The provided FAQ already offers some interesting insights into rules related questions. Insights that arise some follow-up questions:
(Quotes are from the above mentioned FAQ)
Defending Submarines do not have the option to submerge.
What about all the rules that base on the (defending) submarine’s ability to submerge:
Are seazones containing only enemy subs hostile now?
Can we still choose to ignore enemy submarines?
Do the “Sea Units Starting in Hostile Sea Zones”-rules now apply for seazones containing only an enemy submarine?
Do submarines now block movement?
What is the impact on the defending sub’s Surprise Strike ability?
The defender obviously still needs a destroyer to cancel the attacking subs submersible ability. What is the reasoning behind this introduced imbalance?
First of all, the game is still in development, and once the Early Access starts, players will be able to file feature requests at our service desk.
Right now: Sea zones with enemy subs are still considered friendly, but defenders are not able to submerge their submarines at this time. Submarines do not block unit movement. At this time, all defending subs that do not have an enemy destroyer in the battle automatically conduct a surprise strike.
About your last question: the change was made to accommodate asynchronous play. The developers might look at ways to address this based on the community feedback.
Good to read, that the core rules behind that did not change,
@JuliusBorisovBeamdog , thank you for your answer.
So I understand that whenever during the game the opponent usually needs to take any action (here: decide whether to submerge or not) the rules have been “adjusted” to allow for an “uninterruptible gameplay”.
Unfortunately it costs the submarine a core ability: to submerge!
Interesting approach however :smiley:
I think defending subs loosing the ability to submerge is just flat out wrong; especially solo subs. It breaks the spirit of “pass through” and is non-intuitive for A&A players.
Dave Jensen, Founder of Axis & Allies .org
Agreed, @djensen , it looks like the decision for what they call “asynchronous play” dominates the development of the software, causing some “side effects”.
