:: :: FAQ :: Search :: Memberlist :: Join! (free) :: Profile :: Log in to check your private messages :: Log in ::
WAS FAQ - Clarification Starts Here
Page 1, 2  Next  
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Axis & Allies ForuMINI Forum Index -> WAS General Discussion -> WAS Rules Clarification
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertising.

 


Likes received:




Post subject:   (Liked by:)  Like this post
Back to top
swarbs

 Nothing but Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash.


Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Likes received: 3

Posts: 10199
FLAGS




Post subject: WAS FAQ - Clarification Starts Here  Reply with quote   (Liked by:1)  Like this post
The War at Sea Rules Clarification forum is here to help you.  Before you post a question, please consult the resources below to see if it is already answered there.  Of course, should further elabortation or explanation be required to settle your case, start a new thread and everyone here will be happy to help.

First, some resources.
You probably already have the rulebook, but in case you don't, it can be downloaded here by clicking on Download Advanced Rules:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/aam/WaratSea

A supplement to the rulebook has been released by Avalon Hill making sweeping changes in the game, including moving surface torpedoes into the surface attack phase, giving a penalty to strafing fighters, and adding rules for harassing submarines.  It also clarifies some oft mis-understood rules.  It is available here:
http://www.wizards.com/avalonhill/rules/War_at_Sea_Clarifications.pdf

The old (now defunct) Avalon Hill forum featured a section where WAS questions could be answered by an actual employee with the power to make rulings.  Much of this information (though you can no longer post there) is still relevant and can be found here:
http://boards.avalonhill.com/showthread.php?t=19718

Additionally, the new Gleemax boards offers a place to post questions which can be answered 'officially' by a WotC representative, these can be found here:
http://forums.gleemax.com/forumdisplay.php?f=758

Numerous questions arose about the second set of WAS, Task Force.  Enough confusion abounded that an FAQ was needed for that set alone, here it is:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/aam/ah20080724c



In response to a request for a sort of WAS FAQ, I have created this thread to post a few common questions and thier answers.  If you have a suggestion for a commonly mis-understood rule, please post it here and I will add it to the FAQ, thanks.  And with that, here we go.  If you notice mistakes (especially concerning the rules) please notify me in a reply or by PM as well.

WAS FAQ

Gunnery and Bomb attacks:
These attacks must be rolled one at a time.  Attacks from multiple units at the same target, or attacks by multiple gunnery values from the same ship (main, secondary, etc) are all rolled by themselves and are never added together.

Example:  Rodney is attacking an enemy vessel at range 3.  It may target that vessel with both its main and its secondary guns, but each attack is rolled seperately.  Instead of one attack of 18 dice, Rodney gets one attack with 13 dice and one attack with 5 dice.

Note:  The rules also state that torpedo attacks should be made seperately, and it is good practice to do so.  This is despite the fact that rolling torpedos together gives no advantage to the attacker, unlike stacking gunnery attacks.

Capturing Objectives:
Objectives are captured at the end of each turn by a player who has a ship in an objective sector where no enemy ships are local or adjacent.  Submarines are unit type submarine, not ship.  Therefore, submarines do not keep a player from capturing an objective even if they are local or adjacent.  Ships with the No Sea Control SA cannot capture objectives.  However, because they are unit type ship, they do deny the capture of an objective which they are local or adjacent to.


Smoke Screens/Concealment:
Smoke screens come into effect immediately, despite the fact that action during a single phase is regarded as being simultaneous.  All units within a smoke screen have concealment, including aircraft, which gain a concealment roll against any attack made against them.  Concealment rolls, if successful, nullify one entire attack, whether it be gunnery, bombs, or a salvo of torpedos.  Note that if multiple torpedo hits are scored in a single salvo, the concealment roll is for all of these hits.

Aborted Fighters
Fighters are aborted just as any other aircraft during the Air Defense phase.  However, all attacks are considered to be resolved at the same time.  Therefore, the SA's of the aborted fighter (such as Escort) remain in effect for the rest of the Air Defense phase.  Additionally, the fighter may still attack enemy air targets during this Air Defense phase, so it is entirely possible for two fighters to abort each other during a single Air Defense phase.
_________________


Last edited by swarbs on Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:11 am; edited 6 times in total
PostWed Mar 26, 2008 2:30 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
swarbs

 Nothing but Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash.


Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Likes received: 3

Posts: 10199
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
ok, this is just to make a start of it, here's the top three questions I've seen pop up.  Any further suggestions, please reply, any mistakes, please reply.
_________________
PostWed Mar 26, 2008 2:32 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Duck Crusader

 Tora Tora Tora


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Likes received: 2

Posts: 5979
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Do the air attacks one, does an aborted fighter get to attack in AA phase/does an aborted fighter still cover the bombers. Yes to both IIRC

edit by Swarbs - added this one to the list, thanks for the suggestion
PostWed Mar 26, 2008 2:36 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Okie

 USS OKLAHOMA BB-37

MySpecialCauseClub

Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Likes received: 2

Posts: 10865
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Thank you Swarbs as this will be a big help when question's arise.
table talk
_________________
PostWed Mar 26, 2008 3:09 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
EvilKobra

 Resident U-Head


Joined: 08 Jan 2008
Likes received: 67

Posts: 2688
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Great work!

One question, though: are you sure about ships with No Sea Control? I was under the impression that such ships also could not contest objectives.
_________________
PostWed Mar 26, 2008 9:45 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
swarbs

 Nothing but Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash.


Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Likes received: 3

Posts: 10199
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
EvilKobra wrote:
Great work!

One question, though: are you sure about ships with No Sea Control? I was under the impression that such ships also could not contest objectives.


Yep, here is the quote from the clarifications document:
No Sea Control: Units with this special ability cannot claim objectives, but they do
prevent an opponent from claiming an objective by being in or adjacent to that objective.

I actually included this one as much for me as for anyone else, before the clarifications doc came out I adamantly attacked someone on the old boards for saying PT boats could contend objectives.
_________________
PostWed Mar 26, 2008 1:32 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
cealigh the MadScot

 I AM the Mad Scot! None are my equal! Many are my betters!


Joined: 01 Mar 2008
Likes received: 5

Posts: 1712
FLAGS




Post subject: THANK YOU! Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Thank you, this will definitely help out.
_________________
Make no mistake! We are all going to die today! But BY GOD, we will take as many of those Nip Son's of Bitches with us when we do! Now get to work killin' these Bastards!"  
PostWed Mar 26, 2008 2:00 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rutilius

 

Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Likes received:

Posts: 28
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
does the escort ability cover more than one flight?
i.e. if i park a wildcat in a square and 3 dive bombers do all the bombers benefit from the escort?
thank you
mike
_________________
The scariest sound is not the roar of a lion about to charge, or a trumpet of an elephant bearing down on you. It is a click when you wanted a BANG!
PostFri Mar 28, 2008 1:39 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
afilter

 Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way -- G.S. Patton


Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Likes received: 26

Posts: 8587
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
rutilius wrote:
does the escort ability cover more than one flight?
i.e. if i park a wildcat in a square and 3 dive bombers do all the bombers benefit from the escort?
thank you
mike


Yes one fighter escorts all bombers in the same sector.
_________________
Aaron

"Focus on your own character and your reputation will take care of itself"

Trade/sale list:
http://aaminis.myfastforum.org/about7267.html

WAS Large Map House Rules:
http://aaminis.myfastforum.org/about7382.html
PostFri Mar 28, 2008 1:57 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
swarbs

 Nothing but Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash.


Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Likes received: 3

Posts: 10199
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
afilter wrote:
rutilius wrote:
does the escort ability cover more than one flight?
i.e. if i park a wildcat in a square and 3 dive bombers do all the bombers benefit from the escort?
thank you
mike


Yes one fighter escorts all bombers in the same sector.


Yep, thanks for catching this one afilter, I haven't paid enough attention.  All bombers in the same square recieve escort.
_________________
PostTue Apr 01, 2008 5:01 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
afilter

 Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way -- G.S. Patton


Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Likes received: 26

Posts: 8587
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Capturing Objectives:
Objectives are captured at the end of each phase by a player who has a ship in an objective sector where no enemy ships are local or adjacent.  Submarines are unit type submarine, not ship.  Therefore, submarines do not keep a player from capturing an objective even if they are local or adjacent.  Ships with the No Sea Control SA cannot capture objectives.  However, because they are unit type ship, they do deny the capture of an objective which they are local or adjacent to.


Should the word phase be replaced with Turn?
_________________
Aaron

"Focus on your own character and your reputation will take care of itself"

Trade/sale list:
http://aaminis.myfastforum.org/about7267.html

WAS Large Map House Rules:
http://aaminis.myfastforum.org/about7382.html
PostTue Apr 01, 2008 5:06 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
swarbs

 Nothing but Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash.


Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Likes received: 3

Posts: 10199
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
afilter wrote:
Capturing Objectives:
Objectives are captured at the end of each phase by a player who has a ship in an objective sector where no enemy ships are local or adjacent.  Submarines are unit type submarine, not ship.  Therefore, submarines do not keep a player from capturing an objective even if they are local or adjacent.  Ships with the No Sea Control SA cannot capture objectives.  However, because they are unit type ship, they do deny the capture of an objective which they are local or adjacent to.


Should the word phase be replaced with Turn?


Another big save.  Thanks very much.
_________________
PostTue Apr 01, 2008 5:09 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
swarbs

 Nothing but Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash.


Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Likes received: 3

Posts: 10199
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Adding link to the old forum's question thread.  Questions here were often answered by a WotC official rules arbiter (though since the forum has closed I haven't seen much of Y2UAsk on Gleemax).  
_________________
PostFri Apr 25, 2008 2:12 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
EvilKobra

 Resident U-Head


Joined: 08 Jan 2008
Likes received: 67

Posts: 2688
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
There's an interesting clarification over at Gleemax about how Zuikaku's SA works. Among other things, it defines the land airbase as a sector not adjacent to any other sea sectors. Here it is:

WotC wrote:

Defensive Armament applies against all fighter attacks, so it does apply against Airfield Strikes, BUT ...

Defensive Armament increases only the aircraft's armor, not its vital armor. Aborting a target aircraft during an Airfield Strike has no effect -- the aircraft is already sitting out the turn at the land airbase. The only result that matters in an Airfield Strike is destruction of the target by beating its Vital Armor, which isn't bumped by Defensive Armament.

For the Japanese, the optimal attack is Zekes, on turn 1, stiffened by Expert Dogfighter, hitting something with relatively low vital armor.

I'll go ahead and answer the obvious follow-up questions now. All of these have to do with the application of the word "sector" in regard to the Airfield Strike SA. Generally, the land airbase is treated the same as a sea sector when it comes under air attack.

1) Interceptor does kick in if the enemy has no fighters at the airbase and your fighter attacks a bomber.

2) Likewise, Escort kicks in if an enemy fighter attacks your bomber on your land airbase while you have an Escort fighter there, even if it's rearming.

3) Combat Air Patrol can't be used to shift a fighter into your opponent's land airbase, because the base isn't directly connected to any sea sectors (it's separated by that thick, black border).

_________________
PostFri Aug 08, 2008 7:16 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
jfkziegler

 Forum Administrator


Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Likes received: 13

Posts: 15353
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
It sucks that a re-arming fighter can still provide escort.  That doesn't make much sense.
_________________
PostFri Aug 08, 2008 1:26 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
swarbs

 Nothing but Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash.


Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Likes received: 3

Posts: 10199
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
With rulings like this about specific unit SA's, should we add some units to the FAQ section or are links to the WotC clarifications and forum good enough?  It seems good to have some up in our own document, but I'm not convinced people read this before posting questions anyway, and if it is just a huge amount of material it would be even more imposing to wade through all of it.
_________________
PostTue Aug 12, 2008 5:50 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
NeuralDream

 
MySingleNationClub

Joined: 22 Dec 2007
Likes received: 270

Posts: 18234
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
swarbs wrote:
With rulings like this about specific unit SA's, should we add some units to the FAQ section or are links to the WotC clarifications and forum good enough?  It seems good to have some up in our own document, but I'm not convinced people read this before posting questions anyway, and if it is just a huge amount of material it would be even more imposing to wade through all of it.


swarbs, what I've suggested just now to the other admins is to compile a FAQ document with WoTC's answers and send it to R.B. together with the rest of the feedback. Then I guess he may get someone in WoTC to edit it and make the official Clarifications document just like last year for Set I. Unless we get such an official document I don't expect to see any errata. Not even for the U-66.

It would be fantastic if someone could prepare this document.
_________________
PostTue Aug 12, 2008 5:59 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
cealigh the MadScot

 I AM the Mad Scot! None are my equal! Many are my betters!


Joined: 01 Mar 2008
Likes received: 5

Posts: 1712
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Question: can a fighter make an AA attack against a fighter in the same sector that they are escorting a bomber/torpedo etc, and the bomber still benefit from the "Escort" ability from the fighter's SA?

