Cruiser C11 AD@3 SH@3
B. Cruiser C13 AD@4 SH@4
Battleship C18 AD@4 SH@4
G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions)
-
Ps. Just down into the depths…
:-DFor 1942.2 what you’d want is a reason for the US or UK to send subs against the money islands and Japan. Japan in turn sends subs against Australia, India and maybe the Americas. On the Atlantic side you want Germany sending their subs towards UK/North America/Africa/Arctic.
What you don’t really want is the situation where UK/US are raiding the hell out Germany (the way they raid Italy in G40) to put the European Axis out of play, which is like the opposite of what we see in all the Battle of the Atlantic documentaries. I guess if this last is unavoidable, it could just be interpreted abstractly as a blockade, but using the sub unit for convenience?
How do we make it such that the sub is a better buy for the Germans vs UK, or the Americans vs Japan. Without up ending the situation, so you get the complete reverse happening? I don’t know, seems tricky.
In Global we’d want much the same, except that you’d have a few more players in the mix with Australia and Italy etc.
I think people love the idea of a sub sinking a loaded carrier in gameplay terms, though how often did that really happen? Subs taking out transports is more realistic… but is there a way to achieve that which would satisfy the exciting sub gameplay we want, without busting normal naval combat in the process?
I would not be opposed to suggesting an economic boost to all nations if such a thing is necessary to make the system work, with Bombers and Subs doing economic damage. (I would attach that bonus to control of VCs, as we have discussed many times). And perhaps we use subs to offset the m3 transports, with some kind of specialized action?
In tripleA terms, what is possible using either the sub raid mechanics in G40, or the familiar SBR/aaa fire system, but for submarines? Preferably something that could work on either map?
Can we make a sub unit that doesn’t create a hostile sea zone, and basically doesn’t interact with combat units at all, with the sole exception of the destroyer? Treat the destroyer kind of like the classic aa gun, but for subs? Here maybe the destroyer wouldn’t block subs at all, it just has a chance of “shooting them down” outright whenever subs are present or pass through a sz controlled by a destroyer.
Then subs could prowl around all over the place. I think the economic raid itself would need a built in risk, of the same sort faced by strategic bombers. Or if subs can target transports, maybe something similar, whenever they make such an action there is a risk of being destroyed.
Any ideas how we might get something like that to float?
-
Somehow you just new it would come down to this damned submarine again hehe.
Dive! Dive!
It’s stands right next to the strategic bomber and the transport, as the unit which consistently causes the most headaches.You can tell these 3 have been the most problematic units from the start, since they are the units which underwent the most significant changes since classic.
Subs keep drawing other units into their wake, even the inclusion of the destroyer as a brand new unit (and then creating a series of complex interactions between them) hasn’t been enough to solve the issue. The persistent naval nightmare.
:-DI hate to come back to it again, when I feel like we’re so close to an interesting ruleset to test, but the real issue is that we have a unit which should be targeting economies as a combat unit.
I always liked the idea of a submarine that was purely focused on raiding. Not to throw us off course, but anyone for a more radical change to the unit?
Defenseless sub? Hehe
I feel like I’m standing on the edge of a black hole here, but is it possible that the sub gets the m3, with a special action? Removed from normal naval combat. Only does raids. Can be destroyed in the process (the way bombers are by aaagun fire), can be “intercepted” by destroyers somehow?
I mean it would be a huge break from the past. But G40 did finally introduce the sub raid as a general concept. Something that could work for both G40 and 1942.2?
At least, it worth to explore some unexplored possibilities.
If Triple A has too much limitation, maybe for Subs, DDs dynamics and fodder it worth to try something which is not exactly what we want (whatever it is) but can be similar enough to feel how it works, assuming it is just to get a general idea.On side note, exploring DE case showed me how much layers of assumed HRs cannot be taken as it is.
Simply, in games I tested with Subs, it was always possible for them to escape on 2nd combat round.
So, I realised OOB it is not possible for Sub to do so as long as there is at least one Destroyer on other side.
