UK cannot land there because they did not own it at the beginning of their turn. US comes after them in the order.
You found the relevant rule and quoted it.
Amphibious Assault vs. Land Battle
-
Just wanted some clarification on a rule which seems strange.
Let’s say I have two transports full of US troops. 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Tank for arguments sake. They are accompanied by a Battleship and Cruiser.
I land them in Morocco via Amphibious Assault in uncontested sea zone. My ships kill the two defending infantry…
- Do the defenders get to roll hits or are they denied from doing so by dying in the bombardment?
I then decide I want to take Libya on my next turn. The sea zone is still devoid of Axis ships. It seems to make more sense to load my troops back onto the transports and conduct another amphibious assault in order to get the marine bombardment, despite the fact I can simply attack Libya by land.
- This seems OP so is there some subtle rule that I’m missing or is it perfectly legal to chain these unnecessary amphibious assaults?
-
@JBZ said in Amphibious Assault vs. Land Battle:
Just wanted some clarification on a rule which seems strange.
Let’s say I have two transports full of US troops. 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Tank for arguments sake. They are accompanied by a Battleship and Cruiser.
I land them in Morocco via Amphibious Assault in uncontested sea zone. My ships kill the two defending infantry…
- Do the defenders get to roll hits or are they denied from doing so by dying in the bombardment?
They fire back, as the rulebook says (page 17):
“Roll one die for each battleship and cruiser. Battleships hit on a “4” or less, and cruisers hit on a “3” or less (their attack numbers). For each hit, the defender moves a defending unit to the casualty zone of the battle board (used for land combat, below). These casualties will be able to defend during the land combat step before they are eliminated.”I then decide I want to take Libya on my next turn. The sea zone is still devoid of Axis ships. It seems to make more sense to load my troops back onto the transports and conduct another amphibious assault in order to get the marine bombardment, despite the fact I can simply attack Libya by land.
- This seems OP so is there some subtle rule that I’m missing or is it perfectly legal to chain these unnecessary amphibious assaults?
No there isn’t. This move is perfectly legal. This is simply something players have to take into account.
Welcome to the forum :-)
-
@Panther Thanks for the speedy answer… feels like a strategy that might make me unpopular but if it’s legitimate then I suppose it’s fair game.
Suggested Topics
