I can agree with number 2. Personally, I dont see why we need mechanized infantry to begin with, all infantry are mechanized! It’s not like you have a battalion of soldiers with no jeeps, no halftracks, no duece-and-halfs, no silversides, no cattlecars, etc, etc, etc. What makes one more mechanized than the other? As for blitzing with tanks, is that not just soldiers jumping on the tank and riding along?
hmmm, I can see the point. Mechanized inf means the development of a true APC, not the half tracks the Germans had, but a wholly enclosed armored troop carrier. And when we are talking about the numbers that are represented in A&A that is going to equate to entire corps of motorized and mechanized infantry. Just not practical on the battlefield, Mech inf are a support unit to help keep inf up with the tanks.
Inf riding on tanks however should not be included. For one it would be on a small scale, you’re not riding a tank 200 miles, just over the front line. Also, most nations and soldiers realized that riding on a tank is a sure way to leave a bloody stain, the Russians did it most because they lacked appreciable numbers of tracked infantry carriers.
@Cmdr:
I can agree with number 2. Personally, I dont see why we need mechanized infantry to begin with, all infantry are mechanized! It’s not like you have a battalion of soldiers with no jeeps, no halftracks, no duece-and-halfs, no silversides, no cattlecars, etc, etc, etc. What makes one more mechanized than the other? As for blitzing with tanks, is that not just soldiers jumping on the tank and riding along?
Actually, this is why I like the idea of the 2 types of infantry and the extra cost of the mech. As I said earlier, the USA and Commonwealth were the only 2 that pulled it off. The Germans were next, but a very distant runner up. Most of their infantry units relied on horses. It just doesn’t look that way as the wartime propoganda films always followed the tanks and panzer grenadiers (mech inf). Italy was supplied with captured French trucks and Opel Blitz by the Germans to supplement their low production, yet they were never able to fully motorize in Africa or Russia and they never even tried elswhere. China had 300 divisions, only one was motorized. Japan only had 2 tank divisions and used motorized transport for supply except on rare occasions.
It adds a splash of historical flavor, because it translates well in game terms. The USA can easily afford it, and Britain too, once the US is there to help them (but both have the option of cheaper leg units if things don’t go well). Germany buys a decent sprinkling of them and everyone else gets the odd one when they are able to justify it.
I brought this idea up about mech infantry being treated like infantry on transports over on Larrys website a few months ago. It just got ignored. I thought it had merit.
Honestly though, how often do you buy a mech. infantry instead of a normal infantry?
Here is my situation. SZ 6 is occupied by the American Navy, and the IJN is within striking range but out numbered. So my question is, can I ncm my fleet back to SZ 6 to regroup with some naval units to be built that turn? Or does the U.S. Navy need to be removed first?
I seem to remember answering this question somewhere else.
In any case, the answer is no. You cannot go to a hostile sea zone in a non-combat move.
Ok, thank you. But you can place new units into a hostile SZ via adjacent IC correct?
Honestly though, how often do you buy a mech. infantry instead of a normal infantry?
With Japan? All the time.
With Germany? Sometimes, rarely.
With Italy? More often than with Germany, but still, rarely.
With everyone else? Never.
Rules : Alpha2+
Situation : I declare an amphibious assault from a ship free sea zone. I move transports and Battleship accordingly, but since there’s a airbase with 2 figters adjacent I feel 1 Battleship won’t be enough and I could be beaten at sea.
Question : Can I move, during combat moves, other ships (like destroyer or AirCarrier) and planes to that sea zone so I’m stronger against those 2 possible scrambling figters?
Here is my situation. SZ 6 is occupied by the American Navy, and the IJN is within striking range but out numbered. So my question is, can I ncm my fleet back to SZ 6 to regroup with some naval units to be built that turn? Or does the U.S. Navy need to be removed first?
If the US and Japan aren’t yet at war and you’re playing by the box rules, you can move your fleet there. (In the Alpha rules the US fleet can’t be there if the US isn’t at war with Japan.)
However, if the two powers are at war, you can only move subs and air units that will land on carriers that you are mobilizing into the sea zone. None of your other units may move into a hostile sea zone in noncombat movement.
In any case, new units may be mobilized in the sea zone.
(Please delete all previous answers to this question.)
Here is my situation. SZ 6 is occupied by the American Navy, and the IJN is within striking range but out numbered. So my question is, can I ncm my fleet back to SZ 6 to regroup with some naval units to be built that turn? Or does the U.S. Navy need to be removed first?