Consequently, all Subs D1 unit could be use as fodder even when owner’s would have prefer to save them.On defenseless Submarines, is it possible for Triple A to make it chosen last, even behind TP? Or just before TP? Of course, if it is the sole units in SZ, it remains as it is.
-
just found this quote from crazy german:
In reply to this post by BeornTheBold
I’ve thought about better sub rules for a while, and this post made me realize that there is an alternate way!Its possible to make subs strategic bombers, but they would need to be air units. Its possible to ban them from entering land territories, and set carrierCost=0. This would mean that it can fly over enemy units of course, so if you made destroyers anti-air that only affects subs this would also allow to make the relationship work on a 1 to 1 ratio! Destroyers will NOT be able to stop subs from moving through totally, however they can shoot at subs that are passing by, and subs wouldn’t be able to submerge.
It sounds encouraging.
It’s gonna take some finetuning but it looks as if we have a winner :-D Just a quick rundown. As crazy german says they can’t block subs but they can shoot at them. Also you can set the attack factor at w/e you want and have it target as many subs as you want. If the sub attacks the DD directly then the DD aa will not fire and combat will resolve normally.
I haven’t messed with it too much yet but looks as if there’d be no first strike (wouldn’t matter with the DD present obviously) but Idk there might be a way around that. I’ll play with it some more and see if maybe I can get crazy german to chime in over at triplea. He seems to be fairly active.
:mrgreen:
Haven’t tested on convoy damage yet but I don’t see why it wouldn’t work on that
-
So in tripleA terms it is essentially an air unit that only operates in sea zones?
Lands in the water. Moves freely around all other naval units as if flying above, (or in this case “diving below”). Only exposed either when its running a raid, or when it gets blasted by a destroyer on the “fly” by.
Is such a thing possible?
If so it would certainly clear up any issues about introducing a totally unfamiliar system. People would quickly recognize how the basic mechanics work, because they’ve been doing similar things with aircraft for a while. I mean, if it could be done, that would be like a triple roundhouse kick.
:-DWhat sort of economic raids are on option? Just what we have in the G40 game I’m guessing?
Raids occurring on the opponents turn always struck me as bizarre. I’d much prefer all this stuff occur on the attacker’s turn, if there is a way to do it. But I guess I’d still take the G40 approach over nothing.
An SBR like raid on an IC strikes me as somewhat problematic for an alternative. If the unit can’t enter land territories it doesn’t work at all, but even if it did, it would be really strange to see subs and stratB’s hitting an IC together. I think its probably better separated off.
This sticks you with the coastal territories dynamic stealing directly from the opponent’s purse… This makes certain sea zones way more powerful than others. In 1942.2 for example, just look as sz5… one sz with potentially 19 ipcs exposed. Other potentially very high value sea zones for that game would be, sz 6, 8, 11, 14, 62 and 56. Those are the really big ones with the possible double digit payoffs (depending on who controls the surrounding coastal territories). But there are plenty of other sea zones in the 4-6 range. The G40 system might work here, provided the overall boost to economies was sufficient to deal with this, and the new SBR system with cheaper stratBs. In G40 sub raiding is already part of the game, so there you could just keep the OOB system, but with the new traits for the sub.
-
Ps. Just down into the depths…
:-DFor 1942.2 what you’d want is a reason for the US or UK to send subs against the money islands and Japan. Japan in turn sends subs against Australia, India and maybe the Americas. On the Atlantic side you want Germany sending their subs towards UK/North America/Africa/Arctic.
What you don’t really want is the situation where UK/US are raiding the hell out Germany (the way they raid Italy in G40) to put the European Axis out of play, which is like the opposite of what we see in all the Battle of the Atlantic documentaries. I guess if this last is unavoidable, it could just be interpreted abstractly as a blockade, but using the sub unit for convenience?
How do we make it such that the sub is a better buy for the Germans vs UK, or the Americans vs Japan. Without up ending the situation, so you get the complete reverse happening? I don’t know, seems tricky.
In Global we’d want much the same, except that you’d have a few more players in the mix with Australia and Italy etc.
