Convoy Disruption: 1941, 1942.2 & G40 Submarine economic warfare

There is no such thing as Convoy Disruption for Submarines in 1942.2.

I tried to make a proposition from Black_Elk wishes.

It would better reenact the historical Atlantic and Pacific Subwarfare with it.

@Narvik:

So, what is wrong with the OOB rule ?

Maybe were you talking about the submarine combat values?
Here are the main posts from the thread which started everything:
@Baron:

I play-tested the ideas below:

SUBMARINES A3 D1 M2 Cost 7
Surprise Strike, (blocked when at least 1 Destroyer or Anti-Sub Vessel is present),
Submerge, instead of rolling for a Surprise Strike attack (blocked by ASV on a 1:1 basis for the first combat round only),
Stealth Movement: No Hostile Sea-Zone (except ASV can block Submarine Stealth movement on 1:1 basis),
Cannot hit airplanes,
Can be hit by planes, doesn’t require an Anti-Sub Vessel.
Re: Reality wrecking destroyer rules need a revamp…
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=34169.msg1372793#msg1372793

DESTROYER A2 D2 M2 Cost 7
Anti-Sub Vessel: each ASV blocks Surprise Strike capacity of all enemy’s Submarine units present.
Cancel Sub’s Submerge on 1 DD:1 Sub basis for the first combat round only
(When it occurs, defending Subs rolls a Defense @1 in the first round, and any surviving Subs can submerge at the beginning of the second combat round.)
Cancel Sub’s Stealth Movement on 1 DD: 1 Sub basis for Combat or Non Combat Move, all additional Sub units can perform a Stealth Movement as usual.

TRANSPORT A0 1Def@1 Maximum per TPs group M2 Cost 8, 1 hit
A transports group get a single defense roll @1/round along with defending warships
(for this single defense roll, friendly transports are all considered being part of the same defending player’s group),
and each transport unit can be taken individually as casualty. As long as their is still 1 TP remaining, it can roll this single defense @1.
Must be escorted by a warship when making an amphibious assault in an enemy’s Submarines infested SZ or Transports infested SZ, so to be able to ignore them/ or fight them with combat units.
Otherwise, Submarines and Transports may be ignored during Transport Combat Move or Non Combat Move.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=34290.msg1373212#msg1373212

The Submarines in defensive combat situations always rise the question of taking them as casualties or not (since it has such a low defense @1 and unable to hit planes).
The option of submerging after first round (even when enemy’s Destroyers are present, as allowed according to the HR above, not OOB) is still a tough call.
It clearly leaves all tactical decisions to the player.
That is quite funnier than all Sub rules I tested before (and I tested numerous variations, believe me! :-D):
will you take the Sub unit as fodder or let your Destroyer taking the hit, which gives the opportunity to submerge and fight another day (on offense with a high @3)?

No complex rules with planes vs Subs either.

I can see it work, people. Submarines are not always taken as fodder instead of a friendly destroyer, letting Destroyer be the main sea fodder. And the main reason is that you don’t want to loose you more offensive efficient Sub units in a desperate combat.
Sometimes, it is a tough call: giving an additional combat round to your Battleship, so you can have one last chance to make a hit @4, or simply submerging the Subs (sacrificing your BB) knowing that there is an enemy Battleship which will be without escorting DD and very vulnerable to First Strike Shots when your Subs will be on offensive.

The overall units interaction is simpler while the Submarines have a much more offensive role, if you don’t use them as fodder (which are not cheaper than Destroyer, since they are at the same cost.)

You can easily play Defenseless TPs at 7 IPCs and both DDs and Subs at 8 IPCs, if you prefer.
You will still get the same simpler interactions between combat units (Subs, DDs, planes).
I forgot to mention that according to the HR above, owner choose the order of all casualties, including transports.  So all the tactical choices are in his hands.

