Global War 1940 2nd ed.

Sorry.
I did not realized you included surface warships too.

Its fine. Just no autokill for all attacking pieces.

You dont like it ?

2 DD
2 CR
2 BB attacking

5 Transports.

2 DD = 1 hit
2 CR = 1 hit
2 BB = 1 hit
3 hits 3 Transports killed
2 Transports escape roll 1,2
2 Transports escape

No ?

@SS:

Its fine. Just no autokill for all attacking pieces.

You dont like it ?

2 DD
2 CR
2 BB attacking

5 Transports.

2 DD = 1 hit
2 CR = 1 hit
2 BB = 1 hit
3 hits 3 Transports killed
2 Transports escape roll 1,2
2 Transports escape

No ?

I’m all ok with this.

I just copy-paste from TP : “d) Escape attempt for Transport @2, if alone and being attacked by only subs or planes and is not killed per round.”
I did not realize you slightly change to include surface vessels in comment below.
“d) Escape attempt for Transport @2, if alone and being attacked by surface ships and or subs or planes and is not killed per round.”

Got some more turns in game. Germany ready to take Stalingrad and Italy taking back Cairo in 2 turns maybe giving the Axis 29 points soon. There at 26 right know. UK landed in Norway. Even though UK sacrificed a lot there it made Germany retreat its major pieces back to Norway with there planes giving Russia a extra turn buy. They are holding there own. Will see if Germany taking Stalingrad will cost them on Russias counter if they have enough. With the Air Base ( Fig- Tac M6 ) in Moscow it makes Italy and Germany to bring Navy support with there transports other wise the figs can hit in Turkey sz or Leningrad sz.
As you can see as in war the convoy axis raiding has slowed do to time to get Russia.

Japan has been being hit hard for the first time in the Pacific. US trying to get close enough to do a landing. Japan figs on Toyko with the M of 6 for figs have countered any US landing in Soviet far East. Fec will not lose Calcutta and some movement now finally in islands. With that 2nd IC in India has helped Fec hold Calcutta and now being able to buy some navy and hopefully get some pressure on Italy as soon as possible.

After 8 turns there is 10 techs out there in game so far. This is normal. US got there NA Fast Carriers M3 at start of turn and this works good with the Cruisers M3 for faster support towards Japan. More Cruisers are being bought in the Pacific for US and Japan.
US also got Super Subs Tech 2 turns ago so now the Subs A6 D3 and are being bought for Japan navy attacks coming soon with fleet so planes cant hit them except Tac-N Dive B.

The sub cant hit sub rule is sweet. Subs were passing each other in the Atlantic. US even got a sub in the Med for 2 turns to force Italy to buy a destroyer on a turn because all they had were transports and a Battleship. No figs in Rome to scramble. Italy Tac bomber missed the US sub 3 times !
So far it doesnt seem like the new piece values are favoring anybody or anything in game so far.
There seems to be more smaller naval battles in the both sides of theater do to the Cruiser M3, Tac-Dive hitting Subs, Naval Fig-Dive B only M4 from anywhere, Subs not being able to hit Subs, and the Fig-Tac M5-6AB.

Will see what happens. Looks like a allies victory if US can get to the Philliphines with Anzac support.

@SS:

After 8 turns there is 10 techs out there in game so far. This is normal. US got there NA Fast Carriers M3 at start of turn and this works good with the Cruisers M3 for faster support towards Japan. More Cruisers are being bought in the Pacific for US and Japan.
US also got Super Subs Tech 2 turns ago so now the Subs A6 D3 and are being bought for Japan navy attacks coming soon with fleet so planes cant hit them except Tac-N Dive B.

The sub cant hit sub rule is sweet. Subs were passing each other in the Atlantic. US even got a sub in the Med for 2 turns to force Italy to buy a destroyer on a turn because all they had were transports and a Battleship. No figs in Rome to scramble. Italy Tac bomber missed the US sub 3 times !
So far it doesnt seem like the new piece values are favoring anybody or anything in game so far.
There seems to be more smaller naval battles in the both sides of theater do to the Cruiser M3, Tac-Dive hitting Subs, Naval Fig-Dive B only M4 from anywhere, Subs not being able to hit Subs, and the Fig-Tac M5-6AB.

