Bumped for curiosity.
AARHE: Phase 2: Naval Combat
-
Wasn’t that was available? More firepower? Some ships had more guns, flat rate of hit, more chances to hit… Makes sense to me…
GG
-
ok sounds good
note the percentages are now…
CA 4 * 1/6 = 66%
BB 3 * 1/6 = 50%
DD 2 * 1/6 = 33%
CV 2 * 1/6 = 33% -
ok good add it to the file. thanks Tekky! 8-)
-
That looks great.
A small concern - As UK in a game I’m currently playing with Botider I sent a DD after his Japanese transport first turn as UK. The DD was sunk, and the transport lived! Now this may half be that I’m angry, but I don’t think that makes sense. How can a transport group sink destroyers? Throw food at them?
-
yep we thought about that too
we made it that transport can’t hurt anything but transports
hits by heavy units go against heavy units first
hits by light units go against light units firstcan’t use sack transports
(Can’t imagine transports dashing out in front of a Battleship taking hits for it can you?)even more importantly submarines can’t hurt submarines in WWII
(Well, I thought it was important…so I pushed to convince them to include it in Phase 1 when everything else can still flaky)in the current draft…
Naval Combat Hit Allocation
SS hits must be allocated on non-SS naval units.
BB and CV hits must be allocated on BB or CV first, then CA or DD, finally AP.
CA and DD hits must be first allocated on CA or DD first, then BB or CV, finally AP.
AP hits must be allocated on AP.WWII Submarines did not have anti-submarine nor antiaircraft capabilities.
Capital ships are primary targets in a naval battle. Different classes of warships have their role. -
That’s good. Wish it had been in use during my game :-)
-
in LHTR 1.3, submarines can’t submerge if enemy destroyer is present
can AARHE submarines submerge and withdraw from combat if enemy has destroyers or cruisers present?
the other thread about submarine submering http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=7275.0 shown some ideas
*submarine chance to move through enemy SZ with destroyer/crusier - we could have that, but don’t think we need to force all submarines to fight when some submarines are detected
*detection model - our draft at the moment each DD can target one SS with search dice as well as attack dice…I think we may need to change it to each DD rolls as many search dice as enemy SS, but can only roll an attack dice against one detected SS
*number of DDs don’t make detection easier - is this more or less realistic?
*“submerge time limit” and “submerge in non-combat” - probably not needed, submarines can only remain submerged for hours, so that would be tactical level. I think the OOB rule of resurfacing at the end of the turn is good enough leaving “submerge” meaning “submerge and retreat” rather than “submerge and remain submerged for months”
-
That is 100% correct.
Tekky is their anything left for naval combat?
aside from the DIV, NAV problems?
-
Nothing else I think.
Just this little bit more on submarines.That is 100% correct.
What are you referring to?
*SS can’t submerge with enemy DD presence?
*ASW search roll in combat move?
*my radar sugguestion?So we can put project time on Technology, National Advantage, National Victory Condition and call it phase 2.
Looking forward to phase 3 (probably 2 weeks from now?) with Economic attacks and stuff.
-
*SS can’t submerge with enemy DD presence?
++++ yes thay can after a round of combat. or they can retreat
*ASW search roll in combat move?
+++ yes each ASW ship rolls one d6 looking for search on 2 or less… if they locate then each ASW ship AND any BB can get one free shot on subs at 2 or less… latter with sufficient ASW tech planes can participate in ASW search ( at 2 or less) and further level allows them to attack under ASW .
*my radar sugguestion?So we can put project time on Technology, National Advantage, National Victory Condition and call it phase 2.
++++ yes good.
Looking forward to phase 3 (probably 2 weeks from now?) with Economic attacks and stuff.
+++ yes what exactly is left for phase three?
-
@Imperious:
+++ yes each ASW ship rolls one d6 looking for search on 2 or less… if they locate then each ASW ship AND any BB can get one free shot on subs at 2 or less… latter with sufficient ASW tech planes can participate in ASW search ( at 2 or less) and further level allows them to attack under ASW .
I haven’t came to agree on letting BB attacks SS yet.
But for the “search on 2 or less” we would call it ASW search roll with -1 modifier to cater for technology modifiers.*my radar sugguestion?
You didn’t reply to this.
And actually I meant sonar sugguestion.+++ yes what exactly is left for phase three?
I only recall Economic attacks and National Advantage.