@Baron:

Thanks guys for your reply,
I think I really find the solution and it was under our noses.
The issue about 6 IPCs Subs is that it shouldn’t be the fodder of the sea, but 8 IPCs Destroyer.
Larry Harris fixed this issue by requiring that planes need Destroyer to hit Submarines, so not bringing into combat a Destroyer will prevent the defender to use submarines as fodder against a massive Air attack.

Your 8-8-8 was part of the solution Toblerone77.
Destroyer is still A2 D2 M2 C8, 1 hit, block Submarine’s no hostile SZ and Surprise Strike on 1:1 basis
Transport is A0 D1 M2 C8, 1 hit (I prefer chosen last for historical, but the Classic transport is OK, from a game play perspective)

The real change is to make Submarine absolutely not interesting unit as fodder.
Here is the trick, I think:
Submarine A3 D1 M2 C8, 1 hit, Submerge, cannot hit plane, No Hostile Sea Zone, Surprise strike and the rest as OOB.
Need 1 DD to block 1 Sub’s Surprise Strike.
Works the same as yours Der Kuenstler, with KNP escape always possible during regular combat phase, except 1 thing:
planes can always hit submarines (DD not needed, but they can submerge before being attacked, if the Surprise Strike Phase is not blocked).

On offense, such Sub can be prefered over Destroyer A2 and even sometimes, Cruiser A3 and Fighter A3, simply because you will be able to directly hit Warships, even capital warships (the costlier units), with even a bonus by getting ride of enemy’s DDs and being able to retrieve Surprise Strike. So submarine would not be chose amongst the first fodders casualties.

At first glance Sub seems more powerful.
In fact, this Sub unit is weaker than the actual OOB Submarine with DK’s HR.
4 OOB Subs A2 D1 C6 = A8 D4 C24, 4 hits.
3 Subs A3 D1 C8 = A9 D3 C24, 3 hits.
4 Subs A2 OOB 57% vs 3 Subs A3  38% for 8 IPCs Subs, if both were attacking the others at her attack factor.

On offense, it is still a formidable weapon, but on defense and due to the similar cost with Destroyer, it will be a waste to sacrifice them as fodder since you can always Submerge (once the first regular attack has been done against them, in case when many DDs are attacking) to make a better use of them on the offense. Let them survive to fight another day!
Why would you keep them as fodder to pad your fleet on defense, since they are now vulnerable to plane but unable to hit them like DD can?

I think this new combat value and the same cost as Destroyer and the evasive Submerge will do the job by itself without the need to add a specific restriction on casualty picking as I suggested earlier.

The optimized choice of any owner’s will be clear. You can use Subs as fodder on defense, but it is at a huge tactical cost, since this more expensive Submarine is an offensive weapon, hitting as hard as a Cruiser on specific targets, such as BB, CV and Cruiser. That was the case OOB, but since it was the cheapest warships, it was clearly tantalizing to pick them as casualty.

What do you think of this?
Isn’t that simpler?
No special rule for plane.
No unlimited blocker capacity for DD, keeping 1:1 against Surprise strike and no hostile SZ only.
A Submerge capacity which is not block but only delayed until the regular combat phase, which still imply that Planes needs to bring X number of Destroyers to prevent X number of Subs from submerging during their Surprise Strike phase.

Do you see why it was mostly right under our nose? :wink:

Do you think there is enough money on the 1942.2 board to be playable and not a plague on overall economy?

@Black_Elk:

But that precedent has been established with global.
Perhaps if you wanted to explore a less potent convoy disruption, the subs “on station” might only hit at a 1, or perhaps auto damage at 1 to match their defense value, the way you have the raid matching the attack value? This would be more of a token or novelty phenomenon, but might prevent the sort of disruption spam you see against Italy in G40.

The 1 hit auto damage can be interesting. It is, after all, the average results of 1+2+3+0+0+0= 6 out of 6 = 1 IPC.
I was inspired by G40 which gives to roll 2D6 for Convoy Disruption.
The difference is that I split the rolls to increase the opportunity for Submarine to do it before being sunk.
In a complete table turn, a single sub unit cannot do more damage than her G40 counter-part.