If the US and Japan aren’t yet at war and you’re playing by the box rules, you can move your fleet there. (In the Alpha rules the US fleet can’t be there if the US isn’t at war with Japan.)
However, if the two powers are at war, you can only move subs and air units that will land on carriers that you are mobilizing into the sea zone. None of your other units may move into a hostile sea zone in noncombat movement.
In any case, new units may be mobilized in the sea zone.
You could only move subs in NCM to Z6 if there are no Allied destroyers.
Rules : Alpha2+
Situation : I declare an amphibious assault from a ship free sea zone. I move transports and Battleship accordingly, but since there’s a airbase with 2 figters adjacent I feel 1 Battleship won’t be enough and I could be beaten at sea.Question : Can I move, during combat moves, other ships (like destroyer or AirCarrier) and planes to that sea zone so I’m stronger against those 2 possible scrambling figters?
Yes. The chance of scrambled air defense allows this.
You could only move subs in NCM to Z6 if there are no Allied destroyers.
Not true. You can move subs into a sea zone with enemy destroyers; you just can’t move them through one.
It would certainly help Japan out, and the US starts with a few mec that are annoying to try to move across the Atlantic when they can only go 1 at a time or paired with regular infantry. I like it.
I have a few questions regarding Alpha 2 global.
Can France and Britan scamble at the same time to defend the same sea zone ?
What sea zone is the Turkish strait?
What do Kamakazees hit at? Does the defender get a defense for the Kamakazee attack?
Can Britain move into US sea zones when not at war with Japan?
Can US move into Brazil if they are not at war?
I have a few questions regarding Alpha 2 global.
Can France and Britan scamble at the same time to defend the same sea zone ?
What sea zone is the Turkish strait?
What do Kamakazees hit at? Does the defender get a defense for the Kamakazee attack?Can Britain move into US sea zones when not at war with Japan?
Can US move into Brazil if they are not at war?
Not sure if I’m allowed to answer, but “unofficial” answers:
1. Yes France and Britan fighter can scramble along. Remember that each airbase can have a maximum of 3 scrambling planes maximum (mix of fighters/Tac bomber), even if you have more planes in the territory. Example : French fighter, 2 Britan Fighter its ok and max 3 planes is reached.
2. The strait itself is not a sea zone (like gibraltar strait or Pananma canal), it’s located between sz100 and sz99.
3. Kamikaze hits at 2. No defence (actually none needed, every kamikaze used are destroyed…). Japan has 6 blue tokens to represent those 6 kamikazes. No more are available and Japan can’t buy more. So, once used it’s done.
4. Yes, there’s no restrictions regarding UK (or Anzac for that matter) navy.
5. No. USA is not allowed to move land units to a territory that is not their starting territories.
In the interest of providing answers as quickly as possible, anyone else who is sure that they know the answer should feel free to chime in. If an incorrect answer is given, it should be corrected within a few hours by someone official. Any incorrect answers or off-topic posts will be deleted by a moderator.
For BigBadBruce:
Correct answers from any source are always appreciated.
You could only move subs in NCM to Z6 if there are no Allied destroyers.
Not true. You can move subs into a sea zone with enemy destroyers; you just can’t move them through one.
I’m looking at page 30
“if a submarine enters a sea zone containing an enemy destroyer, it must end its movement there. If it ends its combat move in a hostile sea zone, combat will occur”
Hmm, also page 21
“Unlike other sea units, submarines can move through and even into hostile sea zones in the NCM phase. However, a submarine must end its movement when it enters a sea zone containing one or more enemy destroyers”
So you can move submarines in non-combat move into a zone with enemy destroyers, and there will be no combat. And the subs ARE allowed to move INTO a zone with enemy destroyers. Wow, I have never seen an opponent do this, so I wonder if most players are not aware of this.
Awesome, my first post on this thread, and I was wrong.
@SAS:
It would certainly help Japan out, and the US starts with a few mec that are annoying to try to move across the Atlantic when they can only go 1 at a time or paired with regular infantry. I like it.
I like it the way it is too
So you can move submarines in non-combat move into a zone with enemy destroyers, and there will be no combat. And the subs ARE allowed to move INTO a zone with enemy destroyers. Wow, I have never seen an opponent do this, so I wonder if most players are not aware of this.
I wasn’t aware… and wouldn’t understand it without this post. Thanks!
