Multinational Scrambling

Sure, why not?

There may not be a naval battle occurring immediately once the US Transport enters SZ6, since there are no Japanese combat ships in the water, however the Japanese Kamikazes and Fighters are protecting SZ6; thus they are able to act after the Combat Movement Phase is completed and before the Combat Phase begins.

Kamikazes cannot be used against transports or submarines so the transport may enter the “empty” SZ6 by itself in safety. However, upon entering SZ6 the Japanese Player now has the option to scramble to protect SZ6 and therefore the transports can now be attacked. There does not have to be a naval battle already in place for the planes to scramble; their scrambling itself creates the naval battle.

Axis and Allies Pacific 1940 Rulebook (2nd Edition)
Page 15 (Bold added by me)

Scrambling is a special movement that the defender can make at the end of this phase. It must be done after all of the attacker’s combat movements have been completed and all attacks have been declared. The attacker may not change any combat movements or attacks after the defender has scrambled.

A quick reaction team of no more than 3 defending fighters and/or tactical bombers (strategic bombers can’t scramble) located on each island or coastal territory that has an operative air base can be scrambled to defend against attacks in the sea zones adjacent to those territories. These air units can be scrambled to help friendly units in adjacent sea zones that have come under attack. They can also be scrambled to resist amphibious assaults from adjacent sea zones, whether or not the territory being assaulted is the territory containing the air base. They may defend against the enemy ships conducting the amphibious assault even if friendly ships are not present.

The confusion seems to be in you’re holding back naval ships for naval bombardment. The advantage about scrambling planes is that it forces the attacker to commit all their naval ships regardless if they want to or not. That’s why it is sometimes wise to scramble in a losing battle if the enemy is relying on bombardment for victory. The easiest situation would be when Japan invades the Philippine islands. If Japan was so aggressive that all they brought was two infantry with two cruisers as example. I would scramble the fighter in that situation because while I will lose the sea battle, if you choose to invade the island after the battle, you’re doing it without naval support which gives my defending infantry a better chance at winning.

Good catch

He probably meant 2 or less, but that’s not what he said  :-)

Sometimes I find the units on the transports more valueable to eliminate than the transport itself.

In a RARE occassion, someone might opt to NOT scramble against such an attack, and let the infantry be destroyed instead!  :evil:

Awesome thank you all for the clarification!

@Dark_Destroyer:

RAW = Says nothing about air units, just “additional units”.  RAI = Means air included.

It says nothing explicitly about sea units, either.  The type of units is unspecified, implying that any type of unit that may legally move there is allowed.

@Dark_Destroyer:

RAW = Can not move into a territory unless it’s occupied by enemy forces.  This would include sea zones that don’t scramble.

An exception for an amphibious assault where scrambling may occur is explicitly made here.

@Dark_Destroyer:

If you don’t scramble and don’t have any enemy forces and don’t amphibiously assault, moving airplanes into that sea zone is not a valid move.

True.

@Dark_Destroyer:

RAI = You can always bring air into sea zones just to cover what if’s.

No.  RAW = You can always bring units (sea and/or air) into sea zones from which you’re doing an amphibious assault, if there is a potential for the defender to scramble.

@Gargantua:

So there is a DEFINITE seperation between invading a Friendly Neutral, and a friendly/allied territory.

That is what we’re currently trying to determine.

@kcdzim:

A) if the US controls finland (or has fighters there), it’s no longer neutral.  It MUST be at war to be in Finland, no other way around it.
B) if any axis power declares war on Russia on the Europe side of the map, Russia is no longer neutral (it’s at war with someone, so it’s a friendly power to the Allies).
C) Declaring War occurs at the beginning of the move phase, and scrambling occurs at the end (at which point Russia is at war with at least one Axis power).

So in your example, as Russia is not neutral, and the US is not neutral, US planes in Finland can scramble to the seazone against an attack on Russia.

Correct, except that TheDefinitiveS said “UK”, not “US”, but that is a minor point.  Either way, the scrambling power is at war.

@kcdzim:

Neutral non player powers are different, in that they never automatically flip to a side, they just change to “friendly neutrals”.

Not exactly true.  When attacked, they join the opposite side from the attacker.

@kcdzim:

And even “friendly neutrals” require a non combat move into them to take control, even after they’re forces have been activated by a failed enemy attack.

After being attacked, they are no longer neutral, but friendly to the opposite side from their attacker.  However, the territory and forces are uncontrolled, as you say.  The question at hand is the timing of this status change.

@kcdzim:

And a friendly neutral is not the same as a player power not yet at war - they have completely different diplomatic rules.  For example, if Russia is not at war on the Europe map, Britain CANNOT noncombat move through their spaces.  It is NOT the same as a friendly neutral, for lack of a better term it’s a Neutral Power, completely different than a Friendly Neutral or a Strict Neutral.

Correct.

Thanks Krieghund.

Planing amphibious operations vs. the US-Player at the moment.  :-D