Japan vs Allied Subs

thanks and sorry

Krieghund had this to say in another thread:

@Krieghund:

SBRs against all ICs were unlimited in Classic (1984), and that didn’t change in Europe (1999) or Pacific (2001).  It wasn’t until Revised (2004) was published that any kind of limits on SBR damage were introduced.

I agree that it doesn’t make any sense that an IC with limited production should allow unlimited SBR exposure.  Many people, including myself, have played with house rules for many years that limited SBR damage to such ICs.

So, when Pacific was being developed, I’m guessing that little or no thought was given to the impact of SBR damage limits on game balance.  Those rules were probably simply inherited from the previous games and taken for granted.

It might be interesting to see what the impact of limiting SBR damage would be.  However, I can only assume that it would benefit Japan most, and Japan already has the advantage in the game.  You would certainly want to limit only ICs with limited production, as limiting damage to “home” ICs would curtail the US’s ability to reduce Japanese VPs through SBRs.

I’m afraid that’s the best answer that I can give you, since I wasn’t involved in A&A in any official capacity back in those days.

Yep, you’re right, Saburo.  Man, it’s been a long time since I’ve played Pacific.   :oops:

Previous post corrected and +1 karma to Saburo.

Thank you

It is not my essay.  As I mentioned, it was prepared by James Redford, a former DOI member.  I don’t know how to contact him, but the best bet is to contact Rich at wargamer’s Club at this email:  info[at]wargamersclub.org… He may be able to get or give approval for publishing.

SS

I don’t know, the Allies have a hard enough time winning as it is. :-?

You mean if you have an ally’s fighter on your carrier as you move into combat with it? This is a fascinating question. I think that the fighter can’t take part in the battle in any way, including as fodder. Since the fighter is cargo on the carrier, I would treat it like any other cargo on a transport, since it’s basicly the same thing except with a fighter. Since the ally’s fighter cannot attack with your forces and it didn’t take off before the carrier moved, it must be considered on the carrier if it sinks. “If the fighter doesn’t take off before you move the carrier, the fighter is treated as cargo for the remained of your turn and may not fly, fight or be used as a casualty” (p. 32)