Failed amphibious assault, sea battle - retreat question

@panther

Thank you for responding! Sorry.

The prime response would be a couple of existing US fighters, but since you can’t stage them onto Canada or Iceland or SZ 102 until your 2nd turn, and then only at war (except for SZ 102, so J1) the only way for the UK to receive them would be for them to put a CV in SZ 109, which is dangerous.

The worst thing about a SeaLion threat is that UK needs all its fighters on 1 space, because it cannot defend Scotland and London and a fleet until it has several turns of buys.    This means only 3 scramblers, not the 6 scramblers.    And it means you can’t start an early fleet (say 1 CV and 1 DD in SZ 109) because the fighters will have to jump off once London is threatened, which leaves the fleet bare.

So that’s why CV in 102 is so nice, because its the only direct, safe intervention.  But since you don’t have a CV to start, you’d build US 1, head to SZ 102 US 2, and hope for a J3.  In every other case (J1, J2) you could just land on London as soon as you stage up, but that’d be Iceland US2, London US3.  And if they killed London, your only LZ is back on the carriers…

Yes, with 24 IPCs you can…

Add one infantry in UK, one in Scotland (makes Sealion hazardous and unlikely). More freedom to scramble on G1.

One infantry in Yunnan (dicey battle for Japan), one in Hunan (somewhat dicey battle) and 3 artilleries in the Russian far East territories (increases the punch of the 18 infantries there).

With bids higher than 24, Egypt can be reinforced further. Then there is the typical sub in 98 that people really like. Well placed land units are very hard to beat.

You can ignore the subs, but if Japan scrambles a fighter the subs can fight in the sea battle.

@WILD:

@knp7765:

This is why we modified the Russian NO with our own house rule……

I know this is out of place, but the Russian NO is very much part of an over all Med strat….(one that shouldn’t exist IMO).

Yea, the 3 IPC bonus the Russians get for Italian African territories, and Med islands is ridiculous (it has been a major gripe sense it was introduced). This theater was never a realistic or historic goal for the Russians, and it is exploited way to much as ppl get more familiar with it. This NO was changed partially to boost the Russians if there is a Sea Lion (kinda like a penalty), but now it is being manipulated even w/o Sea Lion.

IMO Finland, The Balkans, The Mid East, and Eastern Europe (Orig German territories) are a realistic goal. I’l even buy Original Italian possession in Europe like Albania, parts of N Italy and maybe even Rome could also be added to the list (but the Americans beat them to it for the most part).

What we are experimenting with (not an original house rule by any means) is that Russia gets a bonus for any Orig German, Orig Italian, Pro Axis Neutral , and Pro Allied Neutral territory that Russia is in control of equal to that territories IPC value (could also include True Neutrals activated by the Axis, or liberated by Russia from the Axis). This makes the Italian Med islands worthless, and Libya/Ethiopia hardly worth going after. It will tone down some territory bonuses for the Russians (like Bulgaria), but allows them some new territories to target as well that were more in tune with their goals IMO.

Obviously Finland was a major goal, but so was the Balkans (Bulgaria, Yugo, Romania, maybe Albania, and Greece) especially once they beat back the Germans (like in a Sea Lion attempt, or a failed assault on Moscow). In The Mid East it still allows the Russians to gain NO bonus for control of Iraq (reduced), and now Persia for added income once at war (could be as late as R4 before they could be in either because they have to pause in NW Persia). The NO bonus for Iraq, and Persia could also simulate the lend lease coming up through the Persian Gulf. I know that Persia being Russian isn’t very historical as it was British controlled (Russia did invade what is NW Persia though). My thinking here is that if the UK doesn’t take Persia early (leaving it for Russia), then the Allies are out some English Pounds and a couple of inf needed early on. If Germany does a G3 Barbarossa, then by time Russia gets to Persia it would be Rus4 (6 or more IPCs lost to England if they activated it UK1). It would be a viable target however for the Russians to Liberate Persia from the Axis after going for the Oil Bonus, to get a bonus of their own).

In the event of a Sea Lion (or failed assault on Moscow), the Russians would still get good bonuses for the orig German, orig Italian, Pro Axis Neutral, and now some Pro allied Neutral territories in the Balkans & Mid East (average of 2-3 IPCs each). If they crack into Northern Italy, or Greater German territories then their NO bonuses rise even more.

The med island thing is no big deal, since 1 axis plane in SITA stops any russian landing.  But, I do like the NO changes you proposed.  It should only affect Original axis in Europe, and all neutrals in Europe/Middle-East. (No islands).

Yes, ever facility built has it’s own AA.

The attacker must choose which facility he is bombing FIRST, then the defender rolls.

I think the only time anything can retreat separately is with an amphibious invasion.

If you only have attacking subs and planes, the subs could submerge (assuming no enemy destroyer) but the planes would have to wait one round before retreating.

@aethervox:

Does Sea Zone 110 include the English Channel? I assume it does. However, it appears the English Channel could be considered sparate from Zone 110 - it certainly would give consideration to the Strait of Dover as a dividing line between the North Sea (zones 110,11 & 112) and the English Channel.

Yes.  SZ110 connects SZ104, 105 & 109 to 111 & 112.  There is no seperate English Channel Seazone.  The only Seazone that is currently unmarked (and should be numbered) is the Caspian Sea.