Clint Walker
United States
Mattoon
Illinois
-
After re-acquinting myself with the rule-book, a document which I despise due to the overly-verbose way in which it was written, I found myself stumbling on an old question, one which is kind of tackled here, but wanted to bring up anyway, just for my own purposes.
I get that bombers using their special ability (the one that lets them fly into the territory with the battle marker in it) cannot capture a territory on their own.
I guess I'm just confused about exactly what other units, if any, can help capture a territory along with bombers flying "overhead."
Example: Let's say America has left poor salt lake city alone with one piddily infantry.
An invader player sees this up ahead (meaning it's just out of range of their land forces, who haven't advanced that far yet) so they send in two bombers "overhead" to deal with it. They win the battle, but as is currently, cannot stay at that location because they can't capture a territory by themselves.
Sounds cool to me, but what if during second movement the invader player looks and sees they did have a lone helicopter that's two spaces away?
Can the invader player in this instance send in that helicopter to capture this territory with the bombers, even though....
a: the rules say (Page 18, the "exception" listed after the first bullet point under "you can (if you wish) move") that units can't move into a place where bombers alone left the territory vacant or...
b. that helicopter didn't actually participate in the original attack. Part of me wants to say yes on this, since you can always move into captured territories with or without units that didn't attack, but this is seeming to conflict with the bomber rules that say there need to be other forces to help them capture.
I guess I just don't understand if bombers need other units ATTACKING with them to capture a territory, or if they just need ANY units (whether they attacked or not) coming in during second movment, to help them capture it.
Thanks!
-
Damo
Australia
Hobart
Tasmania
Plastic & Shiney!
Don't try this in a B-17!
-
Page 16 of the Rules says this of empty territories
But Page 18 says "Exception"
So, in the case of only bomber attack, no 2nd movement by the chopper is allowable.
-
Clint Walker
United States
Mattoon
Illinois
-
Thanks for the quick reply, however this doesn't really answer my question.
Of course I get that in a general sense that you have to meet certian requirements to capture a territory; I'm asking about this special situation in particular. Or in other words, I'm not sure what the requirements are in the case mentioned in my question.
Showing me that paragraph is like showing me a paragraph that says "You must roll dice to determine what happens in a battle."
Thanks!
-
Damo
Australia
Hobart
Tasmania
Plastic & Shiney!
Don't try this in a B-17!
-
Sorry about that - I got caught up in a conversation before I'd finished the second half of the question.
See above edit.
-
Jon W
United States
Aurora
Colorado
-
I think it's pretty explicit on p.18, under General Second Movement Rules:
You can (if you wish) move:
o Into a vacant territory, with or without units that attacked. EXCEPTION: Units cannot move into a territory that was left vacant by a lone bomber or bombers: such a territory cannot be captured.
The example that precedes this quote also clarifies that even if the bombers attack with non-bomber support, if that support doesn't survive the battle (and the bombers do), the territory cannot be captured because the bombers are alone at the important moment (so you don't have to remember the game state).
-
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
-
 First of all, re-acquaint yourself with the FACT that neither Helicopters nor Bombers are allowed to Capture a CITY by themselves, from any *Special* moves, nor even in the event from any combination for this that could arise, such as what you've described. ALSO, you have to have some NON-Bomber participate and SURVIVE, in order to advance later with whatever within the Attacked AREA, and this were considered NON-*Special*/Exclusive then too, now isn't that? You'll just have to accept and agree on this for what you've lain out here, since it is: "not going to happen".
I'll reiterate here once again: Bombers attacking alone, or even initially in conjunction with others, yet ending up being the SOLE SURVIVORS making theirs for where any others also HAD participated as well, shall then make that particular AREA ineligible on Capture in any form or demeanor during these instances.
Did you take notice that there may even become some *Special* Bombers MOVES occurring unintended, as a result from where and when any initial accompanying units aren't around any longer, to assist in the forthcoming Attack? Yes, those JUST THEN become such!
It is a 'deference' slanted toward the USA Player, in order to give them some leeway, or an 'edge', against the overwhelming, massive amounts of INVADERS coming at them from every direction. If you are unable to COMPLY with what is required on making a legitimate "Capture", as accorded with what you HAVE to accomplish on this, then you won't!
-
Clint Walker
United States
Mattoon
Illinois
-
Thanks for the help everyone. I figured the "exception" was absolute, but it was one of those things I totally overlooked (not hard to do in a rulebook so crammed with verbiage that reading it out loud would be like trying to speed-read through Moby-Dick), so I guess I just wanted to make sure that was the rule. Makes sense, too.
