TWW 3.0.9? NTSH (ax) v (al) ubernaut Game 4
-
Hi, here again with a new question.
I attacked Berlin having one air trasp only, no other units and no def struct.
I attacked with a naval fighter and I expected to play a battle with germany defending with zero (auto win)Question 1 Why TripleA triggered no battle ?
Question 2 My opponent says that in case of battle german fig in adjacent territories could scramble but... Whane I attack a structure defending with zero such a rail or a barrack, no scramble should trigger so...My opponent says that maybe air trasp dies only if I conquer but on the other hand... when air trasp is involved in an attack PlayerEnforcedRule says it mut die as last casualty and I thought that being air trasp the only units in Berlin... the german air trasp dying as last casualty would die immediately.
Can you clarify a few things? So I'm guessing you attacked with a Air transport with a Paratrooper, because without one you shouldn't get Berlin. Is that correct?
The engine is kind of stupid about Paradrops (and maybe also amphibious assaults) against no defenders. If there are scrambling airfileds and planes in a neighbouring territory, the engine offers to scramble them before combats but then the territory changes owners, and no battle takes place in the combat phase. So the player-enforced rule and what the engine decides to do agree that there should not be a battle if there are no defenders before the attacker moves in. So that makes your/your friend's second question irrelevant. -
No, I attacked with a Us naval fighter in Berlin
In Berlin only one german air trasp was present and I expected to win because air trasp was defending with zero...
Did not want to conquer, my opponent is not so kind, just wanted to kill the air trasp... -
@malmessi Ok sorry, I don't know about that scenario. But I suppose that if the engine doesn't start a combat, then there shouldn't be one.
-
-
@malmessi can you share the combat move or before combat autosave?
-
@Nothingtoseehere we’ll have to do it later im gonna be tied up for the next few hours
-
Nothingtoseehere said:
This links to the save file at the end of cm. I'm available for now.
-
@Nothingtoseehere im around now did you change anything?
-
@ubernaut No
-
@panther we had an odd situation i believe i/we made the right call but just wanted to double check with you
in the first version of this battle ( the transjordan one) @Nothingtoseehere made a retreat with his paratroopers to syria. i declared that an illegal retreat since there were no ground forces in the battle to retreat with other than his amphibious assault inf. that's correct yeah? bc the engine allowed it.
another odd thing about this battle the engine seems to allow his transport unloading an amphibious assault to retreat from sz 53 to sz 72 (the red sea) even though that path is not crossable for his side since i hold the canal
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login