• 2024 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18

    @Cernel said in Calling off landings:

    @DoManMacgee Are you sure that AAO doesn’t want it on purpose or is it just a yet unsupported feature or deemed not worth coding yet? Haven’t really followed how much the game is or is not supposed actually to be a 3rd Edition (?) of 1942 (is it?).

    It was intentional to support asynchronous gameplay, I’m pretty sure. Same reason you can’t land Fighters on another friendly power’s carrier in that game. AAO was originally designed for casual, multi-player experiences. It was only after basically everyone told them to shove it, and that 1v1 ranked was what (most) people cared about that they implemented a ladder/ranked system (that’s my guess, anyway. For all I know ranked could have been planned from the start). However, it has been clearly stated by Beamdog that scrapping the ability to use another power’s transport/carrier was an intentional design decision.

    I guess everyone knows that almost all German troops in Africa were shipped by the Italian navy but, of course, that doesn’t matter if the Italians are Germans too.

    If you want a game that’s 100% historically accurate, or even close to that, A&A is the last place you want to be. Gameplay trumps historical accuracy here, and always has.

    But to your point, since Italy has debuted in AA50, the Mediterranean has been filled with Italian boats, and Germany’s navy has been limited to Subs in the Atlantic + the meager Baltic fleet.


  • @DoManMacgee Being able to move on board transports of your allies, as well as being able not to offload units into a territory after a battle changed what you are aware you can commit into the battle just makes sense. I think a definition of nonsense is not being allowed making something that makes clearly sense. Thus, not being able to load into a transport of an ally of yours that is fine letting you load onto it makes no sense, as well as it makes no sense that, after winning a sea battle, you are irrefragably driven into committing your, possibly decimated, forces to a battle, possibly with next to no hope, as all rulesets after Revised original oblige you to do. Of course, I’m aware that, in practice, both these items are next to irrelevant and are arguably far from clear, and even far from sensible, in all their possible applications (especially the rules for calling off landings, otherwise I would not have this discussion).

    @Krieghund As probably the final bunch of things about calling off landings, I assume that, during Non Combat Move, the land units that I called off cannot offload, if I loaded them on the same turn, while they can offload if already on board at the start of the turn (because, in the first case, they already moved, on the same turn, but not in the second case).
    I also assume they are not restricted offloading only into the territory where they intended to offload (in this case, this would be possible only if that territory has been conquered), thus can offload into whatever adjacent currently friendly territory.
    Finally, I assume they keep the ability to load units, if not offloading any.

    What the rulebook says is that:

    “During the conduct combat phase, that player may call off the landing but cannot redirect the attack to a different territory.”
    “A transport can never offload in two territories during a single turn”

    Hence, unless I’m missing something, I should be able still to offload to a different territory, during Non Combat Move, since I never actually offloaded, nor there is a rule inhibiting me to do anything for calling off landing, after the Conduct Combat phase.

    So, for example, I have two sea zones,
    one occupied by no units and
    another one occupied by enemy units and an allied unit with two infantry of mine on board.

    I move one transport with two loaded infantry into the empty sea zone, offloading both infantry into an enemy territory.
    I move offenceful ships into the enemy zone.
    I have one transport with 1 already loaded infantry on board, which I load 1 armour into, then move it into the enemy zone, offloading both the infantry and the armour into the same enemy territory.
    I offload all units from the allied transport into the same enemy territory.

    I conduct combat in the sea zone, killing all enemies without losing the transport.

    At the moment I decide to resolve the battle in the enemy territory, I decide to call off landings, which keeps the transport with the 1 infantry and 1 armour unoffloaded, keeps the allied transport unoffloaded, while still offloading the transport with 2 infantries (my only two possible decisions is either this or offloading everything I can).

    Then, during Non Combat Move,
    for the transport with the 1 infantry and 1 armour still on board, the armour is stuck on board, while I can offload the infantry into any adjacent territories that are friendly at this point (thus also into the same territory I called off the landing, if it was conquered),
    while, for the allied transport, I can offload all units on board into any adjacent territories that are friendly at this point (thus also into the same territory I called off the landing, if it was conquered).

