Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

If thinking about an invasion of Egypt from the Red Sea, Italy should check the CW defences in the region first.

IMO sailing a cruiser out (either with a division or to pick up a division from a broken-down corps in Italian East Africa) should occur only if the CW is setup such that reacting to the move would open a gap somewhere else where Italy could land and stay ashore.

(Personally speaking, when I am playing the CW usually I stick an Egyptian TERR unit in Cairo - admittedly usually just to cover against a march up from Ethiopia/Eritrea - but it would put paid to an invasion next door.)

quote:

11.4 Naval movement
How far can units move?
A unit must stop moving when you have spent its entire movement allowance or it has reached the limit of its range, whichever happens first.
You spend 1 point of a unit’s range:
* For each sea area and port it moves into.

You spend 1 point of a unit’s movement allowance:
* For each sea area and port it moves into;
* If it starts the movement out of supply;
* If it starts the impulse in a port with naval units controlled by another major power; and
* For each point of the (unmodified) search number of the section you put the unit into.

Into and out of port
When you move a unit out of a port, you must spend its first point to move it into a surrounding sea area (e.g. naval units in Amsterdam must move directly into the North Sea).

There are three special cases:
* Although Kiel is a coastal hex on the Baltic Sea, you can move naval units directly to Kiel from the North Sea and vice versa.
* Although Suez is a coastal hex on the Red Sea, you can move naval units directly to Suez from the Eastern Mediterranean and vice versa.
* Although Panama City is a coastal hex on the Gulf of Mexico, you can move naval units directly to Panama from the Caribbean, and vice versa provided the Panama Canal is not closed to you.

Similarly, a naval unit can only move into a port from the surrounding sea area. It could continue moving but, if it ends the naval move in port, turn it face-down (for convoy points, use a “CP used” marker instead).


11.11.4 Neutral major powers
You can only move a land unit of a neutral major power into:
* A hex it controls; or
* A hex controlled by one of its aligned minor countries; or
* A hex in a minor country it is at war with.

The only exception is the US (see 13.3.2 US entry options, option 7 Occupy Greenland & Iceland & option 44 US occupies Northern Ireland).

18.2 Not co-operating
Units that don’t co-operate cannot:
1. Stack in the same hex, at any time that stacking limits apply; or
2. Transport each other’s units; or
3. Draw supply from a source controlled by the other; or
4. Reorganise each other; or
5. Be committed to any combat or mission that the other unit is, or will be, involved in this step. This doesn’t apply to naval air or naval air interception missions.

Foreign troop commitments
A major power or minor country unit that ends any step in the home country of a friendly major power it doesn’t co-operate with is destroyed unless:
* It started the step there; or
* It started the step elsewhere and the unit satisfies the foreign troop commitment limit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

If thinking about an invasion of Egypt from the Red Sea, Italy should check the CW defences in the region first.

IMO sailing a cruiser out (either with a division or to pick up a division from a broken-down corps in Italian East Africa) should occur only if the CW is setup such that reacting to the move would open a gap somewhere else where Italy could land and stay ashore.

(Personally speaking, when I am playing the CW usually I stick an Egyptian TERR unit in Cairo - admittedly usually just to cover against a march up from Ethiopia/Eritrea - but it would put paid to an invasion next door.)

But only if you are playing with the optional rule Territorials. Without them, the Commonwealth (and Italy) have fewer land units to work with in Africa.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

An Italian light cruiser (range 3 / speed 5 = Taranto;) could only make the 2 box of the Red Sea from Italy, giving the notional a factor. Trickier delayed re-basing / re-org schemes using Tripoli are possible though.

Later in the war the way to take Aden is to clear the Suez Canal with land units on a summer turn, immediately sail a CA + Division through the Canal, DOW Yemen and land there, then walk into Aden if the CW has nothing to react to the landing in Aden. The Royal Navy is more likely to be using Bombay as a base, for secure land access to oil and supply. Makes a good base for the Japanese or Italians though. In 1939 the Italians would be better off trying for a port in the Levant in an eastward focused Italian strategy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Plain Ian

Steve or anyone? Can someone mark up the hex on map below which is next to Suez and Cairo and is invadeable.....so i can follow this thread.

