2017 League General Discussion Thread

oysteilo

Strange that a battle does not trigger combat in a sz, but its Kreig so its gotta be true!Â Not sure I agree with the premise that the sub stays ignored when there are no ships there to ignore it.Â Thanks for the clarification though gamerman!Â

You can also look at page 156 and the next couple of pages in the Q&A for a similar discussion. I struggled with the logic there for a while

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=28562.2325

Adam514

Wow that’s an obscure rule, my apologies.

JDOW

Interesting, thanks Gamerman.

“In other words, kamikazes don’t pull ignored subs into battle”

I am curious: Do scramble battles pull ignored subs into battle?

Assuming German sub in sz113, US goes there with DD, TT and 3 air, unloading to Norway ignoring the sub.
The Germans scramble 3 planes, the German planes die, but so does the DD.

–> Can the TT now unload or does the sub prevent it?

JDOW

Oh, and of course, does the sub fight in the sea battle? I guess yes, correct?

gamerman01

@JDOW:

Oh, and of course, does the sub fight in the sea battle? I guess yes, correct?

Yes, again, kamikazes are unique. They are a separate attack that takes place at the beginning of the conduct combat phase.

Scrambles of aircraft (actual plastic pieces on the board as opposed to kamikaze tokens) are regular, conventional battles that create combat in the seazone (kamikazes do not), bringing the subs into the battle.

gamerman01

No worries, Adam, it’s very helpful that you answer so many questions. None of us are 100% accurate all of the time. So thank you

majikforce

@Gamerman01:

Sure thing, and I can explain it:

Don’t think of the kamikazes as a “battle”, but rather an “attack” or a special attack, at that. It is a unique rule.

The sub was ignored in the combat movement phase when there was an attacking destroyer to ignore it. Kamikazes happen at the beginning of the conduct combat phase, which is after the combat movement phase is entirely complete.

Not to beat a dead horse but I am having trouble grasping the logic here. Not saying you are wrong just need to wrap my head around it.

Rulebook says pg15 Combat move phase:
However, a transport is not allowed to offload land units for an amphibious assault in a sea zone containing 1 or more ignored enemy submarines unless at least 1 warship belonging to the attacking power is also present in the sea zone at the end of the Combat Move phase.

I now understand the idea that the condition was met in order for the transport to unload.

But then pg 17 Conduct combat phase for amphibious assaults says:
Step 1. Sea Combat If there are defending surface warships and/or scrambled air units, sea combat occurs. If there are only defending submarines and/or transports, the attacker can choose to ignore those units or conduct sea combat. If sea combat occurs, all attacking and defending sea and air units present must participate in the battle. (Even if the attacker chose to ignore defending subs and/or transports, they will still be involved in the battle if the defender scrambles air units and forces a sea battle.) Conduct the sea combat using the rules for General Combat (page 18), then go to step 3 (land combat). If no sea combat occurs, go to step 2 (bombardment).

This seems to me that since the Kamikazes occur at the begininnig of the conduct combat phase that the conditions have now been altered. Hence the attacker getting the choice to ignore for a second time. The idea that the “ignore” conditions change is further evidenced by the fact that a scrambling fighter can negate the attackers choice to ignore. Just a little confused. Please explain.

wheatbeer

@majikforce:

Hence the attacker getting the choice to ignore for a second time.

The attacker only decides one time whether or not to ignore subs.

Kamikaze does not force a second “choice to ignore” from the attacker.

Scramble does not force a second “choice to ignore” from the attacker, but Scramble does gives the defender the option for their subs to fight (regardless of the attacker’s “choice to ignore”).

gamerman01

Kamikazes aren’t even mentioned in the rules you cited, because the kamikazes are irrelevant to these rules (ignoring submarines/transports).

“Sea combat occurs if there are defending surface warships or scrambled airplanes” which is exactly what I’ve been trying to say (answer to JDOW’s question)

Kamikazes don’t create “sea combat”.
Maybe it would help you to think of kamikazes as being between the combat movement and conduct combat phases - because kamikaze attacks are, in effect, independent of either phase.

Anyway, Wheatbeer’s right that the attacker chooses to ignore subs in the combat movement phase, and that is a one time decision.

Only a scrambled plane will undo that ignoring, because scrambled airplanes cause sea combat and “all (attacking and) defending sea and air units present must participate in the battle”, the rule you quoted.

Again, kamikazes are different and unique. They are not a sea or air unit.

gamerman01

@wheatbeer:

but Scramble does gives the defender the option for their subs to fight (regardless of the attacker’s “choice to ignore”).

No, like the rule majikforce quoted says, all naval and sea units present MUST participate in the battle. The defender scrambling ALWAYS brings the subs into the battle, it is not the defender’s choice. If the attacker has destroyers, the defender’s subs can’t submerge. If the attacker doesn’t have destroyers, then those defending subs could immediately submerge, and that is where the defender WOULD have a choice.

variance

Do Kamikazes still stop shore bombards?

majikforce

@wheatbeer:

@majikforce:

Hence the attacker getting the choice to ignore for a second time.

The attacker only decides one time whether or not to ignore subs.
Doesn’t specify this in the rulebook. And per the rulebook wording the choice is offered in the combat move phase as well as the conduct combat phase

Kamikaze does not force a second “choice to ignore” from the attacker.
Why would the rules state that the attacker can choose to ignore again during the conduct combat unless the kamikazes possibly changed the battlefield conditions?

