So I’ve been thinking about how straits are used in A&A, specifically in G40 but I guess this is applicable to most other variants as well, the rule that whomever holds the key territory adjacent to a strait (that is, in game, the border between two sea zones), has total control over said strait. In G40, whenever a nation holds a key territory, such as Gibraltar for sea zones 91 & 92, that strait becomes instantly inaccessible to the opposing side acting as a physical barrier that does not allow passage.
Now as a game mechanic I have no objection to it, it’s straightforward and functional, but it isn’t very realistic. Straits aren’t the same as canals obviously and so can’t actually be closed like there is a huge chain across the sea zone borders, a la the Battle of the Blackwater. I propose that even when a strait is controlled, enemy vessels - both surface and sub surface - should be allowed to cross but with an inherent risk.
I think it would be more engaging and entertaining to have shore defences along the straight that enemy ships have to run the risk of engaging if they brave a strait transit.
There is some historical precedence for anyone who is interested, at the Battle of Drobak Sound, a 100 year old naval battery in the Fjords on the approach to Oslo, using 50 year old Austrian-Hungarian weaponry and manned by pensioners and raw recruits sank the Heavy Cruiser Blucher.
I think it would be a better experience to have this sort of possible engagement in A&A. It would add an element of risk whilst still keeping certain territories such as Denmark important enough to occupy. So before I ramble on any more, I’ll bullet point this and make it clearer.
-
Straits no longer immediately stop surface vessels from passing through, the sea zones now act like all others.
-
If a controlling territory is occupied by at least one infantry unit, the controlling territories defences are then manned.
-
Shore defences cannot be destroyed or bought. They are only found in territories that command straits.
-
Ships that attempt to pass through straits in a non combat movement are attacked, shore defences are NOT utilised in combat movements and cannot be used in land battles or amphibious invasions.
-
For every ship that passes the strait, such as from Sea Zone 112 to 113 the defender rolls 1 at 3, example: 3 Transports and 2 Destroyers = 5 rolls. Every hit is the same as in a combat movement and the hits must be distributed by the player who controls the fleet.
-
For every sub that passes the strait, the defender rolls 1 at 1. Every hit is the same as in a combat movement and the hits must be distributed by the player who controls the fleet.
-
The difference in the rolls is because surface ships have more defences to worry about, cannons, torpedo’s and mines, not to mention searchlights, RADAR and other range finding equipment. Subs have to deal with mines and sub nets, but are much harder to detect and so the defences are more passive, giving them a greater chance of passing unmolested.
I thought about making attacks against ships 1 at 4, but that would make the risk of damage too great and the prospect too unappealing, as such, 1 at 2 is a bit too low to make holding a strait worth the effort. With subs, I wanted to make the risk marginal so as to keep it a viable option should running the gauntlet with ships be too much of a risk.
It occurs to me as I write this that shore defences could be used in the English Channel, for a sort of Channel Dash recreation, but I thought that might break the game a little, but of course the option of where and how shore defences are used are up to the players.
Again, I don’t have a problem with the current rule, I’m just looking for a way to spice up the game and leave more options on the table. I actually have another house rule in mind that this one works quite well with but that’s for another post.
As always, comments and criticism are welcome.
One final and only slightly unrelated note; I highly recommend watching The Kings Choice (my inspiration for this house rule) if you get the chance.