Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
9 Posts

Rise and Decline of the Third Reich» Forums » Rules

Subject: Anglo-French DAS Interception rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Patrick Bauer
United States
Reading
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Waste Water too
badge
Mid-Atlantic Air Museum
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
When one Allied power uses air for ground support and the Axis fly DAS can the other Allied power intercept that DAS? or does that constitute being in the same stack?

It's not specifically prohibited under 34.32 but seems to be prohibited under 34.3.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doug Poskitt
Portugal
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would say it is prohibited, because doesn't that, in effect, constitute the French and British air units stacking together in the same hex?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
fangotango
Canada
Halifax
Nova Scotia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree. That would have French and British in the same hex.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Patrick Bauer
United States
Reading
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Waste Water too
badge
Mid-Atlantic Air Museum
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Good enough. That's what I thought.

That means the only co-stacking allowed is the specific DQB 34.32 for Ground support of seaborne invasion.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oh my God They Banned Kenny
Canada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
I agree that the rule imply air missions cannot be conducted by both the French and British in the same hex. The DQB item referenced states:

Quote:
DQB May British air units give ground support to French units and vice versa when making a seaborne invasion?

A. Yes, the land and sea portions are treated separately.


This might be read as strictly referring to seaborne invasions. It might be read as providing for a more general separation between sea / land and air components. However, in neither case is there any allowance for an exception for French and British air ending up in the same hex.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
john bailey
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
deadkenny wrote:
I agree that the rule imply air missions cannot be conducted by both the French and British in the same hex. The DQB item referenced states:

Quote:
DQB May British air units give ground support to French units and vice versa when making a seaborne invasion?

A. Yes, the land and sea portions are treated separately.


This might be read as strictly referring to seaborne invasions. It might be read as providing for a more general separation between sea / land and air components. However, in neither case is there any allowance for an exception for French and British air ending up in the same hex.


Air or Ground, right?

Quote:
34.3 British and French units may not stack together under any circumstances.

DQB If France has a minor ally -- say, Spain or Turkey -- may British units stack with that minor‘s units before 1942?
A. No, and the reverse is equally true if Britain has a minor ally.


Specifically;

34.31 British fleets may neither carry nor Sea Escort French units.

34.32 British air units may give offensive Ground Support to French ground units (because the British air would be placed atop the attacked Axis units rather than atop the French) provided the attacked units are not in a hex prohibited by 34.1. They may not give DAS to the French, because they may not be atop the French units.

DQB May British air units give ground support to French units and vice versa when making a seaborne invasion?
A. Yes, the land and sea portions are treated separately.


This is a special case because the ships are in the water and the ground support is over the enemy ground units.

Quote:
34.33 British armor may not Exploit a French breakthrough. (If British and French units on separate hexes attack the Breakthrough hex, then armor units of whichever nation occupies the Breakthrough hex may Exploit (even if that armor was adjacent only to participating attackers of the other nationality)--in this case there would be no Anglo-French combined stack.)

34.34 British air may base on a French air base (i.e., a French city) only if no French units are in the hex. The same applies to British naval units basing in French ports. British air may never base on a French air base counter nor may British fleets or ground units stack with a French airbase counter.

34.35 In 34.31 through 34.34 the reverse is equally true: French fleets may not carry British units, etc.

34.36 British and French air units and fleets may not combine to perform any mission. Note one exception: if ground units on one hex were attacking Axis units on two or more hexes as one attack (14.23), British Ground Support could be flown over one of the attacked hexes and French Ground Support over the other.

DQB If British fleets fail an interception die roll, can French fleets then try to make the interception (or vice versa)?
A. Not against the same enemy mission. All attempts must be announced before die rolls are made -- if French and British both succeeded it would be illegal; therefore they can‘t both attempt the intercept. See also 29.57, the last paragraph of the example.


34.37 Units may pass over each other freely during Movement, flight, etc.
.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oh my God They Banned Kenny
Canada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
setnaffa wrote:
deadkenny wrote:
I agree that the rule imply air missions cannot be conducted by both the French and British in the same hex. The DQB item referenced states:

Quote:
DQB May British air units give ground support to French units and vice versa when making a seaborne invasion?

A. Yes, the land and sea portions are treated separately.


This might be read as strictly referring to seaborne invasions. It might be read as providing for a more general separation between sea / land and air components. However, in neither case is there any allowance for an exception for French and British air ending up in the same hex.


Air or Ground, right?


setnaffa wrote:

This is a special case because the ships are in the water and the ground support is over the enemy ground units.


While I certainly agree that it is a 'special case', I generally try to avoid basing rulings on such 'rationalisations'. It is a special case because, IMHO, it is stated as such. French air providing GS for a British seaborne landing would be in the same hex as the British, apparently violating the 'general' rule. However, an exception is provided for by the DQB item. Without that, I would say it was not allowed. The point I was raising, while leaving it 'unresolved' because it was not applicable to the immediate question, was whether that DQB item is strictly limited to seaborne invasion.

Say, for example, the British were attacking a German held Gibraltar via ground, and the RN was providing shore bombardment. There is no seaborne invasion taking place. Could the French provide GS for the British attack?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Patrick Bauer
United States
Reading
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Waste Water too
badge
Mid-Atlantic Air Museum
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
deadkenny wrote:
setnaffa wrote:
[q="setnaffa"]
This is a special case because the ships are in the water and the ground support is over the enemy ground units.


While I certainly agree that it is a 'special case', I generally try to avoid basing rulings on such 'rationalisations'. It is a special case because, IMHO, it is stated as such. French air providing GS for a British seaborne landing would be in the same hex as the British, apparently violating the 'general' rule. However, an exception is provided for by the DQB item. Without that, I would say it was not allowed. The point I was raising, while leaving it 'unresolved' because it was not applicable to the immediate question, was whether that DQB item is strictly limited to seaborne invasion.

Say, for example, the British were attacking a German held Gibraltar via ground, and the RN was providing shore bombardment. There is no seaborne invasion taking place. Could the French provide GS for the British attack?


Since the stated rationale for the allowing the stacking is "ships at sea, ground support over enemy" I would say it certainly applies as it's the same condition. It would be difficult to argue that this case of ships at sea/air over enemy is different in any substantial way.

OT: The British player in your example would have to suffer the in-game "walk of shame" to have lost Gibraltar before the fall of France and then need, much less get, French air support for the counter assault. Shame! blush
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oh my God They Banned Kenny
Canada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
SewerStarFish wrote:
Since the stated rationale for the allowing the stacking is "ships at sea, ground support over enemy" I would say it certainly applies as it's the same condition. It would be difficult to argue that this case of ships at sea/air over enemy is different in any substantial way.


Actually the stated rationale is "the land and sea portions are treated separately", which isn't quite the same thing. Again, although the DQB item in question is specifically related to a seaborne invasion question, I have no difficulty with the principle being extended. That was sort of my point in the first place, although again it does not relate directly to the question in the OP.

SewerStarFish wrote:
OT: The British player in your example would have to suffer the in-game "walk of shame" to have lost Gibraltar before the fall of France and then need, much less get, French air support for the counter assault. Shame! blush


Lol. I suppose so. If it seems more 'plausible', perhaps it might be a British attack on Copenhagen with SB and potential French GS. No need for the Brit to 'hang his head in shame' in that scenario. With Berlin coming under attack early in the game, an Allied move against a German occupied Denmark seems mild in comparison!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.