In tripleA terms, what is possible using either the sub raid mechanics in G40, or the familiar SBR/aaa fire system, but for submarines? Preferably something that could work on either map?
Can we make a sub unit that doesn’t create a hostile sea zone, and basically doesn’t interact with combat units at all, with the sole exception of the destroyer? Treat the destroyer kind of like the classic aa gun, but for subs? Here maybe the destroyer wouldn’t block subs at all, it just has a chance of “shooting them down” outright whenever subs are present or pass through a sz controlled by a destroyer.
Then subs could prowl around all over the place. I think the economic raid itself would need a built in risk, of the same sort faced by strategic bombers. Or if subs can target transports, maybe something similar, whenever they make such an action there is a risk of being destroyed.
Any ideas how we might get something like that to float?
G40 Convoy is difficult because Sub unit must be in a given Convoy SZ and wait until the opponent’s end turn.
If sunk, nothing happen.
Assuming we cannot introduce my Convoy HR, or anything similar, which is too far from Triple A, we must tweak or bend just a bit actual rules and mechanics. Example, more rolls than 2 dices. Eliminating some units from raiding possibility, etc.Thinking out loud, what could happen if
Submarine have 1 hit, A2 first strike D1 first strike C5 M2-3,
taken as last casualty amongst warships, just before TP.
Player vs player can easily do it (enforce it) in casualty selection, always choosing any other unit before Subs.
That way, Sub hit’s will be allocated to other warships first.
It can be rationalize as the more hidden unit is not a priority target.
Even amongst planes with DDs attacking surface vessels and Subs, surface warships are much easier to locate.
Taken last allows for a 5 IPCs Sub unit because it cannot pad any surface fleet.So, even without Triple A rule change about Planes doesn’t need Destroyer to hit Subs.
The DD requirements is just adding more Sub elusiveness.
On large fleet combat, it is possible that attacking Subs cannot be targeted at all by defending Fgs simply because in earlier game rounds all Destroyers have been taken as casualty.
And before, all attacking casualty would have been larger surface vessel.So, Destroyer remains as it is.
Submarines can now also be on 5 IPCs sweet spot, and in friendly SZ is somehow padded by all other surface vessels.
This increase is attractiveness, hence more Naval actions.
No more a padding unit as it is OOB.
Planes still needs DDs to sink them.
That imply that if only planes are attacking Subs and TPs, TPs will be sunk as OOB.
Still better elusiveness than OOB.It can be Face-2-face enforced.
Maybe someone can tweek Triple A AI casualty selection to. -
I edited the above post. They won’t go on land so they won’t bomb any factories. You’ll probably need to tweak some numbers to get it just right.
One thing that’s a potential big problem is w/e there at on the water they could be attacked. Not sure if there’s away around it. I think there is
-
just found this quote from crazy german:
In reply to this post by BeornTheBold
I’ve thought about better sub rules for a while, and this post made me realize that there is an alternate way!Its possible to make subs strategic bombers, but they would need to be air units. Its possible to ban them from entering land territories, and set carrierCost=0. This would mean that it can fly over enemy units of course, so if you made destroyers anti-air that only affects subs this would also allow to make the relationship work on a 1 to 1 ratio! Destroyers will NOT be able to stop subs from moving through totally, however they can shoot at subs that are passing by, and subs wouldn’t be able to submerge.
It sounds encouraging.
It’s gonna take some finetuning but it looks as if we have a winner� :-D� Just a quick rundown. As crazy german says they can’t block subs but they can shoot at them. Also you can set the attack factor at w/e you want and have it target as many subs as you want. If the sub attacks the DD directly then the DD aa will not fire and combat will resolve normally.
I haven’t messed with it too much yet but looks as if there’d be no first strike (wouldn’t matter with the DD present obviously) but Idk there might be a way around that. I’ll play with it some more and see if maybe I can get crazy german to chime in over at triplea. He seems to be fairly active.
:mrgreen:
Haven’t tested on convoy damage yet but I don’t see why it wouldn’t work on that
Is it possible to put somekind of IC in water, near a given tty?
