Carrier with planes movement Question

@ShadowHAwk said in The Taranto Raid Fighter/Carrier Question:

Ofcourse if you take less then 2 hits in that combat its not the worst thing.

certainly not!

@ShadowHAwk:

@Caesar:

Yes, this usually get abused by the Allies since they have more aircraft and more carriers to move around, sometimes I will let US carriers just carry a single plane so ANZAC and UK can launch raids on weak targets to have a place to land.

Or worst, have 1 anzac, Uk plane on a US carrier, carrier moves 2 spaces in non combat plane can safely attack 4 spaces away.
You really sure those transports are safe because of your blockers?

Carriers are awesome like that, it’s one the reason why I build the Graf Zeppelin on G1 just encase I sent the Kreigsmarine to back up the Italians.

Agree with GHG, the limitation there is because you spend so many resources and so much time building up as the USA, it just wouldn’t seem fair that you could just pick off his invasion force, which in some situations, the USA player can not replace for 2 turns or possibly, ever.      Of course, its still pretty much impossible to invade japan proper unless you are demolishing him economically and even then, it takes quite a bit of time to get the forces over there–however, japan is not the only place he can kami --how is it fair to let him kami a transport that’s coming into iwo jima to set up a US strongpoint there?

The true limitation of the kamikaze is that there are really only 4 units that can be hit by it; dd ca cv bb    (no subs, transports, or planes, so its a long list), and 2 of those things aren’t sunk by just 1 hit.

Carriers are the most vulnerable, but they don’t even have to come along, they can wait in the wings and all they bring to the battle is soak hits.

Plenty of times when the allies attack SZ 6 they do it with like 2-3 naval units and 10+ planes, so the kami isn’t effective alone in stopping him.

The reason to keep it around in Japan’s pocket is that it ruins his support shots, iirc

Its a fun flavorful rule but its just piling on because Japan doesn’t really need it in order to survive or thrive, and usually when you try to depend on it it fails miserably in a gigantic blaze of glory.  I say try n dump it (we do in G42 G41 at times)!

You only need to move the carriers there if you have to land planes on them.

In order to move the planes into combat you first must show your opponent that you can make a legal landing spot with your carriers by moving them into position on non-combat movement phase. If the planes survive combat you must move the carrier(s) to land the plane(s). If the planes don’t survive you can choose to do whatever you want with the carrier(s).

Thanks Variance

thanx for clearing that up for me

I thought they had to be at war with japan too

I see the logic now that uk and dutch are at war with germany makes them buddies

I’ve found floating a sub (or a couple!) on down off the west coast of Africa can work out pretty well.  Some nice convoy action down there to disrupt, and not many threats around.  Puts U.K. out of position if they come chase you down.

Thanks!