Planes vs. Sub

I usually use the Aussies to trade islands with the Japaneses, while building mostly navy with the Americans. I’ve seen an Australian navy used very effectively in a couple of cases, anyone have better success with one versus the other? Which is better?

@cwglee:

Ok thanks,
so then if the carrier is damaged or destroyed then plane is awarded 1 space to find a suitable landing space else lost?

That’s correct.

I agree with Simon about the use of US transports in the Pacific. You wipe out the Japanese navy and take back the islands and the mainland. Shuck your troops to Europe and take out Germany and Italy. Japan will be forced to surrender. You know, just like WW2. Unless the Japanese player has been smoking crack you will spend all day assaulting Tokyo while Germany makes mincemeat out of Russia and the UK.

One thing worth mentioning here is that Africa is essentially a trap for the Axis.   Whether the Italian fleet survives or not, it is very hard to make much of an income difference or gain any NOs before America enters the war and takes it back, or without compromising some other more critical front. Â

Italy only risks 2 IPCs by losing Africa.   In our Game 92 on Saturday, I had the entire Italian navy survive because my opponent did exactly what you suggested, and attacked Tobruk rather than Taranto.   The counter is quite favorable to the Italians, to send in their entire fleet on the attack and clear the med for your NO.   Even with the gigantic navy, I was still boxed in as I couldn’t control either Gibraltar or Egypt in the long term though I took both of them once.   Â

Buying more ships is a trap, and you can’t really hold Gibraltar.   I spent all my $$ on strategic bombers and mechs to help Germany on the eastern front and using Italy to protect the Atlantic Wall or help leapfrog Germany in the East is stronger than trying to take the Maghreb or the Levant.  If you keep any transports, the most effective thing to do with those is threaten/cover/block/rush out of Gibraltar but its going to be hard…

One of my buddies said that far from wanting to reinforce the Italian stack on Tobruk, he wanted to evacuate it from Africa.  Its ineffective and trapped on a good day and easy to annihilate on a bad one.

@simon33 ty

@SunTzu7:

Just wanted to check a sub rule. If a sub goes up against other non transport, non destroyer type ships (in this instance a damaged carrier and cruiser), can the sub keep doing a surprise attack till the opposition are destroyed without them firing back? That’s how my friend read the rules.

Like Brado explained, yes the sub gets a “surprise strike” each round.  But the defending carrier and cruiser do fire back every round provided it was not sunk by the sub surprise strike.

So in your example, if the sub hit, the defender would choose a casualty.  Whatever he chooses will not roll (will not fire back) but the other unit will fire back.
Subs get surprise strikes at the beginning of every single round of combat (the first round AFTER the last enemy destroyer is sunk), even when they are on defense.

If you read through Step 2 under General combat (Submarine Surprise Strike or Submerge), the rule book tells exactly how to handle sub combat and makes it very clear that surprise strike happens every round, and also how to handle surprise strike casualties.
One such sentence:
“As long as there are attacking and/or defending submarines and no opposing destroyers, this step is repeated during each round of combat.”

Hi Wittman,  That does help and thank you.

@fanofbond:

T Where as aa42 would, in my opinion leave me felling I had just chosen to play a lesser game

I wouldn’t say AA42 is a lesser game. It is definitely shorter and smaller but for people like me that don’t have the room to set up an AAG40 game, AA42 fills the niche nicely. I added in NAs, NOs, a 1941 setup (thanks to Hobbes), and research and development to AA42 to make it a little better, or more like Revised with AA50 rules. And AA42 does not have all of the errata or set up changes to balance the game. Also, at retail price it is about $150.00 cheaper than AAG40.