It seems every time we play there are certain things we just don’t understand. While we understand the rules sometimes they just do not seem rational.
Does anyone have house rules addressing the following?
Artillery supporting infantry during an amphibious assault.
If I move a sub or a destroyer-less navy into a convoy sea zone, forcing the enemy to submerge, why can they convoy me?
It does not make much sense that scramblers are defenders, especially in some cases involving tac bombers.
I get that Kamikaze attacks have to choose their target. But if I bring in 3 cruisers, 2 battleships and a carrier and they choose to hit the battleships, shouldn’t the cruisers get to bombard? They can’t take part in the defense against the Kamikaze.
Convoy Disruption seems easy. There are no ill effects to the disruptor. If you can intercept when facilities are being attacked it makes sense a navy in that sea zone should be able to do the same.
I would love to hear some input on these as well as any house rules ideas.
In terms of house rules, are you looking for balance or realism?
I always argue realism before balance so.
1:No, Artillery should not be able to support infantry during sea invasion, that’s why battleships should be used.
2:I argue they should. The sea territory is vase and submarines are loved during WWII because they are a pain to track down, they are basically the naval sniper.
3: I am not sure the exact issue. Fighters and Tacts can be used offensively and scramble protects your navy. I personally think all allied aircraft should scramble regardless of what nations navy is being attack as long as the nations allows it.
4: Kamikaze wings traditionally went after Battleships and Aircraft Carriers first because taking those out would give the IJN fairness as the IJN had a lot of smaller ships. I personally think Kamikaze wings should also be allowed to target transports.
5: So what’s the issue with Convoy Raids then? It makes you force yourself to deal with an enemy navy.