Here I’m thinking like a minor IC or Base (6 IPCs dmg max) or more preferably 4 IPCs dmg (like Karelia in 1942.2)
If that so.
It can be player enforced that damage in IC SZ near owned TTy must be totally repaired in purchase and repair phase. Then may buy units. Still cannot built unit there of course.
This would allow some kind of Sub attacking IC in SZ, similar to SBR. -
yes and no on the IC Baron. It has some problems but I think Frostion got it to work
-
Haha you could just kiss that crazy German!
What do you know, like a gift from the depths.
:-DHonestly if we get something like that working, I’d be pretty happy. Kind of cool how the engine restraints force us to explore things we might not ever have considered otherwise. But that type of dynamic would fit much better with my sense of how subs should work in this game.
I agree the G40 raiding system leaves something to be desired. Although if the only way for these subs to go down, is during movement on the attackers own turn (aa fire when passing opponent’s destroyer) then subs surviving through the opponent’s turn is not so much of a challenge. Is that too much of a stretch?
It would transform the way players purchase and place the destroyer unit. Rather than an active hunt, it would be more like a passive one, where the DD has to wait for the oppertunity to catch the subs as they move or raid.
-
Did you read that post in which I introduced this?
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36518.msg1629277#msg1629277Submarine
A2 first strike
D1 first strike
Cost 5
M2-3,
Hit 1
taken as last casualty amongst warships, just before TP.As playable on Triple A, totally and easily player enforced.
Another way to say this:
About Submarines, why not making them a more elusive and independent unit while forbidding them to serve as cannon fodder for bigger warships?
@Imperious:Submarines should never be cannon fodder. In fact, Submarines should only participate in one round of combat and not engage in multi-surface combat actions. Their was never any major naval actions where submarines were used in a major role in such combat. They are basically sinkers of commerce ships. They participated as advance screening for fleet movements to locate and possibly sink a few ships that were passing through the area, but a sub travels at 7 knots underwater and a cruiser is at 34 knots and a battleship is 25-32 knots. That’s why the other chap in an earlier thread bought those destroyers and stopped buying battleships. (…)
It is possible by simply add a special casualty rule for Subs : “Subs can only be picked as casualty when their is no more surface warships available.”
And for increasing their survivability, it depends on the Destroyers blocking capacity.
If anything possible to do on that in Triple A.But Subs may still be very ellusive if planes need DDs to attack/defend against Sub.
This rule can be kept or not according to play-tests, if Triple A allows to try both ways.
(I hope Barney’s right.)
Here is the origins of my idea, coming from AA50 rulebook before Errata.About Aircrafts, why not let them hits any units, including Subs? As it was historically the case and in many previous games before A&A 50 Anniversary.
You can read the interesting answers of Krieghund about the evolution of this rule on Aircrafts and Subs here:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=14344.msg1264872#msg1264872
Here is the most interesting point IMO:
@Krieghund:@Baron:
So is there any version of OOB Subs rules which allow Submerge during First Strike and let planes be able to hit directly subs without DD, the sole condition is that defending sub choose not to submerge first (in such situation, fighter A3 or StB A4 will be considered as any single indestructible attacking Cruiser A3 or Battleship A4, because Sub cannot hit air units.)?
No.
@Baron:In this condition DD still get a function because all freaking subs can always submerge before receiving any hits.
If all Subs rules after Revised always included both Submerge during First Strike and planes need DD to hit subs,
Does the simpler sub rule Submerge on First Strike phase with Air can hit subs without DD (if subs choose not to submerge) was ever play-tested?
Because, according to the uncorrected AA50 Rulebook,
Sub rule was easily understand that way (give hints to think about it),
subs (submerging before reg combat) becomes far less vulnerable than in Revised rules (submerging after regular combat),
and this rule is simpler: “simplifying unit interaction”.Yes, it would make subs less fragile, but the thing that it would not do is keep subs from being used as fodder in fleet battles. With subs being immune to air units without a destroyer, it’s dangerous to pad a fleet with subs, since all an attacker needs to do is go in without a destroyer in order to force all of his/her air unit hits to bypass the subs and hit the more expensive units. This makes destroyers the better choice for fleet protection, as it should be.
