Retreating from a combined amphibious assault and land attack. Is it possible?

@Panther

:+1:

@Soviet-Steamroller said in Attacking an empty sea zone?:

Hi there,
As i’m reviewing the scramble rule a question came to my mind.
Can i assign planes to a sea zone with no ennemy warships just as a safety against scramble?

Bringing units against a potential scramble is a valid combat move, indeed.
Rulebook Pacific 1940.2 page 13

… Further, if enemy air units could potentially be scrambled to defend the sea zone, additional units may be moved into the sea zone to combat them in case they are indeed scrambled.

Thanks you two.

Strafe attacks would be the only possibility as you mentioned ShadowHAwk, but sods law if you strike too well! But it’s another curious question sorted out as there are many odd cinereous un answered here in this wonderful game haha

BH

@knp7765:

@kcdzim:

And Allied units that enter original USSR territories should be “interned” - removed from the board with infantry (and infantry only) showing up back in their home capitals a couple rounds later in equal numbers to the units interned   :wink:

In the original Europe game, they had a rule if UK or US planes landed in a Soviet territory with an IC, on the Russian Mobilize Units phase, they could be turned into Russian planes.

I always wondered about something like this.  Considering the equipment lend lease that USA had with USSR I would of thought “gifting” units to Russia should be acheived in someway.  Of course who knows what that would do to balance.  I guess the the Archangel NO is their to represent the Lend-lease activities.

One reason to use them on land would be to take FRA, WFR, and SFR all at once … but it probably doesn’t outweigh the strategic advantage of sinking an extra SZ of Allied ships.

Though you have me thinking now about how many land units you can safely free up (i.e. start moving toward Russia early) by using significant air over Paris and how much difference that would make against the USSR.  This would only make sense if you only do Sea Lion opportunistically and you plan an early Barbarossa.

@barnee said in What Turn to Attack with Japan?:

@AndrewAAGamer

I always thought it was cow who originated it. Good to know. As in the real world, things do develop in parallel : )

I believe Cow is the one that exercised it / pushed it to the level of respect it deserves.

You’re now in turn 3?

I’d say wait with ships and build some defence if needed (or some air units) and some troops for South Africa. Meanwhile wait for USA to come and help out (with a sufficient warfleet en enough subs)

You can also opt to build up UK fleet in Canada, but don’t send them to their death