Author Topic: Q & A  (Read 9537 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mark

  • Administrator
  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
    • View Profile
Q & A
« on: February 10, 2006, 03:11:52 AM »
"In air-to-air combat, every unit that survives the
round is moved to the ground combat battle board;
correct?"


Surviving planes designated as bombers from both sides are moved to the ground or naval battleboard.  Planes designated as fighters or interceptors remain on the air to air battleboard.  All planes are placed back on the air-to-air battleboard to duke it out again at the beginning of every combat round.

Mark

  • Administrator
  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
    • View Profile
Re: Q & A
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2006, 03:15:10 AM »
"Just to confirm, aircraft may not be taken as
casualties in ground combat - only air-to-air combat?"


Planes can only be taken as casualties in ground or naval combat if they are hit by AA guns.  AA fire happens at the beginning of every combat round.  Hits from ground or naval combat (other than AA) can not be applied to planes - once all of your ground units have been hit and all you have left is planes, excess hits are ignored.

Mark

  • Administrator
  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
    • View Profile
Re: Q & A
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2006, 03:19:58 AM »
"If ground forces attack a territory that only
contains aircraft, what happens? Do the aircraft have
a round of combat, or do they re-base to another
territory immediately? Suppose they re-base to another
territory where there will be only aircraft, and then
that territory is also invaded by ground forces. Would
the aircraft re-base again?"


If ground units attack a territory that only contains aircraft, the aircraft immediately have to retreat (re-base) up to half their movement and can not perform any defensive air support for that combat phase.  If the re-based territory is then attacked, the aircraft are forced to retreat (re-base) again.
(Though eliminating them on the second re-base sounds intriguing. . .)

Mark

  • Administrator
  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
    • View Profile
Re: Q & A
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2006, 03:22:48 AM »
"In Axis & Allies, any defending units in an amphibious
invasion that are hit by bombarding ships are
eliminated immediately without a return shot; if were
reading the rules correctly, in World at War units
always get a return shot. Is this correct?"


Yes - units always get a return shot in this game. 

Mark

  • Administrator
  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
    • View Profile
Re: Q & A
« Reply #4 on: March 17, 2006, 03:20:25 AM »
"An observation I've made is that the naval movement rates in the Pacific don't seem to be justified. It's hard for me to speak definitely on this, since we haveyet to get a game to the point where there's any action in the Pacific, but only allowing tactical movement of two zones seems peculiar. I realize that the Pacific is covering a larger area, but at the same time, we're talking about turns that are supposed to cover from 2-4 months. Under the current system, it would be impossible to re-create the Coral Sea campaign from history, since neither side could reach that sea zone in one turn using tactical movement (historically, the US fleet was able to steam from Pearl Harbor to the Coral Sea, fight, and steam back to Hawaii in less than a month)."

A good question.  Several versions ago, tactical movement in the Pacific was 3 sea zones (instead of 2) and fighters launched off of carriers could move 4 (just like land fighter movement).  What several games illustrated was that one massive fleet could cover a vast area of the Pacific map and the Pacific theater became a game of both sides building a massive fleet and slamming it into each other - which was not that much fun.

To make the game have more the feel of the Pacific theater, tactical movement was reduced to 2 spaces and planes off of carriers were reduced to 2 as well.  This forced players to have multiple fleets to attack or defend different strategic areas of the Pacific map and made for a much more dynamic game and captured a bit more of the essence of the war in that theater.  Also, having a movement of 2 and a rule that says "all units must be off loaded from transports at the end of a movement phase forces both sides to island hop - which was perfect.

To answer you question about the Coral Sea: a lot of design and playtesting went in to allow history to be played out almost turn for turn the way it happened.  In a season per turn game, some of the things that happened historically are hard to simulate.  But, Coral Sea and Midway would have happened something like the following:

Winter 1941 Axis Turn:Â  Japanese move and bomb Pearl Harbor and a seperate Japanese task force invades Rabaul and Northern New Guinea.

Winter 1941 Allied Turn: The US strategically moves (up to 8 spaces) a carrier task force to the Coral Sea to protect Port Moresby and Australia.

Spring 1942 Axis Turn: The Japanese attack the Coral Sea and lose a light carrier due to a hit by a US carrier based fighter plane and the Japanese retreat.  the Japanese also strategically move another fleet together to prepare for Midway.

