Game: Asia Engulfed

Thread: Re: New Supply Rules for Japan in India and Ceylon?

markluta — 2008-07-03T05:02:32+00:00

So, is Ceylon counted as a part of India for purposes of this rule?

Thread: Re: Simple question re: 4.74 Naval Builds

r3gamer — 2008-07-01T11:29:16+00:00

Thanks! Rereading the rules with these concepts (fleet step vs units) in mind, makes a HUGE difference.

Thread: Re: The Great Escape (by transports)!

markluta — 2008-07-01T10:13:47+00:00

Asyncritus wrote:
But then how do you define "about to be out of supply"? Seems like it would end up being rather fiddly.

Not at all fiddly, 'about to be out of supply' is defined as 'will be out of supply during the Initial Supply determination phase at their current location' as this will be done after the Naval Movement phase. (Of course they could be put back in supply during the Naval Movement phase by moving fleets, and/or adjusting the Japanese Supply Network, possibly using the Submarine Supply [though in this specific case the Japanese player does not currently have any submarines]).

All I am suggesting preventing is an illogical dash east by Japanese transports to somehow then get to Japan--there ought to at least be the option of harassing this move for the American fleet, in my view. There were many instances of transports sunk coming and going, even an unfortunate sinking by a submarine of a Japanese transport mostly carrying prisoners of war. Most of the troops will still probably make it, as they need only survive one round of combat plus a submarine attack--bad weather and they get through easily!

On the other hand, one could argue that mad dash east (or the similar evacuation of China from a previous post) represents a Japanese operation of stripping away defenders which has been in progress for several months. After all, we are simulating what is 'really happening' in many instances in any game, for the contemporary commanders, it was not as though they could look at the Pacific Charts and say, 'Aha, if I put LBA squadrons here and here, and base a fleet here, the enemy will be out of supply.' Rather, as the islands and bases are taken, and more and more enemy planes and ships arrive, it becomes problematic to get supply and troop transports through--but not impossible, particularly a few at a time. After all, most of those U-Boat supply vessels in the Atlantic escaped detection for long periods of time, and the Pacific is much larger than the Atlantic.

So like I said, I could argue either way as to whether transports ought to be able to move cut off units home unscathed. This is often possible with warships, but of course a couple of cruisers making a dash for home is much different from a bunch of slow and essentially unprotected transports--even a destroyer which found them could probably slip past the escorting destroyers and sink a few transports.

Thread: Re: The Great Escape (by transports)!

bassie — 2008-07-01T06:54:57+00:00

In a related situation, this is what I asked on ConsimWorld:

Rebasing troops to Home port

As the US, I'd taken the smaller two Japanese islands and was about to move into Honshu. My opponent still had many infantry units in the northern Chinese coastal areas. So during naval movement he moved all of them into the East China Sea, where I could not get at them in any way, despite my huge naval forces nearby. Then in the rebasing phase he moved them all to his home port in Honshu, ignoring influence as per the rebasing rule.

As far as we could tell this was legal, but it did seem strange. Was this ok? Could I have prevented it?
And Rick answered:

How the heck did he have so many transport points so late in the war?

On the face of it, it looks legal, but you should be able to make hay in China now and win anyway, in theory.

Thread: Re: Simple question re: 4.74 Naval Builds

Asyncritus — 2008-07-01T12:50:17+00:00

r3gamer wrote:
1. Add a (as in JUST ONE) replacement naval step to a reduced naval unit of the matching type. Can a step be assigned to multiple reduced units....or is it literally, ONE unit receives ONE step, and that's it?

You should be careful in your use of the term "unit". The rules make a clear distinction between "units" (air and ground) and "fleets" (naval). I know it sounds like nitpicking, but it can be very important.

r3gamer wrote:
2. Build a new unit at full strength as long as it is avail in the Force Pool. Pretty darn clear.

Your statement is clear, but incorrect. As Mark aptly pointed out already, you get to build a new fleet at ONE step - not full strength.

Bottom line is - one completed naval build marker (whether from a damaged step or not) equals one step on a fleet block.

Thread: Re: The Great Escape (by transports)!

Asyncritus — 2008-07-01T12:34:34+00:00

But then how do you define "about to be out of supply"? Seems like it would end up being rather fiddly.

