@barnee Thank you very much Barnee. This is the first time this situation has come up, so we wanted to do it right.
Scramble clarification PLEASE
-
If there are ONLY two transports off the coast of a territory and that territory has an operative airbase with fighters, can they scramble if enemy fighters attack the two transports?
Thank you.
-
I’m quite certain they can indeed scramble.
-
If there are ONLY two transports off the coast of a territory and that territory has an operative airbase with fighters, can they scramble if enemy fighters attack the two transports?
Thank you.
Yes, any attack movement ending in a sea zone adjacent to an operational air base with fighter/s, is eligible for scramble deployment, even if that sea zone is empty. For example: America moves into sea zone #6 to conduct an amphibious assault on Korea, even though there are no Japanese ships in SZ #6, and the enemy is not attacking Tokyo, fighters stationed on an operational air base on the Island of Japan may scramble to defend the adjacent sea zone. Also remember that even 1 fighter scrambled into a sea zone from which an amphibious assault is being conducted will negate all bombardments from attacking cruisers and or battleships.
-
So one fighter disallows any bombardment after the sea zone battle? wow. good to know, thank you.
-
So one fighter disallows any bombardment after the sea zone battle? wow. good to know, thank you.
Yes, any type of sea combat before an amphibious assault will disallow bombardments, a fighter scrambled into a sea zone will initiate a sea battle on it’s own. A lone transport will also
negate bombardments if the attacker wishes to engage it, if the attacker wishes to use their bombardments during an amphibious assault from a sea zone containing only a transport, they will need to ignore it. -
Same thing with enemy subs. You can ignore them and bombard the shore, or destroy them with no bombardment.
Suggested Topics