Spring 1942 Allied Turn:Â  The US stratgically moves their carriers adjacent to Midway anticipating the Japanese attack.

Summer 1942 Axis Turn: The Japanese move their carrier group adjacent to Midway and stratigically move a transport force to the Marianas islands - in striking dstance of Midway.

Summer 1942 Allied turn: The US attacks the Japanese carrier force adjacent to Midway with their own carrier based planes.  The US player rolls extremely well and sinks 2 Japanese carriers.

Remember, players can strategically move their navies up to 8 spaces through sea zones they control to enable this series of events to happen.  Both at the Coral Sea and Midway, the US was on the strategic defensive - so in game mechanics they strategically moved their fleets prior to the battle to defend the area from Japanese aggression.  I think the game system - between strategic and tactical movement - allows things like the Coral Sea and Midway to simulated pretty well with a game of this scale.


Mark

  • Administrator
  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
    • View Profile
Re: Q & A
« Reply #5 on: July 10, 2006, 02:49:10 PM »
"Can mechanized units attack in the mechanized phase after they are landed via amphibious assault during the movement phase?"

No, per the Mechanized Phase rules on page 27:

Mechanized units may either move into a friendly territory or into an enemy owned territory (combat) during the mechanized movement phase.  Mechanized units may not move into combat by moving into enemy owned territory if:
1)Â  It is a winter turn in a non-arid/desert territory.
2)Â  The mechanized unit was landed as part of an amphibious assault on the general movement phase.
3)Â  The mechanized unit was moved via strategic land (rail) movement during the general movement phase.
4)  The mechanized unit is moving into or out of a rough forested or mountainous territory.  

Mechanized units may still move into friendly owned territories during these conditions on the mechanized phase – just not into enemy owned territories.

Mark

  • Administrator
  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
    • View Profile
Re: Q & A
« Reply #6 on: July 10, 2006, 02:52:08 PM »
"After flying defensive air support, do my air units have to land back in the territories they intercepted from?"

Yes, unless the territory they intercepted from is no longer friendly occupied at the conclusion of the combat phase.  Per the rules on page 16:

After defensive air support, defending air units must return to the territory or carrier that they intercepted from.  If the original territory / carrier is no longer available to return to due to enemy occupation, battle or it is sunk, the intercepting air unit must fly to an alternate territory / aircraft carrier within range of half its movement from the battle territory or sea zone.  If no carrier or territory exists within this range, the air unit is eliminated instead.
 

John D.

  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 1183
    • View Profile
Re: Q & A
« Reply #7 on: July 11, 2006, 04:14:17 AM »
Can mechanized units attack in the mechanized phase after they are landed via tactical or strategic movement by transport during the movement phase?

derdiktator

  • Captain
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Q & A - Mech attack after non-amphib transport
« Reply #8 on: July 11, 2006, 07:50:51 AM »
"Can mechanized units attack in the mechanized phase after they are landed via amphibious assault during the movement phase?"

No, per the Mechanized Phase rules on page 27:

...Mechanized units may not move into combat by moving into enemy owned territory if:
1)  ...
2)  The mechanized unit was landed as part of an amphibious assault on the general movement phase.
3)  ...

Presuming I haven't missed something, you might reword the above to make it explicit that any form of transport (not just amphibious assault)  precludes mech attacks by the transported units.  We had the case where the mech units were transported a short distance into a friendly zone  - NOT an amphib assault - and then wanted to mech attack, but apparently even this form of transport precludes mech attacks.

Truth to tell, the above particularly hurts the Western Allies D-Day landing since it means that a break-out / mech attack basically can't occur until the third turn of the lodgement:
Turn 1: Invade with infantry (typically)
Turn 2: Transport in a bunch of tanks and other good stuff (no mech attack allowed). [The Axis can almost certainly keep the initial infantry bottled up.]
Turn 3: Tanks and infantry attack out of the bridgehead.

dd
« Last Edit: July 11, 2006, 08:03:41 AM by derdiktator »

Mark

  • Administrator
  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
    • View Profile
Re: Q & A
« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2006, 04:41:58 AM »
OK - clarified:
If the mech unit moves by transport (either tactically or strategically) during the regular movement phase, it can not mech attack during the mechanized phase (it may mech friendly, however).

Thanks,
Mark