:: :: FAQ :: Search :: Memberlist :: Join! (free) :: Profile :: Log in to check your private messages :: Log in ::
Chitose Sea Planes (Attacks; ASW Threat w/ Loss of Chitose)
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  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
Solomiranthius

_
 
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Likes received: 766

Posts: 19325
FLAGS




Post subject:  Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Capt. Strange wrote:
Solomiranthius wrote:

The Seaplane is an SA, but whether we look at the Seaplane itself or the ASW Threat it generated as the "Effect," either ceases to function once Chitose & its Seaplanes are removed. It is not at all like damage which is permanently applied immediately prior (or at the very least simultaneously) to the removal of the unit that caused the damage.

Moreover, and more importantly, the ASW Threat generated by an Attack is far more like the "Effect" of an SA than the damage caused by an Attack.


I would strongly disagree with this.  

As long as the seaplane token has/had rolled an actual ASW attack the corresponding threat counter wouldn't be removed until after the sub shots.  It's not the presence of the aircraft at all, or the SA tokens in this case, its the actual airborne attack itself that gives the sub -1 Torp dice.


Why? There is nothing in the rulebook about removing ASW threat "counters" as contrasted with rearming counters (the treatment of which is specifically detailed in the rulebook page 20). Why wouldn't the ASW Threat last beyond the turn? Nothing in the rulebook says otherwise...

Except for the fact that the Aircraft are returned to the airbase/carriers AFTER the Submarine Attack Phase in the Air Return Phase. The presence of the attacking craft is gone, so no more ASW Threat. That's how ASW Threat goes away. Just as it would go away if the attacking aircraft is destroyed and removed before the Submarine Attack Phase.
_________________


"You like ships. You don't seem to be lookin' at the destinations. What you care about is the ships, and mine's the nicest." ~ Firefly ~
PostFri May 13, 2016 1:01 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Capt. Strange

 Master of the Mystic Arts


Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Likes received: 467

Posts: 3313
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Solomiranthius wrote:

Except for the fact that the Aircraft are returned to the airbase/carriers AFTER the Submarine Attack Phase in the Air Return Phase. The presence of the attacking craft is gone, so no more ASW Threat. That's how ASW Threat goes away. Just as it would go away if the attacking aircraft is destroyed and removed before the Submarine Attack Phase.


To each their own, but that simply isn't true by the rulebook.  It explicitly states "each enemy aircraft that makes an ASW attack", so if the seaplane tokens have made an attack -1 torp die to said sub end of story.  All this talk of presence, and now returning/destroyed aircraft etc, doesn't apply at all. Yes presence is mentioned in the opening line of flavor text of the subsection "ASW threat" but not in relation to any rules/rulings whatsoever just flavor text.  We all know flavor text does not equal rules.
PostFri May 13, 2016 8:30 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
ticat1

_
 
MySingleNationClub
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Likes received: 818

Posts: 10680
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
This is great
_________________

Qui Tangit Frangitur

To you, from failing hands we throw the torch; be yours to hold it high
           -John McCrae
PostFri May 13, 2016 9:29 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Solomiranthius

_
 
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Likes received: 766

Posts: 19325
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Capt. Strange wrote:
Solomiranthius wrote:

Except for the fact that the Aircraft are returned to the airbase/carriers AFTER the Submarine Attack Phase in the Air Return Phase. The presence of the attacking craft is gone, so no more ASW Threat. That's how ASW Threat goes away. Just as it would go away if the attacking aircraft is destroyed and removed before the Submarine Attack Phase.


To each their own, but that simply isn't true by the rulebook.  It explicitly states "each enemy aircraft that makes an ASW attack", so if the seaplane tokens have made an attack -1 torp die to said sub end of story.  All this talk of presence, and now returning/destroyed aircraft etc, doesn't apply at all. Yes presence is mentioned in the opening line of flavor text of the subsection "ASW threat" but not in relation to any rules/rulings whatsoever just flavor text.  We all know flavor text does not equal rules.


Flavor text can help one interpret rules that are ambiguous / capable of multiple interpretations. Until Set V, after the New Rulebook was released, it was impossible to have an aircraft that made an ASW attack be destroyed and removed from the game before the submarine attack phase.

Other SAs/Rules involving tokens/markers (Rearming Tokens; Smoke Screen; Mines) either explicitly call for the removal or permanency of the token/marker or else have been clarified to detail the removal/permanency.

This would be, to the best of my knowledge, the only "counter" that is open ended in lifespan (that is not otherwise tied to the survival/presence of the unit).

The counter is really only a substitute for using the Aircraft to mark the ASW Threat they are providing, likely, as we all know, because the sectors can become so overcrowded that placing a bunch of PBs around a sub in sector with fighters, bombing aircraft, and 4-6 ships gets a tad confusing.