Will see what happens. Looks like a allies victory if US can get to the Philliphines with Anzac support.

It seems to be very promising and to be actually interesting to have so many more options because of units abilities. It is very appropriate to get many smaller battles in many SZs. I rather prefer this.

Now, US fast Carrier can work tandem with Cruiser. Pretty useful when front line is far away along asian coastal SZ.

Land vs carrier based aircraft seems to be working pretty well.

TacB cannot always hit on marks against Subs in offense when patrolling SZ, increasing survivability and creating the annoying effect of needing to protect surface vessels against them, as it should. For instance, Italy needing to purchase a DD otherwise BB becoming vulnerable to US Sub. Without the rule “Sub cannot hit sub”, Italy would have kept a Sub along BB and not be afraid of US Sub first strike. Now, it is mandatory to purchase DD to counter Sub.

IMO, it is a small price to pay about a lesser ship-to-ship depiction (as we know that Subs were sinking Sub sometimes, mainly US vs Japan) to gain a better operational depiction of Subs against surface vessels. Like Destroyers are needed to protect and escort surface vessels against Subs.

@SS:

Got some more turns in game. Germany ready to take Stalingrad and Italy taking back Cairo in 2 turns maybe giving the Axis 29 points soon. There at 26 right know. UK landed in Norway. Even though UK sacrificed a lot there it made Germany retreat its major pieces back to Norway with there planes giving Russia a extra turn buy. They are holding there own. Will see if Germany taking Stalingrad will cost them on Russias counter if they have enough. With the Air Base ( Fig- Tac M6 ) in Moscow it makes Italy and Germany to bring Navy support with there transports other wise the figs can hit in Turkey sz or Leningrad sz.
As you can see as in war the convoy axis raiding has slowed do to time to get Russia.

Japan has been being hit hard for the first time in the Pacific. US trying to get close enough to do a landing. Japan figs on Toyko with the M of 6 for figs have countered any US landing in Soviet far East. Fec will not lose Calcutta and some movement now finally in islands. With that 2nd IC in India has helped Fec hold Calcutta and now being able to buy some navy and hopefully get some pressure on Italy as soon as possible.

Interesting for Soviet to get more options with Land-based TcB or Fg, the additional 1 IPC worth it for them, Soviet get no use of naval aircraft. Also, TcB are much more accurate against German’s Artillery or Tank which is pretty depicting how Soviet Shturmovik Ill-2, were kind of air tanks on German’s lines.

Japan can cover more SZs, making US escorting vessel mandatory to land in Soviet Far East.
You have so many distance on your map that M5-6 is not a luxury.
I might add that on your map, these two types of aircraft make for a more complex planing strategy to use them at maximum effectiveness.

2 ICs for FEC seems working.

What exactly means FEC?

@Baron:

@SS:

Got some more turns in game. Germany ready to take Stalingrad and Italy taking back Cairo in 2 turns maybe giving the Axis 29 points soon. There at 26 right know. UK landed in Norway. Even though UK sacrificed a lot there it made Germany retreat its major pieces back to Norway with there planes giving Russia a extra turn buy. They are holding there own. Will see if Germany taking Stalingrad will cost them on Russias counter if they have enough. With the Air Base ( Fig- Tac M6 ) in Moscow it makes Italy and Germany to bring Navy support with there transports other wise the figs can hit in Turkey sz or Leningrad sz.
As you can see as in war the convoy axis raiding has slowed do to time to get Russia.

Japan has been being hit hard for the first time in the Pacific. US trying to get close enough to do a landing. Japan figs on Toyko with the M of 6 for figs have countered any US landing in Soviet far East. Fec will not lose Calcutta and some movement now finally in islands. With that 2nd IC in India has helped Fec hold Calcutta and now being able to buy some navy and hopefully get some pressure on Italy as soon as possible.

Interesting for Soviet to get more options with Land-based TcB or Fg, the additional 1 IPC worth it for them, Soviet get no use of naval aircraft.
Japan can cover more SZs, making US escorting vessel mandatory to land in Soviet Far East.
You have so many distance on your map that M5-6 is not a luxury.
I might add that on your map, these two types of aircraft make for a more complex planing strategy to use them at maximum effectiveness.

