Transports and hostile sea zone question

@Chris_Henry

You’re welcome!

Another variation for US IPC calc would be 3Tn + 2d6 (ie. 3 times turn # + 2d6), this gives US more incentive to delay entering the war.  For turn 4, the calc ends up being the same as 8+2Tn+2d6 rule.

Also, on your point about capital ships - we use a 2 turn build rule.  Where on TURN X you can put down anything from 1/2 to full price, with balance due on TURN Y you put into action (which doesn’t need to be the next turn).  Exception: You can purchase and deploy capital ships on TURN 1.

@Carolina:

I would like to add to answer 3, that if the capital that was captured is liberated, any of it’s territories that are in control of friendly powers, immediately go back the original owner.  ie.  Moscow is liberated by UK.  UK controlled Livonia goes back to Russian control.  See pg. 20 Capturing and Liberating Capitals, next to last para .

The OP’s questions are not regarding the capture of a capital, but rather the tournament rules for the political collapse of a power.  Once a power suffers a political collapse, it is permanently out of the game.

Krieghung, thanks for the quick response.  That poor Russian battleship in SZ12 has to thread the needle through SZ11 and SZ10 even if there are no ships there and I guess once the UK Navy is gone in SZ29, you just need to start ground pounding your way through Ottoman to get into the fight.

@UKcommander:

That does not preclude a player from moving from a friendly territory, into a second friendly territory, and then into a hostile territory two spaces away does it?

That is exactly what the rules prevent. You must use your full movement to enter a hostile territory (one that contains no friendly units); think of this in the same way that you can’t move ground units before loading onto a transport.

You can move units multiple spaces into a contested territory though, and they would participate in an attack in said contested territory if you made one.

That’s what I thought.

There is no such thing as a contested sea zone.

Personally, I don’t think this should even occur. One round of sea combat only; if the defender survives the attacker must retreat (and can still do so even after a victory).

I can understand the logic behind a land force not being allowed to retreat after a victory - they have to consolidate their hold over the conquered tt.

But why would ships remain behind in an empty sea zone, especially if they can retreat back into a friendly port for repairs and/or reinforcements from newly launched ships? Unless they wish to launch amphibious assault or enact USW why should they be obliged to remain behind and quite possibly become sitting ducks for enemy fleets? A case of being punished for success?

The anomaly occurs when a player places new ships into a sea zone occupied by enemy fleet. Should a battle immediately occur? Or should the new ships only be “launched” in his next movement/combat cycle?

I thought he meant that both sides are wiped out.