    During Non Combat Move, if any of the transports I called off landings from would have had only 1 unit on board, I could have loaded 1 other unit on board of them, as long as not offloading any, from the same transport (this both for my transport and the transport of my ally, all else happening as described above).

    Finally, I could have called off the landings from the allied transport also in case the sea battle ended with both sides completely eliminated (thus only the allied transport and its cargo remaining in that sea zone).

    Correct?

    If so, I also assume that I can take advantage of this rule to load units onto a transport and send the transport in a naval battle while keeping the units on board. This series of actions is itself illegal (as I’m loading, thus moving, units that are not ending their movement into a combat situation), but, as long as I declare that these units are offloading into a land territory and, then, call off the landing, I’m sure to be able to perform this move practically just like if I would be able always to load units onto transports that are sent into combat, as long as the combat happens in a zone adjacent to an enemy territory I’m not amphibiously attacking.


  • @Cernel said in Calling off landings:

    @Krieghund As probably the final bunch of things about calling off landings, I assume that, during Non Combat Move, the land units that I called off cannot offload, if I loaded them on the same turn, while they can offload if already on board at the start of the turn (because, in the first case, they already moved, on the same turn, but not in the second case).
    I also assume they are not restricted offloading only into the territory where they intended to offload (in this case, this would be possible only if that territory has been conquered), thus can offload into whatever adjacent currently friendly territory.
    Finally, I assume they keep the ability to load units, if not offloading any.

    What the rulebook says is that:

    “During the conduct combat phase, that player may call off the landing but cannot redirect the attack to a different territory.”
    “A transport can never offload in two territories during a single turn”

    Hence, unless I’m missing something, I should be able still to offload to a different territory, during Non Combat Move, since I never actually offloaded, nor there is a rule inhibiting me to do anything for calling off landing, after the Conduct Combat phase.

    So, for example, I have two sea zones,
    one occupied by no units and
    another one occupied by enemy units and an allied unit with two infantry of mine on board.

    I move one transport with two loaded infantry into the empty sea zone, offloading both infantry into an enemy territory.
    I move offenceful ships into the enemy zone.
    I have one transport with 1 already loaded infantry on board, which I load 1 armour into, then move it into the enemy zone, offloading both the infantry and the armour into the same enemy territory.
    I offload all units from the allied transport into the same enemy territory.

    I conduct combat in the sea zone, killing all enemies without losing the transport.

    At the moment I decide to resolve the battle in the enemy territory, I decide to call off landings, which keeps the transport with the 1 infantry and 1 armour unoffloaded, keeps the allied transport unoffloaded, while still offloading the transport with 2 infantries (my only two possible decisions is either this or offloading everything I can).

    Then, during Non Combat Move,
    for the transport with the 1 infantry and 1 armour still on board, the armour is stuck on board, while I can offload the infantry into any adjacent territories that are friendly at this point (thus also into the same territory I called off the landing, if it was conquered),
    while, for the allied transport, I can offload all units on board into any adjacent territories that are friendly at this point (thus also into the same territory I called off the landing, if it was conquered).

    During Non Combat Move, if any of the transports I called off landings from would have had only 1 unit on board, I could have loaded 1 other unit on board of them, as long as not offloading any, from the same transport (this both for my transport and the transport of my ally, all else happening as described above).

    Finally, I could have called off the landings from the allied transport also in case the sea battle ended with both sides completely eliminated (thus only the allied transport and its cargo remaining in that sea zone).

    Correct?

    Yes.

    If so, I also assume that I can take advantage of this rule to load units onto a transport and send the transport in a naval battle while keeping the units on board. This series of actions is itself illegal (as I’m loading, thus moving, units that are not ending their movement into a combat situation), but, as long as I declare that these units are offloading into a land territory and, then, call off the landing, I’m sure to be able to perform this move practically just like if I would be able always to load units onto transports that are sent into combat, as long as the combat happens in a zone adjacent to an enemy territory I’m not amphibiously attacking.