Not sure if the invasion is coming from the E.Med or Red Sea?

There was an excellent thread on invadeable coastal hexes a few years ago but I need a refresher on this if someone doesn't mind.

Edit - just to add that yes I can see which hex it should b,e but it doesn't look like a hex which can be invaded?

quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

The desert hex east of Cairo has two all-sea hexsides on the Red Sea (the Gulf of Suez technically). So it can be invaded from the Red Sea. Suez itself does not have an all-sea hexside - it has two hexsides on the Suez Canal instead.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm
Italian units can not enter the Suez port while neutral. They can sail through the canal but not enter the port.


RAW: 9.1 Neutral major powers
A major power is a ‘neutral major power’ if it is not at war with any other major power. If it is at war with
at least 1 major power, it’s called an ‘active major power’.
Units controlled by a neutral major power can only enter hexes controlled by that major power, by a minor
country aligned with it, or by a minor country it is at war with. They can also go to sea.
A neutral major power can’t co-operate with any other major power (see 18.)

quote:

There are three special cases:
* Although Kiel is a coastal hex on the Baltic Sea, you can move naval units directly to Kiel from the North Sea and vice versa.
* Although Suez is a coastal hex on the Red Sea, you can move naval units directly to Suez from the Eastern Mediterranean and vice versa.
* Although Panama City is a coastal hex on the Gulf of Mexico, you can move naval units directly to Panama from the Caribbean, and vice versa provided the Panama Canal is not closed to you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm
Italian units can not enter the Suez port while neutral. They can sail through the canal but not enter the port.


RAW: 9.1 Neutral major powers
A major power is a ‘neutral major power’ if it is not at war with any other major power. If it is at war with
at least 1 major power, it’s called an ‘active major power’.
Units controlled by a neutral major power can only enter hexes controlled by that major power, by a minor
country aligned with it, or by a minor country it is at war with. They can also go to sea.
A neutral major power can’t co-operate with any other major power (see 18.)

That is what I said in my post #357 but Steve says different in his post #359.

quote:

There are three special cases:
* Although Kiel is a coastal hex on the Baltic Sea, you can move naval units directly to Kiel from the North Sea and vice versa.
* Although Suez is a coastal hex on the Red Sea, you can move naval units directly to Suez from the Eastern Mediterranean and vice versa.
* Although Panama City is a coastal hex on the Gulf of Mexico, you can move naval units directly to Panama from the Caribbean, and vice versa provided the Panama Canal is not closed to you.

You move from the minor port of Suez to the Eastern Mediterranean Sea zone.

You move from the Eastern Mediterranean Sea zone to the minor port of Suez.


You do not move from the Red Sea zone to the Eastern Mediterranean Sea zone.

You do not move from the Eastern Mediterranean Sea zone to the Red Sea zone.



You have to enter and pay range and movement points to enter the minor port of Suez.

Then you can go from the minor port of Suez to either the Eastern Mediterranean Sea zone or the Red Sea zone.

It would take a 4 range to move from a port in Italy to the Read Sea zone.

1 to leave port and enter the Italian Coast sea zone.
1 to enter the Eastern Mediterranean Sea zone from the Italian Coast sea zone.
1 to enter the minor port of Suez from the Eastern Mediterranean Sea zone.
1 to leave the minor port of Suez and enter the Red Sea zone.

quote:

