No landing space after scrambling..

The confusion seems to be in you’re holding back naval ships for naval bombardment. The advantage about scrambling planes is that it forces the attacker to commit all their naval ships regardless if they want to or not. That’s why it is sometimes wise to scramble in a losing battle if the enemy is relying on bombardment for victory. The easiest situation would be when Japan invades the Philippine islands. If Japan was so aggressive that all they brought was two infantry with two cruisers as example. I would scramble the fighter in that situation because while I will lose the sea battle, if you choose to invade the island after the battle, you’re doing it without naval support which gives my defending infantry a better chance at winning.

@Krieghund:

@Young:

Hey Leo, if the subs sitting in 91 don’t want to attack so that they can move during the non-combat phase, you only need to declare that the subs will not be participating in combat even though there is a battle in the zone they occupy.

This is incorrect.  All units in the space where a battle occurs participate in that battle, whether or not they have legitimate targets.  As a result, they may not move in noncombat movement.

Any units that sea zone that you want to move elsewhere must move during combat movement.  This is legal even if they are not moving into combat if they are moving to escape combat (even if it’s just potential combat due to a possible scramble).

Sorry Krieghund, I will PM the OP and inform him of your correction.

@atease:

@Sire:

Looks like you are right…

«• A fighter or tactical bomber can land in a sea zone
(even a hostile one) that is adjacent to an industrial
complex you own if you will be mobilizing an aircraft
carrier that you previously purchased in that zone
during the Mobilize New Units phase.»

…from the A&A Europe rulebook p.23.

For those who struggled to find this, it’s actually on page 22.

Ya, under “Where Units Can Move”

Yes. They would all become Allied friendly.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=24111.0

Here is a link to pictures of my table and game room. It is a simple design and there is a materials list on page 2.

@lnmajor:

But then you would never send unescorted transports to amphibous assault a TT containing a airbase with fighters present. Is that correct?

yup, gotta protect those transports.

Simple.  The airbase is located near the coastline, so planes can fly 0-50 miles or whatever out to sea to defend.

Planes in Berlin shouldn’t be able to defend Poland in the same manner, no.

Larry’s Alpha + includes a clarification that planes on a Jap airbase couldn’t defend against an amphibious assault (if no naval battle) on Korea.  That’s because the Korean coastline is too far away from the Jap airbase for scrambling….

Lastly, remember A&A is an abstraction.  Not all the rules have good reason.

In AA50 you can bombard France from the Mediterranean immediately after France is captured by an amphibious assault from Z7.  Battleships that can launch salvos hundreds of miles with pinpoint accuracy?

Just roll with Larry’s rules and enjoy the game, man.  Scrambling is for sea zones only.  :lol:

Thanks Krieghund.

Planing amphibious operations vs. the US-Player at the moment.  :-D