## Amphibious assault & counterattacks...confused

Expand Messages
• Let´s suppose player A launches an amphibious assault(1 navy, 4 units) against player B territory and neither it´s destroyed (no losses) Then B reinforces
Message 1 of 7 , Dec 8, 2005
Let´s suppose player A launches an amphibious assault(1 navy, 4
units) against player B territory and neither it´s destroyed (no
losses)

Then B reinforces the territory under attack from adjacent teritories
with some land units.

A reinforces the light blue sea from he is making the amphibious
assault with another convoy(1 navy, 4 units)

B can counterattack...where?

I am very confused at this point because:

A player (1 navy,4 units) made the amphibious assault and, since
neither player completly destroy the other, he must keep attacking or
surrender.

But if A reinforce the sea with another convoy (1 navy + 4
units)...did he have to attack again with ALL the forces in that
light sea or just with the ones that participated in the previous
assault?

What´s worse...if B counterattacks...did he attacks ONLY the forces
that made the amphibious assault or must battle against the
reinforces A have just placed in the sea too???

This controversial point arised in our first game and completly
ruined it...not a good way to try to intruduce new players to this
game.
• To be more precise: v3.0 of the rules says: If the attacker does not capture the territory, then he must continue to attack with those forces, but only after
Message 2 of 7 , Dec 8, 2005
To be more precise:

v3.0 of the rules says:

"If the attacker does not capture the territory, then he must
continue to attack with those forces, but only after the defender has

I understand that i must continue to attack with the same forces that
made the amphibious assault. Do i have to pay a set of supplies to
continue the attack?

"During Step E, if the attacker does not wish to continue the battle
in that territory, then he must surrender his forces in the territory
he attacked, or, withdraw his armies from that territory to a navy in

Then i may choose to retreat to an "adjacent light blue sea" so i
understand well my forces are ON the enemy territory (but battles are
fought in the borders, not in the territories ¿¿??).

This is the key point. During the step D the defend may
counterattack...but where? The landing forces are ON defender
territory, isn´t? So defender should choose their own territory as
the Theater of war to attack the enemy forces...or maybe enemy forces
may not be attacked?

To make things worse, rules says:

"However, if the attacker wants to continue the battle, then he may
reinforce his armies in the territory he attacked, even though he did
not capture it during Step D."

Aghhh!!!! So now the attacker may reinforce the armies in the
territory? how come? You are supposed to reinforce a territory to
launch an attack to an enemy territory, not to reinforce an enemy
territory on which your forces are "fighting"?

So, the reinforces can fight with the remaining attacking units that
must continue the attack? is that attack is supply-center free?

Very, very confusing. Technically speaking, where are the attacking
forces?

a) On enemy territory, sharing space with defender units
b) On the frontier...in some kind of undefinded "limbo"
c) On the navy transport
d) On the light blue sea
• ... has ... that ... battle ... territory ... in ... are ... as ... forces ... did ... that ... I hope i can help you, but I am not an expert by any
Message 3 of 7 , Dec 8, 2005
--- In Supremacy@yahoogroups.com, "rybenmegido" <rmegido@h...> wrote:
>
> To be more precise:
>
> v3.0 of the rules says:
>
> "If the attacker does not capture the territory, then he must
> continue to attack with those forces, but only after the defender
has
> had an opportunity to counterattack."
>
> I understand that i must continue to attack with the same forces
that
> made the amphibious assault. Do i have to pay a set of supplies to
> continue the attack?
>
> "During Step E, if the attacker does not wish to continue the
battle
> in that territory, then he must surrender his forces in the
territory
> he attacked, or, withdraw his armies from that territory to a navy
in
> an adjacent light blue sea."
>
> Then i may choose to retreat to an "adjacent light blue sea" so i
> understand well my forces are ON the enemy territory (but battles
are
> fought in the borders, not in the territories ¿¿??).
>
> This is the key point. During the step D the defend may
> counterattack...but where? The landing forces are ON defender
> territory, isn´t? So defender should choose their own territory
as
> the Theater of war to attack the enemy forces...or maybe enemy
forces
> may not be attacked?
>
> To make things worse, rules says:
>
> "However, if the attacker wants to continue the battle, then he may
> reinforce his armies in the territory he attacked, even though he
did
> not capture it during Step D."
>
> Aghhh!!!! So now the attacker may reinforce the armies in the
> territory? how come? You are supposed to reinforce a territory to
> launch an attack to an enemy territory, not to reinforce an enemy
> territory on which your forces are "fighting"?
>
> So, the reinforces can fight with the remaining attacking units
that
> must continue the attack? is that attack is supply-center free?
>
> Very, very confusing. Technically speaking, where are the attacking
> forces?
>
> a) On enemy territory, sharing space with defender units
> b) On the frontier...in some kind of undefinded "limbo"
> c) On the navy transport
> d) On the light blue sea
>
I hope i can help you, but I am not an expert by any means...there
are others in this group who i am sure can help you better, but i'll
try

