Leningrad is so close.

@dazedwit

In case you need it, here are PDFs of the latest Axis and Allies rules from the official manufacturer, including for Europe and Pacific 1940:

https://renegadegamestudios.com/axis-allies-resources

@morvill said in Submarine & Fighter attack, Fighter DD defense - Retreat Rules:

To me, it seems like because the 2 defending fighters have a valid target, that being the 1 attacking fighter, this condition is not met. And it does not specify “All units of a particular type”, so we can’t say the destroyer was “all units” in any sense. I don’t think I’ll see any disagreement on that. Thus, another round of combat will ensue unless the attacker chooses to retreat. The submarines cannot submerge at any other point than step 2 of the General Combat Sequence, thus for the subs to remain in the sea zone, another round of combat must persist, otherwise they must retreat “with” (the fighters remain the sea zone as part of their retreat) the fighter. Yet, if the attacker chooses to press, the subs do not have any valid targets for the next round of combat. Again, they could choose to submerge, but you could also surprise strike at “no units”, which to my knowledge is neither allowed nor disallowed by the rules, at least in this context.

Correct. It doesn’t matter whether or not all units on both sides have a valid target, only that at least one on each side does. If the attacker decides to press, all units will remain in the sea zone, even those that don’t have a valid target (the subs). If the attacker decides to retreat, all attacking units must retreat. As you say, the subs can submerge in the next combat round, but the only reason for them to do so would be so that they can remain in the sea zone if the attacker decides to retreat at the end of that round, as they are effectively out of the fight anyway.

Not sure if this is relevant, but per the rules:

Sea zones are either friendly or hostile. Friendly sea zones contain no surface warships (this doesn’t include submarines and transports) belonging to a power with which you are at war. Hostile sea zones contain surface warships belonging to a power with which you are at war. (The presence of a surface warship
belonging to a power on the other side with which you are not yet at war doesn’t make
a sea zone hostile.) pg. 8

The friendly/hostile state of the sea zone has no bearing on combat. That is relevant only to movement.

@Seath thanks for your quick reply.

@SuperbattleshipYamato
Doing all 3 might be risky but the risk might be worth it.
Taranto is a given if you send the carrier chances of Italy scrambling are low anyway.

Toburk is also pretty easy just the naval battle before it might be tricky. You could remove the destroyer from the taranto raid to make that combat even more safe.
Or the cruiser from gibraltar if you still have it.

Dont think you need the tactical for the taranto raid, you could swap the figher for the tactical to make tobruk safer

Its 1 cruiser + 1 BB + 3 fighters ( 19attach. 6 hitpoints ) vs 1 destroyer 1 cruiser 3 fighters 1 bomber 1 carrier 18attack/ 8 hitpoints ) your first 2 hitpoints dont cost you a single die as well.

all of my japan factories got SBR’d by B29’s and the empire folded like an origami swan that was pretty realistic

It’s a 69% attack against starting units in Leningrad. 49% if they put 1 extra inf in. So they can withdraw 5 troops on the peninsula back to Leningrad and 4 troops from Leningrad - perhaps more if they fly some planes in. In balanced mod, this theory has more merit if marines are bought G1.

The point here is that it slows the Soviet withdrawal to Bryansk. Particularly good if the southern force is sitting in Western Ukraine at the end of USSR1 - they can’t counter attack a force smashing the withdrawing Leningrad forces although may be able to hit a weak German force in Eastern Poland.

Situational can make it hard.  If I knew I had a fighting chance (say at least a 30% chance of a win, I would stick it out, but if the Japanese wanted to play a waiting game (so planes could be used elsewhere) and build up for the attack, this fight is not going to be much of a fight.  I guess like Russia, it comes down to just how long you can hold out.  So what is considered a victory for the allies?  If India can hold out till Round 9, do you consider that good for the Allies?  I know that goes hand in hand with holding Russia, but for the experts out there, how long can you hold out and still achieve Allied victory?

I recently played a game where I rushed to gibralter through Spain. I also attacked Turkey and Sweden with Germany. I eventually lost the game though. However, the decision to invade true neutrals was out of desperation as the axis were already in trouble, so I believe that if you build your strategy based on taking these neutrals as opposed to doing it on a whim, the axis can turn it to their advantage. So many more options become available with the geographical positions of these neutrals. That’s just my 2 cents.