Carrier Question

China needs to legitimize their hold over these fake island bases theyve conjured up. Every time they challenge us or some other power over them, and we back down, it makes their foot-hold a little more legit.

@wittmann:

Afternoon Suprtramp.
Yes it can. Only Navy blocks naval movement(or a Strait of course!).
An island is a separate territory, yes.

With the exception of Subs and Transports, which cannot block enemy movement by themselves.

Thanks for the quick response molinar13.

Welcome, Aicanario!

@Aicanario:

The question is, since the rules simply state under Aircraft Movement that the movement only requires for the possibility of a aircraft carrier to be in the zone to pick up the wandering aircraft, whether or not it has the room for it.

Calvinhobbesliker is correct.  The part about “whether or not it has the room for it” isn’t in the rules - you just made it up!  :wink: :-)

@Krieghund:

@moralecheck:

The UK not only can’t land it’s units, but it has to endure one round of defensive fire from the scrambled unit(s) before it can retreat.  Any units on those transports are lost.

Not so.  Since it’s not the transport’s turn, it is not in the battle and can’t move.  The scrambled fighter simply prevents the amphibious landing without inflicting any casualties.

@moralecheck:

KH explained: A fighter can scramble to join a battle or against an amphibious assault.  It cannot scramble against ships that are just putting around its waters though.  This raises a new question, so I hope Krieghund is reading:  If I send transports (only), or even a fleet with warships to assault an island with scramblable (I made up a word!!) units, can I send a fighter into the waters with it, even though that is not really a combat move (but it will be if my opponent scrambles)?

Yes.  Just the chance of combat is enough to justify the move.

UK units on a US transport. Missed that.  My bad.

@TexCapPrezJimmy:

I think your first situation is correct but I’m having a hard time understanding the benefit of the second situation, unless I’m misreading it. If you are engaging in combat in the sea zone and the coastal territory (with the SZ the only access point to the territory), why wouldn’t you just bring the transport along with the naval attack to assist in capturing the territory?

If the blocking ship was not on the coast (one sz out), you could kill him in combat and move transports in during non combat to off load them onto the  coastal tt you just took. Assuming that you indeed did take the coastal tt by other means.

@TexCapPrezJimmy:

So let me get this straight, in sea battles, you can kill an enemy blocker ship (destroyer) in the combat phase and move your fleet past that SZ into the next SZ in the non-combat phase assuming that none of your fleet is engaging in a combat move. Is this correct? If so this really changes things for me in Pacific…

Yes that is what I was referring to. You can kill the enemies ships in combat (using just a few ships or planes even). Then in noncombat move into the cleared sz (1st move) with your ships that where not involved in the battle. Then (2nd move) to the coast to off load your transports on to the coastal tt you also took during combat. Of coarse the 2nd sz could not be hostel. You can also do this to join two of you fleets together. It doesn’t come up to often, but in P40 it could be useful to both the allies or Japan (especially when you consider NB).

You’re welcome.

Thanks  :-D