AAG40 FAQ Alpha+.2

[Jennifer]

And so you feel the fighter, tactical bomber and strategic bombers (for the US) were what?

And I thought the Zeroes had torpedoes, they designed a special one for the shallow depths at pearl too!

[Fishmoto37]

@Cmdr:

And so you feel the fighter, tactical bomber and strategic bombers (for the US) were what?

And I thought the Zeroes had torpedoes, they designed a special one for the shallow depths at pearl too!

The navy SBD dive bomber is the one represented in the AA games as a tactical bomber. The B-17 is the one in the AA games representing the stratigic bomber. The navy F6F and the army P-38 are the AA fighters.

[kcdzim]

@Cmdr:

We know the zero carried a torpedo, it was used in Pearl Harbor, so they had the technology early in the game.

Ummm…  No.  The A6M2 (Mitsubishi Navy Type 0 Carrier Fighter) did not carry torpedoes during the attack on Pearl.  The Zekes/Zeros/A6Ms escorted the B5N Kates (with torpedoes or bombs) and D3A Vals (with bombs).  The Zero was used for fighter interception and airfield strafing.  It probably couldn’t have carried a torpedo on a bet.

@Cmdr:

I am supposing a tarctical bomber would be a P-38 lightning instead of a P-51 mustang?  Or is the P-38 still too fighterish to qualify?

The P-38 is a strange case.  It was technically a heavy long range fighter, and excelled in the pacific almost in spite of itself.  It’s most similar to an Me 110, and in Europe was outclassed by the single engine planes that could outmaneuver it.  In the Pacific, it didn’t matter quite as much because it could usually kill a Japanese plane in one pass because
A) it had all it’s cannons centered on the nose with 0 convergence zone, so it was as accurate at 100 yards as it was at 400
B) Japanese planes had no armour and no selfsealing tanks.
C) it (and the P40, but that had it’s own set of issues) were the only US planes faster than the zero in the first half of the war.

the P38 is still more of an air superiority fighter, but it did do some ground attack.  And it may have seen more use in a ground attack role had it not been for it’s fatal flaw (at least in early models till the J, I believe) which suffered from compressibility - once in a fast dive it was nearly impossible to get out of it.

The P-51 is absolutely NOT a tactical bomber - it’s a born and bred dogfighter.  And the Corsair wasn’t considered primarily a tactical bombing until the Korean War, where it no longer could serve as air superiority as it was now too slow, though it did serve well in ground attack in late WW2 (and EXCELLED in air superiority).

[kcdzim]

@Cmdr:

And so you feel the fighter, tactical bomber and strategic bombers (for the US) were what?

Fighter:  P40, F4F, F6F, P38, P51, F4u, P47. Oh, yes, and the P39, but it was horrid at dogfighting, and per the game standards of tac bombers including the Il-2, the P39 could probably be considered a tac bomber as well.

Tacs: Dauntless, Avenger, Helldiver, Vindicator, A26 Invader…  the list goes on.  Anything that couldn’t hold its own in a dogfight and wasn’t bristling with gun turrets…  Max crew of maybe 3?  Although while the B25 and B26 can almost be called a tactical bomber, but in this game it’s probably more appropriate to think of as a strategic bomber.

Strategics: B17, B24, B25, B26, B29, etc etc etc.

[Fishmoto37]

In the Pacific the P-38 could not turn with a zero. They could survive by holding at a high altitude and then diving on a zero with its heavy firepower. If it missed then the pilot could just keep going as they were faster in a dive. After outrunning the zero the P-38 could just come back around for another pass.

[kcdzim]

@Fishmoto37:

In the Pacific the P-38 could not turn with a zero. They could survive by holding at a high altitude and then diving on a zero with its heavy firepower. If it missed then the pilot could just keep going as they were faster in a dive. After outrunning the zero the P-38 could just come back around for another pass.

Yeah, I mentioned that above I though?  Although, again, diving in a early model p38 was a risky proposition.  They could handle shallow dives, but many pilots were lost in p38’s once they got stuck in a dive too steep.  Both the P40 and P38 used boom and zoom combat methods.  In a turning fight, absolutely nothing could match the A6M until 1942/3 (and even then I don’t think US planes matched their rate of turn so much as surpassed them in every other aspect - armour, roll, dive, climb, weaponry, etc).

What was the main point of this thread anyway?

[BadSpeller]

@kcdzim:

What was the main point of this thread anyway?

It was suppose to be for asking Alpha+.2 rule questions for Krieghund to answer.

