Sorry wrong plane cost.
Sm search plane = C6 A0 D2 M4 Only fighters can attack search planes.
Lg search plane = C8 A0 D2 M6 Only fighters can attack search planes.
Both search planes can retreat after first round of combat.
Baron this HR has progressed beyond the simple blurbs here and there. I’ve also added bombard to DDs. A DD still can stop subs so yes you would still want them. Again I’ll point to my arguement against realism, historical realism attemps, and trying to correlate real-world numbers to units.
Ok. It is just not clear what was OOB for Destroyers and Subs and what has changed.
The Submarines can still Submerge and get First Strike, right?
A single Destroyer blocks any number of Subs, right?
This affect both Submerge and First Strike capacity.
1 DD can still be used as blocker against an infinite number of units, including Subs?
So a Sub being attacked by planes only could Submerge instead of rolling a Defense @2, right?
But, if a Destroyer is along planes, then a Sub, being blocked, can only roll a Defense @2, and if it gets a hit, the DD will destroyed first if the owner choose to (because it is cheaper).
Otherwise, such a Sub cannot flee (submerge) until the destroyer is sunk, right?
Baron the 888 rule is just part of a larger set of rules. In fact it is more so part of more than one set of rules varying in complexity. When I get more time I will elaborate more. The most simplistic you could get is to simply allow planes to hit subs and call it “tough cheese” if they or force a submerge. Again I’ll elborate later when I’m not at work.
Baron the 888 rule is just part of a larger set of rules. In fact it is more so part of more than one set of rules varying in complexity. When I get more time I will elaborate more. The most simplistic you could get is to simply allow planes to hit subs and call it “tough cheese” if they or force a submerge. Again I’ll elborate later when I’m not at work.
Fine.
To understand it and evaluted by itself, you should start a specific thread for this 8-8-8 set of rules.
Did you get an occasion to play-tested it somehow?
Again I’ll point to my arguement against realism, historical realism attemps, and trying to correlate real-world numbers to units. Eventually the numbers go back to having 3 total types of units land , sea, and air which IMO is no fun. There is a game called Attack! Which implements this type of system you can get it for $15-20 on Amazon. It’s not exactly the same but comes close.
If we want a simple wargame, we play RISK.
A&A Subs rules have changed many times since 1984, Classic. (See the quote at the end of this post.)
And many rules variants exists for the Board Game or the Hasbro Computer game.
It is part of the challenge to find a way to improve the actual game to keep as much as possible both historical feel and a flowing game mechanics.
Since it is a figurative wargame with sculpts, it is natural to intuitively gives them some caracteristics of the real weapon the sculpt represent.
And A&A is also a beer and breztel wargames, it mustn’t be too much complex and each sequence mechanics shouldn’t be too long either.
It always end with a compromise toward one side or the other of the spectrum.
All I wanted to know about my opening post is**, from experienced players POV, what is the most disturbing aspect of this whole HR which tried to solve the 3 aberrations issues?**
This points toward three aberrations which creates both complex games situations and contrary to a consistent historical simulation:
1- Transport could have been taken last (without too much turmoils ) but the no combat value _makes an infinite number of transports destroyed by a single combat uni_t.2- A single Destroyer can block an infinite number of Surprise Strike attacking Submarines.
3- The Destroyer can block an infinite number of defending Submarines Submerge.
So a massive number of Submarines can be destroyed (by a large air fleet and a single Destroyer) while the attacker can only lose one Destroyer.In addition, Planes cannot hit submarines without Destroyers, makes the Carriers very vulnerable against Submarines.
While, historically, Escort carriers were specifically used in submarine warfare.Aircrafts and 1 destroyer combined with transports on offense against defending Submarines makes for complex situations which needs explicit FAQ.
And some strange unhistorical impossibility to destroy Submarine units and no way of protecting transports against them.
Making for auto-kill or immediate retreat.
@Baron:
Hi everyone,
since the creation of A&A, the submarines rules receives a lot of modifications.
The actual OOB rules on Sub warfare includes mostly 3 units: Sub, destroyers and planes.The Subs have 6 caracteristics:
1-Stealth movement,
2- First Strike,
3- Submersible and
4-cannot hit aircraft.
A fifth one is derived from aircraft limitation: cannot be hit by aircraft.