11.4.2 Moving naval units
You can move your naval units through a series of adjacent sea areas and ports.
Each naval unit has a range and a movement allowance. The range determines how far the unit can move; the movement allowance determines how effective it will be when it patrols a sea area.
How do units move?
You can only move a naval unit if it is face-up in a sea-box or in a port.
You can move your naval units individually or in a task force. To move naval units in a task force, they must all start in the same port or sea-box section.
You can split a moving task force in any sea area or port it passes through. Each time you split a task force from the main force, you use a separate naval move (exception: SUB task forces ~ see 11.4.1). The task force you split off can’t move any further.
Example: 2 Commonwealth SCS sail together from Alexandria to the eastern Mediterranean. It is not possible for one to move into the Red Sea while the other enters the western Mediterranean. One could stop in the eastern Mediterranean while the other continues on to either of those adjacent sea areas. That would then count as 2 naval moves. Alternatively, you could move them separately to the Red Sea and the western Mediterranean. That would also count as 2 naval moves.

quote:

11.4.4 Naval movement restrictions
[...]
2. You can’t move naval units between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red Sea, or between Suez and the Eastern Mediterranean, if a major power you are at war with controls any of the hexes adjacent to the Suez Canal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

Steve is correct in #359. I might add Orm indicated that units can move directly from the E. Med to the Red Sea through the Suez canal.

While nowhere in RAW is there an explicit list of which sea areas are adjacent, the adjacency of E. Med and Red Sea is made clear in some of the other rules text, to whit:

(1) From § 11.4.2:

quote:

11.4.2 Moving naval units
You can move your naval units through a series of adjacent sea areas and ports.
Each naval unit has a range and a movement allowance. The range determines how far the unit can move; the movement allowance determines how effective it will be when it patrols a sea area.
How do units move?
You can only move a naval unit if it is face-up in a sea-box or in a port.
You can move your naval units individually or in a task force. To move naval units in a task force, they must all start in the same port or sea-box section.
You can split a moving task force in any sea area or port it passes through. Each time you split a task force from the main force, you use a separate naval move (exception: SUB task forces ~ see 11.4.1). The task force you split off can’t move any further.
Example: 2 Commonwealth SCS sail together from Alexandria to the eastern Mediterranean. It is not possible for one to move into the Red Sea while the other enters the western Mediterranean. One could stop in the eastern Mediterranean while the other continues on to either of those adjacent sea areas. That would then count as 2 naval moves. Alternatively, you could move them separately to the Red Sea and the western Mediterranean. That would also count as 2 naval moves.

Emphasis mine. This example implicitly relies on the adjacency of the Red Sea and E. Med; otherwise the split under discussion would involve the choice between moving to the W. Med and Suez.

(2) From § 11.4.4:

quote:

11.4.4 Naval movement restrictions
[...]
2. You can’t move naval units between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red Sea, or between Suez and the Eastern Mediterranean, if a major power you are at war with controls any of the hexes adjacent to the Suez Canal.

Point 2 explicitly mentions direct movement from the E. Med to the Red Sea as distinct from moving between Suez and the E. Med.

quote:

2.1.2 Sea areas
The seas are divided into areas by dark blue lines (called sea area borders). Each sea area is individually named (e.g. ‘RED SEA’). Each sea area contains a sea-box which regulates movement and combat at sea. Two sea areas are adjacent if they share a common sea area border or if they are directly connected by a blue communication line. Some sea areas on the west European and Pacifi c maps contain statements that they are connected to one or more sea areas on the USA minimap. The connected sea areas are also adjacent.

The Mozambique Channel and the Azanian Sea (both on the Asian map) are connected. Treat hexdot ‘O’ as being connected to the hexdot south of hex ‘U’ by a blue communication line.

The Red Sea is the only sea area that is on 2 maps. The sea-box is only on the east European map but the hex-dot on the Asian map is still part of the same sea area. The hex-dot on the Asian map is adjacent to the large hex-dot at the eastern end of the sea area on the east European map.

Blue communication lines
Only aircraft and naval units (and their cargoes) can move along blue communication lines.

A naval unit moves along blue communication line from sea area to sea area.

An aircraft unit moves along a blue communication line from any adjacent hex-dot in the fi rst sea area to an adjacent hex-dot in the second sea area (see 14.1.2). If it’s not clear which hex-dots are adjacent to a blue communication line, the nearest ones always are.

