Kamakazi attacks, do they happen on the japanese combat phase only?



  • This is a bit ambiguous, but this is how i read it.  Any clarification?

    Our situation is as such:

    American carriers outside iwo jima (captured last turn).  Japanese moved in the entire japanese navy and air force and decalred kamakazis on the carriers.

    If they are damaged, the planes on the carriers do not participate yes?

    If they are destroyed, the planes go down with the carriers, yes?

    Or do the fighters/tacs launch in the movement phase before the kamakazi attacks?

    And the rulebook is ambiguous, but it seems to indicate that kamakazis can be used during th conduct combat phase, and since it’s a japanese power it’s on the japanese turn.

    Update:

    We found a section in the carrier section that says the carriers always launch planes when they come under attack and the planes are always considered to be defending in the air.  This seems to apply to kamakazi atttacks as well.


  • Official Q&A

    Kamikaze attacks occur on the Allied players’ turns, not on Japan’s turn.  Like scrambling, they are a reaction to enemy combat movement.  As a result, any attacking carriers’ planes will be in the air, unless they belong to an ally and being carried as cargo.



  • … and if they are Allied planes they are treated as cargo.  They are not in the air when the attack comes.  If the carrier is damaged, the planes are stuck on board until the carrier is fixed.  If the carrier is sunk, the planes are lost.



  • They have to be cargo, kamikazes only come when Japan is being attacked. That being the case, only one ally can attack at a time so the allied planes would have to be cargo.



  • @Krieghund:

    Kamikaze attacks occur on the Allied players’ turns, not on Japan’s turn.  Like scrambling, they are a reaction to enemy combat movement.  As a result, any attacking carriers’ planes will be in the air, unless they belong to an ally and being carried as cargo.

    If this is the case, it is quite unclear in the rules.  I reread that section a number of times and it seemed to indicate that it would occur at the beginning of the conduct combat phase after allied units “had” been moved into a sea zone with the kamakazi symbol.  The use of the past tense here could indicate that the units in question were moved there last turn, not necessarily “just moved.”

    I personally prefer the interpretation where the kamikaze attacks happen right after allied movement phase, but that is not how the rules word it.



  • Does that mean the carriers planes, do not defend against the kamikaze attack?



  • The carriers and the planes are not defending, they are attacking and the kamikaze is defending.


  • Official Q&A

    @Bridger:

    If this is the case, it is quite unclear in the rules.  I reread that section a number of times and it seemed to indicate that it would occur at the beginning of the conduct combat phase after allied units “had” been moved into a sea zone with the kamakazi symbol.  The use of the past tense here could indicate that the units in question were moved there last turn, not necessarily “just moved.”

    I personally prefer the interpretation where the kamikaze attacks happen right after allied movement phase, but that is not how the rules word it.

    Read the paragraph before Kamikaze Attack:

    There are two special actions that can take place at the beginning of this phase.  Both actions involve defending air units reacting to enemy movements.  These actions must be completed before any combat occurs.



  • It might help to clear up some of the confusion by stepping though an example.

    Assume Japan meets the requirements on a previous turn to allow Kamikaze attacks.

    Assume sz17 has 1destroyer and Iwo Jima has 1inf.

    Lets say the US attacks sz17 with 1CRZ, 2AC (1AC has an ANZAC 1fighter on it as cargo because nations may NOT attack together, only defend together.) and 1trn with units for the Iwo Jima assault.

    Lets say the US declares an amphibious assault on Iwo Jima with 1 transport w/2inf, 3ftr which all have 1 movement point left to move in noncombat and land on 2AC in sz17 during Mobilize New Units Phase.

    In phase 2 (Combat Movement) of the US turn, the US moves his units and declares his amphibious assault.

    When phase 2 is done, and before phase 3 starts, Japan announces 2 Kamikaze attacks on 1Ac, 2 Kamikaze attacks on the other 1Ac with ANZAC 1ftr as cargo on it.

    Phase 2 for the US is done, over with; the US player may NOT change their moves.

    Japan must declare how many Kamikaze attacks they will roll for. They can’t roll, then check for hits, and roll some more.

    Fighters are already flying at the start of Combat Movement, they do not move with the AC, they move separately, and land on the AC at the end of noncombat.

    Before phase3 for the US starts, the 4 Kamikaze attacks are rolled.

    Let’s say Japan gets 1 hit on each AC. (if there were 2 hits on 1 AC, then the AC would be removed at this time.)

    Now start phase 3…Conduct Combat!

    US attacker rolls for 1CRZ @3,2 damaged AC @0, 1 loaded trn @0
    US gets 1 hit.

    Japan chooses 1DD as a casualty, and rolls @2 for a miss.

    With the sz17 now clear, it is now amphibious assault time and the US wins that battle and takes control of Iwo Jima.

    Phase 4 Noncombat.

    Oh no! The US has nowhere to land 3ftrs, the 2AC are damaged, and the fighters are lost to the sea and removed from play.

    On the ANZAC turn, his 1ftr may not leave the damaged AC.

    On Japan’s turn, aircraft are sent to easily destroy the stuff in sz17 (1Crz@3, 2damagedAC with a fighter that is stuck below deck @2, 1trn @0), the 3ftrs from before are no longer there and 1 is stuck below deck.

    Conclusion, the only planes involved with Kamikaze attacks are planes from other Allies below deck as cargo. The rest of the planes have to deal with whatever happened.

    Japan would have loved to Kamikaze attack the transport, but the rules do not allow that.

    Japan could have Kamikaze attacked the 1CRZ and, if successful, prevented the amphibious assault because there would be no way to clear the seazone (AC attack @0, transports attack @0).

    Why did the US bring in the 2AC, when it could have moved them there during noncombat? I don’t know.  Rules do not prevent bad play. This was an example of what happens, not how one should play.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 9
  • 2
  • 4
  • 10
  • 3
  • 105
  • 2
  • 1
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

37
Online

14.0k
Users

34.3k
Topics

1.4m
Posts