Submarine Rule Intepretation

Page 16 of the box rules states that Submarines on both sides may retreat by submerging.  It’s implied that this takes place before the attacker choses to press the attack or withdraw, though not specifically stated.

Although page 19 is even more ambiguous.  It states that do the following:

1. Place units on the battle board
2. Conduct Opening Fire (submarines firing here)
3. Remove Opening Fire Casualties
4. Attacker Fires
5. Defender Fires
6. Attack/Retreat (Submarines on page 16 for the defender are given the option to attack/retreat in this phase as well.)

LHTR 2.0 states that Phase 7: Withdraw or Press Attack.

Then, to clarify on page 14, LHTR goes on to say, and I’m going to bold face this as a direct quote:

SUBMARINES HAVE AN ADDITIONAL WITHDRAWAL CAPABILITY THAT MAY BE EXERCISED AT THE END OF ANY ROUND OF COMBAT.  SUBMARINES MAY WITHDRAW BY SUBMERGING. THEY DO NOT HAVE TO ALL SUBMERGE AT THE SAME TIME.

That means that my subarines in SZ 7 may submerge immediately after opening fire phase of the combat before any attackers can fire guarentying that I will have both submarines for my counter attack on SZ 7.  And, if by some weird circumstance, you fail to sink both the transport and destroyer and thus are allowed to withdraw, Germany would have a total of 3 submarines, 5 fighters and 2 bombers to hit SZ 8 with, even if you put up a blocking unit in SZ 12 (unless it’s the American destroyer, then Germany would only have two submarines to use.)

DM:

I think it would be considerably foolish for England to move into SZ 15.

I’ve always said the best option for England if in this scenario would be to evacuate the destroyer, fighter and armor and use them to either help in Russia, to move to the Atlantic for use against Germany or against Japan.

The last thing they should do is attempt to get fancy and try and kill off the German southern fleet because it will only get them badly hurt and Germany will be all the stronger for it.

Jen, you have completely misread that.

A Round of Combat is all of the listed steps of combat.

Opening fire is ONE segment of one round of combat.  It is not a ROUND of combat in and of itself.

Read the paragraph in context and it is clear that retreat (including submergence of submarines) occurs ONCE per round of combat, and then only at a specific phase of that round of combat (Specifically the option to submerge submarines is listed as occurring in STEP 7 of 8 in a round of combat, NOT as you posit it as being permitted after Step 2.

I think you are incorrect in your assumptions, Mr. Switch.

LHTR specifically calls it PHASE 4: CONDUCT COMBAT.  It does not say “Combat Round”.

It then proceeds to list out the steps in conduct combat PHASE.

It also stipulates that combat continues unless the defender withdraws all submarines leaving no defending units in play.  Since attacker retreat can only occur when there are defending units in play, then it suggests that the defender can submerge and stop a retreat.  A risk England would have to take in attacking a SZ 7 abandonment of the Baltic.

All this suggests that the defender has the option to submerge before the attacker has the option to surrender the sea zone.  A very valuable tool to use in “assisting” England with the deconstruction of their fleet.

However, I won’t be reading all 30 pages, so if you find something that contradicts, feel free to share the page and paragraph number.  Line number would be great too.

Just read the 8 steps of Combat.

You yourself have never played with that fracked up ruling to my knowledge, I have no idea why you are advocating that misinterpretation of the rules here.

Also, this is off topic of the original post as this is now a Rules discussion.

Feel free to start a new thread then, Mr. Switch.

And I did read the 7 steps of combat in LHTR.  It specifically states that submarines may withdraw after any round of combat.  Opening Fire round.  Attacker/Defender round.  Attacker choses to attack/retreat round.  Those are how I read it.

And no, I’ve never had to play with those rules because I never find myself in a situation where it is needed.  Generally speaking, the enemy attacks my SZ 5 fleet (whether in SZ 5, 6, 7 or 3) with air power only and I kill the submarines to give my destroyer the best possible chance to cripple the RAF for me.

I dunno about the rest of the world, but that’s pretty standard for me, and I presume for most everyone by this point.  Though I don’t need 40 people posting that they submerge instead, I’ll believe you that some of you submerge, some kill the submarines and leave the transport/destroyer for last.

As for CSub rules, honestly, I have no real drive to read them.  They’re pretty fracked up from what I remember.

However, for the sake of argument, let’s pretend you are correct until such time as you prove you are definitively; Attacker attacks with battleship, transport, 2 fighters, bomber and scores two hits, defender scores two hits.  Attacker takes damage to battleship and loses transport.  Attacker then determines to press the attack.  Defender takes transport, destroyer and submerges.

