Shuffling figs on friendly CVs in same sz?

Again, in the case where the SZ is being attacked, NONE of the defending AC’s are MOVING.  Movement is reserved for the ATTACKER under game mechanics.

And if you are talking about a move where an ally is moving their AC into a Sea Zone, that does not work either, because any FIGs presently in that SZ belonging to another nation cannot MOVE to the new AC since it is not their turn; and MOVEMENT may only be done during that nation’s move (either combat and/or non-combat).

No, it cannot.

FIGs not of your nation are not MOVING in your turn.  As such they are CARGO on whatever AC they are currently attached to.

The rules are explicit… MOVEMENT is reserved for the ATTACKER.  And a friendly AC moving into a friendly SZ does not allow for the allied FIGs already in that SZ that belong to another nation to get a movement when it is not their turn.

In order for you to support your argument, you will need to show me where in the rules it allows for a nation who is not currently moving OR being attacked to be permitted to move their FIGs.

Otherwise, the new AC entering the SZ is just that… a new AC moving in, and the other allied FIGs ignore it until their turn.

Sorry, I am NEVER going to allow a nation that is NOT in its turn and is NOT being attacked to MOVE their FIGs.  The rules do not allow for it.  It ain’t your turn, you CANNOT move.  Those are the rules.

If you think I am in error, ask Kreig for his advice…

I’m going to have to side with 'Switch on this one.  Tim, I think you’re reading too much into the word “friendly” in the rule you quoted.  When it’s your ally’s turn, your fighters on his/her carrier are cargo - they can’t move.  This means they wouldn’t be in the air, which precludes transferring to another carrier in the same sea zone.

Movement doesn’t necessarily require a piece to move from one space to another.  For example, transports move within a space when they pick up units from one territory then unload them into another territory bordering the same sea zone.

The only time your fighters are in the air when it’s not your turn is when they’re under attack.  Even then, they may only move when their carrier is sunk out from under them.  Under that circumstance only may a fighter move, even within the same sea zone, when it’s not the owner’s turn.  In that case, it may land on another friendly carrier.

I think you are in error, Switch.

For one, it’s MUCH easier to assume that a nation’s fighters are on their own carrier instead of just trying to remember who landed what on what carrier 15 rounds ago.

Secondly, I think Tim is correct, fighters are assumed to have been launched each turn and land at the end of the turn to refuel.  They cannot move to a new territory, but the same sea zone is not a different territory.

Third, as mentioned before, Carriers do not count as a territory, otherwise launching from a carrier would be the same as leaving an island chain, it is not.

Fourth, just from a historical and logical precedent, we know that carrier air groups flew cover air patrol when not actively attacking the enemy, therefore it would be logical sense for them to land on their own carriers to refuel and change crews whenever possible.

Lastly, when you attack a fleet with more than one carrier, you do not kill the fighters that were originally on that carrier when you sink a carrier, the defending fighters only die at the end of combat if there is no viable landing spot.  Therefore, we do have a game precedent set to support the idea that fighters can be on whatever carrier the owner choses whenever the owner choses them to be there, regardless of whose turn it is, provided there is room for the fighters on carriers present.

@Cmdr:

For one, it’s MUCH easier to assume that a nation’s fighters are on their own carrier instead of just trying to remember who landed what on what carrier 15 rounds ago.

I’ll not agree or desagree with Jen or Switch. Simply i’ll say about that quote:

If playing face to face, just put the figs on the carrier they landed (limey figs on green carriers… puagh, but still…). AA battlemap or TripleA can be tricky, but you simply can post what figs are in what ACs.

Under Cargo rules:

• A nation, exemple UK,  CAN load it’s infantry on a USA transport on it’s turn.
• The USA transport CAN move on USA turn with UK infantry onboard but cannot disembark them
• UK on its turn CAN disembark the infantry either combat or non-combat wise.

Now, Allied fighters on a carrier are threated as CARGO.
This means:

• A nation, exemple UK,  CAN load it’s fighters on a USA carrier on it’s turn.
• The USA carrier CAN move on USA turn with UK fighters onboard but cannot disembark them.
• UK on its turn CAN disembark the fighters either combat or non-combat wise.
• IMPORTANT note, fighters as cargo CANNOT be use offensively or Defensively. If the USA carrier is part of an attack and sink, they’ll go down with it as any cargo goes down with a transport.

This is how I and friends interpret it.
So to answer:

• Shuffling of UK fighters is not possible on USA turn as per Cargo rules. (you can’t disembark them)
• It is possible however to extend the range of fighters by 2 zones in this scenario if the carrier moved that distance ( which makes sense, since they are transported )

Other interpretation is:

• IF allow other nation fighters to be use defensively, then they are treated as landed and CANNOT move with the carrier. Lost at sea if carrier leaves the zone and there is no nearby friendly zone.

But really, the tripleA rule is wrong for me, fighters should be treated as cargo and not allowed to even defend.

@Cmdr:

For one, it’s MUCH easier to assume that a nation’s fighters are on their own carrier instead of just trying to remember who landed what on what carrier 15 rounds ago.

Funcioneta has already addressed this, so I won’t.

@Cmdr:

Secondly, I think Tim is correct, fighters are assumed to have been launched each turn and land at the end of the turn to refuel.  They cannot move to a new territory, but the same sea zone is not a different territory.

