Japan Basic Strategies, Concepts and Ideas

[Jennifer]

Submarines cannot defend transports.

Submarines cannot defend squat, really.  They are somewhat okay attack units, but destroyers are much better for that role too.  All in all, why build a submarine when you can have a destroyer?

[Uncle_Joe]

Wow, submarines can be FAR FAR more effective in the Pacific than DDs for the simple facts that planes cannot hit them (without a DD present) and more importantly, that sub hits cannot be applied to planes at all (regardless of DD presence). This makes them CV killer in the extreme. If you havent witnessed that, its no surprise you dont advocate a J1 DD build. :)

Also, DDs are vulnerable to enemy CVs which are 3 spaces away. Subs are immune to anything that doesnt have a DD within 2 spaces. This gives them greater freedom to operate.

Keep in the mind the combat sequence. The Defender has to select casualties before rolling their defense. This means that if you have subs present, he might take a higher value casualty to keep a DD alive to prevent first strikes in a following round (or to allow aircraft to hit in later rounds). For example if you have a BB, CA and DD (and a few TRs present) and a bomber and 3 subs attack. If the attacker hits twice, what do you pick? Obviously the BB soaks up 1, but then what? If you pick the DD, then on round 2, any sub hits are going kill without allowing a strike back (meaning potential loss of all the TRs). Rather than risk that, you might lose the CA instead of the DD. As another example, take a CV w/ 2 Fighters, a CA, and a DD. If the enemy attacks with 3-4 subs on round 1 and hits only once, what do you take? Its got to be the CA. What if he hits twice? Again, the CA and the DD, but if you fail to wipe him out with return fire, you are left with a single 2 to defend against a 2 that first strikes. Not a pretty sight for a TF that costs 54 vs one that costs 18 to 24…

Finally, SSs are cheaper hits in naval combat and they attack just as well as DDs (better if there is no DD present because First Strike can be extremely powerful). Subs are EXTREMELY effective combatants if used correctly. And if you dont have proper DDs for support you could lose a LOT of money in CVs/Fighters from lowly 6 ipc units… Either that, or you have to spend a lot of time running and that is a waste of time that is often critical.

Dont get me wrong, DDs are great units too. But they are certainly not ‘better’ than subs in any way, shape, or form in the Pacific. They are different and both have important roles to play.

[Uncle_Joe]

@Cmdr:

frood.net is where I get most of my stats from.

Thanks! I’ll check it out

If Russia liberates Manchuria it is NOT a National Objective for England.  You have to take an orange territory for England to get that National Objective.

I dont see why. Is that in the FAQ or some obscure ruling? The Brit NO simply says 'Gain 5 IPCs if Allied powers control any territory originally under Japan’s control. Manchuria starts under Japan’s control so why would it not count for the Brit NO?

Finally, don’t forget that Submarines are almost completely worthless in Anniversary.  They cannot stop ships from moving through sea zones.  They cannot defend for squat and they subtract IPC you could be spending on real naval units.  The only thing submarines are good for is slipping through enemy lines to hit transports if the enemy doesn’t put a destroyer in the way.  I wouldn’t worry about getting “trapped” down in Australia.  You can just drive right on past those submarines, no questions asked! (BTW, they don’t stop transport from loading or unloading, they don’t stop ships from bombarding.  In other words, they may as well not even exist as far as the game is concerned.)

See above post on Subs. :) I find that they are hardly worthless in AA50 and in fact, they are quite powerful if used correctly. You cant really ‘drive right on past them’ if that leaves them in attack position and you have no DDs. Pound for pound, they will tend to shred most other naval mixes.

[Jennifer]

Okay, but this is not Pacific, it’s Anniversary.

Just like in Pacific, Submarines cannot hit planes, they cannot be attacked without destroyers and they can slip under enemy units if no destroyers are present, BUT!

Submarines cannot stop surface ship movement.  I can glide past any submarines on the board I want too.

They cannot stop me from loading a transport or unloading a transport (in other words, they do not make a sea zone hostile by themselves.)

They defend at a 1 and can be attacked by a destroyer and 40 fighters if you want to attack them as such.

Basically, they are completely and utterly useless units to build.  They cannot hit battleships and carriers since you can elect not to receive submarine hits on those units (according to the rulebook in the box, it might be different in the FAQs now.)

To put them in a nutshell:

Submarines can shoot Submarines, Transports, Destroyers and Cruisers.  
Submarines do not make a sea zone hostile, they can be completely ignored.
Submarines cannot pass through destroyer patrolled sea zones (all others they can)

But hey, they cost less than transports and barely more than tanks now! (BTW, I do bring them, having one or two in your fleet can be useful just for the fact they force the enemy to put a destroyer in the water.)

