Scenario:

I was Japan. My navy was running low. US was amassing ships and bombers in and around Alaska…well in range of Japan.

I needed to hold them off from attacking the Island of Japan with a ton of bombers for one more turn so I could fortify with 8 fresh infantry.

I split my navy up and surrounded Japan in both sea zones with the idea that US bombers could not skip the sea battle for whichever sea zone they chose to enter and bomb Japan (non SBR).

The US player thought they could just skip the sea battle and save the bombers for a remaining amphibious assault on Japan after the naval battle was resolved. I contend that they cannot because of the sea combat that had to take place and the bombers had to be involved in it. (Note that I had a battleship in each sea zone, so it’s not like it was transports or subs.)

Verdict??

@panther

Thanks everyone. I need to go tell my son about this and apologize ;) But, now that I realize you can’t sacrifice air units like in the '86 version, a bombing run from Alaska wouldn’t work anyway due to distance.

Scenario:

I was Japan. My navy was running low. US was amassing ships and bombers in and around Alaska…well in range of Japan.

I needed to hold them off from attacking the Island of Japan with a ton of bombers for one more turn so I could fortify with 8 fresh infantry.

I split my navy up and surrounded Japan in both sea zones with the idea that US bombers could not skip the sea battle for whichever sea zone they chose to enter and bomb Japan (non SBR).

The US player thought they could just skip the sea battle and save the bombers for a remaining amphibious assault on Japan after the naval battle was resolved. I contend that they cannot because of the sea combat that had to take place and the bombers had to be involved in it. (Note that I had a battleship in each sea zone, so it’s not like it was transports or subs.)

Verdict??