2 ICs for FEC seems working.

What exactly means FEC?

Far East command

Got 11 turns in now and the Axis have still a slight chance maybe ? Allies landed in West Germany but Germany should take it back now with less pressure now on taking Stalingrad which they did. With a most buy in Pacific for US Italy still was able to come back and support Germany. But now they probably wont get back Cairo do to Allies landings in Paris where they need to support Germany.

With the Figs and Tacs getting a move of 5 and 6 from an airbase this makes Germany have to have some kind of navy for any Russian planes coming from Moscow by the Leningrad sz to protect there transports. Plus it benefits both UK and Germany also.

US lost most of there fleet getting back Manilla a few turns ago and now with mostly US Pacific buys has helped FEC and China put some pressure on Japan in Saigon area. The US got the Tech Super Subs A6 D3 C7 and had 8 subs with fleet but decided to keep them on the surface for fodder in the big naval battle for Manilla. Would of been nice to see if them subs would of gotten in on some sneak attacks. Ill call them Labrador Packs.  With the M6 AB figs are deadly from any Capital defense and going out aways to attack or defend.
With Naval planes only M4 and can only land on Carriers in game, now Japan cant just have a walk in the park. There still deadly with there planes if you position them right.

Well there was 17 techs in game and still didnt unbalance game. It would of been nice to finish out game but have a new game Saturday morning. Axis has 27 points with losing back Manila (1 point )and Cairo (1 point). That would of been 29 points and with the Mideast Oil fields control (1 point) giving them 30 would of won the game. These last 2 games were the best so far. I hope Saturdays game turns out just as good. But have more players now and some will need to learn some of the changes to game.

Saved

@SS:

US lost most of there fleet getting back Manilla a few turns ago and now with mostly US Pacific buys has helped FEC and China put some pressure on Japan in Saigon area. The US got the Tech Super Subs A6 D3 C7 and had 8 subs with fleet but decided to keep them on the surface for fodder in the big naval battle for Manilla. Would of been nice to see if them subs would of gotten in on some sneak attacks. Ill call them Labrador Packs.  With the M6 AB figs are deadly from any Capital defense and going out aways to attack or defend.
With Naval planes only M4 and can only land on Carriers in game, now Japan cant just have a walk in the park. There still deadly with there planes if you position them right.

It seems introducing land-based M5-6 aircraft is also a way to keep IJN overwhelming airfleet M4-5 carrier-based aircraft restraint and balance.

Carrier-based are still allowed to land on AB right?

Subs are best on offence role, probably not the best tactics but, if you don’t have enough DDs, you can use Subs for fodder. But opponent will be happy that A6 be underused as D3.

Yet, US Subs were the most efficient weapon groups of all WWII:

Employing boats of the Gato, Balao, and Tench classes, American submariners scored the most complete victory of any force in any theater of war. Having advanced considerably in design, technology, and reliability during the 1930s, the submarine was ready to become a very flexible weapon in the war against Japan. Each of these Fleet boats displaced roughly 1,500 tons, and carried a complement of 7 officers and 70 men. Four diesel engines provided surface propulsion at speeds up to 20 knots and charged the batteries that powered the electric motors for submerged operations.  […]

Despite a slow beginning because of the Pearl Harbor attack and the nagging problem of defective torpedoes, the Submarine Force destroyed 1,314 enemy ships in the Pacific, representing fifty-five percent of all enemy ships lost and a total of 5.3 million tons of shipping. Out of 16,000 U.S. submariners, the force lost 375 officers and 3,131 enlisted men in 52 submarines, and although this was a tragic loss, it was still the lowest casualty rate of any combatant submarine service on either side in the 1939-1945 conflict.

