Great!
Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)
-
As a tag along to this, does a carrier count in this case? Ie are either of these possible
enemy sub in sz42 - attacker brings in a loaded transport accompanied by a sub of the same nation to take Java
enemy sub in sz42 - attacker brings in a loaded transport accompanied by a carrier of the same nation to take Java
-
Bold, I’m not sure about the sub but I’m pretty sure that your carrier isn’t enough.
Transports
Cost: 7
Attack: 0
Defense: 0
Move: 2
Unit Characteristics
No Combat Value: Even though a transport can attack
or defend, either alone or with other units, it has a
combat value of 0. This means that a transport can’t fire
in the attacking units’ or the defending units’ fire steps.
Transports may not attack without being accompanied
by at least 1 unit with an attack value, unless they are
conducting an amphibious assault from a friendly sea
zone that is free of enemy submarines.Page 32 of Europe Manual 2nd ED
-
A carrier does not have attack power.
-
Here’s the catch though. It says that they HAVE to be accompanied by at least 1 unit with an attack value UNLESS they’re doing an amphibious assault from a friendly SZ that is free of enemy subs. It’s there in black and white, I’m not sure how much clearer it can get.
@seththenewb:
No Combat Value: Even though a transport can attack
or defend, either alone or with other units, it has a
combat value of 0. This means that a transport can’t fire
in the attacking units’ or the defending units’ fire steps.
Transports may not attack without being accompanied
by at least 1 unit with an attack value, unless they are
conducting an amphibious assault from a friendly sea
zone that is free of enemy submarines.It’s obviously not talking about conducting naval combat for the second part because an enemy sub alone does not make a seazone hostile.
-
Im sure krieg can explain it :-)
-
Im almost certain that krieg will say the operative word is “attack”. Ie the transport is not attacking if unloading in a zone with an enemy sub and an escorting acc.
-
I will admit I don’t know what the heck it’s talking about on page 32 with the part you put in bold.
But you have to pay attention to page 16 also, under “transports” where it more clearly than page 32 is referring to the case of submarines potentially blocking amphibious assaults by unescorted transports.
The requirement on page 16 merely says WARSHIP
A carrier is a warship, and so is a sub.
-
Because I don’t know what in the world the sentence on page 32 is talking about exactly, you will have to wait for Krieghund for the authoritative answer on this.
If a carrier doesn’t work to overcome the sub block, then he has some explaining to do about page 16.
-
But you’re ignoring the part that specifically precludes you from trying your amphibious assault.
unless they are
conducting an amphibious assault from a friendly sea
zone that is free of enemy submarines.That part of the rule is pretty specific. ie, you can move them around unaccompanied during combat moves to conduct an assault, UNLESS you’re doing an assault that has an enemy sub. I’m not arguing your right to load your transports up and send them to whatever friendly seazone you want. But you HAVE to have a ship with an attack power present if you want to offload them in an amphibious assault. I have a sub protecting that sz and the ONLY warship you have within reach of me is a carrier with 0 attack. IE, you cannot conduct an amphibious assault into that terr until you fix this issue by either
1. Killing my sub (not possible with only a carrier and air available to you)
2. Convincing me to retreat said sub (ha, not likely!)
3. Or getting a ship with attack power in range to accompany the transport for an assault NEXT turn. -
Because I don’t know what in the world the sentence on page 32 is talking about exactly, you will have to wait for Krieghund for the authoritative answer on this.
If a carrier doesn’t work to overcome the sub block, then he has some explaining to do about page 16.
Well it kind of makes sense if you look at page 15
Aircraft Carriers
Although they don’t have an attack value and aren’t
represented on the battle strip, carriers can still participate
in an attack and can take hits, as long at least 1 unit with
an attack value attacks along with them.Carriers are NOT allowed to attack unless they’re accompanied by at least 1 unit with attack power, since subs can’t be hit by air you could make the argument that fighters don’t have an attack power in that situation.
Also, in the convoy raiding section, it says any warship in a convoy zone and then it goes on to actually specify that carriers are excluded. So it starts broad and then gets specific.
-
If a carrier doesn’t work to overcome the sub block, then he has some explaining to do about page 16.
Yea, it’s not really clear. Obviously I tend to think PG32 is the right answer for this situation, but he needs to clear things up either way he rules in this matter.
-
The operative word is attack. If I assault from a sea zone with only an enemy sub present with an escorting acc and no possible scramble then neither the trn or acc is attacking.
-
Again, I would disagree with. But any arguments we muster are pretty much moot until Krieg weighs in. :-D
-
i didn’t mean to say it authoritatively. i’m just giving my prediction of what krieg will say. :-)
-
Just try reading that part on page 32 objectively and think how else could it make sense? The answer is that it doesn’t. :-P
:wink:
-
the part about submarines makes no sense in my opinion. guess there’s really nothing else to do but wait for krieg to explain definitively (my guess is it’s already somewhere in the faq). the thing is, the enemy subs are being ignored so there is no combat in the zone so i do not know why it would matter if the warship accompanying the transport had an attack value or not (and of course the only warship without an attack value is the acc).
-
Boldfresh is correct.
-
Boldfresh is correct.
correct that it is somewhere in the faq or correct that an acc qualifies as an escort for amphib assault in a zone with only enemy submarines present (and no scramble option).
either way, could you please clarify what is meant by the phrasing on page 32? “Transports may not attack without being accompanied by at least 1 unit with an attack value, unless they are conducting an amphibious assault from a friendly sea zone that is free of enemy submarines.”
this sentence seems to be mixing two unrelated thoughts if we are saying the operative word is “attack”.
-
Yeah, can you please clarify this. And also explain it maybe?
-
The rulebook seems to contradict itself. I’m trying to wrap my head around this, but it does not seem like both of these statements can be true at the same time. Either the rules need to be clarified better or one of them is wrong.
PG16
However, a transport
is not allowed to offload land units for an amphibious
assault in a sea zone containing 1 or more ignored enemy
submarines unless at least 1 warship belonging to the
attacking power is also present in the sea zone at the end
of the Combat Move phase.Seems to indicate that any warship can escort a transport for the purposes of an amphibious assault when an enemy sub is present.
PG32
This means that a transport can’t fire
in the attacking units’ or the defending units’ fire steps.
Transports may not attack without being accompanied
by at least 1 unit with an attack value, unless they are
conducting an amphibious assault from a friendly sea
zone that is free of enemy submarines.Seems to indicate that carriers are not an acceptable escort for transports for the purposes of an amphibious assault when an enemy sub is present.
Unless the rules are talking generalities first and then it drills into the specifics, these passages SEEM to be mutually exclusive. So please say if the following situation is a legal amhpibious assault within the context of the rules.
Enemy sub in sz42 - attacker brings in a loaded transport accompanied by ONLY carrier(s) of the same nation in order to conduct an amphibious assault on Java
Suggested Topics
