Sub Destroyer Handicap

[LuckyDay]

If say the Japanese player attacks a zone with 1 SS and 4 FIGs against 1 SS and 1 DD:

The Jap sub does not get a 1st strike, so both the SS and FIG shoot at same time,correct?

If the sub hits and say 2 of the FIG hit, then there is 3 hits to be accounted for with the 2 allied ships (DD/SS)

What can be hit?  Do all the hits have to be accounted for on the 2 ships, or can the allied player take the sub hit on the destroyer and then the Fighter hits will not be able to hit the Sub?  Remember they are all at the same time…
thanks!

[Krieghund]

You must assign the hits in such a way that as many of them are applied as possible.  In this case, the sub must take the sub hit so that a fighter hit may be applied to the destroyer.

[LuckyDay]

thanks Krieghund, much appreciation.
+1 to 122 now

[LuckyDay]

Krieghund,

ok, so we are trying to really understand this right.  playing a game with mojo right now and we’ve had this come up in 2 rounds in a row and we want to make sure we got it correct.

on page 14-15 of the manual it gives the steps to naval combat.
1-setup battle board
2-submarine 1st strike/ remove casualties
3-rest of attackers fire
4-defender fires

the situation i posted actually happened in our last round.  Can you help us break this down.  on step 2, with the presence of the enemy allied DD, does the japanese SS fire in step 2 on its own or is step 2 skipped because of the DD and the SS fires in step 3 with the fighters?

[Krieghund]

If attacking subs don’t get a First-strike due to the presence of a defending destroyer, step 2 is skipped and they fire along with everything else in step 3.  Sorry I didn’t make this clear earlier.

[mojo]

i have to disagree. i think the steps remain the same.  just as it states.  the only difference is when you remove sub hits.  if a dd is present they go to the casuality area for a defense shot.  without the dd they are removed from the game.

[Krieghund]

You’re applying the rules of Revised to Pacific, Mojo.

Step 2 is Attacking submarines may make “First-strike” attack or submerge.  In step 3, it says “The attacker now rolls one die for each attacking unit (except submarines that have already attacked or submerged).”  Step 2 specifically mentions the First-strike attack only, while step 3 indicates that subs that have not already attacked or submerged will attack in that step.  If all subs were intended to attack in step 2 whether or not they get a First-strike, step 2 would mention that subs not eligible for First-strike also fire, and step 3 would simply say “except submarines”, rather than specifying subs “that have already attacked”.

[mojo]

kreighund  you just agreed with me.  step 2 atacking subs fire or submerge.  step 3 attacker now fires except subs that have attacked or submerged.  exactly i agree.  step 3 you roll for all other units except your subs which either attacked or submerged in step 2.  step 3 does not say subs that have NOT attacked or submerged.  the word NOT is not there.  it states subs that have attacked or submerged which what step 2 is.

[Krieghund]

No, I did not agree with you.  Step 2 says attacking subs “may make First-strike attack”, not attacking subs fire.  It also says “Attacking submarines usually fire before any other unit”.  The word “usually” indicates that sometimes attacking subs don’t fire before other units, which would be when they don’t get a First-strike.  If the subs aren’t eligible to make a First-strike, they don’t attack in step 2.

As I have already said, step 3 says “(except submarines that have already attacked or submerged)”.  The fact that “that have already attacked or submerged” is added as a qualifier indicates that there are some cases in which subs may not have already attacked or submerged.  If that weren’t the case, “(except submarines)” would suffice.  The “not” is implicit in the qualifying “that have already attacked or submerged”.

[mojo]

man i totally disagree.  the word usually attack is there because subs can submerge.  so step 2 states subs may make a first strike or submerge.  those are your choices. attacking subs do 1 or the other.  you don’t get an advantage by not bringing a dd. figs cannot attack subs without a dd.  so because the defender has a dd your telling me now figs can attack.  i believe you have it wrong.  it goes in steps thats it.  no steps are skipped.  the dd just allows for defense of that units.

i think we need another person to chime in.