@Black_Elk:

Well, if the gameplay was enjoyable, I wouldn’t have any issue including some kind of simple repeating income bonus to facilitate a more dynamic submarine economic warfare situation.

Would be interesting to see how the starting submarines might be used during the first round, **if the player elected to use them for raids rather than combats.

The ability to bleed IPCs directly from the enemy can be very potent, especially if this can effect their starting cash. Thinking mainly of the UK.**

True. I didn’t think about it. It opens a completely different strategy.
One or two German’s Subs can try an opening raid.

Russian Sub will certainly make it against Finland-Norway Sz.

Doing Sub economic warfare in combination with Strategic bombing raid can now becomes a way to strangle an opponent.

@Black_Elk:

On the other hand, if disruption is restricted to subs only (no other ships), and you already have an increased cost for those, it might not be as huge an issue. Allowing air to hit subs would be helpful too, for helping to avoid the convoy disruption conundrum of G40.
:-D

The actual rules suggested still imply that a Destroyer is needed to prevent a Sub to submerge (on a 1:1 basis) before airplanes can make an attack roll.

I can’t figure a simple way to allow planes to hit submarines before they submerge without coming back to Revised Sub rules in which planes were Subs doom.

@Baron:

@Black_Elk:

But that precedent has been established with global.
Perhaps if you wanted to explore a less potent convoy disruption, the subs “on station” might only hit at a 1, or perhaps auto damage at 1 to match their defense value, the way you have the raid matching the attack value? This would be more of a token or novelty phenomenon, but might prevent the sort of disruption spam you see against Italy in G40.

The 1 hit auto damage can be interesting. It is, after all, the average results of 1+2+3+0+0+0= 6 out of 6 = 1 IPC.
I was inspired by G40 which gives to roll 2D6 for Convoy Disruption.
The difference is that I split the rolls to increase the opportunity for Submarine to do it before being sunk.
In a complete table turn, a single sub unit cannot do more damage than her G40 counter-part.

So, you believe it is better if the damage are following the Subs combat values: Attack 3 / Defense 1.

CONVOY RAID DAMAGE:
Each Submarine roll 1D6, considering only 3 or less for damage, up to the maximum number of IPCs from all territories owned adjacent to the SZ for a given round of play.

or CONVOY DISRUPTION DAMAGE:
Each individual Submarine On Station in a given SZ inflict 1 IPC damage, up to the maximum number of IPCs from all territories owned adjacent to the SZ for a given round of play.

In both case, the Disrupted player must pay immediately to the bank the given IPCs damage.

If you have a better way of formulating this HR, I will accept it gladly.

I can see the merits of this 1-3 on D6 roll for damage / 1 IPC auto-damage.
The first Convoy Disruption occurs during a Combat phase where there is already some dices tossing.

The second Convoy Disruption occurs during the Collect Income phase of the enemy player.
Collect Income phase have no such dice rolling.
So it is faster to simply count how many Submarines are On Station and to substract IPCs accordingly.

@thespaceman:

Hi all. Great discussion so far. I have always thought that there should be a sub war built into the game.  Here are a few thoughts.

First. The problem with planes. Historically planes were the nemesis of subs in The Atlantic. Closing the Air gap really was the end of the sub free for all. Asw planes were the liberators welling tons catalina etc not spitfires and hurricanes

Proposal:
1.only bombers can complete asw missions. Fighters do not have range or equipment for asw.
2. When on asw range of planes is reduced by 2.

Is the 1:1 rule to big a drop for the destroyers. A few destroyers would often guard an entire convoy against the wolf packs.
Proposal:
Destroyers remove the surprise strike at 2 subs per destroyer. This would give the destroyer a bit bigger bite.
Submerge.subs should never lose the submerge ability. It is the sub captains choice to attack or withdraw.

Fighters (F4F wildcat) and TcBs (TBF Avenger) were used against Subs in ASW but they were aboard Carriers, mostly escort carriers.
So in fact, Fgs attacking Sub from Island have a lot less range than Fgs aboard carriers. If you move the Carrier, you can move 2 spaces while Fgs go 3 space and came back 1 behind to deck on Carrier.

