Very simply question.
I had a situation where I lost Hawaii to Japan but had the Sea Zone around it blockaded as I was preparing a counter invasion to take the island back. Japan had one strategic bomber and one infantry on the island. Is it perfectly legal for Japan to fly the bomber over the occupied sea zone and not engage it? To be perfectly clear, the sea zone had aircraft carriers with fighters as well as a surface fleet.
Yup. Perfectly legal. Attacking planes can only be shot at in the zone/territory they finish their attack move. Aircraft can only scramble to defend facilities or from airfields. Aircraft carrier could be an awesome house rule, but isnt oob
Thanks, fair enough. I personally agree that aircraft should NOT be able to fly over a hostile sea zone if their enemy has aircraft to engage it but OOB is OOB.
The only thing you can’t fly over is a neutral territory. Everything else is fair game.
Yes, I knew that neutrals with aircraft flying over legally is treated as attacking it.
Yeah you might have mixed it up with a CAP in the 2001 version of Pacific.
As GHG and Bob allready explained, it is legal. :lol:
One of the gamers paradise expansions had a rule for this. If player x over flies player y’s fighters. Player y can engage. Any surviving x planes go on to target. Any surviving y fighters cannot conduct combat on their turn.
Really?
I missed that one…
Ya most of these airplane rules mentioned that aren’t in 40 OOB are in all my 39 games to a certain point.
Yup. Came with the unavailable for duty roundels. Those gamers xpansions are cool. Added a lot of flavor. Introduced the destroyer, cruiser and artillary.
Sorry. Slide off topic.
@Caesar:
Very simply question.
I had a situation where I lost Hawaii to Japan but had the Sea Zone around it blockaded as I was preparing a counter invasion to take the island back. Japan had one strategic bomber and one infantry on the island. Is it perfectly legal for Japan to fly the bomber over the occupied sea zone and not engage it? To be perfectly clear, the sea zone had aircraft carriers with fighters as well as a surface fleet.
Be nice if you had at least a choice of scrambling from a carrier if a enemy plane or planes flew over your carriers. If you can scramble from an airbase why not a carrier. It has a base for planes to takeoff and land.
You can go deeper than that Caesar if thats the case for above rule. All naval figs on carriers cannot attack ground units but figs from carriers can scramble in same sea zone or to any adjacent sea zone. Makes your island assaults interesting where now your planes cannot attack ground on islands. Need more transports and bombers. But most wouldnt play that way.
Its kinda like the 40 oob rule. No scrambles from carrier. Kinda saying no scramble from carriers for ground defense. But if you would use the above rule you would have in game figs can scramble to any adjacent territory for defense except sea zones.
The more interesting flyover rule is that AAA could fire at you as you flew over (from Classic). Making you take shots at planes flying to other combats or noncoming when its not your turn creates complex considerations that while they may be more realistic they are not very functional (its the equivalent of an air blockade vs a sea screen).
I’m just curious at what point in the game this was? Did Japan also have the mainland Capitols (Shanghai, Hong Kong, Calcutta)? If he did and held Manilla and Tokyo, then Honolulu would be the 6th VC and if he was able to land his Strat bomber there it would imply that he held Hawaii for an entire turn. Meaning the game would be over. Just curious. Cheers guys!
I’m just curious at what point in the game this was? Did Japan also have the mainland Capitols (Shanghai, Hong Kong, Calcutta)? If he did and held Manilla and Tokyo, then Honolulu would be the 6th VC and if he was able to land his Strat bomber there it would imply that he held Hawaii for an entire turn. Meaning the game would be over. Just curious. Cheers guys!
Japan controlled all Chinese cities and nothing else. Japan had the Dutch Island objective and openly controlled northern China and most of USSR in the east with Mongolia in the fight. I just placed my navy in a situation where I openly allowed Japan to take Hawaii so I could use the fleet somewhere else.
@SS:
@Caesar:
Very simply question.
