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

@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.

It’s chief effect in gameplay terms is to make it harder for the Axis to build/support a med fleet in the deep endgame. Particularly in cases where Japan manages to take the Caucasus, or has parked a fleet in the Med, since they don’t have the black sea safe zone to build. This is the kind of thing that usually doesn’t become a factor until Moscow has fallen. In rarer instances it prevents the Allies from dropping on Ukraine/Caucasus (again usually after Moscow has fallen) in an attempt to sneak in a wedge, or see the formerly Soviet territory come under Western control.

In the opening rounds it prevents Germany from making amphibious drops into Ukraine, or attacking Caucasus directly, which in turn means that the Russians don’t have to defend it quite so heavily.

I think for game balance it’s probably better closed, though most players I’ve gamed with seem to leave it open. Whether you play Open or Closed, or with interceptors on, is something that should be determined before bidding for Allies, since it can have an effect on how the Russians open (e.g. how much emphasis they need to put on a Ukraine opener.) The Ukraine strafe/take by the Soviets is much more attractive, if there is no threat posed by the German transport in the med.

Thanks everyone for the advice. I took everyone’s advice into consideration and sortve blended it together to pull off a successful sea lion on turn 4 of my last game. FYI, Argothair’s second link gave me an idea of putting a carrier in SZ 5. Except I kept it there with two fighters. Turn two built two transports. By the non-combat/ place new units phase of turn 3, the carrier and cruiser protecting the transports had turned Karelia’s IC into a 8 unit IC. Turn 4 London fell, turn 5 Moscow did as well due to some extremely unlucky Russian dice rolling the entire night.

Thanks…  I was a bit confused because it allow you to unload the units.  In a board game, it could be a bit confusing.  The rules really aren’t very clear about it.  I understand that you have to engage any enemy sea units in the area and I think the 1st or 2nd edition rules state something special about sea zones only occupied by enemy submarines.  And I think it’s a BB vs DST which could happen however 1/3 * 1/3 BB misses twice * 1/3 * 1/3 DST hits twice is 1/81.  I’m pretty sure I could manage to be on the wrong end of those dice!  ;)

But the dice keep it fresh. Every game is different. New challenges. The need to recover from different setbacks. I think the random element adds a lot to this game.

On the other hand it is all about probability. If it wasn’t we would not need strategy. Strategy is what I love about this game. My weakness is that I can lose focus when I start to add up big stacks of unit numbers and values.

A perfect mix of strategy and chance.

Try picking up this one if you can - newer version, newer rules, and prices have stayed pretty low on Amazon etc.

@MistuhJay:

One question, Hobbes: what’s stopping UK from sinking your battleship with its BMR/DD?

@Hobbes:

if the UK (and the US) focus completely on KJF and leave the German Med fleet alive and in position on SZ14 until G3… and the German fighter on Ukraine survives… interesting…

As I posted afterwards, lots of ifs for this strategy to work ;)

I always play a new A&A game the same way. First time through I play the new game as the old rules with a new setup and a new unit or 2. Second time I read the rulebook first and play through checking the rulebook on every move as I go. Takes forever but I normally only do this for 4-5 rounds. Third game is playing the game start to finish trying to remember the rules without checking the rulebook but if I have to then oh well. All 3 of these games are a me vs. me games just to learn the rules.

This learning tactic is what made Battle of the Bulge and D-day such a pain in the ass to learn.