I think what threw me was the wording...or in this case, lack of wording, on the refrence card regarding bombers. It says the same thing, pretty much, as the rulebook, but if you look down the last sentence just says "Bombers Alone Cannot Capture a Territory" without mentioning the "no units can move into a territory left vacant by bombers rule." I guess I just wanted to make sure.
Oh...one more thing, just in case it hasn't already been mentioned...
Does the "bombers alone can't capture a territory" bit apply to bombers no matter how they're attacking, or just the ones who are using their special function to attack from above the contested territory?
-
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
-
Yib-Yab wrote: Thanks for the help everyone. I figured the "exception" was absolute, but it was one of those things I totally overlooked (not hard to do in a rulebook so crammed with verbiage that reading it out loud would be like trying to speed-read through Moby-Dick), so I guess I just wanted to make sure that was the rule. Makes sense, too.
I think what threw me was the wording...or in this case, lack of wording, on the refrence card regarding bombers. It says the same thing, pretty much, as the rulebook, but if you look down the last sentence just says "Bombers Alone Cannot Capture a Territory" without mentioning the "no units can move into a territory left vacant by bombers rule." I guess I just wanted to make sure.
Oh...one more thing, just in case it hasn't already been mentioned...
Does the "bombers alone can't capture a territory" bit apply to bombers no matter how they're attacking, or just the ones who are using their special function to attack from above the contested territory?  YES, for wherever these ALONE were to "Attack". Now, they are even allowed to LAND WITHIN an Area captured by a *Special* MOVES Helicopter when that has been conducting such on its own, as well with LAND WITHIN a CITY that had been recently "Captured" that any could fly unto within its RANGE, and even LAND WITHIN an 'Invasion Zone' that belonged to the Bomber's side.
-
Clint Walker
United States
Mattoon
Illinois
-
yikes...when you factor in all the places that bombers CAN zoom off to for their second movements, it sure makes them dangerous, doesn't it?
-
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
-
Certainly, while I shall *denote* that you then don't want to WASTE them on some "fool's errand", because these are too valuable for that matter. Most people will not take the 'chance' for losing any in the manner of which you 'posited' here. You'll also notice that you weren't prohibited from using them any which ways you want, just as long that you abide by their RULES on such.
-
Clint Walker
United States
Mattoon
Illinois
-
sigh. Even when agreeing with me you somehow make it sound like I've overlooked something. Maybe it's just how you write your version of "sentences."
For instance your whole last sentence is just a verbose way of saying "you could have done what you wanted to do with your bombers, as long as you followed the rules." No kidding.
Long story short, and I've hesitated for a while to say this, but while I admire your devotion to this game and the quick way you've snapped to it with answers, perhaps being a bit more concise with your words and maybe not pettyfogging rule questions with over-complications or bizarre fragmentary statements just re-iterating the obvious, would help get your points across more clearly.
Just some friendly advice. Do with it what you will, of course.
-
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
-
Yib-Yab wrote: sigh. Even when agreeing with me you somehow make it sound like I've overlooked something. Maybe it's just how you write your version of "sentences." No, I just shall automatically 'presume' that any of YOU were 'sufficiently intelligent' enough to discern my intent(s), along with the purposes throughout such. Yib-Yab wrote: For instance your whole last sentence is just a verbose way of saying "you could have done what you wanted to do with your bombers, as long as you followed the rules." No kidding. No, again, since it had to become explained thoroughly in order for YOU to fully *grasp* what you hadn't so far, and this were applicable to others in your same situation for whenever it "cropped up yet again", as it no doubt will!
Yib-Yab wrote: Long story short, and I've hesitated for a while to say this, but while I admire your devotion to this game and the quick way you've snapped to it with answers, perhaps being a bit more concise with your words and maybe not pettyfogging rule questions with over-complications or bizarre fragmentary statements just re-iterating the obvious, would help get your points across more clearly.
Just some friendly advice. Do with it what you will, of course. Do YOU even begin to 'believe' that this won't find its way into some further discussions? Want to bet 'moi' that "it" shall NOT? I have some 'admonishment' on that aspect then; maybe some F.RE:A.Q. is in order in here for these that were constantly, "Frequently RE-Asked Questions", for anyone unaware as thus?
I try to "cover all the bases" from the perception with the perspective of prospective 'inquirers', that may later arrive, and for some reason, then they overlooked any portion pertaining unto their 'query'. Sometimes, 'simple' isn't nearly enough in certain instances, while I'm more than willing on issuance with the 'benefit' for where any 'doubt' is CAST for whomever. It may "come off" as condescending, or "talking down", and you can take 'umbrage' however you care FOR since it is your choice in the matter, while THAT wasn't the stated, nor intended comportment with what I provided on these, overall.
