SITUATION:
-A Japanese navy sits off of Hawaii. (1 battleship, 1 loaded transport, 1 dst, 2 acc, 4 fgt)
-Japan sends the fighters and the transport to attack forces in Western United States. Leaving it’s carriers in the Hawaiiaan sea zone.
-Japan also uses transports off Japan, to amphibiously assault Hawaii.
-Hawaii is defended by two fighters.
The question is this…
1. Can Japan attack Western USA with fighters, knowing that should the americans scramble at hawaii the japanese carriers ‘may’ be involved in combat, and unable to provide a landing zone?
The issue is that by leaving the carriers in the hawaiin sea zone, it significantly discourages the Americans from scrambling (because they are unlikely to win). In a sense, the Japanese have committed their carriers to an amphibious operation, and are benefitting from two committments. Of course… if there is no scramble, there is no problem.
My understanding is that this move is entirely valid. Based on the rule that as long as there is a “possibility” of landing, the Japanese aircraft can attack WUSA.
And of course… if I’m the Americans, I’m likely to scramble 1 fighter, to prevent a bombard, and ensure the death of all 4 fighters sent to WUS.