So, there is already in-built game restriction such as you suggested.

Within my HR, Sub is at the same cost as Destroyers and 1 DDs blocks all Subs First Strike, for simplicity.
Sub gets A3 D1 M2 while DD gets A2 D2 M2.

The 1:1 blocker is only for Stealth Move and Submerge.

The attack value of Subs is already better than DDs, no need to give an additional First Strike against DDs.

Thanks Thespaceman,
You gave me an idea to solve the German cunundrum when being Raided.
This country could find it hard and expensive to sunk subs.

Here is the idea: StBs get a special ASW attack @1.
It allows to strike Subs before they Submerge.
This occurs when StBs are attacking a SZ infested by Subs only.
Otherwise, a regular attack @4 is used.

So this gives StB a small chance to sink Sub. 1 shot  before submerge.
So it becomes possible to strike Subs without buying a Destroyer.
Of course, DD is far better but now you can do something against Convoy Disruption if you cannot invest in warships.

It can work as a Catalina or a Condor.

@Black_Elk:

I like this approach, because the mechanic is straightforward. I think I favor Convoy Raids over convoy disruption, because it still strikes me as a little strange allowing the enemy to make a form attack when it’s not their turn. But that precedent has been established with global.

Perhaps if you wanted to explore a less potent convoy disruption, the subs “on station” might only hit at a 1, or perhaps auto damage at 1 to match their defense value, the way you have the raid matching the attack value? This would be more of a token or novelty phenomenon, but might prevent the sort of disruption spam you see against Italy in G40.

On the other hand, if disruption is restricted to subs only (no other ships), and you already have an increased cost for those, it might not be as huge an issue. Allowing air to hit subs would be helpful too, for helping to avoid the convoy disruption conundrum of G40. :-D

I think I better understand why Der Kuenstler and you prefer a Convoy Raid which occurs during player’s turn combat phase.
The G40 Convoy rule are giving Warships some kind of “double dip” actions, unlike SBR or Shorebombardment which imply a choice:
you can SBR or a regular attack, you can Shore bombard or kill the poor enemy’s transport in the SZ but not both.

To the contrary, G40 Convoy Disruption makes for a regular attack in the SZ then, waiting till the enemy’s Collect Income phase, you can roll for damage according to the number of warships which still survived in the SZ.

This is probably one of the reason it affects Italy so much after Taranto raid. Italy lost all his big warships and if counter-strike goes sour, the Convoy Disruption is plaguing this Axis power.

I understand that G40 rules were made that way to simplify the calculations and bookkeeping about the maximum IPCs lost by multiple Raids from more than 1 enemy’s powers, for instance UK subs and US subs could do it against Italy, eventually. It becomes simpler to wait for Italy’s Income Phase to know the total amount of damage and to compare to the maximum allowed.

Here is my solution to solve both: 1- attack on player’s turn (no double-dipping effect) and 2-keep record straight (no immediate plunder on IPCs already owned by player but still waiting Income Phase to apply damage).

1- All warships can do Convoy Disruption, including planes which have room to land on a Carrier. No extra Fgs or TcBs can do it, neither StBs.
2- The damage results for all warships are following their attack factor or less:
Submarines Attack @2 (or Attack @3 if playing with Super Subs Tech, or with my HR Subs A3 D1 Cost 7 or 8 IPCs)
Destroyer Attack @2
Cruiser Attack @3
Battleship Attack @4
Carrier Attack @0 (But planes which can land on Carrier do damage)
Fighter Attack @3
TcB Attack @3 or 4 (if paired to Fg)

3- During combat phase, a player can Convoy Raid an empty SZ or a SZ which have only Transports or Submarines.
Said otherwise, if any enemy’s surface warships is in the SZ, there is no Convoy Disruption, only regular combat.
(Warships are actively protecting the merchant’s ships. That’s the way to rationalize this, IMO.)
This also imply it cannot make a regular attack on Subs and/or Transport and a Convoy Raid, it is one or the other, not both.
(Same rule as with Shore Bombardment applied for Convoy Raid.)

