Carriers

[Guest]

@miragehunter:

I agree that AC’s should be 1/1 but still take two hits.  If memory serves correctly.  They had only 50 cal. guns as their only means of defense back in WW2.  Now they have all kinds of fun things to use.  That is why i agree with it being 1/1.  That is why they have planes on AC’s.

And that is why they had escorts.

[xzorn]

You have to remember, though, that each carrier piece represents an entire carrier group, with a number of carriers and support vessels such as destroyers. That is why they have some sort of defense, I believe. In truth, I think the A&A50 1-2-2-14 carriers were fine. Coupled with fighters they provided the best range and firepower, but at the cost of being vulnerable on their own. Thus, a balanced fleet built around the carriers was the best arrangement.

[trackmagic]

I think the Japanese thought they destroyed the enterprise 2 or 3 times during the war, but the US kept repairing it. The Yorktown was repaired in less than a day once in Pearl Harbor so it could fight at Midway.

I think that the carriers did have some fighting capability of their own. According to wikipedia the Essex-class carriers armament was:
4 × twin 5 inch (127 mm) 38 caliber guns
4 × single 5 inch (127 mm) 38 caliber guns
8 × quadruple 40 mm 56 caliber guns
46 × single 20 mm 78 caliber guns;

With all that considered I think the new rules are historically accurate if that’s what you like.

[maverick_76]

Well after seeing the new preview for the game I’m pretty happy.

[oztea]

Still no way to mark if they are damaged or not……
and my sub scenerio of doom and destruction is still possible

Carrier w/ 2 planes vs destroyer
planes launch to defend
sub hits w/ first strike
carrier damaged
carrier returns fire, hits
planes may not fire
planes may not land on damaged carrier
planes destroyed

exchange [6 ipc Sub <> 20 ipcs of aircraft] UNLESS you cna choose to not launch planes when defending

[Imperious Leader]

I consider the Carrier hit in the final attacking round. It is the last free hit and only if your are sure you will not be attacked since the planes wont be defending if the carrier is attacked on your opponents turn.

And the carrier is a 16 IPC unit with no attack value. I think it could be worth 14 IPC with these rules.

[maverick_76]

Why would your planes deply? You wouldn’t be able to hit the sub without a destroyer, right?

[Imperious Leader]

If the enemy fleet ( think not subs, but anything else) your defending planes cant be used as defenders, so out of the carrier and 2 planes, you just get one 2 or less for defense, rather than 2 fours and a two.

[maverick_76]

So are you saying that your planes cannot deploy at all if an AC is attacked or they can’t only if a sub attacks?

[kcdzim]

@maverick_76:

So are you saying that your planes cannot deploy at all if an AC is attacked or they can’t only if a sub attacks?

If your fleet consists of a carrier plus fighters and is attacked by submarines, your planes would not deploy as defenders as they cannot target a submarine.

However, if your fleet consists of a carrier plus fighters AND a destroyer and is attacked by submarines then your planes WILL deploy as defenders.

The two hit carrier doesn’t substantially change game tactics other than you won’t have to buy a carrier to replace it and you’ll have to limp it back to port.  If it’s attacked in deep water in AA50 by subs, your planes likely would have perished with only one move space.  Now unless you have a destroyer present, they won’t even have that (assuming the subs do their job).

Worst possible scenario now is a lone carrier with fighters against a couple subs.  Only slightly less bad is a carrier w/ planes and a destroyer that manages to kill the subs only after the carrier was obligated to take the hit (destroyers lost AND carrier hit once before planes/carriers/destroyers eliminate the subs).  In this situation, you’ll keep the carrier, but if your planes aren’t close to friendly land or another carrier they’re going to be in the drink.

Otherwise aside from sub hits, if attacked you’ll only select the carrier as a casualty now after all planes are destroyed OR you’re in range for your planes OR it’s more important to weaken/destroy the attacking power regardless of potential loss of your planes after you successfully won.  Which is exactly the same decision you had in previous games, now there’s just a soacker hit which occasionally might come in handy but may also be a hindrance as in previous games it was unclear but implied that planes survived the torp attack…  and now they won’t cause they can’t launch.

[Krieghund]

Carrier-based planes are always considered to be defending in the air when the carrier is attacked.  It doesn’t matter what the attacking force consists of.  If your lone carrier is attacked by subs and hit, whether damaged or sunk, your planes will have one space of movement to land.  If they can’t, they’re lost.  The moral of the story is, don’t leave your fleets without destroyer escorts when there are enemy subs around.

[Guest]

@Krieghund:

Carrier-based planes are always considered to be defending in the air when the carrier is attacked.  It doesn’t matter what the attacking force consists of.  If your lone carrier is attacked by subs and hit, whether damaged or sunk, your planes will have one space of movement to land.  If they can’t, they’re lost.  The moral of the story is, don’t leave your fleets without destroyer escorts when there are enemy subs around.

As it should be.

[Imperious Leader]

Carrier-based planes are always considered to be defending in the air when the carrier is attacked.

but the rules also says that planes cannot launch if the carrier is damaged. So is it the case that if the carrier is ever elected as a hit, the planes can no longer land on the carrier and are forced into this “one space away thing or die” rule?

If that is the case the 2 hit carrier is no positive thing that anybody could ever use.

