Question about Non-Combat moves

[bfrohbie]

Can newly occupied countries be reinforced in the Non-Combat phase (with only land units of course)? I can't remember if that's possible, or if you have to stick with what was left over after the battle.

[Celeritas]

Yes. In fact, it's often a very useful tactic.

[bfrohbie]

Thanks Celeritas, just making sure. For a second I felt like I'd been playing it wrong for years.

[smo63]

Yeap...as long as the units moving during non-combat have not been previously moved in the combat phase of your turn that includes your transports.

So, if a transport is part of an sea battle with units aboard, and the battle goes south and your sea units must retreat during combat, even though your units on the transport did nothing but move on the transport or load, they CAN NOT off load and reinforce a territory.

GS:)

[bfrohbie]

Rock and roll. I had no idea there were so many different forums and threads just for Axis & Allies. I've been playing this game for a long long long long time, but I never looked it up on the internet until I bought the revised edition the other day. I got so into it again that I've already ordered Europe and Pacific! Not that I ever lost interest, but I hadn't caught on to all the new games yet. It will be nice to have options when I have all three. I'm a little hesitant about D-Day though...it looks like it might get old really fast. Then again, chess and the stratego are the same damn game over and over, and they're always great.

[smo63]

Bfro...D-Day is a great game! Probably much easier to learn than Europe/Pacific and takes less time to play...I would then go with Pacific, then Europe...IMHO!

GS:)

[DocZ]

This is why my COS Professor C. has long advocated scrapping the non combat move phase in favour of one combined movement phase. If you want a piece in area X, move it there in the combat phase.
It is ridiculous to allow a power to reinforce in this way, as though the enemy just stands around and allows this to happen.

[smo63]

So DocZ, what is your solution. Something better?

GS:)

[DocZ]

So DocZ, what is your solution. Something better?

GS:)

In matters of tactics and so forth, I defer to my above mentioned associate:

Scrap the non-combat movement phase altogether. Pieces all move in the same phase. You may reinforce friendly spaces.

[axis_roll]

Scrap the non-combat movement phase altogether. You may reinforce friendly spaces.

What you just said contradicts yourself.
There is no way to eliminate non-combat.

[Mighty Airforce]

Scrap the non-combat movement phase altogether. You may reinforce friendly spaces.

What you just said contradicts yourself.
There is no way to eliminate non-combat.

I don't think he's contradicting himself, I think he's suggesting a re-definition of the combat movement phase. In other words, I belive he's suggesting that everything moves at the same time, combat movement and noncombat movement all occurs same-time-aneously.

[pagan]

there are many examples and i will point out a Series of a SINGLE one:

-- USA has naval forces (subs) next to japan
-- USA has TNs with a load of stuff ready for amphib

-- Japan attacks USA naval force off coast with FTRs to get subs to submerge or die
-- Japan then brings in 2TNs with units from asia to drop into japan mainland

___subs only kill ships
___japan would have to bring in TN with FTRs to drop off into Friendly terr (japan)
___japan's survival of TNs is extremely low.

-----this is a major change to how the game works, and unit operation
-----not that this is bad, but it should be taken into account when considering this DRASTIC change.

--same basic scenario
--USA-SS is BETWEEN ***-TNs & Japan
--impossible to fortify japan even if you have a fleet of 1000 BBs, a single SS will keep you from getting there. (to fix this you need more rules?)
--Sub delay is VERY strong, and drastically increases the abilities of subs

-----this is a major change to how the game works, and utilized
-----again, this should be taken into account

--same basic scenario
--USA sub is in same zone as TNs
--OR... USA-SS is in a zone where units will be picked up for transfer
--Sub Stall is ACTIVE + Sub Delay is ACTIVE ; sub strength have increased 10-fold

__Sub Stalling = BAD

__changing the methods of deployment drastically alter the game to the point that what is necesary are Cost modifications along with Map Zone changes to balance things out.

__If the problem is the fortification of territories taken on the same round, then this would be a defiante SIMPLE house rule to incorporate (as long as allied countries [all within the same Round!] are also subjected to non-fortification until the subsequent round (the statement being that the country attacked wouldnt just sit there and let other nations fortify a combat zone before it could react to the initial fight! ____this could get very complicated. I have no idea how the game would play-out either

_On a persnal note, its a bad idea to remove Non-combat as the games have been designed with this process in mind, since the first one called '1942' came out of the mind of Larry Harris

_i think most people just look at the idea of combining both the combat & non-combat phases together very superficially
.

[psychotropic]

.
It is ridiculous to allow a power to reinforce in this way, as though the enemy just stands around and allows this to happen.

I think every general in history would tell you it is important to keep forces in reserve when launching an attack. This way you can strengthen weakening areas or fortify positions of advantage. To me that is what NC is all about. If I fight three seperate battles on the Western front with 75% of my eligible forces, I am then free to use the other 25% as I see fit. If I get really lucky in one particular battle that was supposed to be a dead zone the addition of forces could allow for a hold.

The enemy is not standing around. He has either held and no movement can take place there, or he is retreating and has proven unable to handle the initial forces sent against him let alone additional forces.