4- When rolling for damage, you only consider the lower results which would make for a hit in regular combat.
For example, Cruiser do damage on a 3 or less: 1 is 1 IPC, 2 is 2 IPCs, 3 is 3 IPCs, 4-5-6 make no damage.
Subs do it on a 2 or less: 1 is 1 IPC, 2 is 2 IPCs, 3-4-5-6 make no damage.

5- Once all damaged are calculated, you place in SZ a number of Attacker Country Marker equal to the amount of IPCs damage.
Example, 3 US Destroyers get 1,2,3. It means 3 IPCs damage.
So you put in the SZ 3 US markers.

6- When it is the enemy’s Collect Income Phase, you substract from his IPCs income the number of his Enemy’s Control Marker in the SZ Convoy Raided up to the maximum allowed for this SZ.

7- I would give a Special Convoy Disruption for Subs, each enemy’s Submarine still present in the SZ during player’s Collect Income Phase, makes 2 IPCs additional damage, up to the maximum allowed in this SZ.

That way the OOB 2D3 Convoy damage rolls for Subs can be taken somehow into account without too much complexification.

What do you think everyone of this change for G40 Convoy Disruption rules?

@Black_Elk:

Yes I think that does a pretty good job of sumarizing my misgivings, and contrast with the OOB situation. Also important to me is the ability to create one system that could work on all game boards.
Frankly I don’t like either system, because I think the economic disruption should be a feature of the submarine unit specifically (not all warships) and that this should be a form of “attack” made during the raiding player’s own “conduct combat phase,” not during the opponent’s collect income phase!
My argument there would be for simplicity and for gameplay i.e. as a way to make the submarine different from other naval attack units, and give it a more independent “hunting role.” I say the argument is “for the gameplay” because I’m aware that historically any warship could probably disrupt convoys. But what we’re looking for in a rule, is a way to separate off the role of subs and make that role unique or advantageous when compared to other naval units at a comparable cost. More advantageous than they are in normal combat, so players actually have an incentive to use them for the economic attacks instead of just normal attacks!

Otherwise the subs just default to the same way other naval combat units work e.g. grouped together with the main fleet, or the main air group. I don’t think the submarine should work like this. (I don’t think StratBs should work like this either, for that matter, even if this conversation is just for subs, I see them as related issues. I mean the way a bomber’s economic attack advantage is subordinated to its normal combat attack advantage vs ships, instead of the other way around.)

The sub unit would be far more interesting, if it’s primary role was for economic attacks, with a secondary role in normal combat. The current situation is basically the reverse. And the sub isn’t really very unique as a convoy disrupting unit. It behaves like all other ships that disrupt convoys, except that its cheaper for the spam and can’t be hit by air without a dd.

The analogy I always return to is SBR or Rocket Attacks, I think subs should work in a similar way. Either you choose to use them as a combat unit, or you forego combat for the chance at an “economic attack.” I think you should be able to run such a “sub attack” in any coastal sea zone bordering enemy territories with an ipc value, otherwise it only works on maps with a special “marker” or map designation drawn on the sz, which means it can’t work on all game boards.

A simple rule, that took into account the max value of adjacent enemy territories, and then allowed subs to “roll” against it, would be ideal. If its overpowered, then you just build in some kind of defensive roll, similar to an AAgun vs a bomber, to destroy the sub. I used to play with similar rules in AA50 (although there it was a special roll against coastal factories for my group.)

The danger of all convoy rules that allow you to “destroy” enemy IPCs directly is how they can affect the first round purchase options. Thinking about SBR as a model, when you “raid” with a bomber in the latest games, money is removed indirectly (via the purchase/repair damage system). In the old SBR rules of Classic/Revised a successful “raid” meant that your opponent had give money to the bank immediately, with no “choice” and no damage/repair. Seems to me that the G40 convoy rules follow the earlier sort of idea of Classic or Revised (where the money is given up to the bank ie. destroyed), even though I much prefer the latter sort of idea from AA50 and later, where the player got to choose how to deal with the consequences of the raid.

