World War II in Europe now at HBG

[jamatuccircn.com]

@jim010:

Yes, warships can be added during the Convoy phase. � Anyship you please.

To attack, there are 2 ways:

Through Strategic Warfare with a sub or bomber (stage 1 of Combat) or through Naval Combat with any other unit (stage 2 of Combat).

Bombers and subs always find a convoy, so no need to roll interception. � All other units need to roll to intercept a convoy.  Tac and fighters attack together with ships in regular naval combat.

Strategic attack is a single round (I believe) but would the warships escorting the convoy-transports be allowed to fight back against the bombers (I think only destroyers would be allowed to attack the subs).
On the other hand, if a regular naval attack successfuly intercepted a convoy, would the battle continue until one side or the other was annihilated or retreated. If this is possible and the convoy retreats, to where does it retreat?

[jamatuccircn.com]

It seems to me that having the Initiative on a front is actually a disadvantage in naval operations.
The player moving 2nd can react to the first player’s moves and choose to patrol in the most effective sea zones as well as selecting his own sea routs that avoid patroling enemy fleets.

Is this assessment correct or have I misunderstood the rules?

[jim010]

@jamatucci@rcn.com:

@jim010:

Yes, warships can be added during the Convoy phase. � Anyship you please.

To attack, there are 2 ways:

Through Strategic Warfare with a sub or bomber (stage 1 of Combat) or through Naval Combat with any other unit (stage 2 of Combat).

Bombers and subs always find a convoy, so no need to roll interception. � All other units need to roll to intercept a convoy.� � Tac and fighters attack together with ships in regular naval combat.

Strategic attack is a single round (I believe) but would the warships escorting the convoy-transports be allowed to fight back against the bombers (I think only destroyers would be allowed to attack the subs).
On the other hand, if a regular naval attack successfuly intercepted a convoy, would the battle continue until one side or the other was annihilated or retreated. If this is possible and the convoy retreats, to where does it retreat?

The convoy can retreat to either port it services.

You are correct, that only ASW units can hit the subs, and only fighters can hit the bombers.

In regular naval combat, the fighting keeps going until one side is destroyed or retreats.

[jim010]

@jamatucci@rcn.com:

It seems to me that having the Initiative on a front is actually a disadvantage in naval operations.
The player moving 2nd can react to the first player’s moves and choose to patrol in the most effective sea zones as well as selecting his own sea routs that avoid patroling enemy fleets.

Is this assessment correct or have I misunderstood the rules?

You are correct. With initiative you go first.

But at sea, you have the responsibilty of realizing your opponent sees your movements and can react to them. You could patrol in areas that barricade his fleet, or set up your movements in a way that he would have to cross a point, or multiple points, of patrolling.

[jamatuccircn.com]

How can fighters defend convoys against bomber stategic attacks?
Do they need to be on board carriers attached to the convoy?
Can they patrol a sea zone through which the convoy passes?
If this is possible, will these defending fighters only be able to fight bombers which attempt to intercept a convoy (I believe this interception of the convoy by the bombers is automatic) in the sea zone in which the defending fighters are patrolling?

[jamatuccircn.com]

How is initiative determined for the first turn, before any battles have been fought?
If sea battles have no effect on determining initiative, how can initiative ever change in the Baltic front which has no land spaces?

[jim010]

Edited to reflect fighter hitting at 4 correction.

@jamatucci@rcn.com:

How can fighters defend convoys against bomber stategic attacks?
Do they need to be on board carriers attached to the convoy?
Can they patrol a sea zone through which the convoy passes?
If this is possible, will these defending fighters only be able to fight bombers which attempt to intercept a convoy (I believe this interception of the convoy by the bombers is automatic) in the sea zone in which the defending fighters are patrolling?

Planes on a carrier in a convoy will be considered to be in the air when attacked anywhere along the convoy route.

A plane or ship can patrol over a zone that a convoy passes.  If so, then the attacker will have to get through the patrolling units before it can get to the convoy.  Resolve this first, and then the convoy Strategic Warfare.

Looking over the Strategic Warefare combat, I see there is confusion.  Let me clarify it with this.  I will include this in updated rules:

Your bombers/submarines may attack the defender’s factory or NRZ/convoy.  Follow these steps:
1 Place all of the engaged units to the side of the board.  All units in the same space are placed.
2 Attacker fires.  You roll 1d6 for each fighter/bomber you have in the space.  Every die roll that is equal to or less than the Combat value of the unit is a ‘hit’.  You then add up the number of ‘hits’ rolled, and that is the number of fighters the defender must choose as casualties.
3 Defender fires.  The defender rolls 1d6 for every fighter he has in the space, including casualties.  Every die roll that is equal to or less than 4 is a ‘hit’.  Defender then adds up the number of ‘hits’ rolled, and that is the number of air units you must choose to be destroyed.  Casualties are now removed.
4 Attacker fires.  You roll 1d6 for each bomber/submarine you have in the space.  Every die roll that is equal to or less than 3 is a ‘hit’.  Defender’s factory/NRZ is now damaged, or 1 transport per hit is destroyed
5 Defender fires.  The defender rolls 1d6 for every destroyer//Tac bomber he has in the convoy.  Every die roll that is equal to or less than 3 is a ‘hit’.  Defender then adds up the number of ‘hits’ rolled, and that is the number of submarines you must choose to be destroyed.
• Go to Stage 4.