-
Jon W
United States
Aurora
Colorado
-
GROGnads wrote: Yib-Yab wrote: Does the "bombers alone can't capture a territory" bit apply to bombers no matter how they're attacking, or just the ones who are using their special function to attack from above the contested territory? YES
I'm not sure which half of the OP's (unhelpfully disjunctive) question you're answering. I think you're responding to the first half, and I agree with your answer, but maybe the following will add clarity.
My take is this: the rules state that "a bomber can can battle enemy units on land from an adjacent friendly territory, as all other units can" (emphasis mine). So it seems like bombers attacking alone from an adjacent area should be able to advance and capture.
But, as noted above, the rules on p.18 state that "units cannot move into a territory that was left vacant by a lone bomber or bombers". This does not appear in the section of the rules applying to bombers using their special ability, but instead appears as a general 2nd movement rule, with nothing calling out whether they were in or adjacent to the territory. That seems conclusive, to me.
Note that you could still capture a territory with bombers alone, provided a surviving ground unit was part of the battle. So in the example on p.18, if the mobile unit survives, the bombers could land in the territory, and the mobile unit could remain in the adjacent area or move to an area unrelated to that battle. Which seems weird, but I'm 98% sure the rules as written support this interpretation (I'm considerably less sure that all of this reflects the designer's exact intention).
-
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
-
YES, is applicable in both circumstances, because "Bomber(s) ALONE" were what makes theirs ineligible for any 'Capture', nor is the 2nd example you provide applicable, since it indicates the Bomber(s) were: NOT ALONE; as you stated in such. Bombers that "Attack" without any other UNIT surviving to participate also, then confer the 'Non-capture' aspect whenever that arose, whether intended and especially even when it isn't. Does the other fellow HAVE my 'bet $$$' now?
-
-
tss, such a clear set of rules, how can there be any doubt about its meaning?
Damo's post says it all, and the lack of reference on the reference card for the bomber unit is because its not a repetition of that rule, only a statement of the bombers ability (or in this case, lack of ability to capture on their own).
The logic behind capturing territory is clear; you need a surviving ground unit during the combat phase to perform the capture (ie grasp control from the hands of any enemy army unit and enemy civil administration, the latter not having any combat strength but being sufficient to prevent capture if they're not defeated in combat), but it is only effectively captured if you still have any ground unit present during the "capture territories" phase (which will garrison/set up a friendly civil administration in that territory, later on this friendly civil administration suffices by itself to retain control of the territory).
Helicopters...
EDIT:removed the helicopter bit, it wasnt correct, the rest is correct though.
-
Clint Walker
United States
Mattoon
Illinois
-
Wait...helicopters can't normally capture territory on their own without using their special ability? That's not how I've always played it.
So if I've got say, three helicopters in "Combat Position" next to a disputed territory (a territory with a battle marker in it) and they alone win the battle, they can't then go in themselves on second movement and capture it? Hmmmm...
I just glanced at the rules real quick and I didn't see any stipulation about helicopters as you mentioned, unless I missed it.
I just thought a helicopter's special ability was just another tricky way for them to cut ahead farther than the front line if needed.
-
-
OOPS, just checked the rules for certainty and you are right, Yib-Yab.
disregard my remarks about the helicopters; they can capture territory, whether using their special ability or by normal combat.
sorry about that, I'll edit my previous posts.
-
Clint Walker
United States
Mattoon
Illinois
-
No worries man...hey we've all been there. It's not like this is one of the eaiser games to understand when it comes down to the supreme fiddily-ness of piece movement.
You should have seen the chest-grabber I had when I read your part about the helicopters...ha ha. Like, what else could i be getting wrong about this game?
-
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
-
First of A-L-L, then, do you: "has my BET $$$$?"
As for this: Quote: "The logic behind capturing territory is clear; you need a surviving ground unit during the combat phase to perform the capture" then, that were 'mistaken' as well, since it was further clarified now.
-
Ron Glass
United States
Tampa
Florida
-
Lots of electronic dots so far on this, but it is really very simple.
Since the defender will always fire before the attacker, AT THE MOMENT OF ATTACK, there will either be bombers with ground support...or there will be bombers with NO ground support.
The 2nd case being that the attacking ground unit was killed by defenders fire, or it was a bomber only attack.
In either version of the 2nd case, it is a bomber only attack, and the territory cannot be captured.
Ron Glass
-
|
|
