Battleships attacking subs?

@RYNO87 Sea units can never attack territories containing whatever defending units.

In other editions battleships and cruisers under special conditions can support amphibious assaults by shore bombardment, but not in this game.

@RYNO87 Indeed, the fighters move independently from the carrier. All combat movement happens simultaneously. So while the fighters fly the carrier moves. So you have described it correctly.

@RYNO87 said in Defender Sub sneak attack:

Have a question about sneak attack order with a destroyer. Lets say the attacker has 1 sub and a cruiser and defender has a sub and destroyer. I understand that the attacker sub can’t sneak attack (due to the defender destroyer) but would the defender sub get to sneak attack before the attacker gets his combat turn?

Exactly. The defending destroyer cancels the attacking submarine’s surprise strike ability. So the defending submarine gets its surprise strike before.

Wait? This means I might actually be playing and interpreting a rule CORRECTLY???

I’m sorry, this is a foreign experience….

Ok. Back from cloud 9.

Thank you guys all for assisting me in grasping this.
I’ll be back im sure with more questions.

@Bubbamonkey323:

But everything else I get but one last thing if 5 infantry and a tank are in a territory when they fight since it says in the rules that u can fight to the death would you just use the infantry or can u use any unit over and over again basically saying infantry overrule the tank and it be un usable till all the infantry and done

As my good friend witt says, it is difficult to understand what you are asking, but I thought I would try to clarify by laying it out step by step. When you have read this please let us know whether it is now clear.

It does not make any difference whether those 5 infantry and 1 tank are in attack or defense, so for simplicity I will assume attack. Let’s say 1 tank and 1 infantry in defence:

Attacker rolls

5 inf at 1 or less in attack - they roll 5 dice and lets say that they score 1 hit then 1 tank at 3 or less - roll one die and in this example it rolls a 4 and misses.

Defender takes casualties

he chooses 1 inf as it costs less to replace and because the tank is more likely to kill an attacker the defender’s chosen casualties remain in the game, but are put to one side as designated casualties.

Defender rolls

for all his units including that which has only just been taken as a casualty 1 inf at 2 or less in defence - throws a 2 and so scores a hit 1 tank at 3 or less - throws a 3 and scores a hit.

Attacker takes casualties

the defender scored 2 hits and the attacker elects to lose 2 infantry, because they cost less to replace and the tank is more likely to kill a defender.

End of battle round

Both sides remove their casualties from the game Attacker decides whether to continue or retreat - in this example he decides to continue.

Attacker rolls

3 surviving inf at 1 or less in attack - roll 3 dice and lets say that they all miss then 1 tank at 3 or less - in this example it rolls a 1 and hits.

Defender takes casualties

he only has 1 remaining unit - his tank - and so must choose that as his casualty this remains in the game, but is put to one side as a designated casualty.

Defender rolls

for all his units including that which has only just been taken as a casualty he only has 1 tank left which hits at 3 or less - throws a 1 and scores a hit.

Attacker takes casualties

the defender scored 1 hits and the attacker elects to lose 1 infantry, because it costs less to replace and the tank is more likely to be of value in future combats.

End of battle round

Both sides remove their casualties from the game The defender has no units left as he has lost both his inf and his tank. The attacker has 2 inf and 1 tank left, all of which must move into the territory they attacked.

By laying it out step by step I hope I have allowed for any number of interpretation of your question!

Thanks for the design clarification… appreciate the thoughts during design… I know in the game design business you will always be second guessed, and i’d be happy to toss in a “what about just a simple rule like subs can’t stop passage of units unless its unescorted transports…”  even if it’s just “one warship” which is the same rule you DID put in place for amphibious operations.  Oh well, i’m sure they won’t be putting out an A&A Third Edition rules, Wolfshanze-style!  lolz.  Oh well, that’s what house rules are for.

Thanks again for a great game… I know I might sound a little grumpy, but I always have loved A&A since 1984 when I first started playing, and I really can’t wait to introduce the game to my kids and get back into it again… in the end, my concerns in this thread are minor in the overall picture, and I know i’ll love it now like I did 30 years ago… fingers crossed my kids will feel the same!

We have all misinterpreted the rules. Just means the next game will be different, which is fine.
Keep having fun.

@tbt_delta:

I believe this is only true if you are performing an amphibious assault.  If you are offloading in a friendly territory (moving in non-combat), then you can ignore enemy subs.

This is correct. The exact text states

…a transport cannot ignore enemy submarines to offload land units for an amphibious assault unless at least one warship belonging to the attacking power is also present in the sea zone at the end of the Combat Move phase.

One additional note: It appears that a transport CAN ignore enemy transports to offload land units during an amphibious assault.