Can ships do bombarding attack if user builds new sea force?

@Glamorboy A big load of subs can definitely be useful, and if you aren’t trying to protect transports at all, it is a good option. True, one carrier and 2 fighters loses to 5 subs. Typically though, your navy will be much more expensive than $34 and the fighters are also relevant on land. Also, subs are not good at defense while fighters defense kings.

When I play against friends who are new, I just give them a bid. If they win, their bid goes down and if they lose, their bid goes up. I never spend money on both coasts as US because I feel like I can never get anything going at all and it seems like all the money is wasted. Also, I think it is more helpful to use viable, typical strategies against new players so that they know what to expect. I have learned a lot more about the game through losing than I ever have by winning.

@PrivateerPuffin said in Rules question about Fighters in Sea battles:

1st question: Does the word may in excerpt #2 allow for fighters to be presumed as casualties?

No, but it allows for carriers to be.

2nd question: Does excerpt #3 mean that there can never be more fighters in a battle than you have spots on carriers (if there are no other islands or territories to land in).

Yes.

An example if my question is nonsensical.
Japan took Midway, Alaska, and Western Canada last turn. On the US turn. 4 US fighters from two carriers in SZ 56 used 2 movement to attack a fleet in SZ 64. 1 fighter from Western US then uses 3 of its movement to also attack the fleet. The Japan player says that isn’t allowed because the 4 fighters will need the carriers to land. The US player disagrees and says that they could take a fighter as a casualty, allowing for there to be an open spot on the carrier which the fighter from Western US can land on.

The Japan player is correct.

During combat movement, you must be able to demonstrate possible safe landing zones for all attacking fighters. Once the combat starts, you may take carriers as casualties so that these safe landing zones are not maintained, usually in order to maximize the effectiveness of the attacking force. Once combat is over, all fighters that can still be landed must be (attacker’s choice of exactly which fighters, if there is a choice), and any that cannot are lost.

@domanmacgee

I used to play this version often some time ago… I might remember wrong but I think Germany is strong enough to take down Russia alone some times, just because Germany is so strong at the beginning and sometimes one less than average dice result would kill Russia early. It doesn’t mean Allies can’t hold but it’s tough the first 8 rounds for Allies. Once passed this threshold the chance of Allies victory improves over time typically…

@greyleaf3

Don’t confuse yourself by introducing the term “retreat” to the situation you describe.
The decision to retreat occurs during conduct combat phase (Step 6 of the General Combat Sequence).

Your scenario is at the beginning of the Combat Move Phase - and the “Sea Units Starting in Hostile Sea Zones”-rules (rulebook page 12) apply. So this is about combat movement, not about retreating.

And in this phase sea units can move their full range.

The enemy destroyer of course has no effect on the submarine’s movement here - as the submarine is already there - and does not enter or move through a hostile seazone containing an enemy destroyer.

Greeting from HK player…  Enjoy the new set up and let us know what you think…

@Schrecki:

Where can i see a list with the All game stuff? So if i write them, i will bei Sure that i have all miniature.

410 plastic pieces

Soviet Units: 74 pieces

20 infantry
    8 artillery
    8 anti-aircraft artillery
    10 tanks
    8 fighters
    2 bombers
    4 transports
    4 subs
    4 destroyers
    2 cruisers
    2 aircraft carriers
    2 battleships

United Kingdom Units: 84 pieces

20 infantry
    6 artillery
    8 anti-aircraft artillery
    8 tanks
    8 fighters
    6 bombers
    6 transports
    6 subs
    6 destroyers
    4 cruisers
    2 aircraft carriers
    4 battleships

United States Units: 84 pieces

20 infantry
    6 artillery
    8 anti-aircraft artillery
    6 tanks
    8 fighters
    6 bombers
    6 transports
    6 subs
    6 destroyers
    4 cruisers
    4 aircraft carriers
    4 battleships

German Units: 86 pieces

20 infantry
    8 artillery
    8 anti-aircraft artillery
    12 tanks
    8 fighters
    4 bombers
    6 transports
    6 subs
    6 destroyers
    4 cruisers
    2 aircraft carriers
    2 battleships

Japan Units: 82 pieces

20 infantry
    6 artillery
    8 anti-aircraft artillery
    6 tanks
    8 fighters
    4 bombers
    6 transports
    6 subs
    6 destroyers
    4 cruisers
    4 aircraft carriers
    4 battleships

It’s not exactly related to any strafe, but a move I sometimes enjoy is to hit sz61 and sink the destroyer there, then send your Aussie sub to sz37 and dive immediately (no combat). This can be annoying for Japan, especially if you put your bomber in range, and kept your fighters at the ready for a UK2 attack.

It’s not as painful as trying to kill a Japanese carrier in the first round, and it gives you some naval flexibility against the IJN in the second round, without requiring you to risk the destruction your own navy in the process. If no good attacks vs Japan present themselves, then your sub can bounce towards Suez and just hang out there until more British aircraft arrive to make it effective.
;)

If the Japanese destroyer in sz61 is sunk on UK1, there is no way for Japan to attack this sub, so it’s safe camped out in sz37 by the Japanese battleship/carrier group (going anywhere the Japanese can go) at least until J2, when it can either attack a target of opportunity or withdraw towards Africa.

I’m very wary of an opening move that leaves the second Japanese transport alive, because it allows Japan to bring their ground units into the fray much sooner. Not attacking sz61 would seem to be a requirement of the sz37 attack, whether you’re going all out or just trying some kind of strafe move. A British bid can change my outlook, another sub or destroyer or fighter bid to UK can make the sz37 trade much better, but OOB it still seems real dicey to me.

@MistuhJay:

@UrJohn:

It depends on your strategy.

–CV, AP & 3 INF

why would you need a third CV when you start with two already?

I don’t think you’d need a 3rd CV on J1. By the time its J1, you may be down to 1 CV. If the UK attacks your SZ 37 fleet and wins soundly, then Japan starts off on the defensive. You may want a 2nd CV.

If you don’t buy any navy/air force on J1, then the US can take the initiative in the Pacific. You will be hard pressed to do everything the IJN needs to do: protect Philippines, Borneo, East Indies, Japan, Kwangtung and Manchuria; chase off or destroy the USN; crush India; and pick up Australia, New Zealand and/or Africa.