As for the rules concerning counter-attacks, it is fairly straight
forward-the defender may counter-attack anywhere he wishes so long as
the attack is directed at the superpower that initially attacked,
that is to say, if a attacks b, then b can attack a ,anywhere, not
just in the theatre where the initial attack occured.
The amphibous assault, is a little different from other types of
the territory, they remain there for the remainder of the attack
phase, the owning player either choosing to continue to attack or
surrendering the forces.
As for reinforcing, the attacking player can reinforce the navies in
the sea and the armies in the territory.As i understand it, the
amphibous attacker may reinforce armies in the enemy's territory, and
this is not considred an attack, but only normal movement costs must
be paid. Note, you could reinforce this area using air movement as
well.
As for the defender, when counterattacking in the same theatre, he
would have to choose between attacking the land forces now in his
territoy or attack the navies, off his coast...they are attacked
seperately, i think that is what you were asking.
Keep in mind, the defender does not have to counteratack at all, nor
does he have to counterattack in the same theatre.
Also, if the attacker chooses to not continue to attack, or does not
have the resources to he loses the armies now located in the enemy's
territory, but does not lose the navies. Just remember, that once the
armies are 'dropped' and after the initial attack, the armies and
navies are treated as seperate forces.
hope that helps, if it is unclear or you still have questions feel
free to ask away, and if i have made a mistake, i hope someone will
correct me,
Gordon
• ... Anywhere on the board, as long as it s against A (in the original rules, he could actually counterattack someone else, but that led to some strange abuses,
Message 4 of 7 , Dec 8, 2005
At 07:10 AM 12/8/2005, rybenmegido wrote:
>Let´s suppose player A launches an amphibious assault(1 navy, 4
>units) against player B territory and neither it´s destroyed (no
>losses)
>
>Then B reinforces the territory under attack from adjacent teritories
>with some land units.
>
>A reinforces the light blue sea from he is making the amphibious
>assault with another convoy(1 navy, 4 units)
>
>B can counterattack...where?
>

Anywhere on the board, as long as it's against A
(in the original rules, he could actually
counterattack someone else, but that led to some
strange abuses, such as counterattackign an ally
to give _him_ a counterattack so that he could attack the original attacker).

>I am very confused at this point because:
>
>A player (1 navy,4 units) made the amphibious assault and, since
>neither player completly destroy the other, he must keep attacking or
>surrender.
>
>But if A reinforce the sea with another convoy (1 navy + 4
>units)...did he have to attack again with ALL the forces in that
>light sea or just with the ones that participated in the previous
>assault?

He doens't _have_ to attack at all--he just gets
his next attack, anywhere on the board, with any forces he wants.

Scott Orr
• ... This is under amphibious attack, right? It also says (at least in my copy of MegaSupremacy) that one of the options is to withdraw to the ships (that is,
Message 5 of 7 , Dec 9, 2005
At 10:58 AM 12/8/2005, rybenmegido wrote:
>To be more precise:
>
>v3.0 of the rules says:
>
>"If the attacker does not capture the territory, then he must
>continue to attack with those forces, but only after the defender has

This is under amphibious attack, right? It also
says (at least in my copy of MegaSupremacy) that
one of the options is to withdraw to the ships
(that is, it matches the other rule you quoted below).

>I understand that i must continue to attack with the same forces that
>made the amphibious assault. Do i have to pay a set of supplies to
>continue the attack?
>
>"During Step E, if the attacker does not wish to continue the battle
>in that territory, then he must surrender his forces in the territory
>he attacked, or, withdraw his armies from that territory to a navy in
>
>Then i may choose to retreat to an "adjacent light blue sea" so i
>understand well my forces are ON the enemy territory (but battles are
>fought in the borders, not in the territories ¿¿??).