IE: US has a stand of Daunts attacking  a IJN BB in a sector and are escorted by a stand of Hellcats. the IJN player places a stand of zekes in the same sector to attack the bombers.  The SA for the Hell cats indicates Escort and Advanced Tactical fighter.
Can the Daunts benefit from the Hellcats SA of "Escort" if the Hellcats attack the Zekes in the players AA step and still use the Advanced Tactical fighter SA in an effort to destroy the enemy fighters?
I'm thinking yes.  The Escort SA is a passive type of SA that does not benefit the fighter, and since the Fighters mission in this case is to "escort" the bombers to their target and keep the enemy fighters off of them.  They should be able to use their active SA that benefits them directly against the enemy fighters. Then if they make a direct attack against the enemy fighters in the aa step and destroys or aborts them then they are doing their prescribed mission.  Escorting the Bombers etc to the targets.
_________________
Make no mistake! We are all going to die today! But BY GOD, we will take as many of those Nip Son's of Bitches with us when we do! Now get to work killin' these Bastards!"  
PostMon May 11, 2009 11:26 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
cealigh the MadScot

 I AM the Mad Scot! None are my equal! Many are my betters!


Joined: 01 Mar 2008
Likes received: 5

Posts: 1712
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
cealigh the MadScot wrote:
Question: can a fighter make an AA attack against a fighter in the same sector that they are escorting a bomber/torpedo etc, and the bomber still benefit from the "Escort" ability from the fighter's SA?

IE: US has a stand of Daunts attacking  a IJN BB in a sector and are escorted by a stand of Hellcats. the IJN player places a stand of zekes in the same sector to attack the bombers.  The SA for the Hell cats indicates Escort and Advanced Tactical fighter.
Can the Daunts benefit from the Hellcats SA of "Escort" if the Hellcats attack the Zekes in the players AA step and still use the Advanced Tactical fighter SA in an effort to destroy the enemy fighters?
I'm thinking yes.  The Escort SA is a passive type of SA that does not benefit the fighter, and since the Fighters mission in this case is to "escort" the bombers to their target and keep the enemy fighters off of them.  They should be able to use their active SA that benefits them directly against the enemy fighters. Then if they make a direct attack against the enemy fighters in the aa step and destroys or aborts them then they are doing their prescribed mission.  Escorting the Bombers etc to the targets.

and to follow up that question,
That the Fighter stand cannot both attack an enemy fighter and attack an enemy bomber that are in the same sector and have the fighter benefit or it's escorts benefit from the Escort ablility, since the fighter has to choose a single target for it's AA.
_________________
Make no mistake! We are all going to die today! But BY GOD, we will take as many of those Nip Son's of Bitches with us when we do! Now get to work killin' these Bastards!"  
PostMon May 11, 2009 11:29 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
swarbs

 Nothing but Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash.


Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Likes received: 3

Posts: 10199
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Escort only requires that it be in the same sector as the bomber for that bomber to get the bonus.  So yes, it doesn't really matter what the fighter does in the air attack phase, it can attack a fighter a bomber whatever, and still the escort works.


_________________
PostMon May 11, 2009 11:36 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Page 1, 2  Next



   Axis & Allies ForuMINI Forum Index » WAS General Discussion -> WAS Rules Clarification

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Editor's Choice
Forumini Generals
All AAM cards
All AAAF Cards
All War At Sea Cards
Forumini Admirals
A20 World Rankings
1. Jcmonson 1066
1. Bean965 1038
3. Vergilius 1024
WAS World Rankings
1. Admiral Wannabee 1240
2. mnnorthstars 1170
3. Azrael 1120
AAM World Rankings
1. Lil Snips 1096
2. Tripwire 1021
3. Kawolski 1010
Friends
Official WoTC site
Richard Baker's new Blog
Le Forum de A&ANM
Riverside Gaming
A&A Underground
Top posters
Brigman 42738
weedsrock2 36854
Flakstruk 35335
RAEVSKI 26750
firesdstny 26685
Asbestos 24554
SWO_Daddy 23223
Solomiranthius 19325
NeuralDream 18234
nrnstraswa 17161
herky80 16512
Lt_V 16301
jfkziegler 15353
Swished3 14762
carrion 14490
LcdrSwizzle 13698
packertim 13611
DaJudge 13360
mnnorthstars 12784
The_lucky_Y 12511
danaussie 12161
Shinnentai 11688
hokiepastor 10867


Forumini Newsletter
Issue #10 (Sep. 2013)
Issue #9 (Sep. 2012)
Issue #8 (Dec. 2011)
Issue #7 (Sep. 2011)
Issue #6 (Apr. 2011)
Issue #5 (Christmas 2010)
Issue #4 (Dec. 2010)
Issue #3 (Jul. 2010)
Issue #2 (Apr. 2010)
Issue #1 (Feb. 2010)


Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Theme by: :: Cosmic Distortion ::
Powered by phpBB © 2001 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum