Sub on carrier?

Subs are great. I just hit up Safeway for their $5 Friday and I copped a sub.

Well some interesting facts.

All agree that in Europe 1940 the axis need a bid.
All agree that japan is hard to stop unless US invest heavy in the pacific.

In global nearly all players give the bid to the allies on the europe board and nobody gives the bid to the pac board.

Has anyone tried the “China first” proposal I made? I used this solution in AA50 as a bid alternative, and I think it works well in G40 too, but haven’t received much feedback from actual games other than my own group.  Maybe its because the HR forums are a wasteland of forgetfulness? haha.  
:-D

The basic idea is pretty simple, everything else stays the same, but China moves first in the turn order!
So in Global that’d be…

China, Germany, Russia, Japan, USA, UK/Pac, Italy, Anzac, France (then back to China)

I’m not saying that this change does away with the need for an Allied bid entirely, but it surely makes the bid range a bit narrower, and a lower. I mean if you can bring it down from 15, back into the single digits that’s a definite positive right? And China is a lot more fun to play this way. Its not like you’re getting “11 infantry in Yunnan”, but it does allow China to pull back and consolidate their starting forces, and build 1 round worth of additional units. It gives them their artillery in the first round, and bonus for control of the Burma road. What’s more it gives them a much better chance to secure their National Objective in subsequent rounds. This adjustment in turn order, also affords the Chinese an opening attack option in they want to get balsy!

The reason I really like this approach is because it doesn’t mess with the Europe side of the map (e.g it doesn’t break the med.) Doesn’t change the situation outside of the Chinese theater, since those units are restricted on where they can move. And most importantly, it gives Japan more to worry about. Sure, you’re probably going to kick a lot more ass as Allies if you give UK an extra carrier in the Med, but if that kind of bid strikes you as overly distorting you might try this instead. It’s pretty easy to implement and makes China a lot more effective as a player nation, which eases the pressure on the other Pacific nations. China has an advantage (over India) in that it can’t be strategically bombed or convoy raided into non-existence. Also, you can preserve the illusion that the OOB force distribution of units on the gameboard, actually corresponds to something in reality. As if the units OOB units where chosen for some reason by the designer, to be at least vaguely historical. This change in turn order of just one Nation, allows to avoid bringing too many extra units into the board outside of the normal purchasing/placement mechanisms. Its at least as easy to explain to your opponent as a standard bid, and if you still want to bid anyway, then go for it. But the change is so simple, and it really does give Japan more to chew on, and it seems like the Pacific side of the map is the one that is grabbing all the attention lately in terms of balance.

Also, for the history buffs…I feel like this tweak gives a slight nod to the fact that the War had been going on in China, even before all of Europe and the rest of the world was embroiled in the conflict.

“July 7, 1937 a day that lives in”… I don’t know, the first turn of G40 at least? hehe. There are crazy numbers of potential players in China. The materials are produced there more often than not. Why not roll the dice and see if a China first approach will work? Anathema to all Americans, like me! But in the game’s turn order I think it is kind of cool ;)

Great - thanks

Lesson: bring a DD along when there are Subs around and you are serious about landing!
Brilliant scenario though.

Thanks for the clarification. I still want my game Noll!

Carrier planes are always defending in the air, no matter what type of units are attacking.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Rorschach:

@calvinhobbesliker:

@knp7765:

If two US carriers were attacked by a Japanese submarine, and there were no US destroyers present, the fighters on the carrier that got damaged would not be lost in the air.  They would be stuck on the deck of the carrier until the carrier could get to a friendly naval base for repairs. 
Since planes can not hit submarines without a friendly destroyer present, if a submarine attacks a carrier there is no reason for the planes to take off from the carrier.  They would simply have to withstand the attack aboard the carrier like cargo on transports in hopes that the carrier’s own anti-sub defenses can get the sub or the sub breaks off the attack.
Therefore, you would not lose your planes if the carrier only took one hit. 
However, say your carrier is next to a friendly island or coast and gets attacked by a pack of subs that gets two hits on that carrier.  Then you would lose your planes even though they are just 1 space away because they never took off from the carrier because planes can’t hit submarines.  That part sucks.

All of that is wrong. The planes are always in the air and thus if the CV is damaged, they have to land within 1 space or die.

Calvin is correct.  The only times planes are considered in Cargo on a CV is when they are your allies planes, at which point they are not in the air until that players turn.

To clarify that, allied planes are only cargo if the carrier is attacking. If the carrier is defending, allied planes can still try to land within one space.

My mistake guys.  I just went back and reread the rules regarding carriers and defending aircraft and see now that ANY attack on the carrier has the planes defending in the air, even if the attack is by subs.  I guess I missed that part before.  Thanks for the correction.

I reckon you are not a piano player?

:)

I agree with the attack value of subs and the comparison with bombers is really true. Sometimes I need to land a lonely bomber somewhere on its own and then it gets killed by an inf and art, or something. Same with subs.