A sixth one is an offspring of the no control of SZ for Subs: prevent unescorted transports from offloading for an amphibious assault.Aircraft: cannot hit subs unless there is a friendly Destroyers which is taking part of the combat.
Destroyer have an Anti-Sub Vessel (ASV) role which negates Subs capacities:
mainly First Strike and Submerge.
In addition, a Destroyer allows all friendly planes to hit submarines during combat.
And also block Submarine stealth movement and force him to battle with DD in a given SZ.For reference, here is the OOB Submarine rules in different A&A versions:
Classic:
1st Ed. 1984: A2D2M2C8, attacking Subs get Surprise Strike, cannot submerge but can withdraw in another SZ, cannot hit air.
2nd Ed. 1986: A2D2M2C8, attacking Subs get Surprise Strike, cannot submerge but can withdraw in another SZ, cannot hit air.
3rd Ed. 1997: A2D2M2C8, attacking Subs get Surprise Strike, withdraw in another SZ, defending Sub can submerge in SZ at the end of the round, cannot hit air.Iron Blitz Edition by Hasbro and Microprose 1999, A&A 3rd Ed.:
Sub: A2D2M2C8, Surprise Strike on attack only, can submerge in SZ at the end of the round, cannot hit air.
Destroyer: A2D2M2C8 can retaliate even when hit by subs surprise strike and cancel Subs submerge.Pacific 2001 and Europe Edition 1999:
Sub: A2D2M2C8, Surprise Strike on attack only, can submerge at the end of the round, cannot hit air, cannot be hit by air.
Destroyer: A3D3M2C12, cancel Surprise Strike and allows planes to hit subs.Revised Edition 2004:
Sub: A2D2M2C8, First Strike (attacker and defender), can submerge at the end of the round, cannot hit air.
Destroyer: A3D3M2C12, cancel First Strike and Submerge.Anniversary Edition, AA50, 2008:
Submarine: A2D1M2C6, First Strike, Submersible: can submerge in First Strike phase before regular cmbt, cannot hit air, cannot be hit by air.
Destroyer: A2D2M2C8, cancel First Strike & Submerge and allows all planes to hit subs.1942.1 (2009) : Same as AA50.
Pacific 1940 (2009) and Europe 1940 (2010): same as AA50.1942.2 (2012) : Same as AA50.
Plus: prevent unescorted transports from offloading for an amphibious assault.Pacific 1940 and Europe 1940 2nd Ed. (2012): same as 1942.2.
There is also an evolution of how to treat a Sea-Zone when a sub is present. But, it is also a complex matter, that I left for now.
What I would like to develop is a different relation between aircrafts and submarines; so planes could be able to hit submarines without any destroyer unit.
It will better depict the impact of aircrafts in WWII on Submarine warfare and I hope will create some new tactical situations for naval combat.
I would like also to get rid of the aberration which is created when, paired to others, 1 destroyer unit can give a specific ability to an infinite number of units.
In this specific case:
1 Destroyer gives to an infinite number of planes the ability to hit subs,
1 Destroyer is able to negate the First Strike and Submerge of an infinite number of subs.
For instance, this creates the kind of aberration where 1 DD and a large air fleet can destroy numerous subs and the attacker can only loose 1 single DD unit.
Here someone which said it better than me:
@Fishmoto37:So you’ll have to match my sub purchases with dd purchases? And I defend at a 1, whilst you are just trying to detect me? I don’t know how well that would work… seems to hard to kill the subs.
Well Gar, it is harder to kill subs as we found out in our last 1939 game. That is the whole point. We want to make the subs a more effective unit. In the 1940G OOB rules you can have a German wolf pack of six subs and an allied power can send one destroyer and half a dozen planes and just about wipe out all the subs in one combat round. That is just ludicrous!
Okay Baron here’s my take: I’ll leave my HRs out of the equation.
To stop the problems with blocking of infinite subs by destroyers, take away the block ability and replace it with destroyers are immune to surprise strikes. Destroyers otherwise act just like surface warships.
To counter this loss for the DD allow one opening sneak attack for subs and then all naval combat reverts to standard naval combat and all DD, Subs and aircraft are in standard naval combat. In other words DDs and subs act just like their other naval counterparts even when even against aircraft.
