchuria for a separate battle? Assume victory at sea. Otherwise I assume my transport is dead.
Or is it possible to take over phillipines on turn one as Japan? Cause this is the same mechanic.
Thanks
-
Amphibious assaults can be done in two steps, consisting of a sea battle and a land battle. In your example, both the cruiser and the transport would attack the destroyer. If the attackers win, the transport can offload and the land battle will occur. If the transport ends up retreating (or being sunk), the land battle will not occur and the transport may not offload.