Example: The hex-dot in the Denmark Strait to the right of Iceland is adjacent to the blue communication line connecting to the Norwegian Sea and the Faeroes Gap sea areas. The hex-dot to the left of Iceland is adjacent to the blue communication line connecting to the North Atlantic and the Canadian Coast Sea areas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

Steve is correct in #359. I might add Orm indicated that units can move directly from the E. Med to the Red Sea through the Suez canal.

While nowhere in RAW is there an explicit list of which sea areas are adjacent, the adjacency of E. Med and Red Sea is made clear in some of the other rules text, to whit:

(1) From § 11.4.2:

quote:

11.4.2 Moving naval units
You can move your naval units through a series of adjacent sea areas and ports.
Each naval unit has a range and a movement allowance. The range determines how far the unit can move; the movement allowance determines how effective it will be when it patrols a sea area.
How do units move?
You can only move a naval unit if it is face-up in a sea-box or in a port.
You can move your naval units individually or in a task force. To move naval units in a task force, they must all start in the same port or sea-box section.
You can split a moving task force in any sea area or port it passes through. Each time you split a task force from the main force, you use a separate naval move (exception: SUB task forces ~ see 11.4.1). The task force you split off can’t move any further.
Example: 2 Commonwealth SCS sail together from Alexandria to the eastern Mediterranean. It is not possible for one to move into the Red Sea while the other enters the western Mediterranean. One could stop in the eastern Mediterranean while the other continues on to either of those adjacent sea areas. That would then count as 2 naval moves. Alternatively, you could move them separately to the Red Sea and the western Mediterranean. That would also count as 2 naval moves.

Emphasis mine. This example implicitly relies on the adjacency of the Red Sea and E. Med; otherwise the split under discussion would involve the choice between moving to the W. Med and Suez.

(2) From § 11.4.4:

quote:

11.4.4 Naval movement restrictions
[...]
2. You can’t move naval units between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red Sea, or between Suez and the Eastern Mediterranean, if a major power you are at war with controls any of the hexes adjacent to the Suez Canal.

Point 2 explicitly mentions direct movement from the E. Med to the Red Sea as distinct from moving between Suez and the E. Med.

This statement clearly defines what sea zones are and are not adjacent.

"Two sea areas are adjacent if they share a common sea area border or if they are directly connected by a blue communication line."

I'm looking at the VASSAL map and the Red Sea zone and Eastern Mediterranean Sea zone do not have a sea border and are not connected by a blue communication line therefore they are not adjacent.

quote:

2.1.2 Sea areas
The seas are divided into areas by dark blue lines (called sea area borders). Each sea area is individually named (e.g. ‘RED SEA’). Each sea area contains a sea-box which regulates movement and combat at sea. Two sea areas are adjacent if they share a common sea area border or if they are directly connected by a blue communication line. Some sea areas on the west European and Pacifi c maps contain statements that they are connected to one or more sea areas on the USA minimap. The connected sea areas are also adjacent.

The Mozambique Channel and the Azanian Sea (both on the Asian map) are connected. Treat hexdot ‘O’ as being connected to the hexdot south of hex ‘U’ by a blue communication line.

The Red Sea is the only sea area that is on 2 maps. The sea-box is only on the east European map but the hex-dot on the Asian map is still part of the same sea area. The hex-dot on the Asian map is adjacent to the large hex-dot at the eastern end of the sea area on the east European map.

Blue communication lines
Only aircraft and naval units (and their cargoes) can move along blue communication lines.

A naval unit moves along blue communication line from sea area to sea area.

An aircraft unit moves along a blue communication line from any adjacent hex-dot in the fi rst sea area to an adjacent hex-dot in the second sea area (see 14.1.2). If it’s not clear which hex-dots are adjacent to a blue communication line, the nearest ones always are.