For ASW for aircraft. It must be during regular Naval combat after the surprise attack OR the aircraft must “spot and hit” the sub when only aircraft are attacking. The aircraft must roll a hit the in the first round of combat, if not the sub escapes and simply remains on the board.
You can use whatever stats you like for I’m not going to debate that aspect.
In answer to your question, as an experienced player, the rules on subs, destroyers, transports and their interaction with aircraft as well as each other, has become laboriously over complicated especially to new players. Just look at the questions of new players submitted on this site daily. My take is to minimize naval complexity to the point where it is as easily understandable as ground combat.
By minimizing the effects of any of these special units to a special one round ability against one another you streamline the combat sequence.
@Baron:
In addition, Planes cannot hit submarines without Destroyers, makes the Carriers very vulnerable against Submarines.
While, historically, Escort carriers were specifically used in submarine warfare.
I don’t think the carriers went on sub hunting alone. I believe they were accompanied by some destroyers too.
But, to your case.
I think the sub should roll a preemptive first strike against the carrier.
Then the planes should roll against the sub, and the carrier if it survived should roll too.
With OOB rules only a surviving carrier is allowed to roll against the sub, the planes are not.
The problem with your house rule is that 2 fighters that defend on 4 or less are likely to kill that sub, and that will probably prevent the sub from attacking, and making destroyers obsolete. A combo with 1 battleship, 1 carrier and 2 fighters, which is all allowed to kill that sub, will turn it into a suicide mission for the sub. And of course, who wants to buy destroyers anymore ?
@Baron:
In addition, Planes cannot hit submarines without Destroyers, makes the Carriers very vulnerable against Submarines.
While, historically, Escort carriers were specifically used in submarine warfare.I don’t think the carriers went on sub hunting alone. I believe they were accompanied by some destroyers too.
But, to your case.
I think the sub should roll a preemptive first strike against the carrier.
Then the planes should roll against the sub, and the carrier if it survived should roll too.
With OOB rules only a surviving carrier is allowed to roll against the sub, the planes are not.
Yes.
That is exactly how it would be done with my HR if there is no Destroyer to protect the carrier.
The 2 Fgs can destroy Subs but if the Subs get a hit then Carrier cannot retaliate (if it is a 1942.2 Carrier with a single hit).
The interaction between Subs and planes is now simpler, as it was long time ago.
As you say later, planes will be more dangerous (as before AA50) that’s why Subs need some way to be more efficient by themselves.
I can say however that in OOB, a lot of Destroyers are protecting Carriers anyway.
So, many times all planes can hit Subs.
Hence for a First Round Subs Slaughtering Fest (on both sides when Subs are part of larger fleet).
The 2 hits BB and Carrier are also OOB in G40.
The increase defense for planes against Subs may not change a lot in real game playing.
However, 5 Subs (30 IPCs) attacking 1 DD, 1 Carrier and 2 planes (8+16+20= 34 IPCs) are not more dangerous.
In either case 5 Subs will make an attack roll but…
In my HR, on the first round, 4 Subs get First Strike, this means that with a lucky 2 hits, the DD or the Carrier will not retaliate: 3 defense rolls.
In OOB, all 4 units would have rolls on defense.
In fact, this means that more First Strike allowed means a better odd of survival for Subs.
I think this Destroyer blocks Sub on 1:1 can provides the way to balance the increase efficiency of planes.
About why buying destroyer?
In both 1942.2 or G40, if a Carrier received a hit, then planes can no more land on it whether because sunk (1942.2) or damaged (G40).
In both cases, planes need to find a another landing place within 1 space. Otherwise, they ditch at sea.
So Destroyer are still needed because planes on carrier still keeps a kind of Achilles heels at sea.
Okay Baron here’s my take: I’ll leave my HRs out of the equation.
To stop the problems with blocking of infinite subs by destroyers, take away the block ability and replace it with destroyers are immune to surprise strikes. Destroyers otherwise act just like surface warships.
To counter this loss for the DD allow one opening sneak attack for subs and then all naval combat reverts to standard naval combat and all DD, Subs and aircraft are in standard naval combat. In other words DDs and subs act just like their other naval counterparts even when even against aircraft.
