Carrier question! Anybody plz (OR KREIG!)

[knp7765]

In this case, wouldn’t you have to move those carriers into the hostile sea zone as part of the combat move?  I didn’t think you could save the carriers for the non-combat movement.

[Hobbes]

@knp7765:

In this case, wouldn’t you have to move those carriers into the hostile sea zone as part of the combat move?  I didn’t think you could save the carriers for the non-combat movement.

Depends whether the carriers have to go through a hostile SZ or end their movement on one. If the SZ simply needs to be cleared from enemy ships for movement then you’d have to send something to attack the SZ, on the assumption that the carrier will afterwards move through it and end at another SZ for the planes to land. But if the carrier must finish its move on an enemy SZ for the fighters to land then it will have to make a combat move there.

[Gargantua]

HOBBES

That is Absolutely not the case.

You don’t have to send the carrier into the combat.

IE, sas the carrier was BLOCKED,  AND also must make it to a sea zone that is to also be cleared by enemy ships.

You could still launch the attack, based on the assumption/possibility that you could not only clear the block - but also, clear the full enemy Sea-zone thus allowing you to land.

You can then essentially hold your carriers in reserve.  If your planes die - no move is required.

[Hobbes]

@Gargantua:

HOBBES

That is Absolutely not the case.

You don’t have to send the carrier into the combat.

IE, sas the carrier was BLOCKED,  AND also must make it to a sea zone that is to also be cleared by enemy ships.

You could still launch the attack, based on the assumption/possibility that you could not only clear the block - but also, clear the full enemy Sea-zone thus allowing you to land.

You can then essentially hold your carriers in reserve.  If your planes die - no move is required.

The situation I described assumed that the carrier would be the only unit (either ship or plane) capable to attacking the SZ where it should end its movement. In that case you’d need to move at least 1 carrier there. Of course, if you have other cheaper units you should use them instead.

With your situation both SZs (the block and the final destination of the carrier) need to be attacked for the carriers to be able to be move there during NCM.

[Gargantua]

The situation I described assumed that the carrier would be the only unit (either ship or plane) capable to attacking the SZ where it should end its movement.

Carriers have 0 attack value.

Defenders cannot retreat.

Therefore (With the exception of subs/trans you can ignore) it is IMPOSSIBLE for a carrier alone to clear a sea zone.  Thus making it IMPOSSIBLE to create a landing zone for the planes, thus eliminating the possibility of said style of attack.  You require another unit that can attack.

With your situation both SZs (the block and the final destination of the carrier) need to be attacked for the carriers to be able to be move there during NCM

Yes - exactly.

[Rorschach]

@JimmyHat:

exactly, in fact it isn’t correct…you read it wrong.  You have to save as many planes as possible, the remaining ones die because the carrier they were going to land on did not make it.(that sz still has enemy vessels in it, your sub attack didn’t work)

This I understand.  It was just the way Krieg worded his reply (without context) could be very confusing.

[Hobbes]

@Gargantua:

The situation I described assumed that the carrier would be the only unit (either ship or plane) capable to attacking the SZ where it should end its movement.

Carriers have 0 attack value.

Defenders cannot retreat.

Therefore (With the exception of subs/trans you can ignore) it is IMPOSSIBLE for a carrier alone to clear a sea zone.  Thus making it IMPOSSIBLE to create a landing zone for the planes, thus eliminating the possibility of said style of attack.  You require another unit that can attack.

Forgot we were talking of the new carrier values. Thanks for clearing that up to me.

[Piet Hein]

A US fighter on Gibraltar is the only plane in range of the 10 new transports of Germany “safely” built in SZ113 behind the Danish strait. Denmark is defended with 10 inf.
The US fighter moves 5 and sinks the transports under the assumption that UK on its turn will (i) with 1 transport and 1 inf attack and take Denmark in combat movement against all odds and (ii) move its AC from 110 to 113 in NCM to provide a landing spot for the fighter

Are we saying this is a legal move?

[special forces]

@Piet:

A US fighter on Gibraltar is the only plane in range of the 10 new transports of Germany “safely” built in SZ113 behind the Danish strait. Denmark is defended with 10 inf.
The US fighter moves 5 and sinks the transports under the assumption that UK on its turn will (i) with 1 transport and 1 inf attack and take Denmark in combat movement against all odds and (ii) move its AC from 110 to 113 in NCM to provide a landing spot for the fighter

Are we saying this is a legal move?

You can’t go through straights or canals in the same turn you captured them, even in non-combat, so that would be no.

Edit: in fact the fighter has to land somewhere / anywhere in its NCM, you can’t leave it flying around until next turn

[Piet Hein]

Ok thanks

[Gargantua]

It has to all be done in the same countries turn, because that’s when you have to land your on your carrier.