Can you scranble to prevent sea movement

@wicked_caitiff:

…
Are planes allowed to attack alone and independently, …

Yes, as long as every plane has a valid landing spot.

Pwned.

@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.

Welcome, Alex!

You can reinforce a space in noncombat movement, whether you attacked it or not.  The only restriction is that you can’t move air units into a newly captured land territory.

@sliver:

Thanks, I’ll have to read the instructions again.  Now that I have played a little bit they may make more sense to me.

And read the Errata.  As the OOB rules aren’t clear or correct (in many many subtle ways)

HOWEVER….  If your units are in a seazone that was neutral or friendly but is now hostile due to recently placed ships (or declaration of war, in your example), you can choose to leave that seazone as a combat move and ignore the enemy warships there (in effect, retreating before the fight).  This is one of the very few, if not the only, combat move that doesn’t necessarily result in combat.  So I believe that any units in the shared seazone are NOT blocked from moving from that seazone by your lone destroyer, even if he declares war.  However, should he declare war, he HAS to move those units OR he HAS to fight the destroyer.

That only applies to shared seazones though.  he would not be able to move ships from another seazone THROUGH that seazone with the destroyer as you cannot move THROUGH a hostile seazone.  Only from it, or to it.

@Omega:

don’t forget the +1 the tac give to Fig. Its a very powerful tool on offensive!

No, it’s the tac receiving the +1. I still prefer a sure def of 4 than a maybe attack of 4. And figs are cheaper while bombers move more. Anyway, no harm having at least one tac just in case

@dinosaur:

May the US Destroyer @ Philippines move to SZ 35-45-55-54 on turn 1 when ANZAC ships start in 54?

Yes.

@dinosaur:

May this same Destroyer @ Queensland move SZ 54-49-30-26 on turn 2?

No.

@dinosaur:

Does anything change if UK/ANZAC goes to war with Japan but not the US?

No.

@dinosaur:

The question is really moot because this same Destroyer can move SZ 35-45-46-49 in turn 1 and then make it to Hawaii on turn 2 in two steps.  The details are only an illustration so I can verify that ports are inactive for “future allies” (e.g. nations that will later fight on the same team) but ships may occupy the same sea zone before open hostilities begin.  Thanks.

All true.

@Uncle_Joe:

on a related note, I certanly hope the UK is one territory in Europe 1940. So they can scramble to protect it just as japan does

That would mean that Britain could only touch one sea zone (unless they want to make an exception rule) and would almost completely rule out any possibility of a German naval attack or Sea Lion attack.

It would probably make it too easy to build up and invasion force to clobber Germany since the US can just stack up planes in England and they can defend the entire Brit fleet as well.

Not sure I’d like that…

I would have to agree.

Sean