In the final months of the war, American submarines had difficulty finding targets, because the Japanese had virtually no ships left to sink. In response, U.S. boats employed newly-developed FM sonar sets to navigate through minefields in closely-guarded Japanese home waters to seek out the remaining targets. On 27 May 1945, a nine-submarine wolfpack led by CDR E.T. Hydeman on board USS Tinosa (SS-283) left Guam under orders from VADM Lockwood for the first major penetration of the Sea of Japan. After picking up the survivors of a downed B-29 en route, the pack traversed the Tsushima Strait on 5-6 June and once on station, set up their own shooting gallery. In 11 days, they destroyed 27 merchant ships with total tonnage exceeding 57,000. In the end, Japanese ships had no safe haven. There was nowhere to hide. The American submariner’s silent victory was complete.

http://www.public.navy.mil/subfor/underseawarfaremagazine/Issues/Archives/issue_06/silent_victory.html

Among the U.S. Navy’s deadliest and arguably its most effective weapons were its submarines. The unrestricted submarine warfare during the Second World War in the Pacific knew no bounds, no limits concerning the sinking of Japanese ships. Shrouded in secrecy, the “Silent Service” depended on stealth for its success and resourcefulness to counter Japanese countermeasures.

Postwar records compiled by the Joint Army-Navy Assessment Committee indicate Japan lost 686 warships of 500 gross tons (GRT) or larger, 2,346 merchantmen, and a total of 10.5 million GRT to submarines during 1,600 war patrols. Only 1.6 percent of the total U.S. naval manpower was responsible for America’s success on its Pacific high seas; more than half of the tonnage sunk was credited to U.S. submarines. The tremendous accomplishments of American submarines were achieved at the expense of 52 subs with 374 officers and 3,131 enlisted volunteers lost during combat against Japan; Japan lost 128 submarines during the Second World War in Pacific waters. American casualty counts represent 16 percent of the U.S. operational submarine officer corps and 13 percent of its enlisted force.

[…]

Despite the initial faults of America’s submarine force, there was optimism. For example, between 1941 and 1945, U.S. Navy codebreakers deciphered Japanese sailing dates, courses, speeds, and routes of naval convoys and formations, unbeknownst to the Japanese. This information was supplied to the U.S. submarine force, which would lie silently in wait for unsuspecting ships. By 1943, 22 Japanese warships and 296 merchant ships would be sent to the bottom, due to workable torpedoes and changed underwater tactics.
Increased submarine proficiency, founded on an all-volunteer service (submariners made fifty percent extra pay), new long-range fleet type models, and the successes of the U.S. Navy codebreakers, by August 1944, found the “Silent Service” inflicting prohibitive losses on the Emperor’s merchant marine, scoring key successes against Japanese warships that insured victory in the Battle of the Philippine Sea, and a blockade of the home islands that was strangling the Japanese economy.

[…] The situation for Lockwood and America’s submariners was slowly improving by late 1942: U.S. subs in 1942 sank 180 Japanese ships for a total of 725,000 GRT; yet Hitler’s U-boats sank 1,160 Allied ships of more than 6 million GRT.

[…] The German strategy of “wolfpacking” was adopted. It called for coordinating submarine attack groups during 1943. More submarines, of larger size and firepower, were being built in American shipyards. New torpedo designs added the necessary punch for U.S. subs to eventually penetrate the once forbidden Sea of Japan. By year’s end, American sub improvements had netted a total of 1.5 million GRT sunk. Eighty-six American subs had also rescued 380 downed aviators from Pacific waters.

American submarines flexed their naval might following the recapture of Guam in July-August 1944. U.S. subs based on Guam and Saipan imposed a virtual blockade against Japan. Few ships entered or left Japanese waters without being attacked or sunk by submarines. Japan ran out of oil for her naval armada, gasoline for aircraft and tanks, steel and aluminum for industry, and food for her people. […]

https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/npswapa/extContent/wapa/guides/offensive/sec6.htm

The U. S. submarine service started the war with 111 boats, added 203, and lost 52 (50 of them in the Pacific). Of the 16,000 submariners who sailed on war patrols, 3,506 did not return- a casualty rate of 22 percent, the highest of all arms in the American services during the war. Nevertheless, the U. S. submarine campaign in World War II was the only campaign of its type in the history of naval warfare that can be rated a complete success. The submarines played a decisive role in the war by incapacitating the Japanese Empire�s economy. Of the 7.8 million tons of Japanese merchant shipping lost between 1941 and 1945, nearly two-thirds (4.8 million tons) was sunk by U. S submarines, which were also responsible for one-third of the Japanese warship losses. The U. S. Submarine Operational History, however, conceded that scholars would do well to �ponder the fact that Japanese anti-submarine defenses were not the best. If our submarines had been confronted with Allied anti-submarine measures, the casualty list of the submarine force would have been much larger and the accomplishment of Allied submarines much less impressive�

https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2016/01/01/usn-submarine-campaign-against-japanese-shipping-1941-1945/