---

The ruling, last I heard, was that to get the National Objective the allies had to control any orange territory.  That would limit you to:

Carolines
Formosa
French Indo-China
Iwo Jima
Okinawa
Japan

Territories that start as conquered territories do not count since you are not taking a Japanese territory, you are liberating someone’s territory.

[Uncle_Joe]

They cannot hit battleships and carriers since you can elect not to receive submarine hits on those units

I’m 99% sure this is incorrect. I cant see anything the rules that even remotely implies this. If that were to be the case, then yes, subs woulld be quite useless. But I seriously doubt that is correct and that means that subs are quite effective. :)

The ruling, last I heard, was that to get the National Objective the allies had to control any orange territory.

That would limit you to:

Carolines
Formosa
French Indo-China
Iwo Jima
Okinawa
Japan

Territories that start as conquered territories do not count since you are not taking a Japanese territory, you are liberating someone’s territory. would indeed be pretty useless.

Interesting. Again, I cant see why this would be case. The NO doesnt require taking Japanese territory, but simply occupying territory Japan originally controlled. And by the definition of ‘control’, they certainly ‘control’ Manchuria at the start of the game. Do you know where that ruling is from?

[Jennifer]

China controls Manchuria, Japan is occupying Manchuria

[a44bigdog]

Jenn is incorrect on Subs, they can hit CVs and BBs. That probably is from one of the other flavors of A&A she plays.

Jenn is correct about the Chinese territories and the NO. That has been answered if not in the FAQ then I think by Krieghund some where around here.

And even if subs can hit capitol ships they are still a junk unit. I am sorry it is hard for me to get stoked up about a unit that attacks at 2 and defends at 1.

[Jennifer]

Maybe it was a discussion from before the official release.  I do remember it being talked about that submarines were unable to hit Capitol Ships in Anniversary.

Anyway, let’s recap submarines

1)  They cost 6 IPC, almost as much as a destroyer.
2)  They no longer can act like a blocking unit stopping the enemy from passing through a sea zone without first engaging the submarine and clearing the zone.
3)  They no longer can lock transports preventing them from loading and unloading.
4)  They defend at 1, that was not even overly impressive when it was transports defending at 1, but at least when the transports could defend at 1, they could also hit airplanes!  Submarines can’t even do that!
5)  If you have 30 Submarines you can be attacked by 1 Destroyer and 100 Heavy Bombers.  If so, you can lose all 30 submarines and get 1 hit MAXIMUM, since you cannot hit the aircraft, you can only sink the destroyer.  Cost: 180 IPC for the submarines, 8 IPC for the Destroyer.
6)  Submarines do have some uses, I would at least keep one or two in any sizable fleet since you can use them to attack and they can slip through to harass enemy shipping if the enemy is not careful.

In my honest opinion, anything more than 1 or 2 submarines in MOST games is overkill on Subs.  You’re much better off with Destroyers that can defend as well as attack.  Honestly, that’s what the destroyer is in this game, the Destroyer in AA50 is the Submarine from Revised and Classic, the go to, main, naval fodder piece.  Submarines are gambit units used for those off chance scenarios where they can be effective.

For instance, if the enemy leaves a carrier and fighters in a sea zone it cannot land in, a submarine could be effective. (Attacker at 2, defender at 2, fighters cannot defend and the hit has to be applied to the carrier.)

Or when you can slip past the enemy navy to go at a transport train forcing the enemy to pull units back to defend or build new ones.

(I used ridiculously large number on purpose, I know odds are it would be 5 or 6 submarines, 1 destroyer and half a dozen planes and bombers most of the time, but that doesn’t really demonstrate the point hard enough!)

[Uncle_Joe]

Interesting.

Unless I’m missing it, that frood.com doenst have a combat calculator for A&A50 yet, right? I’d be REALLY interested to see the way subs stack up in combat in those sims.

Apart from that, I can only look at it from a quick analytical point of view. And to me, it appears that subs can be terrifying if used properly. The lack of ability to hit planes is not necessarily a disadvantage IMO. It means that once the DDs are gone, the next thing on the list has a minimum IPC cost of 12 and it goes up from there.

Subs simply threaten surface fleets. And that makes them potent IMO. Just avoid DDs within 2 spaces and you can go wherever you want. Stray DDs are easily brought down by BBs or airpower. I just really think that ability to avoid airpower (both attacking and being attacked) cannot be overstated. But I guess YMMV :)

[Jennifer]

Actually, once defending submarines are gone then defending destroyers are gone, you can damage battleships and then you can hit cruisers, assuming you survive that long, you probably wont.