Thats right I don’t think National Advantage is completed enough to say its been moved to phase 2. -
ok… we have to shift some things into phase three so that its a layered scheme of complexity increasing at each stage.
-
what do you mean in particular? Economic attacks and National Advantage are already phase 3 stuff.
-
After we are done we will look again at what seemed more complex and move a few things around in other slots.
-
We have renewed discussions about Naval Combat Retreats in the phase 2 draft release thread.
*Sea zone is large and movement fluid
(don’t want to restrict to “where you came from”)*casual hopping-over enemy
(don’t what them to hop-over and launch amphibious assault or attack weaker fleets later)*Remaiining force should have say
(how many directions can you prevent retreats from retreating to? the way attacker came from? relative unit numbers involved ?)*Number of cycles
(the further into combat, the less “where you came from” affects where you can retreat to or preventing retreat to) -
We have renewed discussions about Naval Combat Retreats in the phase 2 draft release thread.
*Sea zone is large and movement fluid
(don’t want to restrict to “where you came from”)*casual hopping-over enemy
(don’t what them to hop-over and launch amphibious assault or attack weaker fleets later)*Remaiining force should have say
(how many directions can you prevent retreats from retreating to? the way attacker came from? relative unit numbers involved ?)*Number of cycles
(the further into combat, the less “where you came from” affects where you can retreat to or preventing retreat to)++++++++++ ok to defeat the entire gambit of problems we could do this:
when you retreat you “remain” in the same zone as the engaged enemy. Combat is over. On the other players turn he can either reattack or move into another new sz.
problems solved.
-
Thats a big change. (And if anything I think you would be able to retreat into hostile sea zone too.)
We need to analyse it first. It may not be realistic.How can you remain the sea zone if enemy wants to drive you out?
How can you break off and escape later if enemy attacks from multiple sides?How about
You can always retreat to adjacent sea zone with friendly units.
You may choose to retreat to adjacent unoccupied sea zone.
Remaining force can block retreat to one unoccupied sea zone.
You can’t retreat to adjacent hostile sea zone.To be prefect
All combats are carried out cycle by cycle, to handle retreats to unresolved combat zones.
But this may not be welcomed.
I start to look towards theduke’s idea of letting you retreat to unresolved combat zones and just die if it doesn’t work out… -
Another idea about “Break off”.
Surface ships can choose to “break off” and remain in the sea zone.
Enemy may then choose to also “break off” or press-on.
If you choose to “retreat” out of the sea zone then they can’t chase you.Also I am still thinking remaing force can block retreat to one direction. You declare which direction when you declare press-on or remain.
Another idea for both land and naval combat
You should be allowed to retreat even if enemy “break off” or “retreat”.
Duno why there was this restriction in the first place.
I mean nothing stops you from retreating even if enemy retreats. You might think its a trap. You might think its not a strategic location to leave your troops. -
Another idea about “Break off”.
Surface ships can choose to “break off” and remain in the sea zone.
Enemy may then choose to also “break off” or press-on.
If you choose to “retreat” out of the sea zone then they can’t chase you.++++ omg you are really on to something here… this is great stuff…yes yes great! this adds an important element in naval combat. Is that the entire rule?
Also I am still thinking remaing force can block retreat to one direction. You declare which direction when you declare press-on or remain.
Another idea for both land and naval combat
You should be allowed to retreat even if enemy “break off” or “retreat”.
Duno why there was this restriction in the first place.
I mean nothing stops you from retreating even if enemy retreats. You might think its a trap. You might think its not a strategic location to leave your troops.++++ this works for land combat better. But its kinda self defeating in a way. An army attacks say moscow, then the defender leaves… and then the attacker also leaves and does not take the object of the attack out of “fear”… then why do they attack in the first place? now we are saying “Im too scared to take the prize! but not to scared to risk losing to take it?”
This makes little sence on a strategic setting… Thats why the game needs SR ( strategic redeployment) a limited number of moves where units can be moved into and out of position to balance the battleline.
-
@Imperious:
++++ omg you are really on to something here… this is great stuff…yes yes great! this adds an important element in naval combat. Is that the entire rule?
Yeah thats all.
You add this break off and chase thing to naval combat.This makes little sence on a strategic setting… Thats why the game needs SR ( strategic redeployment) a limited number of moves where units can be moved into and out of position to balance the battleline.
Actually, remember partial retreat is allowed.
So this actually has SR (strategic redeployment) elements in it.
Suggested Topics