Scramble does not force a second “choice to ignore” from the attacker, but Scramble does gives the defender the option for their subs to fight (regardless of the attacker’s “choice to ignore”).

So if scrambling fighters can change the choice to ignore subs why don’t kamikazes?

Thanks for the thoughts wheatbeer! Turn is coming I promise :-D

gamerman01

@variance:

Do Kamikazes still stop shore bombards?

Yes, one kamikaze stops all bombardment

wheatbeer

@wheatbeer:

… but Scramble does gives the defender the option for their subs to fight (regardless of the attacker’s “choice to ignore”).

Gamerman’s right (naturally), I should have written “… but a Scramble requires any ignored subs in that SZ to take part in combat, regardless of the attacker’s choice (although the defender may choose to submerge if the attacker has no destroyer)”

@majikforce:

Thanks for the thoughts wheatbeer! Turn is coming I promise :-D

I’m in no rush to be defeated :wink: Just waiting to see if dice will bail me out :lol:

majikforce

So in the rulebook kamikazes are the first thing to happen in the order of play during the conduct combat phase so I would consider them part of that phase. I am just reading the rulebook as steps to you take in order to complete phases. Let me see if I have the order correct:

Conduct move phase:
-move units for combat situations
-declare any amphibious assualts declare any ignoring of subs/transports
-defender declares scrambles

Conduct combat:
-Kamikaze attacks
-bombing raids
-amphibious assaults
1. sea combat/ or ignore (per rulebook)
2. bombardment
3. land combat

Why does the rule book give the option to ignore a second time during the conduct combat phase if its a one time decision? Why can’t kamikaze attacks change the conditions of wether or not there could be a sea battle?

wheatbeer

@majikforce:

Why does the rule book give the option to ignore a second time during the conduct combat phase if its a one time decision?

When the rulebook says under Step 1. Sea Combat:
“If there are only defending submarines and/or transports, the attacker can choose to ignore those units or conduct sea combat”

I believe this is meant to refer backwards to the choice made during the Combat Movement phase and is not meant to indicate a new opportunity to choose. I see how the verb tense in the rules could lead to confusion though.

@majikforce:

Why can’t kamikaze attacks change the conditions of wether or not there could be a sea battle?

I don’t have a copy of the Pacific rules handy, but I believe that in the section where it defines the conditions that make sea combat happen (again, under Step 1. Sea Combat), it does not include kamikazes as a condition for sea combat (same as Global rules). You never put a kamikaze on the battle strip.

gamerman01

Good answer Wheatbeer, thank you
If this doesn’t satisfy you, you want to talk to Krieghund. We of course did not write the rules.

If I recall correctly, I was right there with you and Adam and probably almost everybody in thinking kamikazes created combat, until Krieghund told us otherwise.

majikforce

I guess it really hinges on the wording and if it does in fact backwards reference the initial choice, but I see no way to confirm that the way it is written. As for the kamikaze I realize they don’t cause a sea battle but they can defintiely influence the parameters to decide if a sea battle takes place. Example: BB and DD attack a sub. kamikaze kills the DD. Now the attacker can choose to ignore the sub or attack based on the step 1: sea combat parameters. Sub submerges. Kamikazes influenced the sea combat decisions. Why doesn’t it work for the DD and transport example? Attacker initially decides to ignore, kamikazes kill the DD and now its on to step 1: sea combat, choose to ignore or combat. Transports can’t initiate combat nor can they amphibious assault with a sub present without an escort.

@majikforce:

Thanks for the thoughts wheatbeer! Turn is coming I promise :-D

I’m in no rush to be defeated :wink: Just waiting to see if dice will bail me out :lol:

My dice have been terrible lately so you should feel quite confident. :wink:

simon33

Hmm, so there should be an errata item for the phrase “can choose” in Amphibious Assault combat. Should say “could have chosen”.

It is implied in a sense because if the attacker is not ignoring the subs, they would have to declare an attack in combat movement I guess.

I can see both sides of the argument on this one.

majikforce

@Gamerman01:

Good answer Wheatbeer, thank you
If this doesn’t satisfy you, you want to talk to Krieghund. We of course did not write the rules.

If I recall correctly, I was right there with you and Adam and probably almost everybody in thinking kamikazes created combat, until Krieghund told us otherwise.

Thanks for all the thoughts guys! Slow day at work and I’m thinking too hard about it I guess. The current ruling satisfies my desire to continue on in my game but my curiosity got the better of me and I started reading the rulebook and started down a rabbit hole. I should contact Krieg and maybe he can straighten me out. :-D

2017 League General Discussion Thread

Featured Topics

T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

PTV24 Elche V 666 (axis +12)

L24 PtV Playoff Semi-Final Ghostglide(Axis+11) vs Adam514(Allies)

L24 PTV Adam514 (Axis+11) vs 666 (Allies)

G40 OOB Cwglee51 L +40 v TinCan X Game take2

L24 BM4 Playoff Semi-Final Adam514 (Axis) vs Gamerman01 (Allies+22)

L23 Playoff BM4 Avner (Axis) Sovietishcat (Allies + 10)

L24 BM4 - BombsAway (Axis) v Avner (Allies + 22)

L24 bm4 axis-dom (axis) vs aetv (allies+30)

47

17.0k

39.3k

1.7m