[jim010]

@jamatucci@rcn.com:

How is initiative determined for the first turn, before any battles have been fought?
If sea battles have no effect on determining initiative, how can initiative ever change in the Baltic front which has no land spaces?

Axis have the initiative in all Fronts at the start of the game.

Sea battles do count towards initiative, but Strategic Warefare battles don’t.

In the Baltic, initiative can change to the Allies when there is a sea battle the Allies win, or if the Axis have no warships (subs and transports won’t count) in the Baltic but the Allies do.  Then initiative will change.  If neither side has proper warships in the Baltic, it stays Axis.

[jim010]

@jamatucci@rcn.com:

It seems to me that having the Initiative on a front is actually a disadvantage in naval operations.
The player moving 2nd can react to the first player’s moves and choose to patrol in the most effective sea zones as well as selecting his own sea routs that avoid patroling enemy fleets.

Is this assessment correct or have I misunderstood the rules?

A house rule you can use (that may make it to a second edition rule set) is that the initiative player can choose to have the opponent move first on his Front rather than he move first.

[jamatuccircn.com]

In the rules, fighters hit on a 4 or less.
Why, during strategic warfare, do defending fighters hit on a 3 or less?
This seems to punish fighters on the defense which is counterintuitive.

It would seem more appropriate if the defending fighter scored a hit on a 3 or 4 which would result in the attacking bombers and any escorting fighters to take losses at the owning players discression. The player would almost always choose to loose the fighters leaving the bombers to continue the bombing raid.
However on a 1 or 2, the defending fighter should be able to choose a bobmer or an escorting fighter as a hit. This seems more in line with the rules for regular combat.

[jamatuccircn.com]

According to the rules, the only way for ships to change port or air units to change base is to be moved during the RP phase. It seems to me that most nations will be using the lion’s share of thei RPs on their navies. This will leave few if any RPs for ground or air redeployment. I realize that ground units can move during “movement” but the maximum RP points of ten that any nation can have, just does not seem to be enough.
How is this working out in your play testing?

[jim010]

@jamatucci@rcn.com:

According to the rules, the only way for ships to change port or air units to change base is to be moved during the RP phase. It seems to me that most nations will be using the lion’s share of thei RPs on their navies. This will leave few if any RPs for ground or air redeployment. I realize that ground units can move during “movement” but the maximum RP points of ten that any nation can have, just does not seem to be enough.
How is this working out in your play testing?

If a nation has 5 RPs, that is 5 RPs for each service.  5 for land, 5 for sea and 5 for air.  So really, the nation has 15 RPs.  It is done this way to prevent all 15 RPs from being spent on land where the movement of 15 ground units can have a huge impact.

Looking into Strategic Warfare for you.  Get back to you on this.

[jim010]

@jamatucci@rcn.com:

In the rules, fighters hit on a 4 or less.
Why, during strategic warfare, do defending fighters hit on a 3 or less?

You are correct.  This is a typo.  Fighters will be at 4.

[jamatuccircn.com]

The aircraft stacking limit on a plain factory site is 10 (ie one aircraft). This is increased to 20 for a major capital and another 10 to 30 for a major capital with an airbase.

The effective stacking limit for a carrier is 20 (two planes). Does this make sense?

[jim010]

@jamatucci@rcn.com:

The aircraft stacking limit on a plain factory site is 10 (ie one aircraft). This is increased to 20 for a major capital and another 10 to 30 for a major capital with an airbase.

The effective stacking limit for a carrier is 20 (two planes). Does this make sense?

This is correct.  Keep in mind, you can stack airbases.  London can have its natural 2 planes, plus a fortress, plus its 2 airbases, plus the American 4 airbases.  London can have 9 planes on it in theory.

[jamatuccircn.com]

In my copy of the rules, I do not seem to have setups for Spain, Sweden or Turkey.
This must be an error.
Is there a rule preventing them from being attacked?

[jim010]

It should have been included in your download? � If not, I’ll include them here.  Click on the bottom link.

Neu(1)(1).xls

[jamatuccircn.com]

For purposes of strategic warfare, it seems that fighters can move to a territory being attacked by BBs on order to intercept the BBs during the stragic raid.
This seems to be another instance where having the initiative is a disadvantage.
Player B could just wait to see what player A has done with his fighters and then take the opportunity to bomb undefended factories and NRZs.

This brings a question about the amount of damage done by bombing raids.
I believe the rules state that any hit by a BB completely destroys the production capacity of the territory. If this is correct, this is a devestating attack.!!!
One successful attack on Munich or Manchester will destroy about 1/4th of Germany’s or Britain’s production. And, BBs have a 2/3 chance of success if they get past the interceptors.
Am I correct, and if so, how is this working out in play-testing?

[jim010]

You understand correctly how it works.

It seems as though you have yet to play the game.  I suggest you play the game yourself to see if your assumptions are right or not, though.

But if you have more questions about rules clarifications, feel free to ask.  I will use these questions to help with clarifications in a FAQ.

After you have played, feel free to share your thoughts.

[jamatuccircn.com]

Is the stacking limit also 20 in a major capital for the power attacking the major capital?