Technically all battles are fought in the defending territory.

>This is the key point. During the step D the defend may
>counterattack...but where? The landing forces are ON defender
>territory, isn´t? So defender should choose their own territory as
>the Theater of war to attack the enemy forces...or maybe enemy forces
>may not be attacked?
>
>To make things worse, rules says:
>
>"However, if the attacker wants to continue the battle, then he may
>reinforce his armies in the territory he attacked, even though he did
>not capture it during Step D."
>
>Aghhh!!!! So now the attacker may reinforce the armies in the
>territory? how come? You are supposed to reinforce a territory to
>launch an attack to an enemy territory, not to reinforce an enemy
>territory on which your forces are "fighting"?

No, the reinforcement is to the attacking
territory (or sea). While the battle technically
takes place in the defending territory, you don't
pay movement costs until you actually move in
after capturing it--so no need to move in
_before_ then, in the reinforcement phase.

>So, the reinforces can fight with the remaining attacking units that
>must continue the attack? is that attack is supply-center free?
>

There's no reason the reinforcing forces can't
join the attack. Actually, think about it this
way: rather than "continuing the attack", the
attacker can simply declare that he's withdrawing
to the light blue sea, and then launch a new
attack (with both the original forces and the
reinforcing forces)--so the question is really moot.

Scott Orr
• ... Under the original rules, the attacker could potentially lose the armies if he invaded from a dark blue ocean rather than a light blue sea (which was a way
Message 6 of 7 , Dec 13, 2005
At 02:51 PM 12/8/2005, generalm5 wrote:

>Also, if the attacker chooses to not continue to attack, or does not
>have the resources to he loses the armies now located in the enemy's
>territory, but does not lose the navies. Just remember, that once the
>armies are 'dropped' and after the initial attack, the armies and
>navies are treated as seperate forces.

Under the original rules, the attacker could potentially lose the
armies if he invaded from a dark blue ocean rather than a light blue
sea (which was a way to do an invasion more quickly--lower movement
cost and the enemy's navies couldn't block it), but such an attack is
no longer possible, and the attacker is always free to reembark his
armies rather than continuing the attack.

As for the counterattack, I think it's reasonable to consider the
navies and armies to be separate forces that have to be attacked
separately, but the rules are actually silent on the point--you could
just as easily rule that they're the same force, and frankly the
latter makes a lot more sense: if the navies are able to provide
combat support on the attack, there's no good reason they couldn't
provide it on defense as well.

Scott Orr
• ... Under the original rules, the attacker could potentially lose the armies if he invaded from a dark blue ocean rather than a light blue sea (which was a way
Message 7 of 7 , Dec 13, 2005
Scott David Orr <sdorr@...> wrote: At 02:51 PM 12/8/2005, generalm5 wrote:

>Also, if the attacker chooses to not continue to attack, or does not
>have the resources to he loses the armies now located in the enemy's
>territory, but does not lose the navies. Just remember, that once the
>armies are 'dropped' and after the initial attack, the armies and
>navies are treated as seperate forces.

Under the original rules, the attacker could potentially lose the
armies if he invaded from a dark blue ocean rather than a light blue
sea (which was a way to do an invasion more quickly--lower movement
cost and the enemy's navies couldn't block it), but such an attack is
no longer possible, and the attacker is always free to reembark his
armies rather than continuing the attack.

As for the counterattack, I think it's reasonable to consider the
navies and armies to be separate forces that have to be attacked
separately, but the rules are actually silent on the point--you could
just as easily rule that they're the same force, and frankly the
latter makes a lot more sense: if the navies are able to provide
combat support on the attack, there's no good reason they couldn't
provide it on defense as well.

Scott Orr

I understood that the navies could support only the initial attack. and that following this, if there are armies remaining, subsequent attacks would be with the armies alone, and to gain navy support an extra 'set' of resources would have to be expended ( as a normal multi-front attack).Or the navies could attack seperately.
And, yes, i interpreted it that the defender would have to attack the navies and armies seperately, as the armies are now 'detached' from the naval attack force. Also, those using tanks of course cannot attack the navies at all, (just to confuse the matter further)

Gordon

---------------------------------

Visit your group "Supremacy" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Supremacy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

---------------------------------

---------------------------------