Page 1 of 1

Bug?

Posted: 16 September 2022, 09:49
by RobertBr
Encountered an unusual case with a Carrier Strike. My opponent wanted to launch one from the UK against an Italian fleet in Palermo but was not allowed to do so. Gibralta was held by Axis forces so obviously no path can be drawn that way but a path could be drawn through the map boxes and through Suez which was in Allied hands. I couldn't find a direct prohibition on conducting a Carrier Strike through the canal but neither of us was sure enough to report it as a bug. Wondering if anyone can clarify on the rule.

Re: Bug?

Posted: 22 September 2022, 20:09
by 0wn
Hi, Reading the Living Rules of 2021-05-31, sections 4 (naval movement) and 6 (carrier strike), i couldn't find a prohibition for this either.

Re: Bug?

Posted: 23 September 2022, 21:41
by Lord Vasta
As long as a valid naval movement path can be traced, it does not matter how long it is. It is intentional.

Re: Bug?

Posted: 27 September 2022, 23:12
by RobertBr
Lord Vasta wrote: 23 September 2022, 21:41 As long as a valid naval movement path can be traced, it does not matter how long it is. It is intentional.
The question that is being asked is not about length, it is about whether for this purpose passing through canals/straits is a valid naval movement path. It is not for interceptions but the the rules do not seem to place a limit on air strikes (though the BGA module appeared to).

Re: Bug?

Posted: 28 September 2022, 00:03
by MarkDey
To be clear, the Carrier Strike movement path could have gone through the Suez canal in this case. The fact that it was not possible via BGA is a bug.

Re: Bug?

Posted: 28 September 2022, 15:25
by Lord Vasta
MarkDey wrote: 28 September 2022, 00:03 To be clear, the Carrier Strike movement path could have gone through the Suez canal in this case. The fact that it was not possible via BGA is a bug.
Mark is right