[mojo]

hey krieghund i thank you for your input, i really do , i hope i’m not coming off sounding like an arse.  i’ve read and re-read these rules for a week now, and i do believe i have it correct,  but i wanna make sure. so thank you again.  for 2 rds. now my subs have been attacked by figs,  and because i  have a dd present somehow that hurts me.  so if i had a tran + 1 sub i’d be better off. i just can’t believe thats the case.  i just think your hung up on the frist strike ability. the steps stay the same.

[Krieghund]

@mojo:

man i totally disagree.  the word usually attack is there because subs can submerge.  so step 2 states subs may make a first strike or submerge.  those are your choices. attacking subs do 1 or the other.

So you’re saying that if a sub doesn’t get a First-strike because there’s a defending destroyer it doesn’t get to fire at all?  The rules state that the “presence of an enemy destroyer in the battle negates all submarines’ first-strike ability”.  By your logic, no First-strike equals no attack.

@mojo:

you don’t get an advantage by not bringing a dd.

Under some circumstances, you may very well get an advantage by not doing so.

@mojo:

figs cannot attack subs without a dd.  so because the defender has a dd your telling me now figs can attack.

I don’t understand what you mean here.  Fighters may only hit subs when there is a friendly destroyer.  In the original example, the defending sub could only be hit if the attacking sub rolled a hit.  Any fighter hits beyond the first would be wasted in any case, as there is only one valid target for them.  In fact, the only way that the attacker could be assured of hitting the sub would be if he/she scored hits with both the sub and at least one fighter.  If the sub misses, the defending sub can’t be hit, as it isn’t a valid target for the fighters.  If the sub hits and the fighters miss, the destroyer can be taken as the casualty for that single hit.  In either case, once the destroyer is hit, the fighters are irrelevent and it’s a sub-on-sub battle.

@mojo:

i believe you have it wrong.  it goes in steps thats it.  no steps are skipped.  the dd just allows for defense of that units.

i think we need another person to chime in.

All opinions are welcome, but I can assure you that I’m not wrong.

[Krieghund]

@mojo:

for 2 rds. now my subs have been attacked by figs,  and because i  have a dd present somehow that hurts me.  so if i had a tran + 1 sub i’d be better off. i just can’t believe thats the case.  i just think your hung up on the frist strike ability. the steps stay the same.

The rule in question has no effect on subs being hit by fighters without a destroyer friendly to the fighters present.  That can never happen.  In the original example, the defending sub could only be hit by the attacking sub, and then the sub hit could only be forced to the defending sub if one of the attacking fighters also hit, as I explained in my last post.

As I said in my original post, you must assign the hits in such a way that as many of them are applied as possible.  That doesn’t include assigning fighter hits to subs if there are no destroyers friendly to the fighters, as that’s not a legal target.

[a44bigdog]

I think as far as the steps issue yall are talking past each other.

mojo Krieg is saying that the steps for Combat are:
1. Put units on battle board.
2 If no enemy destroyers are present subs may fire and those casualties  are killed out right.
  (first strike, opening fire this phase has been called some different names at times)
3. Normal naval combat rolls.
(subs that did not fire in the above step fire now.)
All casualties from this step go to the casualty box
4 . Defensive fire.
5. remove casualties.

Kreig what mojo is saying is that is does not matter when the attacking subs fire as long as the casualties in a battle with a destroyer present get a chance at return fire.

Looking at the unit attributes there seems to be some poor wording here as it mentions destroyers eliminating the first strike ability (which is clear) and allowing aircraft to attack subs. The second in my mind should read hit subs. In other words with a defending sub present defending fighters hits may be applied to submarines. The presence of an attacking destroyer would have no effect on this.

I did note that no where in the rule book does it mention destroyers negating a subs ability to submerge.

[mojo]

i do understand what your saying.  but  maybe we’re interperting the rules differnt.  dd negates “first strike ability”,  not “first strike attack” subs always fire first. it says usually because the attacking sub can submerge.   if you read step 2 to launch a first srtike attack,  after you hit and remove casualities, theres a note about dd’s.   so the steps stay the same.  the dd only comes into play when you remove casualites.
it doesn’t say anything about if a dd is present all attacking units fire at the same time.  it still goes in steps.

again i do believe i have it correct, i even called a A&A buddy of mine, who freaking knows all the rules inside and out to all the games,  and told me i was correct.  i hope to have more input, because luckyday & i just wanna get it correct.