In other words, I don’t think players should have to learn two totally separate “economic raiding mechanics” one for bombers and one for subs. Instead the two mechanics should mirror each other and work in similar ways. If not exactly the same, than at least similar enough that I can explain one with reference to the other.

Putting the focus on coastal factories would probably be too overpowered, given how SBR already works against these factories. But if you’re not going to put the focus on coastal factories or give the defender an intermediate “repair” type option, but use the old model (money taken goes straight to the bank) then there should at least be a chance that the “raiding” unit can be destroyed during the economic attack, the same way bombers face AA fire, defender rolls at 1 to destroy the unit attempting to raid. I think that would be way easier than separating this whole “convoy” process out across multiple turns in the game round, which is what the current G40 system does.

OK Black Elk,
I thought that my little adjustment about G40 Convoy Disruption can be enough for you, but you are really a demanding customer here.  :-D
I bolded many points which you emphasis about the weakness of the actual Convoy rules or what could be a better Convoy rules.
Below, I would provide a different mechanics for Convoy Disruption but before I would address two points about how OOB G40 Convoy are still accurate toward history.
1- Warships were able to make Convoy Raid/Disruption, this imply that restricting it to Submarines is from a simplicity game perspective.
(Ex.: German’s Bismark Battleship last tour is all about Convoy Disruption gone sour.)

2- Convoy Disruption applied during Collect Income phase is not a non-sense.
Since any surviving warships units which are On Station in a Convoy SZ during this phase endure at least 2 Combat resolution phase and still be in such critical SZ, this is a kind of reward for the Sub’s owner against the enemy player which owned the surrounding TTs.
At the time when all merchant’s ships converge from across the map to provide supply to the Capital (the Collect Income), any enemy’s warships raiding Merchant’s vessels is actively blocking or destroying supply, hence Income IPCs. This part of the rule seems quite sounds to me.

Now, here is my new idea:

Keeping the general frame provided in my previous post:
@Baron:

Here is my solution to solve both:
1- attack on player’s turn (no double-dipping effect) and
2-keep record straight (no immediate plunder on IPCs already owned by player but still waiting Income Phase to apply damage).

1- All warships can do Convoy Disruption, including planes which have room to land on a Carrier. No extra Fgs or TcBs can do it, neither StBs.
2- The damage results for all warships are following their attack factor or less:
Submarines Attack @2 (or Attack @3 if playing with Super Subs Tech, or with my HR Subs A3 D1 Cost 7 or 8 IPCs)
Destroyer Attack @2
Cruiser Attack @3
Battleship Attack @4
Carrier Attack @0 (But planes which can land on Carrier do damage)
Fighter Attack @3
TcB Attack @3 or 4 (if paired to Fg)

3- During combat phase, a player can Convoy Raid an empty SZ or a SZ which have only Transports or Submarines.
Said otherwise, if any enemy’s surface warships is in the SZ, there is no Convoy Disruption, only regular combat.
(Warships are actively protecting the merchant’s ships. That’s the way to rationalize this, IMO.)
This also imply it cannot make a regular attack on Subs and/or Transport and a Convoy Raid, it is one or the other, not both.
(Same rule as with Shore Bombardment applied for Convoy Raid.)

4- When rolling for damage, you only consider the lower results which would make for a hit in regular combat.
For example, Cruiser do damage on a 3 or less: 1 is 1 IPC, 2 is 2 IPCs, 3 is 3 IPCs, 4-5-6 make no damage.
Subs do it on a 2 or less: 1 is 1 IPC, 2 is 2 IPCs, 3-4-5-6 make no damage.

5- Once all damaged are calculated, you place in SZ a number of Attacker Country Marker equal to the amount of IPCs damage.
Example, 3 US Destroyers get 1,2,3. It means 3 IPCs damage.
So you put in the SZ 3 US markers.

