Transport vs Sub

@Panther great thnx!

@Panther Thanks old chap. Much appreciated.

@Simon98v:

…

If I interpreted this correctly, a seazone containing both submarines AND transports blocks the movement of sea units. This doesn�t make any sense.

Do submarines have the ability to protect allied transports? (obviously not from air units)

Can you ignore making an attack on a seazone containing transports and submarines to make a seashore bombardment?

Don’t forget:

@rulebook:

An enemy submarine and/or transport does not block any of your units’ movement, nor does it prevent loading or offloading
in that sea zone (with one exception - see Special Combat Movement: Transports, pg. 13). As the moving player, you have the
option of attacking an enemy submarine and/or transport that shares a sea zone with you. However, if a warship chooses to sink
an unescorted transport, that warship must end its movement in that sea zone. It is possible that some units may stop to attack
while others continue moving through the sea zone.

This should answer all your questions.

If I understand correctly your rephrased question, you want to know if it’s possible to play an A&A board game (like A&A 1942) using the large-scale pre-painted models that are used in these product lines…

A&A Miniatures (Original)
A&A Naval Miniatures
A&A Air Force Miniatures

…rather than by using the very small unpainted plastic sculpts that come in the board game itself.  The short answer is no.  The A&A board games are designed to be played with large numbers of tiny sculpts placed on a map board.  The so-called “A&A miniatures” games use models that are gigantic in size compared to the ones in the board games, and there’s no way that they’d fit on an A&A map board.  Besides, you’d need to buy dozens or even hundreds of these “A&A miniatures” to have enough units to play an A&A board game, which would be fantastically expensive – assuming you could even find them on the market, because they’re a discontinued product line.

In principle, assuming that you owned the required dozens (or hundreds) of “A&A miniatures”, you could theoretically use them to play an A&A board game by keeping all the “A&A miniatures” in labeled groups off the board and representing them on the game map by smaller labeled markers or tiny sculpts…but in essence that would bring you right back to playing the board games with tiny sculpts – which is how they’re meant to be played in the first place.

Ah that settles it. Thanks a lot!  :-D

Yes, it applies in 1914 as well.  Except, of course, for the bit about combat movement restrictions, as there is only one movement phase in that game.

Don’t think of loading/unloading transports as using the units’ movement point, think of it as part of the transport’s special ability to carry units. A transport may load units up to its capacity, so long as those units have not moved yet during the turn, and may unload any amount of cargo (none, one unit, or both) once per turn (so no split unloading). However, units that have been unloaded are not able to move for the rest of the turn, and you may not load or move a transport after unloading.

@Sean.C:

@adaptation:

I don’t know why people say Pearl Harbor cannot be done anymore - don’t forget that the Japanese sub is now absolutely untouchable with the new rules and can always go for Pearl Harbor. You can get 3 fighters(9), 1 bomber(4), 1 cruiser(3), 1 sub(2) and 1 AC(1) (grand total of 19) VS sub(1),destroyer(2),AC(2),fighter(4) (Grand total of 9).

Over 95% chance of victory with average IPC losses around 16-18 depending on if you chose to lose a bomber or fighter after your sub.

Then you end up defending with 2 fighters ( 8 ), 1 cruiser (3), and 1 AC (2) (grand total of 13) VS 2 fighters (6), 1 bomber (4), 1 destroyer (2), and 1 battleship (4) (grand total of 16).

Over 95% chance of losing your Japanese fleet with an average IPC loss around 18-20 for America depending on if they chose to kill a fighter or bomber after their destroyer.

Plus US player submerges the sub right at the beginning of the J1 attack, allowing it to participate on the counter on US2…

Then you have to consider that UK1 has almost a 70% chance of wiping out the other half of your japanese fleet

You’re goal here is India, not America.  The only reason people did it before was it was a slam dunk with no losses most of the time with units you didn’t need for India anyhow.  It’s a completely different story now.  Now your looking at the annihilation of a majority of your fleet that you actually need to help take India.

Yup, if the UK attacked SZ37 then Japan has to wipe out any remaining UK fleet from that attack and get the UK transports as quickly as possible. Attacking the US fleet almost removes Japan from the Pacific after US1.