Amphibious Assault Clarification


  • @linkler And amphibious units are ( per the rules ) Fighters and infantry ( marines or regular infantry )… AND only infantry can participate in the first round of assaults and at least 1 infantry has to survive in order to bring on any further assault waves…

    So if you can’t afford to take losses in your assaulting infantry then bring along a lot of fighters I guess.

    Thanks, makes more sense now.


  • @vondox For the record also, my original post was based on V2 rules, since V3 wasn’t out yet haha. While I don’t think the rule changed much, I did want to point that out.

    But I agree with the other two still, the V3 rules don’t specify that you can’t take a fighter as a casualty first, only that the amphibiously assaulting ground units take double casualties! So yeah, maybe bringing a lot of fighters isn’t such a bad thing haha.


  • @chris_henry According to the rules on pg# 41 ( we had this scenario pop up on us this weekend during play ) it states: “If units from ADJACENT land zones are attacking at the SAME time as amphibiously assaulting units, amphibiously assaulting units must be chosen as casualties first.”

    So, in our real life example we had an attack that had both types of attack. The attacker had to take 1 hit. He had 1 marine and 1 infantry. The player wanted to take the loss against the infantry but felt he had to only take the loss of the ONE infantry since he didn’t have another infantry to take the loss. We told him that he could take the marine as the loss and still be in compliance since a marine does NOT take double damage on amphibious landings. It was the only logical way to handle the loss and that it still met the rules. If he had taken 2 hits then one hit could be absorbed by the Marine but the other hit would go against the infantry and it would die thus spoiling the invasion landing. Now, here is the sticky part!!! If the amphibious landing fails and it’s a joint attack the rules read as follows: “The units attacking from adjacent land zones are able to retreat.” So we understand that to mean that if the amphibious landing fails then the land invasion HAS to retreat as well. Is that how everyone else handles that???

  • 2024 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17

    @vondox So, what was coming from where? The infantry was amphibiously assaulting, and the marine attacking from the ground? Or the other way around?

    I guess either way it doesn’t make a difference, it would be the same outcome. If you only had one unit amphibiously assaulting, there’s only one to be taken as a casualty! You wouldn’t apply one hit to the amphibiously assaulting infantry, and then apply another to the marine since “double casualties” are in play. That just means you wiped out the amphibiously assaulting force.

    As to the other half of your question, I think you’re reading it wrong! It says the adjacent units are able to retreat, it doesn’t say they have to! That’s just like any normal combat though, attacking units can always retreat if they want to in a ground attack. So even though the amphibiously assaulting unit died, you can still chose to continue your assault with the ground forces if you so chose!

    Does that clear it up at all?


  • @vondox are able to retreat is not the same wording as MUST retreat …


  • It’s a bit gamey, but when Japan is taking out coastal Chinese territories, we will always put one Infantry on a boat and amphibiously assault just so we can also get the single Bombardment roll. Even if the Infantry is originating from the same territory as the land force invading. And only one Infantry so we never suffer double-casualties. I think this is allowed?


  • @ghetty Absolutely.


  • @ghetty
    A bombardment is at most a single shot at 4 or less… that’s not gamey lol and it is allowed yea, why wouldn’t it be?


  • @bretters I don’t know. I guess it’s just funny if the Infantry originates from the same zone as the rest of his comrades. You put him on a boat and immediately have him get off the boat so another boat can take a pot shot.

    But now that I think about it, it’s probably more along the lines of the main invading force is taking a land route while this Infantry is either trying to flank or create a diversion from another point of attack. You are correct - not gamey.


  • @ghetty
    Also don’t forget the turn is 6 whole months . It’s not unrealistic.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

55

Online

17.2k

Users

39.6k

Topics

1.7m

Posts