A summary of the reasons behind OOB Subs and planes rules by Krieghund:
@Krieghund:Planes were very effective sub killers in reality. However, reality suffers a bit when translated into an abstract board game. Sometimes the designers have to “fudge” one aspect of a reality-based game in order to deal with the limitations of another aspect of it. Hopefully, in the end, the two balance each other out to create a whole that abstractly mirrors reality even though the individual parts may not. The interaction between subs, destroyers and planes is a perfect example of this.
The range of air units and the size of the oceans in the game make it very easy for air units to find and eliminate subs, if air units are capable of hitting them on their own. This gives subs no place to hide and makes them “sitting ducks” for air attacks, as was demonstrated in the Revised edition. This simply doesn’t reflect the realities of anti-submarine warfare as it occured in World War II, at least until long-range aircraft were developed later in the war. Until that time, subs were very safe in the middle areas of the oceans, as planes didn’t have the range to hunt them effectively there. Most were sunk only when they were caught in the act of raiding shipping.
Adding the rule that destroyers are required as “spotters” for air attacks against subs represents the concerted effort needed to hunt and attack subs hiding out between raids. This gives subs more longevity and makes them more the fearsome foes that they actually were in the early to middle days of the war.
It also promotes the purchase and maintenance of more well-rounded fleets, as destroyers are necessary to guard against the threat of subs. This reflects the reality that subs were a constant threat to military shipping as well, and that no convoy would travel without destroyer escorts because of that threat. At the same time, it keeps them from being used as cheap “cannon fodder” in naval battles, as they were most often not used extensively in fleet operations, but rather as harrassing hunters where their unique properties were best utilized.
From an economic standpoint, the necessity of buying destroyers for protection against subs also reflects the economic losses sustained by raids against merchant shipping by submarines.
All of these points, taken together, allow the game to abstractly represent the economic and military threat posed by submarines in World War II. This makes subs a useful and strategic purchase in the game. I hope this sufficiently answers your concerns.
Still have same intents exposed in this post below. I just change the means to get ride of Sub fodder because of Triple A engine modification limitations.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36518.msg1555024#msg1555024 -
yea I’m not sure yet on some things. If it ends being a blocker that won’t work but I think you can make the other units ignore it if it’s infrastructure. Those can be captured or destroyed though so… Idk will have to see.
yea that’d be easy enough to do Baron
-
yea I’m not sure yet on some things. If it ends being a blocker that won’t work but I think you can make the other units ignore it if it’s infrastructure. Those can be captured or destroyed though so… Idk will have to see.
yea that’d be easy enough to do Baron
You meant by infrastructure, an IC in SZ, which can be destroyed or captured?
-
correct Baron. Idk if it can do combat and be infrastructure, which probably won’t work unless we can keep that from being captured/destroyed. I’ll see if I can find anymore on it or just ask over there.
-
correct Baron. Idk if it can do combat and be infrastructure, which probably won’t work unless we can keep that from being captured/destroyed. I’ll see if I can find anymore on it or just ask over there.
Anyway, it is probably hard to give this SZ IC ownership to the adjacent land TTy owner.
Maybe Convoy SZ mechanics need to be investigate.
If it is possible to make it happen twice: attacker turn and owner’s turn this can be good. -
well turns out I followed the wrong post. pyt o torp who crazy german (who didn’t want his subs to submerge for a WWI mod) responded to got rid of the destroyers ability to block subs but gave them the aagun to hunt them down. So there may be some possibilities yet. The only thing different is DDs can’t block subs on defense. On the attack they fire their AA, which can be more than 1, then the sub gets a chance to shoot back or submerge. If the sub stays then they battle it out normally from there on out, with the sub being able to submerge after each rd if he so chooses.
I’ll check this out some more tomorrow and put out a test setup so you guys can try it. Baron I’ll check into the SZ factories some more as well. My impression is you can do what you’re after.
-
Would it be to much raid damage and convoy damage total per turn ( I have both in my game, but sub, surface ship must be in the convoy box ) where for each German sub in the Atlantic US and UK must subtract 1 i ICP from there collect income phase on every turn.
