Newly built fighters and newly built aircraft carriers

[COJOH]

The operations manual page 22, states that newly built A/C can enter play with fighters aboard, whether those are built this turn or already in the territory containing the industrial complex.
The FAQ, page 7, “mobilize units”, first question states that existing fighters who are in the territory containing the industrial complex OR in the sea zone where the A/C is built can immediately be moved onto a newly built carrier.

So , is the FAQ the most accurate explanation ?

[Krieghund]

@cojoh That’s interesting. The only way an existing fighter can be in the sea zone is if it’s already on a carrier, so the FAQ entry would seem to imply that you can move a fighter from an existing carrier to a new one in the same zone. I can’t think of any reason to actually do this other than to move a fighter from one power’s carrier to another, for example moving an existing UK fighter from an existing US carrier to a new UK carrier. We have to assume that this applies only to fighters belonging to the mobilizing power, otherwise it would create a situation where a piece can move on a turn other than its own.

This is quite a concept to be introduced in such an offhand way, but stranger things have happened.

[Panther]

@krieghund said in Newly built fighters and newly built aircraft carriers:

The only way an existing fighter can be in the sea zone is if it’s already on a carrier, so the FAQ entry would seem to imply that you can move a fighter from an existing carrier to a new one in the same zone.

Maybe this FAQ-entry (of April 2010!) was written with the in later (than Revised) games common case in mind where the (UK) fighter ends its move in a seazone where the newly built (UK) carrier will be mobilized, then.

[Krieghund]

@panther It’s possible. I didn’t do this FAQ, so I don’t know for sure.

[AndrewAAGamer]

From FAQ (Entire Question):
A newly built fighter can be placed directly on a newly built aircraft carrier. Can a newly built fighter be placed on an existing carrier, or can existing fighters be placed on a new carrier?

An existing fighter that is in the territory containing the industrial complex or that is in the sea zone where the aircraft carrier is built can immediately be moved onto a newly built carrier. New fighters, however, can’t be placed directly on existing carriers.

OOB Revised Rules: (Bolded by me)

Page 21 NCM… Air Units: Air units can land in any friendly territories. They cannot end their move in hostile territories or in any territories you captured this turn. Fighters can land on any friendly carrier, even those that move during this phase…

Page 22 Mobilize New Units… However, fighters can enter play on newly built aircraft carriers… Newly built carriers can enter play with fighters aboard, whether those fighters were built this turn or were already in the territory containing the industrial complex…

Therefore:

Newly Built Carrier:

• Existing fighter? Yes, if on land with industrial complex where carrier was built from. (OOB Rules) (Advantage from land. Allows movement from land to sea thus gaining one movement point.)
• Existing fighter? Yes, if on existing carrier in Sea Zone where newly built carrier was built. (FAQ) (Advantage from sea. Allows transfer of fighter from non-phasing existing carrier to phasing newly built carrier. Example. US fighter on UK carrier moves from existing UK carrier to newly built US carrier freeing up slot on UK Carrier.)
• Newly built fighter? Yes. (OOB)

Newly Built Fighter:

• Existing carrier? No. (OOB)
• Newly built carrier? Yes (OOB)

(Andrew’s Note: The FAQ introduced a new rule that was not present in the OOB rules; that an existing fighter on an existing carrier in the same sea zone where the newly built carrier was placed in could move the existing fighter between the existing carrier to the newly built carrier.)

(It should be noted also this is for OOB rules only. In LHTR 1.2 the rules were amended to 1) allow a freestanding fighter to hover in a sea zone waiting for a newly built carrier and 2) removed the ability to move a fighter from a territory to a newly built carrier.)

(LHTR 1.2) Exception to normal fighter landing spaces rules: Your fighter may also end its move in a sea zone adjacent to an industrial complex you own if you have purchased an aircraft carrier that turn and will subsequently place that carrier in the seazone where your fighter ends
its turn.

Newly built fighters can be placed into territories containing an industrial complex controlled by your power from the start of your turn, or they may be placed on an aircraft carrier owned by your power in a seazone adjacent to a territory with such an industrial complex. The aircraft carrier may be an existing one or it may be a newly built carrier. You may not place a new fighter on a carrier owned by a friendly power. (Andrew’s Note - no mention of a fighter already in the industrial complex territory)

(Andrew’s Note: Finally, the LHTR 1.2 rules were unchanged regarding this specific discussion in LHTR 2.0.)

[AndrewAAGamer]

@panther said in Newly built fighters and newly built aircraft carriers:

Maybe this FAQ-entry (of April 2010!) was written with the in later (than Revised) games common case in mind where the (UK) fighter ends its move in a seazone where the newly built (UK) carrier will be mobilized, then.

Unfortunately the FAQ, the LHTR 1.2 and LHTR 2.0 files I have are not dated. However, my file folder shows I copied the FAQ into it on 2/7/2005, LHTR 1.2 on 1/21/2006 and LHTR 2.0 on 4/16/2008 which makes me believe the FAQ is referring to the OOB ruleset.

[COJOH]

Sorry for my late reply, I was a few days out of my home. I’m a little confused from the different answers. I was hoping that the explanation would have been simply that the FAQ follows the future rules from1940 or 1942 where you may move a fighter to a sea zone next to an industrial complex where you will place an A/C you bought during the purchase units phase. According to Krieghund the answer is no, according to AndrewAA (OOB rules and LHTR) the answer is yes.

[Krieghund]

@cojoh I’m sorry, but I don’t see any difference between @AndrewAAGamer’s answer and mine, except that he went into a lot more detail. I only allowed for the possibility that the FAQ entry could have been a mistaken reference to later rules, but I don’t think it was.

[COJOH]

@krieghund sorry, maybe due to the language difference (English is my 3th language) that I didn’t understand it very well.
So… can I play it like in the rules from 1940 and 1942 ?

[Krieghund]

@cojoh If by “play it like in the rules from 1940 and 1942” you mean can you land fighters in the sea zone if a new carrier is being mobilized there, the answer is “no.” Unless you want to house rule it ,of course.

[COJOH]

@krieghund yes, that is what I meant