Generally speaking, I have yet to be “terrified” of a submarine in AA50.  I’ve laughed, I’ve laughed so hard I cried, I giggled to the point of a guffaw at them, but I’ve not been terrified!

I’ll point out:

10,000 Submarines vs 1 Destroyer and 4,999 Bombers (almost same cost) should result with:

3,333 hits from the attacker
1 hit from the defender

Cost to the attacker: 8 IPC
Cost to the defender: 19,998 IPC

Still like your submarines?

[Woodstock]

@Cmdr:

Actually, once defending submarines are gone then defending destroyers are gone, you can damage battleships and then you can hit cruisers, assuming you survive that long, you probably wont.

Generally speaking, I have yet to be “terrified” of a submarine in AA50.  I’ve laughed, I’ve laughed so hard I cried, I giggled to the point of a guffaw at them, but I’ve not been terrified!

I’ll point out:

10,000 Submarines vs 1 Destroyer and 4,999 Bombers (almost same cost) should result with:

3,333 hits from the attacker
1 hit from the defender

Cost to the attacker: 8 IPC
Cost to the defender: 19,998 IPC

Still like your submarines?

Even though I agree with you Jen, you do have to take in consideration that a smart player would watch out for DD’s. (would that be a contradictio in terminis? “A smart player buying 10k subs…” )
If there would be no DD (because a smart one would take it out, or stay out of it’s range), you could attack 2500 AV’s, all loaded with fighters (5000).

Those 5k fighters are useless, and with your surprise kill you could get 3300 kills (subs hit at 2 right?). The vessels that you actually kill, don’t get to fight back.

More convenient is that those 5000 fighters will go down as well, as there is no ground underneath their feet…

Now thát could make a sub useful…
And with only 6 or 7 IPC, every 2 subs = 1 CV.

[DarthMaximus]

It depends on the number of subs but DDs alone do not deter an attack.

Consider this:

Attacker: 6 subs
Defense:  2 dd, 2 ac, 4 ftrs (def has no island to land on)

Round 1 - 2 hits to 4 hits

Round 2 - 2 subs vs. 2 ac, 4 ftrs?

Now the ftrs can’t shoot back? 
and it is essentally 2 subs vs. 2 ac.  Not a bad battle there.

Or did the Def lose an AC the previous turn?  If that is the case you can retreat and not only sink an AC but down two ftrs for free.

Granted this is a bit simplistic but assuming you can get the subs in range you might be able to create some OOL problems for your opponent.

If you expect large scale naval battles (Jap vs. US).  It is nice to buy some cheap fodder (4 subs for 24) assuming you already have your heavy hitters.  Even though they defend at 1, sometimes you just need the numbers, esp when you have 1-2 dd and a couple loaded ACs.  IMO they make sense for the US if you are going to be aggressive in the Pac, since they are a nice cheap attacking unit.
Why spend 8, when 6 will do?
If you are agressive, at some point you need to sink Japan’s 3 ACs, 1 BB plus whatever else they buy, and subs attack just as well as DDs so you’ll probably want to go with cheapness and numbers.

[DarthMaximus]

This was my first turn as Japan in my latest game.  I won all the battles, but lost the DD at Pearl and only a few inf overall.  It went really well.

Buy 2 trns, 1 inf.

Attack:

Bor - mt vs. 1 inf (car via trn)
Sum - mt vs. 2 inf (car via trn)
Sz 53 - bb vs. dd (sz 51), 2 ftrs (sz 57)
Sz 56 - trn, dd vs. 2 ftrs (sz 57)
Sz 35 - trn, dd vs. 2 ftrs (sz 61)
Yun - 1 inf, 1 ftr vs. 3 inf (fic), 2 ftrs (man, for)
Sui - 1 inf vs. 3 inf (man)
Hup - 1 inf vs. 3 inf (kia)
Kwa - 1 inf vs. 1 inf, 1 rt (sz 61), 1 ca (sz 61)
Sz 50 - trn, dd vs. 1 ftr (jap), 1 bb (sz 61) [1 trn with 2 inf from sz 61, 1 trn with 1 inf oki, 1 arm jap] - ftr will land on ac moving from sz 57 to 60 if needed
Phil - 2 inf vs. 3 inf, 1 arm (sz 61, oki, jap)

[Jennifer]

Woodstock:

But if my DD prevents your submarines from getting within 2 sea zones of my fleet for fear of being obliterated by my air power, what good are your submarines?