During the war the U-boats sank about 2,779 ships for a total of 14.1 million tons GRT. This figure is roughly 70% of all allied shipping losses in all theatres of the war and to all hostile action. The most successful year was 1942 when over 6 million tons of shipping were sunk in the Atlantic.

https://uboat.net/special/faq.htm?question=4

AA Gun
A0
D@2 at each plane
D@1 at ea H Bomb, Tac & Dive Bomb
M1
C5

I know there is a lot of details and exception in your game.
Maybe to be simpler for memory and emphasize the value of heavy bombers, I’m inclined to restrict AA@D1 to Hvy B only.
TacB were not able of such high altitude bombing.
AAA are going to be more efficient for 5 IPCs against TcB and N Dive-bomber too:

AA Gun
A0
D@2 at each plane (Med B, TcB&DB, Fg&NFg)
D@1 at each Heavy Bomber
M1
C5

And this also emphasize the usefulness of Fighter to intercept Heavy bombers.

Unless you got balance issues about it in previous games?

Tac Bomber  : Cannot land on Carriers.
A7 Can pick target with a return shot. Ground only.
A7 Roll of 3 or less can pick target with return shot. Naval only.
A3 against surfaced subs only. No return shot.
D5 Can pick target with a return shot. Ground only .
D5 Roll of 3 or less can pick target. Naval only.
M5
C11
Dog Fight @1  Every 1st round of combat only if enemy planes.
SBR 1d8 damage (Air - Naval ports, Train Stations and Oil Derricks)
SBR Kills AA gun on a roll of 4 or less
AA Gun D@1 against ea Tac Bomb

Naval Dive Bomber  : Can land on Carriers and ground.
A7 Roll 3 or less can pick target with a return shot. Ground and Naval.
A3 against surfaced subs only. No return shot
D5 Roll of 3 or less pick target with a return shot. Ground and Naval.
M4
C10
Dog Fight @1  Every 1st round of combat only if enemy planes.
SBR 1d8 damage ( Air - Naval ports, Oil Derricks)
SBR Kills AA gun on a roll of 4 or less
AA Gun D@1 against ea Dive Bomb

Naval Fighter  : Can land anywhere.
A5
D7
M4
C10
Dog Fight @3  Every 1st round of combat only if enemy planes.
AA Gun D@2 against ea N. Fig
Cannot hit surfaced subs.

Fighter
A6
D7
M5
C11
Dog Fight@3  Every 1st round of combat only if enemy planes.
AA Gun D@2 against ea Fig
Cannot hit surfaced subs.

To also keep the same repeating special @3 number, I would also place TcB and NDB special attack on AAgun at same odds:

SBR Kills AA gun on a roll of 3 or less

So, Fg and TcB are going to be parallels: Fg in dogfight, TcB & NDB against AAgun.

What do you think?
Any balance issues foreseeable or encountered?

@SS:

Well there was 17 techs in game and still didnt unbalance game. It would of been nice to finish out game but have a new game Saturday morning. Axis has 27 points with losing back Manila (1 point )and Cairo (1 point). That would of been 29 points and with the Mideast Oil fields control (1 point) giving them 30 would of won the game. These last 2 games were the best so far. I hope Saturdays game turns out just as good. But have more players now and some will need to learn some of the changes to game.

It is very promising for the next game.
I’m really happy you got such a satisfying experience with your newly develop unit profiles and House rules.

