Why can't you scramble over neighbouring ground territory?


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    Well, if we get to limiting types of units, we’re basically making a complicated rule again, right?

    Perhaps: 
    No Capitol:  Build warships at your own Naval Base, if you have one.
    No Capitol:  Build airplanes at your own Air Base, if you have one.
    No Capitol:  Build armies at your own Industrial Complex, if you have one.

    I don’t have anything against limiting what units you can buy, intrinsically.  I have no problem, personally, with no capitol no capitol ships, high level bombers or armored units.  Was just thinking of KISS.


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    Making exceptions for territories would be ridiculous

    Exactly my point, I’m glad you agree.  Being able to Scramble over neighbouring Sea Zones, but NOT over Land terriories is a ridiculous exception.

    I hope you also realize that I DO NOT WANT a hex game.  I get the Axis and Allies standard as it is.  and I get that scale doesn’t apply.  Which is EXACTLY why the rule makes no sense! Because there is no scale!  Negating the whole concept that these battles are coastal.


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    I think you are making a larger mistake than you realize.

    A)  Warships are generally in port if they are getting CAP.  So your airbase is probably located in or near the same city the port is in.  Let’s say Jacksonville, FL which actually has both a naval base and an air base.  In this case, scrambling “Alert 5” aircraft for “Cover Air Patrol” gets them on station in what, about 7 minutes maximum?

    B)  These same fighters from Jacksonville, FL can go defend New York, NY (about 935 miles north) to defend against an invasion from Canada as well.

    I submit, they ARE scrambling over land, they are just limited to scrambling over the land they are currently in!



  • @Cmdr:

    …… “Cover Air Patrol” or CAP.

    Its Combat Air Patrol for those who are clueless.


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    I’m a girl, I reserve the right to be correct even when I make a minor mistake. 😛

    Hell, I didnt even know the difference between the ranks until I was 15!  Gimme a break!



  • @Gargantua:

    Making exceptions for territories would be ridiculous

    Exactly my point, I’m glad you agree.  Being able to Scramble over neighbouring Sea Zones, but NOT over Land terriories is a ridiculous exception.

    It is not an exception.  An island/island group is contained within a single sea zone as given by definition in the rules.  It isn’t adjacent to it.  Building an airbase implies building up the infrastructure to meet incoming threats before they reach the island.  Without that, its inability to scramble is just like land.  Otherwise one would have to use carrier to defend an island’s own home sea zone despite the presence of an airbase.

    The answer given at the beginning makes sense: if you want to use fighters to defend a territory from air attack, you should station them there.  Otherwise with what you propose the effective defensive zone of a land territory based fighter with air base would be ~4-6 times that of an island based fighter with air base.  A single fighter unit (wing or whatever it represents) could defend 2/3 of the continental US, one coast, plus a large portion of Canada, and most of Mexico.

    Furthermore, allowing scrambling over adjacent land territories (many enormous) would unnecessarily complicate attacks, stealing the initiative from the attacker–which is a fundamental aspect of attack, concentrating at a vulnerable point.  A large group of fighters in one territory could be divied up to meet multiple attacks in other territories by the same opponent on the same turn.

    What you suggest would seriously unbalance fighters/tac bombers, giving them super defense capability.


  • Customizer

    @Red:

    A large group of fighters in one territory could be divied up to meet multiple attacks in other territories by the same opponent on the same turn.

    What you suggest would seriously unbalance fighters/tac bombers, giving them super defense capability.

    Actually, I don’t believe Gargantua was wanting to change the 3 plane scramble limit for airbases, he just thinks they should be able to scramble over adjacent land territories as well as sea zones.

    There would still be a limit of 3 planes that could scramble.  For example:  the Airbase in W Germany could scramble 3 planes.  Say USA has gotten strong in Europe and is attacking N Italy, Holland/Belgium and Norway (from SZ 112) all in the same turn.  Germany could have 100 fighters on W Germany, but could still ONLY scramble 3 and would have to decide which battle(s) to send those planes to.


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    For the record: I’m not suggesting anything… I just think the concept is strange, and I’m looking for reasons to explain this to new players, because they give ME a hard time about it.


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    @Gargantua:

    For the record: I’m not suggesting anything… I just think the concept is strange, and I’m looking for reasons to explain this to new players, because they give ME a hard time about it.

    As I said, you ARE scrambling everytime you defend your home territory (defined as where you landed), with an airbase you may also scramble to defend fleets in port of your home territory.  Otherwise, you run into the situations where you are scrambling 20 miles away to protect fleet and 1000 miles away to defend a neighboring territory.  Fleet defense makes sense, but neighboring territory?  By the time you got there the battle would be over!



  • @Cmdr:

    @Gargantua:

    For the record: I’m not suggesting anything… I just think the concept is strange, and I’m looking for reasons to explain this to new players, because they give ME a hard time about it.

    As I said, you ARE scrambling everytime you defend your home territory (defined as where you landed), with an airbase you may also scramble to defend fleets in port of your home territory.  Otherwise, you run into the situations where you are scrambling 20 miles away to protect fleet and 1000 miles away to defend a neighboring territory.  Fleet defense makes sense, but neighboring territory?  By the time you got there the battle would be over!

    I admit, The argument breaks down when you’re using the west german airfield to defend the shoreline of Norway or an Amur airbase defending the shore of SFE.  That said, because scale isn’t considered, those oddities must just be accepted.