Example: The hex-dot in the Denmark Strait to the right of Iceland is adjacent to the blue communication line connecting to the Norwegian Sea and the Faeroes Gap sea areas. The hex-dot to the left of Iceland is adjacent to the blue communication line connecting to the North Atlantic and the Canadian Coast Sea areas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tonqeen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Plain Ian

Steve or anyone? Can someone mark up the hex on map below which is next to Suez and Cairo and is invadeable.....so i can follow this thread.

Not sure if the invasion is coming from the E.Med or Red Sea?

There was an excellent thread on invadeable coastal hexes a few years ago but I need a refresher on this if someone doesn't mind.

Edit - just to add that yes I can see which hex it should b,e but it doesn't look like a hex which can be invaded?

quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

The desert hex east of Cairo has two all-sea hexsides on the Red Sea (the Gulf of Suez technically). So it can be invaded from the Red Sea. Suez itself does not have an all-sea hexside - it has two hexsides on the Suez Canal instead.

Isnt an all-sea hexside those with a dot in middle?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Carrying your logic forward, the omission of a dark blue line (a sea area border line) between the Red Sea and the Eastern Med means that the Red Sea is not adjacent to the Eastern Med.

I doubt that that was the intention of the ADG designers. It is vastly more likely that the person who drew the map thought that putting in a dark blue line somewhere across the middle of the Suez Canal was aesthetically displeasing - or he simply forgot to draw it in. Historically the Suez Canal was used throughout the war to send naval units between the two sea areas.

Can agree that these sea areas are adjacent in game terms and move on to more interesting aspects of the Italian strategic plan?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tonqeen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Plain Ian

Steve or anyone? Can someone mark up the hex on map below which is next to Suez and Cairo and is invadeable.....so i can follow this thread.

Not sure if the invasion is coming from the E.Med or Red Sea?

There was an excellent thread on invadeable coastal hexes a few years ago but I need a refresher on this if someone doesn't mind.

Edit - just to add that yes I can see which hex it should b,e but it doesn't look like a hex which can be invaded?

quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

The desert hex east of Cairo has two all-sea hexsides on the Red Sea (the Gulf of Suez technically). So it can be invaded from the Red Sea. Suez itself does not have an all-sea hexside - it has two hexsides on the Suez Canal instead.

Isnt an all-sea hexside those with a dot in middle?

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

An Italian light cruiser (range 3 / speed 5 = Taranto;) could only make the 2 box of the Red Sea from Italy, giving the notional a factor. Trickier delayed re-basing / re-org schemes using Tripoli are possible though.

Later in the war the way to take Aden is to clear the Suez Canal with land units on a summer turn, immediately sail a CA + Division through the Canal, DOW Yemen and land there, then walk into Aden if the CW has nothing to react to the landing in Aden. The Royal Navy is more likely to be using Bombay as a base, for secure land access to oil and supply. Makes a good base for the Japanese or Italians though. In 1939 the Italians would be better off trying for a port in the Levant in an eastward focused Italian strategy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tonqeen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Plain Ian

Steve or anyone? Can someone mark up the hex on map below which is next to Suez and Cairo and is invadeable.....so i can follow this thread.

Not sure if the invasion is coming from the E.Med or Red Sea?

There was an excellent thread on invadeable coastal hexes a few years ago but I need a refresher on this if someone doesn't mind.

Edit - just to add that yes I can see which hex it should b,e but it doesn't look like a hex which can be invaded?

quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

The desert hex east of Cairo has two all-sea hexsides on the Red Sea (the Gulf of Suez technically). So it can be invaded from the Red Sea. Suez itself does not have an all-sea hexside - it has two hexsides on the Suez Canal instead.

Isnt an all-sea hexside those with a dot in middle?

No. An all-sea hexside is one (or more) side of the hexagon that only touches water. As explained before,
(46,36) cannot be invaded from the Baltic but can be invaded from the North Sea. Hex (45, 36) is adjacent to the same two sea areas, but from which one it can be invaded, is reversed. I have color coded yellow for OK and purple for NOT OK.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous




It takes 11 to 16 hours per ship to transit the Suez Canal

They go slow to avoid eroding the canal, have places where ships can pass others, but mostly ships sail in single file.