@Baron:

@SS:

US lost most of there fleet getting back Manilla a few turns ago and now with mostly US Pacific buys has helped FEC and China put some pressure on Japan in Saigon area. The US got the Tech Super Subs A6 D3 C7 and had 8 subs with fleet but decided to keep them on the surface for fodder in the big naval battle for Manilla. Would of been nice to see if them subs would of gotten in on some sneak attacks. Ill call them Labrador Packs.  With the M6 AB figs are deadly from any Capital defense and going out aways to attack or defend.
With Naval planes only M4 and can only land on Carriers in game, now Japan cant just have a walk in the park. There still deadly with there planes if you position them right.

It seems introducing land-based M5-6 aircraft is also a way to keep IJN overwhelming airfleet M4-5 carrier-based aircraft restraint and balance.

Carrier-based are still allowed to land on AB right?

Yes

Subs are best on offence role, probably not the best tactics but, if you don’t have enough DDs, you can use Subs for fodder. But opponent will be happy that A6 be underused as D3.

Yet, US Subs were the most efficient weapon groups of all WWII:

Employing boats of the Gato, Balao, and Tench classes, American submariners scored the most complete victory of any force in any theater of war. Having advanced considerably in design, technology, and reliability during the 1930s, the submarine was ready to become a very flexible weapon in the war against Japan. Each of these Fleet boats displaced roughly 1,500 tons, and carried a complement of 7 officers and 70 men. Four diesel engines provided surface propulsion at speeds up to 20 knots and charged the batteries that powered the electric motors for submerged operations.  […]

Despite a slow beginning because of the Pearl Harbor attack and the nagging problem of defective torpedoes, the Submarine Force destroyed 1,314 enemy ships in the Pacific, representing fifty-five percent of all enemy ships lost and a total of 5.3 million tons of shipping. Out of 16,000 U.S. submariners, the force lost 375 officers and 3,131 enlisted men in 52 submarines, and although this was a tragic loss, it was still the lowest casualty rate of any combatant submarine service on either side in the 1939-1945 conflict.

In the final months of the war, American submarines had difficulty finding targets, because the Japanese had virtually no ships left to sink. In response, U.S. boats employed newly-developed FM sonar sets to navigate through minefields in closely-guarded Japanese home waters to seek out the remaining targets. On 27 May 1945, a nine-submarine wolfpack led by CDR E.T. Hydeman on board USS Tinosa (SS-283) left Guam under orders from VADM Lockwood for the first major penetration of the Sea of Japan. After picking up the survivors of a downed B-29 en route, the pack traversed the Tsushima Strait on 5-6 June and once on station, set up their own shooting gallery. In 11 days, they destroyed 27 merchant ships with total tonnage exceeding 57,000. In the end, Japanese ships had no safe haven. There was nowhere to hide. The American submariner’s silent victory was complete.

http://www.public.navy.mil/subfor/underseawarfaremagazine/Issues/Archives/issue_06/silent_victory.html

Among the U.S. Navy’s deadliest and arguably its most effective weapons were its submarines. The unrestricted submarine warfare during the Second World War in the Pacific knew no bounds, no limits concerning the sinking of Japanese ships. Shrouded in secrecy, the “Silent Service” depended on stealth for its success and resourcefulness to counter Japanese countermeasures.

Postwar records compiled by the Joint Army-Navy Assessment Committee indicate Japan lost 686 warships of 500 gross tons (GRT) or larger, 2,346 merchantmen, and a total of 10.5 million GRT to submarines during 1,600 war patrols. Only 1.6 percent of the total U.S. naval manpower was responsible for America’s success on its Pacific high seas; more than half of the tonnage sunk was credited to U.S. submarines. The tremendous accomplishments of American submarines were achieved at the expense of 52 subs with 374 officers and 3,131 enlisted volunteers lost during combat against Japan; Japan lost 128 submarines during the Second World War in Pacific waters. American casualty counts represent 16 percent of the U.S. operational submarine officer corps and 13 percent of its enlisted force.

