Sea Battle/Transport Question

This game has no mechs,pripet marshes or Italy player.I suspect you’re discussing the 42 version of Global.

Thank you.  That is great work and effort.

@Drill:

My dad had a destroyer and a bomber, and attacked my 2 subs.

I got a hit right away, so he took off his destroyer.  So the battle is over, right?  :)

The destroyer and the bomber will still perform their attacking rolls… since there’s a destroyer it negates the subs’s first strike ability and allow both destroyer and bomber to perform their attack. Then the battle will be over since the bomber can’t attack the subs by itself.

@MrMalachiCrunch:

Rev 1) In a situation where only defenseless transports are present a single attacking piece can be used to destroy them allowing the rest to perfrom offshore bombardment.

I think this is a question of value… You can chose to ignore transports, allowing Bombardment on the territory, which improves your chances of winning the IPC’s and position from territory.
…OR choose to sink Transports Each costing 7 IPC’s but lose the bombardment option.
I think they did this to force the choice, for strategic purposes and game balance

@MrMalachiCrunch:

Rev 2) This is much more radical.  In a situation where there is a defending fleet, some of the attacking fleet is held in reserve.  Combat occurs in the sea zone and if the attacker wins, then the the reserve fleet performs offshore bombardment.

Doesn’t make much sense to me, If an Entire Sea Zone is considered hostile because of any amount of surface warships, any Sea units entering their fire range are vulnerable.  If i were a defending Carrier with planes and i see lots of ships Im gonna try to sink the most valued units, it would help my defense in the land portion. Also, if the attacker could do that then the defender should have some similar balancing option, like maybe the ability to retreat defending planes, to the Land Territ.

The other half of my issue would require a rule modification,  I thought I made that clear in my recent example.  I guess this may be a good time for me to figure out how to initiate a poll on the topic.

Do you think in the special situation of amphibious assault whereby only defenseless transports are present in the SZ that a single combat piece could be designated to destroy the transports and allow the remaining units to perform offshore bombardment?

I suspect the poll would show most are not in favour of this.  I wonder if comments can be supplied as well as the poll answer?  I guess I will find out.

Ahhh i see, thanks germanman01, kreighund, and hobbes for your guy’s input

thanks for your help.

German naval buys aren’t looking good in this game–12$ bombers and defenseless transports make them much harder here than in Revised.

If Germany buys a Med destroyer, and sits in 14, UK can still muster 2 figs 1 bomb for a UK1 attack by moving the AC up into 15 (assuming Germany committed air to killing the destroyer in 15, which is fairly risky unless Germany uses 2 or more planes).  This is risky for UK, but even if they get diced they will kill enough that Russia mops up the rest on R2.

If Germany buys an AC, then I guess UK holds off on a UK1 attack.  But what UK can do is buy 2 bombers, and fly its figs to West Russia or West Africa.  Then rally all land forces in Jordan.  So now, if Germany lands Egy G2, UK attacks UK2.  3 figs, 3 bombers attack 2 figs 1 ac 1 bb.

The Med fleet is doomed.  I’d recommend attacking Egy on G1…at least that forces UK to either counter immediately or lose Africa, and this counter takes some pressure off Japan.