    Yes. This loophole is likely the reason that cancellation of landings was eliminated from LHTR and later games.


  • @Cernel said in Calling off landings:

    @DoManMacgee Being able to move on board transports of your allies, as well as being able not to offload units into a territory after a battle changed what you are aware you can commit into the battle just makes sense. I think a definition of nonsense is not being allowed making something that makes clearly sense. Thus, not being able to load into a transport of an ally of yours that is fine letting you load onto it makes no sense, as well as it makes no sense that, after winning a sea battle, you are irrefragably driven into committing your, possibly decimated, forces to a battle, possibly with next to no hope, as all rulesets after Revised original oblige you to do. Of course, I’m aware that, in practice, both these items are next to irrelevant and are arguably far from clear, and even far from sensible, in all their possible applications (especially the rules for calling off landings, otherwise I would not have this discussion).

    It’s a board game by Hasbro. There’s mountains of other things in this game that make no sense from a historical perspective, but at some point you have to make sacrifices in realism to make a game playable and its rules comprehensible. There are other theater-level wargames out there that do a much better job at realism than Axis & Allies, but they’re much more complicated games and, as a result, fewer people play them.


  • @Krieghund said in Calling off landings:

    @Cernel said in Calling off landings:

    @Krieghund As probably the final bunch of things about calling off landings, I assume that, during Non Combat Move, the land units that I called off cannot offload, if I loaded them on the same turn, while they can offload if already on board at the start of the turn (because, in the first case, they already moved, on the same turn, but not in the second case).
    I also assume they are not restricted offloading only into the territory where they intended to offload (in this case, this would be possible only if that territory has been conquered), thus can offload into whatever adjacent currently friendly territory.
    Finally, I assume they keep the ability to load units, if not offloading any.

    What the rulebook says is that:

    “During the conduct combat phase, that player may call off the landing but cannot redirect the attack to a different territory.”
    “A transport can never offload in two territories during a single turn”

    Hence, unless I’m missing something, I should be able still to offload to a different territory, during Non Combat Move, since I never actually offloaded, nor there is a rule inhibiting me to do anything for calling off landing, after the Conduct Combat phase.

    So, for example, I have two sea zones,
    one occupied by no units and
    another one occupied by enemy units and an allied unit with two infantry of mine on board.

    I move one transport with two loaded infantry into the empty sea zone, offloading both infantry into an enemy territory.
    I move offenceful ships into the enemy zone.
    I have one transport with 1 already loaded infantry on board, which I load 1 armour into, then move it into the enemy zone, offloading both the infantry and the armour into the same enemy territory.
    I offload all units from the allied transport into the same enemy territory.

    I conduct combat in the sea zone, killing all enemies without losing the transport.

    At the moment I decide to resolve the battle in the enemy territory, I decide to call off landings, which keeps the transport with the 1 infantry and 1 armour unoffloaded, keeps the allied transport unoffloaded, while still offloading the transport with 2 infantries (my only two possible decisions is either this or offloading everything I can).

    Then, during Non Combat Move,
    for the transport with the 1 infantry and 1 armour still on board, the armour is stuck on board, while I can offload the infantry into any adjacent territories that are friendly at this point (thus also into the same territory I called off the landing, if it was conquered),
    while, for the allied transport, I can offload all units on board into any adjacent territories that are friendly at this point (thus also into the same territory I called off the landing, if it was conquered).

    During Non Combat Move, if any of the transports I called off landings from would have had only 1 unit on board, I could have loaded 1 other unit on board of them, as long as not offloading any, from the same transport (this both for my transport and the transport of my ally, all else happening as described above).

    Finally, I could have called off the landings from the allied transport also in case the sea battle ended with both sides completely eliminated (thus only the allied transport and its cargo remaining in that sea zone).

    Correct?

    Yes.