Thread: Re: Simple question re: 4.74 Naval Builds

markluta — 2008-07-01T06:16:11+00:00

Naval units are always by steps. Note the differnce on the scenario setup cards, where everything else is by numbers of units, the naval blocks are by steps. The reason is, the steps of ground units indicate some number of men and materiel and unit cohesion, while with naval forces, the steps are each a ship or two, plus the appropriate escorts.

So, each time a naval marker reaches 'built' then ONE step of that type is added to the homeport, either add one step to an existing block of the correct type in the home port, or add a one step new block. If neither of these is possible, the build marker just remains at the 'built' level until a step becomes available, either from the force pool or on a block moved to home port prior to the next production phase for the same player. The build markers can be stacked, to produce multistep fleet blocks all at once.

Damaged markers act just like build markers on their track. One step each (one damaged battleship is hardly going to become 4 new battleships!).

Note this is different from the Japanese air build tracks, which do all get built a 2 steps (air units are always and can only be built to 2 steps).

One other important point, all build markers come off the track at the end of the production phase, so no marker can be moved directly from 'built' back onto the track, there must be at least a one-turn delay (though other build markers in the force pool can be placed at the start of an appropriate track).

Thread: Re: The Great Escape (by transports)!

markluta — 2008-07-01T05:55:17+00:00

Right, the situation I am looking at is forces in and around Papua New Guinea, and at Truk, which the Americans have bypassed successfully--if they hold Palau to the Japanese counterattack, there is likely nothing the Japanese can do to maintain the supply route more than one turn after next at the most, with their LBA about to be eradicated. So the situation is going to be a run out to the Solomon Sea or something.

Parenthetically, even if American fleets were in interception range, they might preferentially want to intercept Japanese fleet moves. And even if they do intercept, the Japanese transports only need to last one day or night combat, then avoid anyway, and rebase home, so the Americans would need a huge fleet to statistically dent up 4 or so blocks.

Anyway, I just wanted to know if this was an intended outcome of the rules or not. I can argue either way from a simulation standpoint about what is realistic, given the two-month scale of the turns. But in terms of game mechanics, faced with certain elimination, the logical thing to do is put the transports to sea and head east. If this is not a desired tactic, a rule could be written that units which are about to be out of supply, and go on transports, must make a naval move towards home.

Thread: Simple question re: 4.74 Naval Builds

r3gamer — 2008-07-01T02:51:50+00:00

More than a question, I just want to make sure I'm reading this right...

When any naval unit marker reaches "built" on the track you can do one of two things:

1. Add a (as in JUST ONE) replacement naval step to a reduced naval unit of the matching type. Can a step be assigned to multiple reduced units....or is it literally, ONE unit receives ONE step, and that's it?
2. Build a new unit at full strength as long as it is avail in the Force Pool. Pretty darn clear.

When any DAMAGED marker reaches "built", you add a single new naval step (a NEW unit at 1 strength)....or add one step to any reduced fleet?

What is confusing me is the line "a newly built naval step" used on 8.6 and similarly on 4.74.

Thread: Re: The Great Escape (by transports)!

spartax — 2008-06-30T11:02:53+00:00

What do you mean when you say the Japanese supply lines are about to be cut? If the US is already enjoying dominant influence (or even limited) in the sea zones around the island, then the transports would have to stop when they entered any such zones, leaving them open to interception. On the other hand, if the US hasn't encircled the island completely, the move would be legal, and a perfectly reasonable punishment for a careless US player.

Remember, transports only move two sea zones, though, so unless the US fleets are based far forward, it'll be hard for them to avoid interception.

Thread: The Great Escape (by transports)!

markluta — 2008-06-30T05:41:37+00:00

Question on whether this is intended to be a legal move:

In the event Japanese units on islands are bypassed by the Americans, when the Japanese supply lines are about to be cut that turn, it seems it is possible to put all the infantry and LBA on any available transports, run away from the American fleets (eastward) beyond interception range (they will then be out of supply when checked), and then rebase at the end of the turn to Japan (and back in supply). The only American naval response could be the submarine unit, which at most could sink 2 steps.

Is this legal?

Thread: Re: New Supply Rules for Japan in India and Ceylon?

Rick Young — 2008-06-28T01:23:10+00:00

the two units limit excludes fleets.

yes, coastal supply units do count against the two unit limit.