What to do with British fighter off of India?

Myself it really depends on what Germany does, though my standard moves are, Dest from SZ35 to SZ59, Sub from SZ40 to SZ45, The Subs a 50/50, some people like to take the carrier to the tran as well but, I prefer the Dest Alone. If Africa is going good, Namely if I can retake EGY, then the tran in SZ40 takes two inf from AUS and invades New Guinea (Something nice to try) If I cannot retake EGY I like to use the Tran to pick up 2 INF from AUS and then move to SZ30, then on UK2 drop them anywhere along the Africa coast (Even Persia if it needs them). If Germany takes EGY and you “can” retake it, then do it bringing 2 inf from IND, 1 INF from TRJ and the Fighter from SZ35 (You can also bring your Bomber but I usually don’t). Otherwise I like to stack 2 inf in TRJ and the 3 Indian Inf and A-A gun to Persia. The AC stays with the Tran wherever it decides to go. If Germany is stupid and doesn’t take EGY, then smile :lol: happily and move the INF from TRJ into it, stack 4 + A-A gun in Persia, move the FIG to EGY and move the Tran and AC to SZ33 (Out of reach of the IJN).
The SAF INF always moves up, regardless of what you do.

If you are playing a KJF (or playing 50/50 correctly), losing India should not be a concern.

I would agree an IC in an all out KGF is a bad idea.

But the russians can support India sufficiently in most cases.

Interesting take.

Destroyers can be better then fighters, if you have combined arms, in that case.  Att/Def at 3 + Bombard @3 in opening fire.  Not too bad if Fighters are nerfed.

Though, I agree, fighters can defend on land and sea, that gives them flexibility.

Thanks for the link Ranor, that has some good information in it.

BalungaLoaf did not mount an attack on AE.  Instead he focused on the BB in the West Med.  He has brought over more ground forces and he bid an Armor in North Africa as well.

My IO fleet could not reach his Med fleet and the ground forces are too strong for direct confrontation at this point.  Pulling back the AE forces, except for one Inf, to concentrate for an expected push into Africa, while at the same time setting the IO/Aus fleet as a counter punch for either Africa or a Japanese push seemed like a good approach.

Right now, he has 3 Inf, 2 Art, and 1 Arm in North Africa but has not moved on AE.  That is 22 IPC holding down 2 IPC worth of territory.  If he sends it into AE (with no losses) the counter punch is 5 Inf, 1 Arm, 2 Fig.  85% chance of recovery with destruction of the AfrikaKorps…  Add US forces landing in Algeria and Germany is contained to Europe.

@rjclayton:

…
Which is better?  Which is more fair?  I suppose it depends on your perspective.  For me, I think of the 4 movement for fighters as being the hard and fast rule unless long range aircraft, then it’s 6 movement (I played classic for many years).  In OOB Revised, this quirky new rule bent the old rules that I had become accustomed to, so definitely seemed odd.  The LHTR Revised ruleset seems to intuitively make more sense to me, and doesn’t bend that rule.  So for me I like this rule change made in LHTR.

I think about it like this: If I wanted to send my fighter to combat, with the intention of landing it on a carrier that was not yet fully launched, when it returned from it’s mission would it return to the shipyard, or would it land on the carrier once it was launched?  I think the answer would be to the carrier once it was launched.  And that’s how I justify this rule change.

Rob

Personally, having seen the pain of trying to get a bunch of fly boys onto a real live ship, I prefer the requirement that the planes land at the airbase closest to the shipyard(IC) and embark on the carrier when it launches (is built).  I find it ridiculously unrealistic to have those planes “meet” and land on a CV that is still trying to figure out if all the bilge level alarms work and why they get seawater out of number 3 A/C refueling station instead of JP5.

Heck, if I really wanted to argue this I would say that CVs can only embark new aircraft if the aircraft are built on a CV.  No carrier next to the IC?  No new naval avaiation units.  Your naval aviators get waxed far from home?  Don’t go expecting those Army Air guys to figure out how to land on a bouncing postage stamp after they have gotten so used to 1500’ long runways that don’t move and are wider than a carrier is long.  I might be convinced that land based air can convert to sea based air in a Non Combat Move but during Combat???  I can see it now, the FTR pulls up next to the refueling plane, fills up his tanks after combat and orders a side of tailhooks.  Of course, all of this is trading playability for complexity.  If I really wanted to do that, I would would not be playing A&A.

Give me OOB rules of FTR at the IC can move to the fresh built CV and stop giving the FTR an extra range of space during the combat move if they happen to grow tailhooks and figure out how to land on new carriers on their way back from the fight.

Well I realize you don’t just use fighters alone, you use them in conjunction with inf as powerful back up. :wink:

Because in WWII when bombers attack, the fighters deffending the territories and industrial complex……

So I think when the Attacker use Bomber Raid sent Bombers and Fighters, and defender could be use the defender fighters before the dice roller to the Industrial Complex