[bennyboyg]

@Imperious:

Carrier-based planes are always considered to be defending in the air when the carrier is attacked.

but the rules also says that planes cannot launch if the carrier is damaged. So is it the case that if the carrier is ever elected as a hit, the planes can no longer land on the carrier and are forced into this “one space away thing or die” rule?

If that is the case the 2 hit carrier is no positive thing that anybody could ever use.

Well I mean having your fighters die is better than having your fighters AND your carrier die.

[ksmckay]

Well I mean having your fighters die is better than having your fighters AND your carrier die.

Exactly, it certainly isnt worse than AA50 or any of the previous games and probably makes a lot of sense in reality.  In reality (which doesnt really matter since this is a game) if a group of subs happened to come across a lone AC you would expect it to get sunk.  I doubt many subs were ever sunk by machine gun fire from an AC.

Pretty simple.  Dont leave AC’s by themselves when at risk from subs and certainly don’t do it if your planes dont have a place to land.  Makes sense.

[warwinner]

I think I’ve come up with a good scenario in which to use the carrier to soak up a hit.

Say you launch an amphibious assault with lets say 2 transports, 2 infantry, 2 artillery, 1 Battleship, 1 cruiser, 1 carrier and 2 fighters. You take the territory only losing one infantry in the conflict, but your opponent rolled snake eyes for is AA. Bye bye fighters.
On your opponents turn a counter attack is launched with lets say 2 fighters and 1 bomber (I understand that attacking a fleet like the one above with only 2 fighters and 1 bomber is unlikely, but this is just an example) Your opponent scores 2 hits total. You tip the battleship, and since you have no fighters left to worry about landing, you tip the carrier. When your defending units fire back, you score 3 hits and destroy his little squadron, ending the battle.
In the end, you have 1 battleship(damaged), 1 carrier(damaged), 1 cruiser, and all of your transports. You still have to go back to port, but you have saved some IPC’s by not losing any ships such as the cruiser. This is just my 2 cents worth, agree or disagree as you please.

[Veqryn]

the rules say you can’t launch a fighter/plane from a carrier with 1 hit on it.
the rules also say you can’t land a fighter/plane on a carrier with 1 hit
the rules also say that all fighters launch whenever your carrier is attacked, even if just by 1 sub.

so this begs the question, is there a situation possible where you have a fighter/plane on a hit carrier, or is the first rule just redundant?  I don’t see why we need to have the first rule, since the situation would never occur with the other 2 rules…

Oh, and my friends and I plan on using Carriers as a 1/1/2/14 unit, instead of this 2 hit but too expensive to buy crap.

[Imperious Leader]

Make a easy example:

Carrier 2 fighters with 1 hit and 1 cruiser and Battleship defending against 2 battleships, 2 Cruisers

The attacker gets two @4, two @3

Defender gets one @ 2, one @ 3, and one @ 4  The 2 fighters don’t roll. but if this was AA50 it would be:

three at 4 and two at 3

So now we are in a worse position with a 2 hit carrier. The price is now 16 IPC as well.

This is not good.

[kcdzim]

@Veqryn:

the rules say you can’t launch a fighter/plane from a carrier with 1 hit on it.
the rules also say you can’t land a fighter/plane on a carrier with 1 hit
the rules also say that all fighters launch whenever your carrier is attacked, even if just by 1 sub.

so this begs the question, is there a situation possible where you have a fighter/plane on a hit carrier, or is the first rule just redundant?  I don’t see why we need to have the first rule, since the situation would never occur with the other 2 rules…

Oh, and my friends and I plan on using Carriers as a 1/1/2/14 unit, instead of this 2 hit but too expensive to buy crap.

It’s not redundant when it involves friendly powers on carriers.  Say Britain attacks a fleet using his carrier (and it has to attack to land a plane in that sea zone) but has a US fighter on board.  Carrier takes a hit in the battle, the british fighter that was to land there will be lost (or was selected as a casualty) but the US fighter will remain on board as cargo, and now will not be able to launch until the carrier is back in port.

@Imperious:

Make a easy example:

Carrier 2 fighters with 1 hit and 1 cruiser and Battleship defending against 2 battleships, 2 Cruisers

The attacker gets two @4, two @3

Defender gets one @ 2, one @ 3, and one @ 4  The 2 fighters don’t roll. but if this was AA50 it would be:

three at 4 and two at 3

So now we are in a worse position with a 2 hit carrier. The price is now 16 IPC as well.

This is not good.

It seems unlikely that this would ever happen as the only way to end with a hit and two fighters aboard would mean you would have had to attack with a carrier with two friendly aircraft on board.  As in the above example, with two US fighters.  But I cannot think of an instance where you would WANT to do that unless it was a massive fleet attack and you couldn’t leave the carrier behind (but why not wait for the non combat move as the 1 soaker hit probably wouldn’t help with the attack all that much.

[kcdzim]

@Krieghund:

Carrier-based planes are always considered to be defending in the air when the carrier is attacked.  It doesn’t matter what the attacking force consists of.  If your lone carrier is attacked by subs and hit, whether damaged or sunk, your planes will have one space of movement to land.  If they can’t, they’re lost.  The moral of the story is, don’t leave your fleets without destroyer escorts when there are enemy subs around.

Thanks for clarifying that.  Considering the new rules of planes not being able to spot subs without the destroyer, I’m not sure I would have caught that they would be aloft when the torps hit (Although, it seems as though it would be an appropriate exploit if the sneak attack also meant planes weren’t yet in the air, but perhaps that would add an extra unnecessary rule).