6- When it is the enemy’s Collect Income Phase, you substract from his IPCs income the number of his Enemy’s Control Marker in the SZ Convoy Raided up to the maximum allowed for this SZ.

7- I would give a Special Convoy Disruption for Subs, each enemy’s Submarine still present in the SZ during player’s Collect Income Phase, makes 2 IPCs additional damage, up to the maximum allowed in this SZ.

That way the OOB 2D3 Convoy damage rolls for Subs can be taken somehow into account without too much complexification.

1. I will also assume my preferred type of Sub against DD:

HR SUBMARINE A3 D1 M2 C7-8 IPCs,
first strike if no enemy’s DD present,
blocked by DD on 1:1 basis sneak move and 1:1 basis submerged for a single round.
Any plane can hit unsubmerged Submarine during combat round without any Destroyer.
(If a Sub submerge during first strike phase, plane can not hit Sub.)
Convoy Raid Damage: 2 Dices keep all 1 to 3 results.
Convoy Disruption Damage On Station: Each Sub make for +2 IPCs additional damage if still present in a Convoy SZ during enemy’s Collect Income Phase.

(I believe it is needed that a zero IPCs results is possible. The sea-lanes are not enlightened as can be some Industrial Complex in a target zone. Merchant’s ships are moving while ICs are at the same place on every SBR.
The maximum damage is the same: 1d6+2 = 8 IPCs vs 2D6, 3 or less = 6 IPCs + 2 IPCs when Sub is On Station.)

DESTROYER A2 D2 M2 C7-8 IPCs,
blocks all Subs First Strike,
blocks on a 1:1 basis Sneak Move and Submerge.
Blocks on a 1:1 basis enemy’s Submarine additional +2 IPCs On Station Convoy Disruption Damage during Collect Income Phase.

2. During Combat move phase, a Submarine can choose whether to make a regular combat attack (@3 first strike, if no enemy’s DD present)
   OR
   to do a Convoy Raid in a given SZ.
   It is only Submarine units which get this option even if the SZ is enemy controlled by warships.
   Other warships (Cruiser, Carrier & planes, Battleship) can only do such Convoy Raid if there is no enemy’s Warships in the SZ to raid.

3. The Convoy Raid damage roll is determined that way: 1 roll 2D6 per Sub and keep only 1 to 3 results, and sum both dice.
   It gives the amount of IPCs which will be lost during enemy’s Collect Income Phase.
   You put in the SZ a Country Control Marker for each IPC damage on Convoy to keep track of the entire game round results against this Power.
   There is no direct plunder on handy IPCs, only on incoming IPCs.

Other Combat units get only 1 single dice to roll, and get Convoy damage if they get their attack number or lower:
Destroyer Attack @2
Cruiser Attack @3
Battleship Attack @4
Carrier Attack @0 (But planes which can land on Carrier do damage)
Fighter Attack @3
TcB Attack @3 or 4 (if paired to Fg)

4. The Merchantman’s ship Escort can retaliate as a reaction to this Sub attack (in an empty SZ or not) / Warships attack (if the SZ was empty).
   This reaction is a single roll @1, nothing more, nothing less.

(Think about the fact that a defenseless military transport cost 7 IPCs which have no DD escort.
So giving a single defense roll @1 to a SZ which can worth less than 7 IPCs, is already a grim reaction defense.)
So, if more than one Submarines make such Convoy Raid (which I call a wolfpack attack), there is still only 1 defense roll @1, figurating it as Destroyer Escort defense. This imply that no more than 1 Sub can be lost at most during Convoy Raid when there is no enemy’s DD in SZ.
(Again, if there is more Subs, it is much easier to get maximum damage with less risk.)

(OPTIONAL: It can be possible IMO to add as raiders all the Tactical Bombers, not just TcBs elligible to land on a Carrier, but, after the attack, instead of a single defense roll @1, there would be an additional defense @1 against each Convoy Raiding aircraft units. It would be played as an IC’s AAA. Many Cargo Ships were equipped with AA guns and were more able to defend themselves than against Submarines attack.)

