Attacking Transports - eligible for taking casualties???

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Rorschach:

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Rorschach:

@3rdReich1221:

yes it works but i have a question. can u blitz through a territory with a tank after it has been unloaded? also can u amphibious assualt the spot, destroy all the units(by amphibious assault) and then unload and blitz through?

No on both counts.  Once a unit has unloaded it can no longer move to another space (unless to retreat to a territory where units came from in the same attack), and all combat moves are considered to take place simultaneously so you cannot blitz through a territory that you have to fight for.

Actually, if even 1 land units comes via transport, you can’t retreat

Just re-reading the rules and looking for clarification via FAQ’s and Errata this seems a sticky situation.

It seems (From what I can find) that if you have a combined Land/Amphibious assault, you are to keep the land and amphibious units separated as the LAND units can retreat.  I can’t seem to find any clarification to state otherwise (although I could have sworn i recently read you could retreat all units as long as some were from the land but for the life of me can’t remember where).

The rules state “Keep the attacking overland land units and seaborne land units separated on the battle board.  Attacking seaborne units cannot retreat.  Attacking overland units and aircraft can retreat.  All attacking overland land units must retreat together as a group.  They can only retreat to where at least one of them originated.”

ALTHOUGH … this isn’t what the original question was anyway (but probably good to clarify nonetheless).

You’re right; I mistakenly thought it was the same as 42 and P40(just to make sure, in 42 and P40, can attacking land units from an adj. territory retreat from an amphib assult?

I just read my rulebooks for both, and I was wrong: land-originating land units can retreat

@Krieghund:

… Only one cruiser hits, but all three defending destroyers hit…

I hate when that happens, but it’s part of the game.  :|

Sucks to be you then  :-(

I have not yet played a single game of AA50 with tech. I choosed the 6-10 games option, but I think almost as many games I played have ended rnd 5 or sooner. So for me it’s about 50%-50% split between up to 6 rnds, and more than 6 rnds.

My record for “long game” I think is 9 rnds, maybe 10.

With NOs I would be suprised if games takes longer than 10 rnds. NOs are a mechanism for shortening games, b/c one side will get substansially more money than in a game w/o NOs, as soon as they start getting the upperhand.

DAAK has a pretty good LL system for AAR, it would need some modification for AA50 for reasons mentioned above (changed BB CA bombard rules, changes to sub rules)

http://www.daak.de/indexe.php3

I would agrue that for AA50 to BB and CA should fire with the ground forces and subs should only fire separately if no DD present, to reduce the variance.

DAAK use an SBR table where the attacker loses 2-3 IPCs (50% chance for each) per turn, from your starting cash pool (as in AAR bomber loses 2.5 IPCs on avergae vs AA gun [cost $15 in AAR]) and inflict 2-3-4 (33% each) IPCs damge to an IC in a 6+ territory since bombers inflict on average 2.92 IPCs per SBR vs AA gun. If no AA then attacker loses nothing and inflicts 3-4 IPCs (50% each)

Different damage tables handle different scenarios (max IPC caps for terrirory value and also with/without AA firing).

Pretty annoying for F2F games though, I personally prefer LL online but ADS in F2F since the calculations really make a live game drag on for ever and ever.

In the light of day I understand you better now, and it’s right that you can calculate your defences/attacks better in LL, so you will end up using lesser resources for “just in case” or “just to be sure” situations. And ofcourse, if there’s a huge pile of trns on a “just enough to keep 1 DD left” fleet, someone made a mistake, because you have to calculate your losses if things go wrong in too. It’s like a 30% chance to take Ger with UK, no one would doubt about that, since the potential gains far outweigh the potential losses, thus tilting the average gain in your direction. That aspect is still in LL though, be it less severe (it’s a question of adding 1 DD instead of 1 BB “to be sure”).

@Telamon:

But as long as you have fun, that’s all that matters.

I couldn’t agree more! (and sry for my tendency to overreact :oops: )

:-)

Q. On page 29 it says that your aircraft may hit enemy submarines if you have a destroyer in the sea zone, but it doesn’t say anywhere in the rules that aircraft can’t hit submarines without a destroyer present. Do you always need a destroyer in a battle in order for your air units to hit enemy subs?
A. Yes. Air units can only hit subs if there is a friendly destroyer on the battle board, otherwise hits made by air units must be applied to units other than submarines. If you’re the attacker, destroyers in the same sea zone belonging to your ally don’t count, since they’re not involved in the battle.

THX Kriegshund, you are right!

I apologize to all readers of my previous posts for having answered without this important information.

In this case the subs would sink the transport without interference of the fighters.

That’s correct.  It would not.