For ASW for aircraft. It must be during regular Naval combat after the surprise attack OR the aircraft must “spot and hit” the sub when only aircraft are attacking. The aircraft must roll a hit the in the first round of combat, if not the sub escapes and simply remains on the board.
You can use whatever stats you like for I’m not going to debate that aspect.
In answer to your question, as an experienced player, the rules on subs, destroyers, transports and their interaction with aircraft as well as each other, has become laboriously over complicated especially to new players. Just look at the questions of new players submitted on this site daily. My take is to minimize naval complexity to the point where it is as easily understandable as ground combat.
By minimizing the effects of any of these special units to a special one round ability against one another you streamline the combat sequence.
Thanks for answering.
As far as I understand your Subs and DDs, it seems that you are going back exactly to the Official Rules from A&A Hasbro software, except Subs cannot hit aircraft.
Subs were A2 D2 C8.
My guess, is that most questions are due to historical counter-intuitive rules such as Planes need Destroyers and Transport have no combat value.
Examples of 3 complex situations:
1- Planes against Subs with Transports
2- Planes and transport against Subs
3- Submarines and Transport against Carrier and planes
In most cases above, transport will be taken as casualty and not taken last, contrary to the Specific taken last rule…
No kidding that a new player is lost and needs extended explained examples.
In 1, Transport will be destroyed by planes and Subs will survive.
In 2, Transport will be sunk by Subs, and planes can do nothing against Subs.
In 3, if Carrier get a hit you sink a sub, while a plane will hit the transport. And the sub can only hit the carrier.
Actually when a sub is in general naval combat, meaning after the one time preemtive surprise strike. ALL units except obvious transport cargo are treated as combatants.
The other option is to do this 1:1 ratio involving subs and destroyers. It complicates things but I suppose it is more fair. As far a air vs. subs you can say “tough cheese” or roll for spotting.
I dunno I guess you have to simply go with what your group agrees upon. If one wants to create a house rule for everyone or Larry that’s a tall order. I simply think there are mamny view points and perspectivesso not everyone is going to agree on everything. Even Krieghund has had ideas that have been passed over.
Complicated doesn’t bother me with HRs necessarily. But if you want simple I’d emulate land units when trying to simulate naval combat IF your looking to simplify.
The other option is to do this 1:1 ratio involving subs and destroyers.
It complicates things but I suppose it is more fair. As far a air vs. subs you can say “tough cheese” or roll for spotting.
I don’t know if DK’s 1:1 complicated things or not.
It is more intuitively understandable, like combined arms, such as Inf+Art, Fg+TcB or Tank+TcB. Easier to understand the rule. No need to read all exceptional case.
2 cases: (blocked) pinned Subs or unpinned Subs.
But on every combat round, each side must count how many DDs are blocking how many Subs, and how many Subs aren’t blocked.
The spotting roll was never introduced in the Official A&A.
World War II, The expansion have a complex but playable Spotting mechanics.
It adds another layer of rolls, but allows to keep the basic unit combat value.
However, such mechanics get complex according to the various naval units with Subs or not, and whether on offense or defense.
But if you want simple I’d emulate land units when trying to simulate naval combat IF your looking to simplify.
What do you have in mind?
The simple casualty rule?
No special interaction of units against opposing side?
Much more?
If one wants to create a house rule for everyone or Larry that’s a tall order. I simply think there are many view points and perspectives so not everyone is going to agree on everything. Even Krieghund has had ideas that have been passed over.
Complicated doesn’t bother me with HRs necessarily.
Simply, I put my thread to make a fusion of many ideas.
But, the one idea that really struck me as the very new idea is:
to apply the taken last rule of transport to Subs in such a way that planes need no more destroyers and Subs didn’nt become a better and cheaper padding for protecting other warships than was destroyer.
I was looking upon if anyone did think something similar before?
The beginning of my relentless effort is about another aberration:
4- A combined fleet on attack can sometimes do much damage to a defender with many Subs by not bringing his destroyer in the attack.
That way, the planes will only attack surface warships (which are all costlier units than Subs).
panzer: my point was that I cannot take hits from air to my subs unless you bring a destroyer so if you attack my fleet without a destroyer it is actually to your advantage because all your hits must be taken on my air force and capitol ships rather than taking them on my subs. I know that my subs get a “deadly” first shot (@1) without your DD but I hardly find that equitable, you sink my fleet (except subs) then move your DD over in non combat to neutralize them on my turn. I feel that as the controlling nation I should get to decide if they submerge. I am with Octo on this, I play the rules as stated and avoid house rules (except perhaps bids).