Germany has 6 subs in Atlantic = US - 6 ICP’s and UK - 6 ICP’s per turn. Use this for Raiding.
If this is too much ICP damage for both countries, you could go to for every 2 subs subtract 1 ICP from US and UK income. The odd number goes up to next number.2 subs= -1 3 subs= -2 4 subs= -2 5 subs= -3 6 subs= -3
Be something to try if you can’t get your IC in sea zone for raiding in Triple A.
-
Well I guess we can wait to see what comes for the subs.
The other rules seem solid to me. What I like is that I’m pretty sure I can explain this entire ruleset, with a brief explanation/justification for each rule, in relatively few words. It’s the sort of thing that would easily fit on a 3x5 note card, certainly on one side of an A4 print out. Maybe a single paragraph in the game notes of tripleA.
It’s a pretty simple change for each unit, but the payoff in terms of the new play patterns for both boards is substantial.
-
Here’s how things work currently with the subs. Everything is the same except for a modified 1st strike, can’t be blocked by DDs and can’t be hit by planes even if DD present. This last can be changed in map options by turning off “Air Attack Sub Restricted”. This allows planes to hit subs whenever subs attack. If a plane attacks the sub it can submerge with no combat. Subs still can’t hit planes. If you wanted planes to hit subs on the attack you could give them the same ability as the DD below.
When a DD is present, the sub undergoes a first strike AA/depth charge attack. Right now it’s set to hit at 2 and you get one shot. This can be modified for different attack factor, number of shots. When the DD misses then the sub gets to use it’s 1st strike against the DD. When it hits the DD, or other naval target if other ships are present, immediately takes a hit (transports are still chosen last). When it misses the other ships, DD included, return fire.
DD still hits/defends at 2.So you can hunt subs with DDs who get 1 crack at them and then the sub can choose to submerge. I would recommend allowing planes to hit them if attacked. However from Barons post above their could still be a problem.
From Baron earlier, don’t know if this is him or Krieghound
“…but the thing that it would not do is keep subs from being used as fodder in fleet battles. With subs being immune to air units without a destroyer, it’s dangerous to pad a fleet with subs,…”
So if subs can’t be hit by planes, (most probably would agree they should be able to hit them in some way), you have this problem. My thought is you’d need to make the sub more expensive than the DD to prevent that. Raise subs to 7 or 8 bucks and drop DDs to 7 or 6. if the lower number you’d probably want to go with Baron’s A1 D2 for the DD. Anyway I’m sure Baron can crunch out an acceptable number.
Some things to keep in mind. The sub is now more powerful. Can’t be blocked. Justifies a higher cost. If you want to block a fleet and protect a blockade zone you’d need more DDs. Justifies cheaper cost since it can’t block anymore, but gets first crack at sub in any sub encounter. If it misses though sub can submerge and blockade successfully.
So I’d say leave the stats the same and C8 and C7 or same for sub C7 A1 D2 C6 for DD. Multiple DDs could be allowed 1 shot or more at each sub. Or 1 DD could target multiple subs would influence the numbers as well.
Overall i think this could work out pretty well. Let me know what you guys think and I’ll put out the test map.
-
Interesting, so perhaps just invert the costs?
Subs go back to Classic cost at 8 ipcs, Destroyer takes over the cost 6 ipc spot on the water?
Basically looking at a similar spread if using Shipyards, just that the two combat units at the bottom of the totem pole switch places?
Ps. Under such a scheme there is really no getting around the need to mention the destroyer, since we would have to describe the depth charge roll.
But I wonder if we really want to preserve the sub as a regular combat unit? If it was purely for raiding, then we could support a lower cost.
My main concern with either unit, is the hitpoint to cost ratio, and trying to keep that in line with the other warships.
-
yea would work for tech. Idk maybe at 6 bucks DD should be A1 D2 but give it a A2 for its sub shot ? Also should fighter only get a A1 shot at subs ? The sub gets to submerge if it misses. Otherwise planes can’t hit subs at all on attack.
Suggested Topics