5. However, if there was any Destroyer-s in the SZ (which could be the sole survivor of a regular naval combat which occurred in the same resolve combat phase), this or these Destroyer-s can also retaliate @2 (according to OOB combat defense value) against this Submarine. And Submarine cannot sink it or them because Subs attack were focused on Merchant’s ships.

6. If the SZ was empty, this is the end of the Convoy Raid.
   But, if there was any Destroyer then there is a second combat round which is like regular combat but only submarines against destroyers.
   The attacking Convoy raiding Submarine can retreat after 1 round against the Destroyer, OR roll it until the destruction of one side.
   That way, a Sub can make a Convoy Raid, first, and take a shot at any Destroyer protecting the SZ without being expose to counter-strike defense rolls of all other heavier warships (Cruiser, Carrier and planes or Battleship ) or defending submarines.
   (This is IMO quite an interesting incentive for Subs to make economic warfare instead of a regular combat.)

7. Once all the battle in the SZ are done, if any Submarine survives until the enemy’s player Collect Income turn, then each Sub worth 2 additional IPCs Convoy Disruption damage per Sub, up to the maximum allowed according to this particular SZ.
   However, any friendly or player’s Destroyer present can block this additional penalty on a 1:1 basis.
   For instance, 3 DDs will block up to 3 times +2 Subs damage occurring in this SZ.
   If there is more Submarine units, each worth +2 IPCs additional Convoy Disruption damage.
   (IMO, this additional bonus is needed to keep an incentive ratio about cost/benefits. And 2D3 on 2D6, +2 is similar to StB damage 1D6**+2**.)

EXAMPLE:
4 Submarines and 2 Cruisers are attacking a SZ with 4 Destroyers and 1 Cruiser.
The attacking player choose to use 2 Subs on regular attack and 2 Subs on Convoy Raiding.

Always resolve Naval regular combat first:
2 Cruisers and 2 Submarines against 4 Destroyers and 1 Cruiser.

Let’s assume it goes sour for the attacker so it loose all his units and the defender keep 1 Cruiser in the SZ.
Then the 2 Submarines can do their Convoy Raid damage (22D6 keeping 1-3) against a single defense roll @1:
22D6 keeping 1-3, sums: from 0 to up to 12 IPCs.
After, Subs can either retreat or stay in the SZ, since there is only 1 enemy’s Cruiser left.
On Cruiser’s owner turn, it can attack both Subs with other reinforcement.
If there is no attacking DD, it would be Cruiser A3 against 2 Subs defending @1 with Surprise Strike.
Everything played as OOB usual.

Let’s assume that the defender choose to keep 1 Destroyer instead.
Then 2 Submarines can do their Convoy Raid damage in this first Convoy Raid round:
2*2D6 keeping 1-3, sums: from 0 to up to 12 IPCs,
against a single defense roll @1 and 1 Destroyer defending @2.
Let’s assume the Destroyer unit or the Convoy Escort get a hit.
During this first Convoy Raiding combat round, Subs can never hit Destroyers. But DDs can destroy Subs.
(I rationalize it that way: Subs are all focused on destroying Merchant’s Ship and not attacking their escorting warships.)

On the second combat round, which works like a regular attack, now.
Their is still 1 submarine remaining (attacking @3) against 1 Destroyer (defending @2).
If the Submarine survive this combat round, then it can retreat.
(Or Submerge in the SZ, according to my Sub HR. But only Sub retreat is possible according to G40 OOB.)
If it stays, then it must be a fight to the death, or can choose to retreat (or Sub submerge) anytime hereafter.

Let’s assume the Submarine retreat.
On the Destroyer’s owner turn, it can attack the Sub with any other units it can muster. As regular DD attack.

**Do you think this can be a workable balance system?

Do you see it as a sufficient incentive for Submarines Commander to prefer raiding over regular combat?**