Naval Mine Scenario Question

@The_Good_Captain

Phew. Thank you for the advice.

@Krieghund

Thank you!

@ragnell804 All hits must be applied. The transport is destroyed. If the Ottomans had scored only 1 hit, the Italians could have broken off the attack and saved the transport, at least for the time being.

protevangelium makes some great points about how lopsided the sea’s were, and sub warfare being the best option for the CP in the war. Subs are a bit lacking in this edition as well as others IMO (nearly impossible to raid convoys, or inflict econ damage). The Austrians, and Turks were very limited in their abilities. The Germans did have a more modern surface fleet (tried to enter a naval arms race before the war), but failed in comparison to the Brits. In this game the Germans can get temporary control of the North Sea early though and add to their fleet. Once the rest of French Fleet comes up the UK still doesn’t need to build much to protect allied transports OOB (two French BB’s is a nice way to start for the allies rebuild). If the allies want to knock the German fleet out, then it could get expensive, but do they need to, or just set-up a multi national defense that the Germans can’t touch to keep allied transports afloat. Then there is always the 1-2 punch if the allies want to go aggressive. I still believe the problem lies with the French fleet (and the abilities of the sub to a point).

When we play we always reduce the Atlantic French Fleet to just a cruiser (swap BB for cruiser and remove the transport). We have done this even before Larry introduced it in the Tourney rules. It does help for game play, and better reflects what the French had in the Atlantic. The French Atlantic fleet was more of a support to the Brits (not nearly equal). Before the war the French naval focus was in the Med not knowing the intentions of the Italians (fearing an Italian attack which the game doesn’t reflect).

It would have been nice for the sub to have a larger roll in this edition having more raiding ability or sz’s to attack econ. Should destroyers be introduced so subs have a better survival rate? Maybe the naval set-up cost should be tweaked. BB’s at 12 IPCs is too cost effective IMO (should they be 15 IPCs?), no one buys cruisers. Just thinking out load……don’t read to much into it. WB

Welcome, blindingblizzard!

@blindingblizzard:

The rules state that U.S. ships cannot move into contested sea zones.Â

There is no such thing as a contested sea zone.  The rule states that the US may not move units into a contested territory.  (For clarifications on this, see the FAQ thread.)

In your example, Germany may choose to either include the US ships in its attack, bringing the US into the war, or ignore them.

@CWO:

Thanks for the interesting behind-the-scenes description of the playtesting process.

Shame the contract stops him from saying a lot.

@Flashman:

So no contested SZs, then.

Does that meant that, when a player with ships in a SZ that an enemy has just built a new ship into takes his turn, he must either fight the new units to the death or withdraw?

If I remember correctly, ships can avoid battle in previous A&A versions, but perhaps he’s changed it to simulate the necessity of breaking through the blockade?

@Imperious:

They buy Pizza and multiple copies of Axis and Allies games.

That’s your whole life right there.