Thanks for the reply Craig.
1) Base rules for supply state that naval units are always considered to be in supply, but I could see where this could seem strange if the land and air units in the home country are considered out of supply.
This is something that has bothered me since I got the game. Since ships are always in supply it sometimes leads to some rather questionable handling of fleets when they are cut off from a base. Watching a fleet that’s out of supply just steam around and engage in battle after battle with no ill effects just really bothers my sense of realism. It also makes me wonder just where they’re getting the fuel they need for all this steaming. There is an excellent article on
www.combinedfleet.com (
http://www.combinedfleet.com/guadoil1.htm) where the author postulates how oil (or the lack thereof) impacted Japanese naval strategy in the Guadalcanal campaign.
He uses a Hatsuharu-class DD as an example. With a fuel capacity of 500 tons of fuel, cruising at 15 knots gives it an endurance of roughly 400 hours. Of course, you can’t fight a battle at 15 knots (not for long, anyway…), and at its flank speed of 34 knots its endurance drops to 30 hours as its fuel consumption goes up by a factor of 13. In other words, it goes from having enough fuel to steam for a little over 2 weeks to having enough to last a little over a day – and we’re talking about a game where turns are several months. Even steaming at 15 knots means that this DD would have to refuel at a minimum of six times in a three-month turn; again, just where are they getting all this fuel?
This is why I strongly feel that something needs to be done in regard to fleets that are out of supply. I’ve had games where I took Gibraltar and the Suez, and yet the British fleet trapped in the Med was able to cruise around for several turns and fight several battles. In real life they simply could not do this – with no supply line they aren’t going to have the fuel, and with even the most liberal of concessions they would be out of fuel the next turn. The only thing they could do is steam for any port they may still control.
Another example would be Hawaii. If Japan had been able to take Hawaii the US fleet would had to have retreated to the West Coast and would have been severely limited in how far they would be able to operate from there; in the game, Japan can take Hawaii – and the US can steam around the central Pacific unaffected.
I’m not sure how to address the issue, but I’m convinced that it does need to be addressed. Possibly saying that a fleet that is out of supply cannot make attacks would help. Another idea might be that a fleet can only operate a certain distance (in sea zones) from a friendly island or territory that is itself in supply. A fleet that is cut out of supply would have to immediately move to re-establish a line of supply.
This may not be an issue for some. For me, the fairly high level of realism the game simulates means that it should be addressed.
As to these optional morale rules, the easy answer is to just say that naval units are unaffected (per the regular supply rules).
2) I didn't see anything in the rules that states that an OOS Bomber couldn't perform a paradrop. It probably should.
The reason I bring up these first two questions is that I’m trying to determine the intent of the rules regarding the forbidding of amphibious invasions or paradrops by units that are OOS. I also don’t think this is specifically addressed in the rulebook, and so a ruling is needed. For whatever it’s worth, I think the Axis out to be able to use Italian units that are OOS to land German troops; otherwise, once Italy is out of Africa they would never be able to get back in.
3) Good question. I would think that it would be apparent to the Italian player to not move out of the Med. theater because of this, but you never know what the situation is. It just might come up in the course of a game. It should be covered.
The group I gamed with 20 years ago had a couple of guys who were absolute weasels who would stay up nights trying to figure out ways to abuse rules to their advantage. I think they got more enjoyment out of all the arguing than they did from playing. That experience has caused me to try and see potential issues ahead of time and ask for clarification. The guys I game with are great guys, and I’m confident they would agree that Italy couldn’t use troops outside the Med in this situation, but random guys at a game club meeting might be as logical.
4) It shouldn't matter since you are just tracing back through the affected territories to your own production centers.
Craig
I agree.
