Regarding SZ 110, I got hosed one time on a UK scramble. Usually as Germany, I send 3 fighters, 3 Stukas, 1 bombers and sometimes 1 sub to SZ 110. Our UK player had gotten in the habit of not scrambling in order to save the RAF for future action.
Well, this one game I made the mistake of just assuming UK would not scramble. I sent 2 fighters, 2 Stukas and 1 bomber to SZ 110. The other fighter and Stuka I sent to kill the French fleet in SZ 93. Well, UK taught me a lesson. They scrambled and wiped out my planes. I didn’t even kill all the ships in the channel.
Never made that mistake again.
AAG40 FAQ
-
Yea, thanks for the list, but, uhm…who the hell came up with the list? Someone needs a spanking! Same with the twit that renamed first corps EYE corps… (used EYE instead of I on purpose.)
Oh well, I refuse to accept your reality and in its place I substitute my own:
BB = Battle Boat
CA = Cruiser Attack
DD = Destroyer Dreadnaught
SS = Silly Submarine
AC = Awesome Craft (aka Aircraft Carrier) -
Actually, members of I Corps are offended when you call it “eye” corps. They are “First!”
-
Actually, members of I Corps are offended when you call it “eye” corps. They are “First!”
Yea, that’s what I was saying!
-
What i meant was this
If a fighter (attacker) attacks a seazone with an enemy submarine and a cc,in the event that the defender somehow chooses the cc as casualty ,and then he misses his cruiser’s hit against the fighter.
This leaves the fighter and the sub in the seazone. Does the fighter use up the rest of his moving spaces to go back to friendly territory or does he automatically retreat moving one space to friendly adjacent territory…? -
You’re example is flawed because the ftr cannot attack the sub, there is no attacking dd present. This battle is actually 1 CA vs 1 ftr, the sub cannot get hit or fight.
-
And fighters don’t retreat one space like ground units do. Fighters can move whatever movement they have left, so must fly 3 or less to the zone or territory it is attacking, leaving at least 1 to fly elsewhere.
If your force is all air and there are enemy subs, those enemy subs are not involved in the battle in any way because they are ineligible targets for air that is not accompanied by a destroyer(s).
-
You mean the submarine does not take part in the fight at all? What im saying is that if a fighter scores a hit,the cruiser must be taken as a casualty…true? and then if the cruiser misses a hit on his turn…the result will end up leaving 1 fighter and 1 submarine in the seazone…
-
Nvm i understand now,subs are not part of the battle at all and they are ignored.thanks!
-
You mean the submarine does not take part in the fight at all? What im saying is that if a fighter scores a hit,the cruiser must be taken as a casualty…true? and then if the cruiser misses a hit on his turn…the result will end up leaving 1 fighter and 1 submarine in the seazone…
yea i dont think the submarine is involved in the battle.
-
thank you 4 clearing that up.
I have read the alpha+2 changes to the game and i stumbled upon this which kind of puzzles me,regarding the submarine special attack
it reads:
“. Submarines no longer fire a special “sneak attack” shot at unescorted transports. Transports are not allowed to unload land units for an amphibious assault in a sea zone containing an enemy sub(s) belonging to a power with which they are at war unless at least one of his warships was also present in the sea zone at the end of the Combat Move phase.”
My question is,why only the end of the COMBAT move phase.Can’t i do this in non-combat move and escort a transport with another surface warship,allowing an amphibious attack and ignoring the presence of the submarine completely? -
No. Being an escort for the transport, the warship is part of the attack (as support). It must move in the Combat Move phase.
-
Hello krieghund, may i ask whether a carrier can carry a strategic bomber.rulebook states it can carry two types: fighter and tactical bomber,what about a strategic bomber.i’m asking this because there is a lonely strategic bomber in central us. it has uses for global but in the europe only game it seems useless. if a carrier cant carry a strategic bomber,that bomber in central us would possibly be impossible to use for attacking or strategic raids to germany.thanks!
-
HIstorically (and currently) speaking an Aircraft Carrier has not and probably will never, be able to carry a strategic bomber.
-
Hello krieghund, may i ask whether a carrier can carry a strategic bomber.rulebook states it can carry two types: fighter and tactical bomber,what about a strategic bomber.i’m asking this because there is a lonely strategic bomber in central us. it has uses for global but in the europe only game it seems useless. if a carrier cant carry a strategic bomber,that bomber in central us would possibly be impossible to use for attacking or strategic raids to germany.thanks!
? Move it to EUS and when America is at war, immediately send it to London. It can bomb to your heart’s content after that. You must be confused about something… You do know USA can land on British territories? I can’t figure out why you think that Strat bomber is useless, and why you’re trying to land it on a carrier. Wow. :-)
-
@Cmdr:
HIstorically (and currently) speaking an Aircraft Carrier has not and probably will never, be able to carry a strategic bomber.
Well, the only thing on the subject I know about is Dewey’s daring reprisal raid on Tokyo. They did have (small) strategic bombers take off from aircraft carriers in 1942. They stripped them down as much as possible, and you should see the video, it’s awesome. They take off (slowly), dip down below the deck after touching off, and nearly hit the water before they start to rise. America really, really, wanted the Japs to feel vulnerable by getting bombed in their own capital city when they felt invincible. Mission accomplished! The bombers had to land in China. The carriers spotted some Jap fishing vessels shortly before the planes took off, and they sunk them immediately in case they could somehow communicate with the military. It’s a great story and apparently you are oblivious to it. I advise you look it up, you’ll enjoy it.
-
Yea, but I couldnt remember the guy’s name, kept wanting to say Mitchel. Anyway, it wasn’t standard practice, and they lost all those planes, I believe.
-
Jimmy Doolittle planned and led the raid. The planes used were B-25 Mitchells (medium bombers). All of the planes were indeed lost, being unable to reach their their planned destinations in China. The raid did no significant military or strategic damage, and was a success only in terms of morale and propaganda, proving to the Japanese people that they were not invulnerable.
-
Hehe, Dewey was the guy Truman defeated. Knew it was a D though! Thanks Krieg!
Actually, I’m pretty sure they did “minimal” physical damage, not “none”. And I was thinking a few made it to China safely, but you guys are probably right about no survivors. I can’t remember for sure.
-
Yes, I knew it was a propaganda thing, and I knew all the planes were lost, and I am very happy I was correct that Mitchel was part of it, name of the plane, so it was integral!
Wonder if there is a way we could incorporate it into the game somehow…maybe leaving them on the carriers, unable to take off until launched and then they have to be lost after the SBR or something…
-
@Cmdr:
Wonder if there is a way we could incorporate it into the game somehow…maybe leaving them on the carriers, unable to take off until launched and then they have to be lost after the SBR or something…
That’s the spirit! ANYTHING can be house ruled! :-D
Suggested Topics