[…]

Despite the initial faults of America’s submarine force, there was optimism. For example, between 1941 and 1945, U.S. Navy codebreakers deciphered Japanese sailing dates, courses, speeds, and routes of naval convoys and formations, unbeknownst to the Japanese. This information was supplied to the U.S. submarine force, which would lie silently in wait for unsuspecting ships. By 1943, 22 Japanese warships and 296 merchant ships would be sent to the bottom, due to workable torpedoes and changed underwater tactics.
Increased submarine proficiency, founded on an all-volunteer service (submariners made fifty percent extra pay), new long-range fleet type models, and the successes of the U.S. Navy codebreakers, by August 1944, found the “Silent Service” inflicting prohibitive losses on the Emperor’s merchant marine, scoring key successes against Japanese warships that insured victory in the Battle of the Philippine Sea, and a blockade of the home islands that was strangling the Japanese economy.

[…] The situation for Lockwood and America’s submariners was slowly improving by late 1942: U.S. subs in 1942 sank 180 Japanese ships for a total of 725,000 GRT; yet Hitler’s U-boats sank 1,160 Allied ships of more than 6 million GRT.

[…] The German strategy of “wolfpacking” was adopted. It called for coordinating submarine attack groups during 1943. More submarines, of larger size and firepower, were being built in American shipyards. New torpedo designs added the necessary punch for U.S. subs to eventually penetrate the once forbidden Sea of Japan. By year’s end, American sub improvements had netted a total of 1.5 million GRT sunk. Eighty-six American subs had also rescued 380 downed aviators from Pacific waters.

American submarines flexed their naval might following the recapture of Guam in July-August 1944. U.S. subs based on Guam and Saipan imposed a virtual blockade against Japan. Few ships entered or left Japanese waters without being attacked or sunk by submarines. Japan ran out of oil for her naval armada, gasoline for aircraft and tanks, steel and aluminum for industry, and food for her people. […]

https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/npswapa/extContent/wapa/guides/offensive/sec6.htm

The U. S. submarine service started the war with 111 boats, added 203, and lost 52 (50 of them in the Pacific). Of the 16,000 submariners who sailed on war patrols, 3,506 did not return- a casualty rate of 22 percent, the highest of all arms in the American services during the war. Nevertheless, the U. S. submarine campaign in World War II was the only campaign of its type in the history of naval warfare that can be rated a complete success. The submarines played a decisive role in the war by incapacitating the Japanese Empire�s economy. Of the 7.8 million tons of Japanese merchant shipping lost between 1941 and 1945, nearly two-thirds (4.8 million tons) was sunk by U. S submarines, which were also responsible for one-third of the Japanese warship losses. The U. S. Submarine Operational History, however, conceded that scholars would do well to �ponder the fact that Japanese anti-submarine defenses were not the best. If our submarines had been confronted with Allied anti-submarine measures, the casualty list of the submarine force would have been much larger and the accomplishment of Allied submarines much less impressive�

https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2016/01/01/usn-submarine-campaign-against-japanese-shipping-1941-1945/

During the war the U-boats sank about 2,779 ships for a total of 14.1 million tons GRT. This figure is roughly 70% of all allied shipping losses in all theatres of the war and to all hostile action. The most successful year was 1942 when over 6 million tons of shipping were sunk in the Atlantic.

https://uboat.net/special/faq.htm?question=4

@Baron:

AA Gun
A0
D@2 at each plane
D@1 at ea H Bomb, Tac & Dive Bomb
M1
C5

I know there is a lot of details and exception in your game.
Maybe to be simpler for memory and emphasize the value of heavy bombers, I’m inclined to restrict AA@D1 to Hvy B only.
TacB were not able of such high altitude bombing.
AAA are going to be more efficient for 5 IPCs against TcB and N Dive-bomber too:

AA Gun
A0
D@2 at each plane (Med B, TcB&DB, Fg&NFg)
D@1 at each Heavy Bomber
M1
C5

And this also emphasize the usefulness of Fighter to intercept Heavy bombers.

Unless you got balance issues about it in previous games?

No balance issues. I agree I will just give H Bomber AAA D@1 only. I believe I had it for what I read history wise was it was hard for AAA gun to shoot down a Tac bomber due to its dive angle.