I had a situation where I lost Hawaii to Japan but had the Sea Zone around it blockaded as I was preparing a counter invasion to take the island back. Japan had one strategic bomber and one infantry on the island. Is it perfectly legal for Japan to fly the bomber over the occupied sea zone and not engage it? To be perfectly clear, the sea zone had aircraft carriers with fighters as well as a surface fleet.
Be nice if you had at least a choice of scrambling from a carrier if a enemy plane or planes flew over your carriers. If you can scramble from an airbase why not a carrier. It has a base for planes to takeoff and land.
You can go deeper than that Caesar if thats the case for above rule. All naval figs on carriers cannot attack ground units but figs from carriers can scramble in same sea zone or to any adjacent sea zone. Makes your island assaults interesting where now your planes cannot attack ground on islands. Need more transports and bombers. But most wouldnt play that way.
Its kinda like the 40 oob rule. No scrambles from carrier. Kinda saying no scramble from carriers for ground defense. But if you would use the above rule you would have in game figs can scramble to any adjacent territory for defense except sea zones.
Yeah, I do find it strange that the US navy would openly allow a wing of Japanese bombers to fly off an island they are currently blockading.
The more interesting flyover rule is that AAA could fire at you as you flew over (from Classic). Making you take shots at planes flying to other combats or noncoming when its not your turn creates complex considerations that while they may be more realistic they are not very functional (its the equivalent of an air blockade vs a sea screen).
By the way, in G40, can AA guns fire at enemy aircraft that choose to fly over the territory?
Nope. Facility aa only fires at the bombers directly attacking it. Unit aa guns only fire if their territory is being attacked.
Side note, it would be cool if aa could chose to defend air or ground combat. Like german 88s being used as anti tank guns and 20mm being used against infantry and lite vehicles. Oh well. Back to the game.
Nope. Facility aa only fires at the bombers directly attacking it. Unit aa guns only fire if their territory is being attacked.
Side note, it would be cool if aa could chose to defend air or ground combat. Like german 88s being used as anti tank guns and 20mm being used against infantry and lite vehicles. Oh well. Back to the game.
Right but AnA will never have a version where each unit has its own attack against certain units. I do think about AA guns should have the ability to shoot at infantry on defense. Each nation in WWII AA guns could be aimed at the ground and I am sure you can find evidence of everyone doing it at some point.
@Caesar:
Nope. Facility aa only fires at the bombers directly attacking it. Unit aa guns only fire if their territory is being attacked.
Side note, it would be cool if aa could chose to defend air or ground combat. Like german 88s being used as anti tank guns and 20mm being used against infantry and lite vehicles. Oh well. Back to the game.Right but AnA will never have a version where each unit has its own attack against certain units. I do think about AA guns should have the ability to shoot at infantry on defense. Each nation in WWII AA guns could be aimed at the ground and I am sure you can find evidence of everyone doing it at some point.
Submarines (and Destroyer somehow vs Sub) and AAA got special targeting. And these units saw various changes.
I saw no outright evidence against more room about special targeting. Do you ?
@Baron:
@Caesar:
Nope. Facility aa only fires at the bombers directly attacking it. Unit aa guns only fire if their territory is being attacked.
Side note, it would be cool if aa could chose to defend air or ground combat. Like german 88s being used as anti tank guns and 20mm being used against infantry and lite vehicles. Oh well. Back to the game.Right but AnA will never have a version where each unit has its own attack against certain units. I do think about AA guns should have the ability to shoot at infantry on defense. Each nation in WWII AA guns could be aimed at the ground and I am sure you can find evidence of everyone doing it at some point.
AnA will never try to have a unit that can do better or worse against different units. IE fighters rolling a 3 against other fighters but a 1 against a battleship and G40’s rules for fighters on strategic bombing doesn’t count.
Submarines (and Destroyer somehow vs Sub) and AAA got special targeting. And these units saw various changes.
I saw no outright evidence against more room about special targeting. Do you ?