Perhaps I have not played enough games to see the air/sub balance.
What a strange gamey strategy:
Bring less unit, so you increase your odds of making more damage to the enemy.
Another counter-intuitive consequence of the OOB rules.
More, bring all your Subs to be used as fodder, so you screen your other warships against other defending subs (almost like DDs).
With my HR, this aberration disappear: you bring more units (destroyers) it is better, than bringing less, to makes more damage on the enemy.
And they are no way to use your own Subs to screen your own warships against enemy’s Subs if you doesn’t bring along DDs in a given attack.
The real iconic and problematic unit is the Submarine.
We all figure it can make some surprise attack and escape into the sea.
I believe it can receive a special treatment.
So I’d hoped much of the complex rules will turned around this unit and less around the others.
@Baron:
But if you want simple I’d emulate land units when trying to simulate naval combat IF your looking to simplify.
What do you have in mind?
The simple casualty rule?
No special interaction of units against opposing side?
Much more?
Baron I see several ways of going about solving issues with these units. However the needs of my group and the aims of my HRs may not work for others. Let me just say I’m working on creating a variant rather than a single house rule mostly when I speak.
Frankly I’d need to write a book on all of my ideas and thoughts.
Recently I’ve been teaching people how to play based on OOB rules, totally straight laced games. They are all intelligent and play tons of other games and play well. Guess what? Axis & Allies confuses the hell out of them. I could go further but will refrain because I’d have to write a book about it literally.
Honestly I’m not sure what the goal or “endgame” is of this discussion. Your premise is well thought out but gathering a consensus is difficult and I simply don’t think any resolution would come simply due to differing perspectives and goals relating to what one wants from the game.
It’s a good discussion nonetheless.
I spent most of yesterday to read me up on submarine warfare. It looks like most of the subs were sunk by land based fighters and medium bombers using rockets. So its obvious from a historical point of view that planes should be able to sink subs by themselves, without a present destroyer.
I think the A&A Europe 1999 edition was the game that modelled the subs and convoys in the best way, too bad this mechanics were abandoned. Germany should start with lots of subs, and UK should start with lots of unprotected convoy zones. Then UK buy plenty of aircrafts and destroyers that sink the subs, faster than Germany can launch them. That is historical correct. That would work in a game starting in 1942, but not a global game starting in 1940, or 39.
Still not satisfied with the HR suggestions so far, and the rationale being what Toblerone77 says, the people I play with are not experts, and do not easily understand rules that are too complex. The way some of you wright rules is pedantic and great if you are a layer or judge, but not to my beer drinking friends. So I need a better HR than the present suggestions.
My suggestions so far, and with Raid rules where a damage marker are placed on the convoy box during the combat phase, and not during the owners collect income phase.
Sub cost 8, move 2, A2, D2, roll a preemptive first strike and may submerge after any finished round of combat.
Destroyer cost 8, move 3, A2, D2 and is immune to a subs first strike, so it rolls even if taken as casualty. Prevent a matching sub from submerging on a 1 to 1 basis
Tranny cost 8, move 2, D1 against air only. So it still needs escort protection against subs and warships.
Aircrafts and surface warships can attack and defend against subs even if no allied destroyer is present, but they cant prevent a sub from submerging.
Ex
1. Subs can decide to target a convoy box or join a naval combat.
A convoy raid is a one time roll, and the eyes on each dice decide how many damage tokens you put on the convoy box.
In this HR, a defending destroyer can only deny a preemptive shot against himself on a 1 to 1, not all preemptive shots against the whole fleet or convoy box.
History shows that no matter how many escorts and warships protecting the convoy, the sub would always get a hit, so this is historical correct. But since a sub in this HR cost 8, and can only inflict a max of 6 IPC damage, since the dice only got 6 eyes, it would not be considered very clever to sacrifice an 8 IPC sub in trade for an average 3 IPC damage, when the convoy box is protected by a fleet. A clever player would probably not attack. But it should be an option.