@Baron:

Tac Bomber  : Cannot land on Carriers.
A7 Can pick target with a return shot. Ground only.
A7 Roll of 3 or less can pick target with return shot. Naval only.
A3 against surfaced subs only. No return shot.
D5 Can pick target with a return shot. Ground only .
D5 Roll of 3 or less can pick target. Naval only.
M5
C11
Dog Fight @1  Every 1st round of combat only if enemy planes.
SBR 1d8 damage (Air - Naval ports, Train Stations and Oil Derricks)
SBR Kills AA gun on a roll of 4 or less
AA Gun D@1 against ea Tac Bomb

Naval Dive Bomber  : Can land on Carriers and ground.
A7 Roll 3 or less can pick target with a return shot. Ground and Naval.
A3 against surfaced subs only. No return shot
D5 Roll of 3 or less pick target with a return shot. Ground and Naval.
M4
C10
Dog Fight @1  Every 1st round of combat only if enemy planes.
SBR 1d8 damage ( Air - Naval ports, Oil Derricks)
SBR Kills AA gun on a roll of 4 or less
AA Gun D@1 against ea Dive Bomb

Naval Fighter  : Can land anywhere.
A5
D7
M4
C10
Dog Fight @3  Every 1st round of combat only if enemy planes.
AA Gun D@2 against ea N. Fig
Cannot hit surfaced subs.

Fighter
A6
D7
M5
C11
Dog Fight@3  Every 1st round of combat only if enemy planes.
AA Gun D@2 against ea Fig
Cannot hit surfaced subs.

To also keep the same repeating special @3 number, I would also place TcB and NDB special attack on AAgun at same odds:

SBR Kills AA gun on a roll of 3 or less

So, Fg and TcB are going to be parallels: Fg in dogfight, TcB & NDB against AAgun.

What do you think?
Any balance issues foreseeable or encountered?

Yes I agree and will make it @3.

@SS:

@Baron:

AA Gun
A0
D@2 at each plane
D@1 at ea H Bomb, Tac & Dive Bomb
M1
C5

I know there is a lot of details and exception in your game.
Maybe to be simpler for memory and emphasize the value of heavy bombers, I’m inclined to restrict AA@D1 to Hvy B only.
TacB were not able of such high altitude bombing.
AAA are going to be more efficient for 5 IPCs against TcB and N Dive-bomber too:

AA Gun
A0
D@2 at each plane (Med B, TcB&DB, Fg&NFg)
D@1 at each Heavy Bomber
M1
C5

And this also emphasize the usefulness of Fighter to intercept Heavy bombers.

Unless you got balance issues about it in previous games?

No balance issues. I agree I will just give H Bomber AAA D@1 only. I believe I had it for what I read history wise was it was hard for AAA gun to shoot down a Tac bomber due to its dive angle.

Just a case about Stuka and Sturmovik:

Rudel, the legendary Stuka pilot and unrepentant Nazi who flew the Ju-87G, claimed to have destroyed 519 Soviet tanks. But Rudel was also shot down or forced to land 32 times, which pointed to the Stuka�s major weakness. With fixed landing gear and a level speed of less than 250 miles per hour, it was very vulnerable to defending fighters and flak.
Sterrett rates the Sturmovik as the best close support aircraft of the war. It was certainly the most expendable. Some 20,000 were destroyed. Facing elite German fighter aces and thick German flak defenses, and flown by inexperienced crews, they took staggering losses, especially in the early years of the war.

�During the spring and summer of 1942, one Il-2 was lost for every 24 combat sorties, and in the Battle of Stalingrad the ratio increased to one aircraft per 10-to-12 combat sorties,� notes the Guards Units book. Perhaps that is why there is a story, likely apocryphal, that some Sturmovik rear gunners were prisoners drafted into special penal battalions.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/stuka-and-sturmovik-the-aircraft-that-inspired-the-a-10-8c8d885d61db

In the opening stages of the Battle of Britain, Stukas performed very well against shipping over the Channel but less so over land, where fighter opposition grew. There were some successful attacks against airfields, ships, and “Chain Home” radar stations, but during just 10 days in August, The Stukas lost 20% of their total strength. The plane’s low speed made escorting it difficult on the way to the target and its low altitude after dropping bombs was an even greater problem (the Stuka proved very vulnerable to ground fire at that point). After August 19, the Stukas were moved to the Calais area to concentrate against shipping, which they continued to do until being withdrawn late in the year to refit for operations in the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe.

http://www.aresgames.eu/18649