(The OOB questions should be asked in the other thread.)

[Jennifer]

Hmm…I have to say my overall World War II knowledge is infinitely better than one would expect from most girls but significantly less than what one would expect from most boys. lol.  In either event, I will think upon what was said, aircraft wise.

[Jennifer]

Scenario:

It is round 5 or later (Russia is almost certainly at war with Germany by now….)

Germany puts a submarine in SZ 125 to deny Russia their national objective.  Russia attacks with a submarine and the defending German submarine submerges.  Can Russia get the National Objective, since technically there are no hostile warships in SZ 125 with a submerged submarine, or does it resurface after Russia’s NCM but before Russia’s Collect Income?

Corrollary:

Same type of situation, except just any old convoy zone.  Does the submarine do convoy dmg if it submerges during Conduct Combat, or no?

[kcdzim]

@Cmdr:

Scenario:

… the defending German submarine submerges.  Can Russia get the National Objective, since technically there are no hostile warships in SZ 125 with a submerged submarine, or does it resurface after Russia’s NCM but before Russia’s Collect Income?

Corrollary:

Same type of situation, except just any old convoy zone.  Does the submarine do convoy dmg if it submerges during Conduct Combat, or no?

Submerging only occurs during combat.  After combat a submarine can no longer be submerged and is no longer considered submerged (which means it’s definately disrupting convoys at the end of the turn).  I realized I perhaps should have been a little more clear.

[Axisplaya]

New Questions.

Ok, all the action is going to take place in SZ 112 and 110. Germany is attempting Sealion.

Can Germany load transport into SZ 112, then go into SZ110 and load some more units from Normandy into transport before amphibious assault on UK when :

1- there is a UK sub in SZ 110
2- there is a surface UK warship in SZ 110
3- there is a UK sub in SZ 110 AND some UK planes scramble
4- there is a surface UK warship in SZ 110 AND some UK planes scramble.

In all cases, the german transports are not alone, they are escorted with the german fleet and and SZ 110 will be cleared before amphibious assault.
Just need to know if they are scenarios when the transports can’t load units in SZ110 on the same turn before the amphibious assault.

[Krieghund]

1- Yes.
2- No.
3- Yes.
4- No.

The only time the transports can’t load is when the sea zone is hostile.  Subs don’t make sea zones hostile.

[Axisplaya]

Thanks for this very quick answer !

So scramble planes don’t make sea zones hostile either…

Well, we had this one wrong every time since we play E40 or P40 or G40…

[Krieghund]

@Axisplaya:

So scramble planes don’t make sea zones hostile either…

No.  They aren’t yet in the sea zone during the combat movement phase.

[fanofbond]

To help me win a stupid argument over ships.  A transport is invading the uk with a tank and infantry on board. Many planes attacking the island itself. The uk scrambled 1 plane to kill the transport.  My stupid opponents refuse to accept they didn’t read the rules before hand so they argue because it is not a warship I can’t scramble. Someone could please give us the official ruling.

[Fighter212]

I am playing against a smart ass who feels he can cheat by making up new rules.
We had the same problem
they are right!!! :mrgreen: :roll:

[TheDefinitiveS]

Units that have no attack value (aircraft carriers and transports) may not attack a sea zone by themselves. In order to carry out an attack, at least one unit with an attack value must participate. This includes sinking defenseless transports. However, this does not prevent transports from attempting to conduct an amphibious assault alone if there are only enemy units within the sea zone that may initiate optional defenses, such as air units that may scramble.
This is taken from the new alpha 2 rules.

[Fighter212]

No hablo ingles

[fanofbond]

@TheDefinitiveS:

Units that have no attack value (aircraft carriers and transports) may not attack a sea zone by themselves. In order to carry out an attack, at least one unit with an attack value must participate. This includes sinking defenseless transports. However, this does not prevent transports from attempting to conduct an amphibious assault alone if there are only enemy units within the sea zone that may initiate optional defenses, such as air units that may scramble.
This is taken from the new alpha 2 rules.

OK, I got you.  The planes CAN scramble to sink the transport as would be logical.

[Axisplaya]

I’m pretty sure this one has been answered somewhere, but i can’t find it…

During Combat movement, can you send some planes in an empty SZ just in case your oponent decide to scramble ?

Exemple: you have 2 loaded transport and just one destroyer, you want to do an amphibious assault, but your oponent could scramble 3 planes. Can you send some planes to “escort” your transports and your destroyer ?