Today only 50 ships go through the canal a day. Your TRS would represent 20% of today's traffic in the canal.

This means it will take you 4 to 5 days for your 10 ships to clear the canal if they are sailing back to back.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easo79

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous




It takes 11 to 16 hours per ship to transit the Suez Canal

They go slow to avoid eroding the canal, have places where ships can pass others, but mostly ships sail in single file.

Today only 50 ships go through the canal a day. Your TRS would represent 20% of today's traffic in the canal.

This means it will take you 4 to 5 days for your 10 ships to clear the canal if they are sailing back to back.

I would say it will take 11 to 16 hours for the 10 ships to pass through the canal. Maybe a little bit more (the time used by the whole convoy to pass in front of an observer...:30 minutes? a couple of hours?)

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

I trust we are keeping in mind that a unit moving through the Suez canal is doing so in the context of an impulse that is (a) an abstract block of time (considering a side can get as few as one, and, theoretically, as many as it takes to get an end-of-turn roll, in a turn), (b) part of a 2-month long turn, and (c) is an imposition of an alternating turn structure over a continuous-time process (fighting a war, ships transiting the Suez canal, etc.).

At any rate, I concur with pauldernyck: further discussion on ships moving through the Suez canal, in the context of a thread whose purpose is to assist in building an effective AIO for Italy, is unproductive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous
I notice the map peskpesk post #344 ~ August 23, 2013 does not reflect the Eastern Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea as being adjacent.

Is this going to be corrected?

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

While raiding the Red Sea in World in Flames is interesting in theory, strategy for the AI needs to be based on more sound principles. Italy has 2 main and somewhat limited assets at the start of the game, in a strategic sense.

One is the advantages offered by the surprise rules. Either to attack enemy ports, best used only against the long-term opponent - the Royal Navy; or the ability of light infantry divisions to land on an enemy shore. The second advantage is using the pair of Italian TRS to reinforce such a landing. Mucking around in the Red Sea negates both advantages as a high enough box can't be reached to make for a successful landing, and the instant war is declared the Suez Canal is closed to Italy, ending all chance of reinforcing the operation. TRS sailing through Suez run the risk of being permanently unavailable, with Italy having no control of that decision, crippling Italian options for a year at least.

Attacking in the Red Sea is akin to the Romans attacking the barbarians two provinces away when they only have enough Legions available to operate successfully in an adjacent province. Poor strategy.

Operating in the Eastern Mediterranean at all is a more difficult strategy at the beginning of the game. A divisional landing anywhere within 4 hexes of the Wavell HQ is a risky proposition to start with. Italy's ability to reinforce a landing is not automatic when they have to fight both the Royal Navy and the French fleet to do it. Operating in the Eastern Med entails quite probably fighting in two sea zones, against superior forces.

Italy's best chance to do something overseas depends on using land-based air to assist their CV-less naval forces. This can be done simply in the Western Med, from 100% safely supplied land bases in Italy. In the Eastern Med, land-based air must operate from bases subject to having their supply lines cut by superior enemy naval forces.

If Italy wishes to use it's surprise impulse advantages early in the game (1939), it is far, far better to do so in the Western Med (or against an empty or weakly defended Malta). The Eastern Med is a viable option for the Axis, but operations stand a much better chance of success in 1940 once the French are too busy to fight at sea and about to disappear as an enemy force, and once additional forces (newly built air units, Luftwaffe reinforcements) can be effectively deployed to forward bases in Libya. This is the main thing the AI should decide - which side of the Mediterranean to commence initial operations in, and when to do it.

On the rare chance that Italy is still neutral or partially neutral at the fall of France, maybe a minor operation in the Red Sea could be considered. It would all hinge on the CW blithely watching Italy sail through Suez and then still remaining neutral for another impulse. Choosing a strategy based on the enemy being stupid isn't that wise. A CW AI should immediately DOW Italy if TRS or infantry loaded SCS sail through the Canal, particularly in 1940.