Your fighters launch and recover on your turn, not on anyone else’s.  From LHTR, page 28:

Fighters from friendly powers can take off and land from your carriers, but only during that power’s turn.

and

Fighters belonging to friendly powers on attacking carriers are always treated as cargo, as it is not their turn.

The intent here is clearly that fighters may only move on their owner’s turn.  As with any other unit, they may defend when they’re attacked, in which case they may defend along with any other units present (also on page 28).  This is an exception to the above rules only in the sense that the fighters take off from and land on the carrier in order to fight.  Since it’s been established that a unit may only move on its owning player’s turn, it must return to the carrier from which it launched.  If the fighter is on the same carrier at the end of the combat that it was at the beginning, in game terms it has not “moved”.  To do anything else would constitute “movement”, even though it is only within the sea zone.  The only stated exception to this limitation in the rules is when the carrier the fighter was on no longer exists, in which case it may move as proscribed on page 26.

@Cmdr:

Third, as mentioned before, Carriers do not count as a territory, otherwise launching from a carrier would be the same as leaving an island chain, it is not.

Correct, however movement within a space is still movement.  This is amply demonstrated in the transport rules.

@Cmdr:

Fourth, just from a historical and logical precedent, we know that carrier air groups flew cover air patrol when not actively attacking the enemy, therefore it would be logical sense for them to land on their own carriers to refuel and change crews whenever possible.

Sorry, but this argument is simply irrelevant.  The rules of the game are what’s important here.

@Cmdr:

Lastly, when you attack a fleet with more than one carrier, you do not kill the fighters that were originally on that carrier when you sink a carrier, the defending fighters only die at the end of combat if there is no viable landing spot.  Therefore, we do have a game precedent set to support the idea that fighters can be on whatever carrier the owner choses whenever the owner choses them to be there, regardless of whose turn it is, provided there is room for the fighters on carriers present.

Not at all.  Since units may not move other than on their owner’s turn (with the above-noted exception), any fighters defending carriers must return to the same carriers when the attack is over, provided they still exist.  The fact that a defending fighter may move if its carrier is destroyed in no way implies that it may otherwise move whenever the owner wishes it to.  The exception applies only under the stated circumstance.

@Corbeau:

Now, Allied fighters on a carrier are threated as CARGO.

Only during the carrier owner’s turn.  When attacked, they may defend.  (Page 28)

@Corbeau:

• IMPORTANT note, fighters as cargo CANNOT be use offensively or Defensively. If the USA carrier is part of an attack and sink, they’ll go down with it as any cargo goes down with a transport.

They can be used defensively, and they defend normally (page 28).

By all of the rules, and by game mechanics, you cannot just start shuffling FIGs around on ACs.

Jen’s argument of “remembering” what landed on what 15 turns ago only applies to Battlemap, and then only if you are careless about grouping the FIGs next to the AC they are sitting on.  But it is meaningless with the actual game board (on which ALL of the rules are based) since the FIG pieces actually sit ON the AC they belong to.

The rules are explicit about FIGs being CARGO except during their won move.  And CARGO does not fly around (unless it is in the back of a truck and is not properly secured and that truck makes some sudden movements… but that is not part of the game…)

You’re still wrong.

If England and America have Carriers and Fighters in SZ 45 (Solomon’s Sea Zone) and Japan attacks and sinks all the British Carriers, do the American fighters die just because those were the original carriers they were on?  No.  They can land on the American carriers if there is room (if not, the Allies can chose to kill the British fighters and make room for the American ones after combat is concluded.)

Therefore, there is precedent that it matters not what ship the fighter was on originally, only that there is a valid landing zone for the fighter.

Edit:

Transports are, of course, a different story.  Infantry and Armor and Artillery do not defend on a transport, therefore they are cargo.  Fighters DO defend, therefore, are units, not cargo.  They can be hauled along with the ship in NCM as if they were cargo, but are not, in and of themselves, actual cargo.

@ncscswitch:

…you cannot just start shuffling FIGs around on ACs.

Indeed.

Jen’s turning the discussion into a classic Monty Python skit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM

Not trying too, but I disagree with their interpretation of the rules.  Fighters are in the sea zone, not on a specific ship.  I’ve given my evidence, no one has specifically found a contradiction codified in the rules.

Transports are not Aircraft Carriers and do not function in combat as Aircraft Carriers and Fighters.  Thus, it’s a flawed analogy to use Infantry + Transports to simulate Fighters + Aircraft Carriers.  (Mainly that the infantry on transports cannot defend themselves, however the fighters on carriers - regardless of ownership of fighters and carriers - can defend themselves when attacked and can move from ship to ship or even to an adjacent land mass to find safe landing after combat.  If your transports die, the infantry on board cannot move to an adjacent land mass to avoid death.)

@Cmdr:

I’ve given my evidence, no one has specifically found a contradiction codified in the rules.

Ok, the question here is that, is swapping fighters between CV’s in the same sea zone considered a “move”?
If its a move then it’s obviously illegal.

But if it’s a non-move, then in what phase would you put it? You can’t put it in the combat movement or non-combat movement phases because it’s a “non-move” and those are movement phases. Only moves are allowed in those phases. And it clearly isn’t combat, a unit purchase, a new unit placement, or a collection of income.

Since, as a non-move, it doesn’t belong to any specific game phase and there is no precedent set for adding new phases to a game turn, then I would say it’s pretty much illegal whether it’s a move or not.

I believe that’s check and mate, Commander.