[mojo]

thanks a44bigdog.  heres the hang up.  step 3.  attacker nows rolls ( EXCEPT SUBS THAT HAVE ALREADY ATTACKED OR SUBMERGED)
it does not say subs that HAVE NOT ATTACKED.  it says subs that have attacked which means they attacked in step 2.  by step 3 there are no subs that did not attacked or submerged. thank you

as for a dd negateing a sub to submerge i can’t find that either,  in revised it does.

[a44bigdog]

Again mojo I think it is mainly a semantic issue.

Since it says except subs that have already attacked, that covers the first strike step. Step 2.
The presence of an enemy destroyer eliminates this ability (step 2). So subs that have not already attack would attack in step 3.

The biggest thing is that a defending destroyer being present allows submarine casualties to fire back and defending fighters to hit subs. Whether sub fire is done as a separate step with the casualties going to the casualty box instead of removed or if the subs fire at the same time as everything else is irrelevant in my mind so long as the defenders where a destroyer is present get a chance to shoot back.

The end results are the same.

[Krieghund]

Thanks for your input, A44bigdog.  The end results can indeed sometimes be a little different depending upon how you intrepret this rule.  In the example that started this thread, the casualties taken by the defender can differ if the attacking sub hits.  If the attacking sub and at least one fighter hit, under our interpretation the defender would lose both the sub and the destroyer.  However, under Mojo’s interpretation the sub hit would be resolved first, and the defender could take the destroyer as a casualty, leaving the sub safe, as it’s immune to fighter attack.

This is but one of the quirks inherent in the combat system due to the interaction of subs, destroyers and fighters.  It adds a layer of stategy to unit purchases and deployment.

@mojo:

dd negates “first strike ability”,  not “first strike attack” subs always fire first. it says usually because the attacking sub can submerge.  if you read step 2 to launch a first srtike attack,  after you hit and remove casualities, theres a note about dd’s.  so the steps stay the same.  the dd only comes into play when you remove casualites.
it doesn’t say anything about if a dd is present all attacking units fire at the same time.  it still goes in steps.

I’m sorry, but you’re just reading a lot into the rules here that just isn’t there.  There’s nothing in the rules in step 2 about moving sub casualties behind the casualty line if there’s a defending destroyer.  The rules simply say that attacking subs don’t get a First-strike if there’s a defending destroyer.  Saying that “First-strike attack” and “First-strike ability” are two different things is just splitting hairs.  I agree that the rules could have been written more clearly, but you’re really stretching them.

@mojo:

again i do believe i have it correct, i even called a A&A buddy of mine, who freaking knows all the rules inside and out to all the games,  and told me i was correct.  i hope to have more input, because luckyday & i just wanna get it correct.

Again, I believe that you (and your buddy) are applying rules from Revised to Pacific.  In Revised, it does indeed work in the way that you describe.  However, in Pacific it doesn’t.

I’m not sure what else I can do to convince you on this issue, short of asking Larry Harris himself.  Every game of Pacific that I’ve ever played has treated subs as I’ve described, including many on-line games (including a tournament) at the Days-of-Infamy club.  The officials of that club prided themselves on adhering to the rules as published, going so far as to have Rob Daviau (one of the designers) clear up any ambiguities in the rules for them.

[a44bigdog]

Krieg my response to the first paragraph there, was it would be irrelevant that the sub took out the destroyer because when that round of combat started there was a destroyer present giving the defenders a chance at return fire and air units the chance to hit subs.

Again that is my interpretation and negates what exact step the subs fire in.

And naturally I am no official source on this either, just applying my interpretations on the Pacific sub rules base of my experience with Revised and AA50 and reading the rule book.

[mojo]

a44bigdog i think you have the scenerio wrong.  you are thinking the attacker had the dd as you just stated.
attacker had 1 sub + 4 fig,  defender had 1 sub + 1 dd.

i’m not applying revised to this because in revised figs can shot at subs.

sorry krieg i’m just not convinced.  you know when luckyday started this thread we were looking for the correct way. i just knew we were doing it wrong.  i didn’t have a position on this until we started talking.  now the more we discuss this the more i believe i got it correct.
but i am willing  to compromise on this for the sake of the game.