Darth:

I believe a rather intelligent player wouldn’t get into that situation unless it was completely unavoidable.  Odds are if you have 6 submarines, your opponent will probably have 3 destroyers, 2 Cruisers, Aircraft Carrier, 2 Fighters and 2 IPC left over.  (Just taking the same cash money for a more realistically balanced navy.)

Notice how the submarines are pretty much useless attacking this fleet and how they can be easily crushed by the fleet if they have to go on the defense.

Thing is, guys, submarines are so easily pushed aside and negated they really serve no purpose anymore.  Perhaps if we gave them the ability to block naval movement back they’d have at least the function of cheap fodder to slow the enemy.

[Uncle_Joe]

I’ll point out:

10,000 Submarines vs 1 Destroyer and 4,999 Bombers (almost same cost) should result with:

3,333 hits from the attacker
1 hit from the defender

Cost to the attacker: 8 IPC
Cost to the defender: 19,998 IPC

Honestly that argument holds no water. Thats like saying AA guns are useless because if your opponent brings only tanks and infantry they cant do anything (and the AA guns are CAPTURED unlike the sub).

Subs create opportunities that DDs cannot. Its that simple. They dont replace DDs, they fulfill a different (and still highly useful) purpose. IMO, CVs and BBs are far better combatants than DDs. Given my druthers, I’d build mostly BBs and CVs with DDs only for screening. But the presence of subs forces DD builds…and they are cheaper. If Player A has a few CVs/BBs and DDs and player B attacks with equal value of CVs/BBs and Subs, player B should have a pretty significant advantage in the combat.

In the end, I guess time will tell if subs end up in the scrapyard, but at this point I’m seeing entirely too much success with them to dismiss them out of hand.

[Jennifer]

You can make some pretty neat houses from submarines using them like matchsticks!  Outside of that, they serve little or no purpose.  (they do work as toothpicks though!)

Honestly, an analogy to an AA Gun is not really realistic.  You start with AA Guns.  Japan is not starting with Submarines and Germany’s losing all of hers in the first round.  America might have one for a while, but outside of that, you have to specifically start buying them en masse in order to do any of the combats I’ve seen proposed.

Meanwhile, do you honestly think your opponent is going to see you investing heavily into submarines and buy battleships? Of course not!  She’s going to buy up a couple of destroyers and a load of fighters and bombers (which, btw, can actually do other things if your sub commanders are smart and stay WAY THE HELL AWAY FROM THE ENEMY AIR FORCE.)

At least if you invest the added couple of IPC into your fleet to make those submarines destroyers you have double the defense and cannot fall prey to enemy air force without the ability to defend yourself.

[kendric]

Maybe just use them for pacific island sailing. If the japanese are keeping multiple fighters
bombers out in their islands which are not under invasion threat, then they are not on the mainland helping. When the DD comes to stop you from harassing his transports, if it comes alone, it has to come towards you and thus you will be the one who gets to attack. If he sends more then 1 DD then you just diverted a lot for only 6 bucks and you can run away and then either he follows in which case you wasted more of its time or if he goes back you go back. Basically use them to make it more work to get all those infantry off the various pacific islands that usually get taken to the mainland. Every sub that makes a DD chase it just bought 2 IPCs right? Just dont let them attack first. Make the first move and they have to come to you

[Jennifer]

is a good idea, Kendric.

But the one submarine you have with America at the start is enough for that.  Maybe a second one.

[a44bigdog]

I thought this was the '41 section. The US has no subs in 41 and the Japanese have to take all those islands in 41. This isn’t revised either and with the kind of money Japan makes I see no pressing need to go fetch all those infantry like revised.

[Uncle_Joe]

Ok, lets try a different tack. You tout the 1 DD and 500 Bombers or whatever vs 1000 Subs. Obviously thats completely silly. But at the very least if a plane is attacking a sub (AND you’ve commited a DD), then thats one more place where that plane is NOT. And in many cases that is a completely fine investment of IPCs as America. If I can keep Japanese planes and CVs floating around the Pacific on ASW, then they arent bothering the Russians or the Chinese or the Brits. You are tieing up a DD and prolly 2 Fighters and likely the CV to base them on to kill a sub that is cheap and easily replaced. If you want to commit bombers, even better. Time can be as big of a resource in A&A than IPCs are IMO.

In any case, until you’ve seen subs well handled, I guess you’ll continue to dismiss them as useless. Thats fine, but I believe you are selling yourself really short on the Pacific tactics.