    Scrambling is simply supposed to represent Coastal Air Fields rapidly deploying to defend fleet movements/attacks within close range of the shoreline, which is where most naval battles occurred.

    It is NOT meant to represent sortees to defend other land attacks.  So, quite simply, you don’t scramble to defend tank movements.



  • @knp7765:

    @Red:

       A large group of fighters in one territory could be divied up to meet multiple attacks in other territories by the same opponent on the same turn.Â

    What you suggest would seriously unbalance fighters/tac bombers, giving them super defense capability.Â

    Actually, I don’t believe Gargantua was wanting to change the 3 plane scramble limit for airbases, he just thinks they should be able to scramble over adjacent land territories as well as sea zones.

    There would still be a limit of 3 planes that could scramble.  For example:  the Airbase in W Germany could scramble 3 planes.  Say USA has gotten strong in Europe and is attacking N Italy, Holland/Belgium and Norway (from SZ 112) all in the same turn.  Germany could have 100 fighters on W Germany, but could still ONLY scramble 3 and would have to decide which battle(s) to send those planes to.

    I wasn’t talking about a 3 plane limit.  The AAP40 rules and FAQ’s don’t have that limit that I can see.  (I don’t have AA Europe 1940 yet…waiting for the reprint.)

    But even with that limit an opponent could end up scrambling 6 or more…because land territories usually have more than one territory adjacent to them.  So one could leave a territory undefended from air attack while counting on 6 fighters to put up a very strong defense.  If you do that, you better make air bases very expensive…and fighters too.



  • @Red:

    @knp7765:

    @Red:

    �  � A large group of fighters in one territory could be divied up to meet multiple attacks in other territories by the same opponent on the same turn.�

    What you suggest would seriously unbalance fighters/tac bombers, giving them super defense capability.�

    Actually, I don’t believe Gargantua was wanting to change the 3 plane scramble limit for airbases, he just thinks they should be able to scramble over adjacent land territories as well as sea zones.

    There would still be a limit of 3 planes that could scramble.�  For example:�  the Airbase in W Germany could scramble 3 planes.�  Say USA has gotten strong in Europe and is attacking N Italy, Holland/Belgium and Norway (from SZ 112) all in the same turn.�  Germany could have 100 fighters on W Germany, but could still ONLY scramble 3 and would have to decide which battle(s) to send those planes to.

    I wasn’t talking about a 3 plane limit.  The AAP40 rules and FAQ’s don’t have that limit that I can see.  (I don’t have AA Europe 1940 yet…waiting for the reprint.)

    But even with that limit an opponent could end up scrambling 6 or more…because land territories usually have more than one territory adjacent to them.  So one could leave a territory undefended from air attack while counting on 6 fighters to put up a very strong defense.  If you do that, you better make air bases very expensive…and fighters too.

    Alpha rules (currently Alpha +3), the creator endorsed rule changes, supercede OOB rules, and have revised Scrambling so that it’s no longer limited to “Islands” and now can be used to scramble from any coastal territory. Airbases are now limited to 3 planes max.

    While these rules have not been released on the publishers website or in an official FAQ/Errata, most players on these forums are aware of them or have playtested them.  This thread hinges on the Alpha version of scrambling.  OOB rules are very different (and as you note, limited to only islands).



  • @kcdzim:

    Alpha rules (currently Alpha +3), the creator endorsed rule changes, supercede OOB rules, and have revised Scrambling so that it’s no longer limited to “Islands” and now can be used to scramble from any coastal territory. Airbases are now limited to 3 planes max.

    While these rules have not been released on the publishers website or in an official FAQ/Errata, most players on these forums are aware of them or have playtested them.  This thread hinges on the Alpha version of scrambling.  OOB rules are very different (and as you note, limited to only islands).

    I’m glad to see the change to allow a scramble from a coastal territory with airbase (I thought it was an odd restriction, though not a game breaker.)  The 3 plane limit on a single territory scramble is not much of a concern, the aircraft are still available for land defense.  However, doing a 6 or 9 plane scramble as I pointed out would happen from multiple territories and having such a mammoth coverage zone for each unit would throw everything out of kilter for the reasons given.



  • Try “carrier war” from Omega, their C.A.P. is just what your looking for


  • Customizer

    @Red:

    I’m glad to see the change to allow a scramble from a coastal territory with airbase (I thought it was an odd restriction, though not a game breaker.)  The 3 plane limit on a single territory scramble is not much of a concern, the aircraft are still available for land defense.  However, doing a 6 or 9 plane scramble as I pointed out would happen from multiple territories and having such a mammoth coverage zone for each unit would throw everything out of kilter for the reasons given.

    Okay, I think I see what you are talking about, scrambling from more than one air base adjacent to a given territory.  Like, for example, Germany scrambling from the air bases in Paris and West Germany to defend Holland/Belgium.  Yes, that would make it hard for anyone attacking Holland/Belgium and probably too easy for Germany to defend like that.
    Although, if Germany bought an airbase for Norway, you would have the same situation for SZ 112.  Germany could scramble 3 fighters from W Germany and 3 fighters from Norway to defend SZ 112.  Of course, Germany would be out the $15 for the airbase on Norway plus $30 for the 3 fighters to put there.



  • I think the rule would be more clear if scrambling only applied to island airbases (including England and japan). If sealion is more difficult then so be it. Sealion seems like it is a little too easy anyways.


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

46
Online

14.8k
Users

35.5k
Topics

1.4m
Posts