Like all other SAs/Effects that are either not permanent or else whose lifespan is explicitly defined in the text, ASW Threat is gone when the unit is gone.
_________________


"You like ships. You don't seem to be lookin' at the destinations. What you care about is the ships, and mine's the nicest." ~ Firefly ~
PostFri May 13, 2016 9:30 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
ticat1

_
 
MySingleNationClub
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Likes received: 818

Posts: 10680
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
[quote="Solomiranthius:1229931"]

The counter is really only a substitute for using the Aircraft to mark the ASW Threat they are providing, likely, as we all know, because the sectors can become so overcrowded that placing a bunch of PBs around a sub in sector with fighters, bombing aircraft, and 4-6 ships gets a tad confusing. /quote]

Not true.  The rule states that the counter or straddling by the aircraft is to keep track of air attacks, not what aircraft are there.
_________________

Qui Tangit Frangitur

To you, from failing hands we throw the torch; be yours to hold it high
           -John McCrae
PostFri May 13, 2016 10:49 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Solomiranthius

_
 
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Likes received: 766

Posts: 19325
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
That's what I said. It is a replacement for using the aircraft as the tracker. Regardless, if used, you still have the problem that the rulebook doesn't call for what happens to those markers like it does for every other one. Except when you view them as the same thing as the aircraft. If you use aircraft and remove it... There goes the threat tracker. The tracker/marker is contingent on the aircraft. Aircraft goes, threat goes.
_________________


"You like ships. You don't seem to be lookin' at the destinations. What you care about is the ships, and mine's the nicest." ~ Firefly ~


Last edited by Solomiranthius on Sat May 14, 2016 12:42 pm; edited 1 time in total
PostFri May 13, 2016 11:06 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
ticat1

_
 
MySingleNationClub
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Likes received: 818

Posts: 10680
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Solomiranthius wrote:
That's what I said. It is a replacement for using the aircraft as the tracker. Regardless, if used, you still have the problem that the rulebook doesn't call for what happens to those markers like it does for every other one. Except when you view then as the danger thing as the aircraft. If you use aircraft and remove it... There goes the threat tracker. The tracker/marker is contingent on the aircraft. Aircraft goes, threat goes.


OK, what happens if it damages a ship or sub?  Does the damage come off if the Chitose plane is destroyed?
_________________

Qui Tangit Frangitur

To you, from failing hands we throw the torch; be yours to hold it high
           -John McCrae
PostFri May 13, 2016 11:12 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Solomiranthius

_
 
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Likes received: 766

Posts: 19325
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Already addressed damage earlier. Damage is permanently applied at the end of each phase before unites are removed. Very different situation than threat.
_________________


"You like ships. You don't seem to be lookin' at the destinations. What you care about is the ships, and mine's the nicest." ~ Firefly ~
PostFri May 13, 2016 11:37 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Grgbobe

 

Joined: 06 Jul 2011
Likes received: 124

Posts: 1392
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Capt. Strange wrote:
Solomiranthius wrote:

The Seaplane is an SA, but whether we look at the Seaplane itself or the ASW Threat it generated as the "Effect," either ceases to function once Chitose & its Seaplanes are removed. It is not at all like damage which is permanently applied immediately prior (or at the very least simultaneously) to the removal of the unit that caused the damage.

Moreover, and more importantly, the ASW Threat generated by an Attack is far more like the "Effect" of an SA than the damage caused by an Attack.


I would strongly disagree with this.  

As long as the seaplane token has/had rolled an actual ASW attack the corresponding threat counter wouldn't be removed until after the sub shots.  It's not the presence of the aircraft at all, or the SA tokens in this case, its the actual airborne attack itself that gives the sub -1 Torp dice.


I'm with Capt. Strange on this; it's the attack that matters here, not presence...
_________________
PostSat May 14, 2016 12:23 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Flakstruk

 Nobody Expects The FLAK-ATAK

MySingleNationClub
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 23 Jan 2010
Likes received: 405

Posts: 35335
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
I'd suggest that the attack on the sub, "attaches" to the sub for harassment once it's made, the original delivery mechanism is irrelevant
PostSat May 14, 2016 4:43 am
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Solomiranthius

_
 
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Likes received: 766

Posts: 19325
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
We can suggest whatever we want. But no one is addressing the discrepancies I am raising.

We all want the threat to last. But what we want is irrelevant to the mechanism and the problems presented by the threat lasting.
_________________


"You like ships. You don't seem to be lookin' at the destinations. What you care about is the ships, and mine's the nicest." ~ Firefly ~
PostSat May 14, 2016 12:49 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Capt. Strange

 Master of the Mystic Arts


Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Likes received: 467

Posts: 3313
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Solomiranthius wrote:
The tracker/marker is contingent on the aircraft. Aircraft goes, threat goes.