So in this case the sub choose to join the naval battle. Lets say 8 attacking subs roll dice, and this should be 8 preemptive first strike rolls. That means, the enemy warships that get taken as casualties, should not be allowed to return fire. But if you got 2 destroyers in that battle, you can choose to take them as casualties, and in that case they will return fire. But if you save them for next round, they can not deny the preemptive roll for the other ships. Now, if your 2 destroyers sank, and you only got planes left, then the planes can hit the subs without a destroyer, but the planes can not deny the subs to submerge after a finished round of combat.
Another example. A lone sub sit in seazone 118. You can attack that sub with an aircraft, and you don’t need a present destroyer. But after one finished round of combat, that aircraft can not deny the sub to submerge. Only destroyers can deny subs to submerge, on a 1 to 1 basis
Since trannies cost 8 and defend against air on a D1, they can now be taken as casualty any time. History has plenty of examples on trannies being used as blockade runners, thrown into minefields or coastal guns before the fleet comes, just to save the expansive capital ships. It should be the players choice what ship is fodder, not the rules
I spent most of yesterday to read me up on submarine warfare. It looks like most of the subs were sunk by land based fighters and medium bombers using rockets. So its obvious from a historical point of view that planes should be able to sink subs by themselves, without a present destroyer.
I think the A&A Europe 1999 edition was the game that modelled the subs and convoys in the best way, too bad this mechanics were abandoned. Germany should start with lots of subs, and UK should start with lots of unprotected convoy zones. Then UK buy plenty of aircrafts and destroyers that sink the subs, faster than Germany can launch them. That is historical correct. That would work in a game starting in 1942, but not a global game starting in 1940, or 39.
Still not satisfied with the HR suggestions so far, and the rationale being what Toblerone77 says, the people I play with are not experts, and do not easily understand rules that are too complex. The way some of you wright rules is pedantic and great if you are a layer or judge, but not to my beer drinking friends. So I need a better HR than the present suggestions.
My suggestions so far, and with Raid rules where a damage marker are placed on the convoy box during the combat phase, and not during the owners collect income phase.
Sub cost 8, move 2, A2, D2, roll a preemptive first strike and may submerge after any finished round of combat.
Destroyer cost 8, move 3, A2, D2 and is immune to a subs first strike, so it rolls even if taken as casualty. Prevent a matching sub from submerging on a 1 to 1 basis
Tranny cost 8, move 2, D1 against air only. So it still needs escort protection against subs and warships.
Aircrafts and surface warships can attack and defend against subs even if no allied destroyer is present, but they cant prevent a sub from submerging.Since trannies cost 8 and defend against air on a D1, they can now be taken as casualty any time. History has plenty of examples on trannies being used as blockade runners, thrown into minefields or coastal guns before the fleet comes, just to save the expansive capital ships. It should be the players choice what ship is fodder, not the rules
Should we read: “most of the subs were sunk by land based fighters using rockets and medium bombers”?
Based on my limited research, Fighters in itself were used to protect torpedoes bombers against Subs’ Flak or enemy’s planes.
The kill was done by the Tactical Bomber special torpedoes or by direct bomb drop.
“the A&A Europe 1999 edition was the game that modelled the subs and convoys in the best way”
Indeed, Destroyers were a combination of Cruisers and DDs, A3D3M2C12, plus anti-sub.
I will try to point out the critics I read on this OOB rule. (Which were one of the reason, there is a change in 1942.1 rules and 1940, 1st ed.)
Does your Subs get Surprise Strike on attack and defense?
For now, I suppose it is a YES.
In your examples, you forget to put Subs against Subs with fleet but not destroyers.
Most of the time, submarines will defend as well as a Destroyer against ennemy Subs.
With this Subs mechanics, both attacking and defending Subs can rolls at the same preemptive First strike phase.
It has virtually the same effect as the DD immune to a subs first strike, a Destroyer can roll before being sunk.
This virtually makes Subs more dangerous than Destroyer and able to be the real padding of the sea for costlier units, since both can be taken as casualty by planes.
Destroyer are better against planes, with a small fleet it is important.
With a bigger one, Subs can do the cannon fodder against aircrafts while planes and carriers are taking care of incoming planes.
And since, Subs can only Submerge after the first round, you can use Subs on a one time shot to destroy some of them before they submerge.
Maybe the 3 spaces move of Destroyer can be appealing but DD is not needed to block Subs. Subs can do the job.
This gamey-way of using Subs instead of DDs seems a problem, don’t you think?
With a M3 DD, it is historically inaccurate (compared to the range of Cruiser, BB and carrier) and your are not simplifying thing either.
On the other part, making the transport @1 against planes only is more historical but it is a complexification.
So, it goes for a better detailed Transport only but create some special situations which would need explanations.
Like using a transport unit as fodder but rolling for defense on and off, according to the composition of the attaking units.
A small correction: “sacrifice an 8 IPC sub in trade for an average 3 IPC damage”, 1+2+3+4+5+6= 21 /6= 3.5 IPCs
About the Convoy Box, I don’t understand what is the role of DD and if Subs can do something against DDs or only roll Convoy damage.
Finally, “The way some of you wright rules is pedantic and great if you are a layer or judge, but not to my beer drinking friends. So I need a better HR than the present suggestions.”
Sorry about my writing style, if english was my first language, I could do better to be simpler.
I wrongly supposed that using the OOB rules as a starting point was clearer.
I can just add don’t reject this HR because of how it is written (I would be sad) but for is substantial issues.
Once you understand it, if you don’t like some of his features or find it still too complex, it is all OK.
Just don’t kill the messenger but judge the HR for itself. It’s all I ask.
I realized that a real play-test should have less additional rule patch. If it works with less this would be cool enough.
So, here is what I keep for the test.
I’ll go with Classics TP A0 D1 M2 C8.
Subs A2 D1 M2 C6, with OOB Submerge, Surprise Strike, etc.
I keep this single casualty rules:
Subs can be chosen as casualty if there is no eligible surface warship.
Destroyer A2 D2 M2 C8, as DK’s HR: blocks Subs abilities on a 1:1 basis.
Planes can hit Subs anytime, DD not needed.
That is the core of my HR to simplify interactions.
Compared to OOB, there is still only 1 special casualty rule instead of being applied to Transport, it is for Subs.
If it works in Playtest, is funny and units are somewhat balance, then there is no need for additional rules I intended to use in my Opening Post.
Mainly Knp’s 1 round before Submerge and
special retreat move for DDs and Subs.
Could it be enough simplified to everybodys’ taste?
@Baron:
So, here is what I keep for the test.
I’ll go with Classics TP A0 D1 M2 C8.
Subs A2 D1 M2 C6, with OOB Submerge, Surprise Strike, etc.
I keep this single casualty rules:
Subs can be chosen as casualty if there is no eligible surfaces warships.Destroyer A2 D2 M2 C8, as DK’s HR: blocks Subs abilities on a 1:1 basis.
Planes can hit Subs anytime, DD not needed.
That is the core of my HR to simplify interactions.
Compared to OOB, there is still only 1 special casualty rule instead of being applied to Transport, it is for Subs.
Here is the missing part of the puzzle.
With this last point every aspects of the OOB games will be retrieve keeping all the main interactions between units.
What was missing with the Last Warship Taken as casualty rule for Subs is a way to fight to death with them without necessarily losing the costlier warships during an attack. I find a way to sacrifice the cheapest unit without being at the expense of the more important and precious if the first rounds of an attack turn sour.
It needs only a small rule specific to submarines which allows them to retreat independently from the other attacking units.
Independent retreat:
Submarines on attack can retreat before or after the others units retreat.
This will allows subs a way to continue an attack all by themselves (and to be sacrificed) while all the other units have retreated.
What do you think now, better isn’t it?
yes, subs independent retreat, that was the missing link.
OOB you can submerge your subs and retreat the planes, and let the surface warships continue the battle. It should be the other way around too. Retreat the ships, but not the subs, or the planes.
yes, subs independent retreat, that was the missing link.
OOB you can submerge your subs and retreat the planes, and let the surface warships continue the battle. It should be the other way around too. Retreat the ships, but not the subs, or the planes.
I didn’t thought about surfaces ships only retreat.
It certainly could works with planes and Subs left behind to try to finish off enemy’s units in the SZ.
I was pondering whether or not Transport should retreat only with warships or have more latitude by being able to choose to retreat with Submarines (& eventually planes) or with warships.
Any idea what could be better or fairer?
