Amphibious Assault and Sea Combat in another Zone

@panther @farmboy thank you

@Soviet-Steamroller said in Attacking an empty sea zone?:

Hi there,
As i’m reviewing the scramble rule a question came to my mind.
Can i assign planes to a sea zone with no ennemy warships just as a safety against scramble?

Bringing units against a potential scramble is a valid combat move, indeed.
Rulebook Pacific 1940.2 page 13

… Further, if enemy air units could potentially be scrambled to defend the sea zone, additional units may be moved into the sea zone to combat them in case they are indeed scrambled.

Morning Knp.
The Italians had no inclination to fight the British and even less the Americans, when they joined the war.
There was also a massive class divide between Officers and the enlisted man. This made morale very low and did not help create a fighting force. Italians were happy to be left alone.
The Italian army was also a foot one. Hardly any units were motorised and that would prove a problem in the vast expanses of desert and the seesaw nature of the campaign.
The British were lucky when they attacked in Dec of 1940 as they had only had limited objectives. The advance was so uncontested, that they kept going until they had Benghazi and Tobruk.
Being Italian, I love to laugh at my WW2 army’s dismal performances and unwillingness to throw their lives away for someone else’s glory.
When the Italians switched sides, however, things got very bloody as civil war broke out amongst the Fascists and Communists. Many Italians proved they were not afraid of dying once they had a real cause and future in which they believed.
My dad’s dad was in Africa, Russia and later ran and hid from the Fascists in Tuscany.

@Eqqman:

@P@nther:

No, that is not correct:

@Europe:

Transports can move to friendly coastal territories
and load or offload cargo, unless they loaded, moved,
offloaded, or were involved in combat during the Combat
Move or Conduct Combat phase.

Hmm, well, if that is the real intent of the rule, they should have said OR load/offload cargo, since by saying AND they are only prohibiting offloading when the ship tries to move and offload together.

@Europe:

Whenever a transport offloads, it can’t move again that turn If a transport retreats, it cant offload that turn

does that help?

Anyone use War at Sea miniatures in the global game?

@Vance:

or take carolines.

Right, that’s the best place to stage the USN . . . but there’s already a naval base there silly.  :wink:

As Japan I like to stage the IJN off of phil, put a blocker to prevent Korea/Japan invasion, and stack the carolines with as many ftr/tac as I need or can spare. Usually US doesn’t have more then 1-2 transports, so it should be safe from an amphib assault with 3-4+ air there.  Keep the mainland air on kwansi/FIC to land on carriers and you’re set up for a very heavy counter to any US moves in that direction.

I don’t like to trade ships with US when I can help it and if I have to fight a naval battle I’d rather be set up to hit him as hard as I can with the strength of my powerful airforce. Most of the times the threat is enough and the USN stays away.

@aa:

k so were at a stand still german forces went into sea zone 112 first round and as russisa i want to combine my fleet there. first of all is this possible? were not at war. and if it is possible if the uk attacks that german fleet does the russia fleet have to defend? any rules on this would be very helpful

As long as nations are not at war with each other, they may move through and/or occupy the same seazones.  And it is ALWAYS allowed to place units in seazones, even if they are occupied by enemy powers.

If the UK attacks the German fleet, the Russians would never defend under any circumstances.  They’re neutral for one, but they’re also an Allied power.  They’re ignored.  Even if they were at war with Germany and in that seazone, they would NEVER be involed in the battle as combined attacks are not permitted.

thanks for the responses.  I really appreciate it!