Again not true, as per the rulebook the aircraft itself is meaningless it's the attack roll that matters.
PostSat May 14, 2016 1:41 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
ticat1

_
 
MySingleNationClub
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Likes received: 818

Posts: 10680
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
I think the overall debate lies in the first line of the rule.

The presence of ASW Ships and Aircraft interferes with a Submarine's ability to attack.

does it actually apply to Aircraft Attack?  Or does the air attack itself constitute aircraft presence?
_________________

Qui Tangit Frangitur

To you, from failing hands we throw the torch; be yours to hold it high
           -John McCrae
PostSat May 14, 2016 1:52 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Solomiranthius

_
 
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Likes received: 766

Posts: 19325
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Capt. Strange wrote:
Solomiranthius wrote:
The tracker/marker is contingent on the aircraft. Aircraft goes, threat goes.


Again not true, as per the rulebook the aircraft itself is meaningless it's the attack roll that matters.


This may be true if the rulebook only said to use a counter. But it doesn't. So I can as easily say your statement is again untrue. It's ambiguous and must be  treated consistently with other rules and mechanisms, and all the language in that section. Your explanation does not do that.
_________________


"You like ships. You don't seem to be lookin' at the destinations. What you care about is the ships, and mine's the nicest." ~ Firefly ~
PostSat May 14, 2016 1:52 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Lt_V

 
MySingleNationClub

Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Likes received: 30

Posts: 16301
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
The way I always understood it was that:

Air attacks vs sub = -1 torp die

&

Local or adjacent presence of a surface craft with an ASW attack value (except for those with an SA stating they do not have that effect) at the beginning the the sub phase = -1 torp die
PostSat May 14, 2016 1:53 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Solomiranthius

_
 
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Likes received: 766

Posts: 19325
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
ticat1 wrote:
I think the overall debate lies in the first line of the rule.

The presence of ASW Ships and Aircraft interferes with a Submarine's ability to attack.

does it actually apply to Aircraft Attack?  Or does the air attack itself constitute aircraft presence?


Both. The presence of the attacking aircraft. Which is consistent with the RAW, clarifications, and the overall ASW mechanism as I'll explain in a bit.
_________________


"You like ships. You don't seem to be lookin' at the destinations. What you care about is the ships, and mine's the nicest." ~ Firefly ~
PostSat May 14, 2016 1:54 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Capt. Strange

 Master of the Mystic Arts


Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Likes received: 467

Posts: 3313
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
ticat1 wrote:
I think the overall debate lies in the first line of the rule.

The presence of ASW Ships and Aircraft interferes with a Submarine's ability to attack.


Wrong because as I said before that's not the actual rule, just flavor text, which is meaningless outside of being descriptive.  The rule itself as Ventor posted from the physical rulebook is ironclad IMO.
PostSat May 14, 2016 2:52 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Solomiranthius

_
 
MyTheaterClub

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Likes received: 766

Posts: 19325
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Then answer this question: when does the ASW Threat go away, and why?
_________________


"You like ships. You don't seem to be lookin' at the destinations. What you care about is the ships, and mine's the nicest." ~ Firefly ~
PostSat May 14, 2016 2:58 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Capt. Strange

 Master of the Mystic Arts


Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Likes received: 467

Posts: 3313
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Solomiranthius wrote:
Capt. Strange wrote:
Solomiranthius wrote:
The tracker/marker is contingent on the aircraft. Aircraft goes, threat goes.


Again not true, as per the rulebook the aircraft itself is meaningless it's the attack roll that matters.


This may be true if the rulebook only said to use a counter. But it doesn't. So I can as easily say your statement is again untrue. It's ambiguous and must be  treated consistently with other rules and mechanisms, and all the language in that section. Your explanation does not do that.


Total rubbish.  Read the rule, it's the attack not the aircraft. Just because one rule works somewhat differently then others doesn't invalidate it.  

Frankly, I think your lawyer gene is kicking in here something tough.  I can only say the same thing so many times so I have nothing more to add and am going to remove myself from the debate before I say something I regret as I think your a good dude.
PostSat May 14, 2016 2:59 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Capt. Strange

 Master of the Mystic Arts


Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Likes received: 467

Posts: 3313
FLAGS




Post subject: Reply with quote   (Liked by:0)  Like this post
Solomiranthius wrote:
Then answer this question: when does the ASW Threat go away, and why?


After a sub makes it's attack roll or if it doesn't attack at the end of the submarine phase.

PostSat May 14, 2016 3:02 pm
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  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