Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Amphibious assault & counterattacks...confused

Expand Messages
  • rybenmegido
    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.
    • rybenmegido
      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
        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
      • generalm5
        ... 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
          attacks. To answer your question, the land units involved are 'in'
          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
        • Scott David Orr
          ... 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
          • Scott David 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
              >had an opportunity to counterattack."


              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
              >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 ¿¿??).


              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
            • Scott David 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
              • gord munro
                ... 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

                  ---------------------------------
                  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


                  Visit your group "Supremacy" on the web.

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

                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


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






                  ---------------------------------
                  Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.