    While we both agree that this is what the rules are literally saying, I’m actually uncomfortable with it. Beside retreating and flying back air units that participated in combat, combat movement is done on the Combat Move phase. So, I think it would be coherent the most that the transports are actually moving not only to the sea zone but also to the coastline of the territory they intend to offload into during Combat Move. If they would do so, then, they would not be able to offload the cargo that was called off into any other land zone, during the subsequent Non Combat Move phase. By, this way, substantially assuming that moving to the coastline is an intra-zone movement, done only after resolving the battle, I see the following inconsistencies or absurdities:

    • If the battle is victorious and landings are not called off, we are substantially splitting Combat Move between the Combat Move and the Conduct Combat phase, the transports going into the sea zone (but not to the coastline) during Combat Move, then moving to the coastline during Conduct Combat, after winning the battle.

    • If, after calling off landings, I can, then, offload into a different land zone, during the subsequent Non Combat Move phase, then I see no reasons why I cannot do the same during the Conduct Combat phase, deciding not only if, but also where, I’m offloading, only after resolving the sea battle. To be clear, there is no doubt that the rules are against redirecting landings or choosing where to land after resolving the sea battle, thus it is the other side of the coin that I’m feeling not coherent, as the only way I can possibly explain the reason of such limitations is that the movement to or towards the coastline, not just into the sea zone, was already made, during the Conduct Combat phase (this is the only reason why I can possibly explain why I cannot decide the coastline after the battle, though, in my mind, in this case, I should not be able to decide the coastline after the battle at all, for the whole turn, comprising the subsequent Non Combat Move phase, while the rules, instead, allow me to).

    • If the rules would have said that ships that called off landings still count as having offloaded (nothing) into the land zone they were meant to offload into (thus they cannot load anything and are restricted offloading only into the land zone where they called the landings off, if something else conquered or liberated it), this would have gone a long way to limit the aforementioned “loophole”.

    I guess it would be too much of a stretch to interpret the fact that I cannot redirect the landings to another land zone as also saying that, during the subsequent Non Combat Move phase, I can only offload into that same land zone (and lose the ability to load anything, since there is nothing to load from that coastline), but just wanted to clarify the reasons why I’m doubtful about the opportunity of, substantially, just threating transports that called off their landings exactly like transports that moved into the battle without any intention to offload their already loaded cargo (this doesn’t feel right to me, even not taking the loophole into account).

  • 2024 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18

    You’re free to just make a house rule if you don’t like the official rules. People do that pretty often.


  • @DoManMacgee I’m mostly curious what is the assumed behaviour, behind the rules, with sea borne assaults preceded by sea battles. Basically what is happening between:

    1. The transports move to the coastline during Combat Move, take part in the battle, then offload (or not) the cargo, without moving within the same sea zone, during that phase.
    2. The transports move to the sea zone, yet not to the coastline, during Combat Move, take part in the battle, then move (or not) to the coastline, during Conduct Combat, offloading the cargo.

    If it is the first case, when I call off the landings, that means that I call them off while I’m on the coastline, while, in the second case, I call off not only the landings, but also the movement to the coastline itself.


  • @Cernel A good argument against the fact that I’m moving to the coastline during Combat Move, if the sea zone is hostile, may be that I can have two or more different landings from the same embattled sea zone, and all these sea units are part of the same battle, which seems to hint they cannot be on the coastlines, at that point, as, this way, they would be not all together. So, it may be that they are all together during the battle, then, after winning the battle, they split up and head each one to their assigned coastline. Is this how it is working? If so, this would be the 3rd case of same sea zone movement I’m seeing (the first one, of course, being bridging, while the second one being loading a transport from two different land territories, without moving the transport itself, comprising non combat loading immobile transports that combat moved or took part in battles (or both)).


  • @krieghund If during the Amphib Assault ‘sea battle’ the defending forces kill all the attacking warships and only the defender is still present, can the loaded transports retreat or do they become casualties?


  • Transports are no different than other units in this game as regards casualties. They don’t need to be taken last, and they are not automatically destroyed when alone. If you choose to sacrifice your warships to protect your transports, they can retreat if they survive.

Suggested Topics

  • 4
  • 8
  • 6
  • 2
  • 7
  • 2
  • 4
  • 19
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

22

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts