Yes, it does not matter which territory the troops on the transport are invading. The amphibious assault is in the sea zone adjacent to a territory with an airbase, which is all that is required.
Marsh
Kamikaze rule question
-
The situation is:
Philippines is under Japanese control. However, NO japanese land or air units are stationed there. In addition sz 35 (philippines) is emptyCan Allies launch an attck with an unescorted singel transport and an inf to take Philiphines without kamikaze?
From page 16 in the pacific rulebook:
The Japanese player has the ability to make
a special defensive strike against Allied
surface warships. Japan is allowed to make
6 kamikaze strikes during the game. These
strikes can be made only in sea zones that
contain the Kamikaze symbol: those surrounding Japan,
Okinawa, Iwo Jima, Formosa, Marianas, and Philippines.
If an Allied player attacks Japanese units in or declares an
amphibious assault from one of these sea zones, the Japanese
player can announce at the beginning of this phase that he or
she intends to launch one or more kamikaze strikes in that sea
zone. They are resolved before any combat begins.
The Japanese player must declare how many kamikaze
strikes will be made, in which sea zone(s) they will
be used, and which enemy ship will be struck by each
kamikaze before any dice are rolled. For each declared
strike, 1 Kamikaze token must be spent (no actual air unit
is involved) and will be removed from the game after the
strike is resolved. A kamikaze strike can target any specific
enemy surface warship (not a submarine or transport)
belonging to the attacking power. More than one kamikaze
strike can be made against the same ship. Kamikaze strikes
hit on an attack roll of 2 or less. If a hit is scored, it must
be applied to the chosen unit. Surface warships that are
destroyed by a kamikaze strike (capital ships still take 2
hits) are immediately removed and will not participate in
the subsequent battle. A kamikaze strike prevents offshore
bombardment supporting an amphibious assault in that
sea zone, whether or not the strike is successful (place the
used Kamikaze token in the sea zone until you resolve the
amphibious assault to remind you that the ships may not
bombard). -
Yes, they can.
-
@wittmann:
Yes, they can.
In the first red paragraph it is referred to amphibious assult. what is meant by this? (since it does not apply to the specific situation)
-
There are two occasions when a Kamikaze can be called used. Firstly, if Japanese naval units are attacked in a Kamikaze SZ and secondly, if they try and take an island or territory, in which a Kamikaze symbol exists. In your example, the amphibious assault criterion is negated, as no Surface Warship is accompanying the landing. Transports cannot be targeted.
Is that what you were asking? -
@wittmann:
There are two occasions when a Kamikaze can be called used. Firstly, if Japanese naval units are attacked in a Kamikaze SZ and secondly, if they try and take an island or territory, in which a Kamikaze symbol exists. In your example, the amphibious assault criterion is negated, as no Surface Warship is accompanying the landing. Transports cannot be targeted.
Is that what you were asking?right I think I get it now! Thanks for the answer!
-
I have a follow up question. What if the empty Philippines is guarded by a single sub, and the Allies send a transport guarded by a destroyer, intending to ignore the submarine to conduct an amphibious assault? I would assume Japan can use its kamikazes because of the amphibious assault, but would the destruction of the destroyer prevent the landing (as lone transports can’t amphibious assault against subs), or would the landing go through since the destroyer already ignored the sub?
-
Morning Colonel Carter.
The Japanese player can use a Kamikaze and if the DD is eliminated by the Kamikaze, the Sub will prevent the landing. -
Sorry, wittmann, but that’s incorrect. Kamikaze strikes, while they do prevent offshore bombardment, do not provoke a sea battle by themselves. As the destroyer was present in the sea zone at the end of combat movement (kamikaze strikes occur in the combat phase), the sub could be ignored, and as there is no sea battle for the sub to be drawn into, it will not prevent the amphibious assault.
-
Ok, thanks Krieg. And thanks Colonel Carter for the question.
-
Has made me rethink though.
This means a Sub off the Philippines, does not prevent the capture of the Islands, as long as the Allied player is happy to lose a DD.
In fact, why throw away a Kamikaze, if the island will fall anyway? -
Thanks Krieg.
-
Need clarification on the word “Ignore”.
So, in essence the DD coming into the same SeaZone with an Enemy Sub , can choose NOT to attack it ( as combat is decided by attacker).
So the Defender cannot choose to “defend” the SeaZone , as the Attacker has chosen not to “attack” it, just “escort” the TR.And since No defense was needed, No Kamikaze involved.
Is this a correct analysis of the situation?
Tx
-
That would be correct if there was no amphibious assault involved. However, since the tranny is conducting an amphibious assault, it does allow kamikaze strikes to be used–but they (unlike scrambles) do not force a sea battle, just prevent bombardment, so the sub stays ignored, whether or not the escort ship is destroyed.
-
I am just running into this situation in a game and I was glad to see that the answer is here. As complicated as this scenario is (to me), Krieg’s answer is completely supported by the rulebook. Thanks to all!
Suggested Topics