OR

Attacker retreats to SZ 8, builds a carrier and destroyer (best possible defensive punch they can afford on R1) and America units.  Now, the Russian submarine, I presume, is blocking SZ 12 so that America can reinforce the now empty England with some ground troops.

Germany has 3 submarines, 5 fighters, 2 bombers against battleship, 2 destroyers, carrier, 3 transports, 2 fighters

FROOD:

Attacker wins decisively with at least two bombers left most of the time.  The defender BARELY has a chance to keep her battleship alive.  And I mean BARELY.  We’re talking less odds then I’d be happy with as an island nation with no capitol ships within range to defend new transports.

And that’s assuming you are correct!  If you are incorrect it’s even WORSE because now you are trapped without the American Transports and Destroyer for help!

PHASE:  The entire aspect of a given turn of play (such as the Combat Movement PHASE or the Combat PHASE)

ROUND:  Each repeat of the 7 STEPS of active combat operations

STEP:  Each sub-part of a Combat Round
1:  Place units on Battle Board
2:  Conduct Opening Fire
3:  Remove opening fire casualties
4:  Attacking Units Fire
5:  Defending Units Fire
6:  Remove Casualties
7:  Press Attack or Retreat

If 1 round of combat does not complete the combat, you repeat steps 4 through 7.

The rules are explicit that under Step 7 of the combat sequence…

SUBMARINES:
Attacking submarines may retreat during this step by submerging…

Now, if you wish to argue, let’s see what others have to say about this…

So, in your mind, Mr. Switch, do you think that Submarines submerge before or after the attacker decides to engage again?

By your own admission (and I agree that’s how the OOB rules read, I disagree on LHTR until I get a page and paragraph) the submarines submerge in the same “sub-part” of a combat round.

@ncscswitch:

PHASE:  The entire aspect of a given turn of play (such as the Combat Movement PHASE or the Combat PHASE)

ROUND:  Each repeat of the 7 STEPS of active combat operations

STEP:  Each sub-part of a Combat Round
1:  Place units on Battle Board
2:  Conduct Opening Fire
3:  Remove opening fire casualties
4:  Attacking Units Fire
5:  Defending Units Fire
6:  Remove Casualties
7:  Press Attack or Retreat

If 1 round of combat does not complete the combat, you repeat steps 4 through 7.

The rules are explicit that under Step 7 of the combat sequence…

SUBMARINES:
Attacking submarines may retreat during this step by submerging…

Now, if you wish to argue, let’s see what others have to say about this…

Other than the statement in red (it should say to repeat steps 2 though 7), everything above is correct.

Subs sumberge in step 7 in both the box rules and LHTR.  In LHTR it clearly states that the attacker has the choice to retreat and/or submerge before the defender may submerge.  In the box rules it is never clearly stated in which order these things occur, only that they all occur in step 7.  The only reasonable interpretations can be that they occur simultaneously, or that the attacker chooses first, since that is the “normal” order of things.

The part in read is from LHTR, but it has qualifiers regarding SUB opening fire in subsequent rounds of combat.

I think it was written that way to remove any questions about BB’s support shots and AA fire in subsequent combat rounds.

From LHTR 2.0, page 14:

As long as combat continues, repeat steps 2-6 (only subs will be able to fire in step 2 - all other opening round fire capabilities are for one round of fire only).

If no submarines are present, then repeat steps 4-6.  Each such set of steps constitutes one cycle of combat.

The reference to steps 2 through 6 and 4 through 6 assume that the repeating cycle is actually part of step 7.  This could have been worded a bit more clearly, but I think the intent is evident.

I also think that this section may be the source of Jen’s misperception.  There is an inconsistency of terms here.  Opening Fire is referred to here as a “round”, while the complete combat round is referred to as a “cycle”.  However it also says on the same page that subs may submerge “at the end of ANY round of combat”.  This should read “at the end of ANY cycle of combat”.  No matter how many times you proofread something like this, there’s always something you miss!

@Cmdr:

However, for the sake of argument, let’s pretend you are correct until such time as you prove you are definitively; Attacker attacks with battleship, transport, 2 fighters, bomber and scores two hits, defender scores two hits.  Attacker takes damage to battleship and loses transport.  Attacker then determines to press the attack.  Defender takes transport, destroyer and submerges.

OR

Attacker retreats to SZ 8, builds a carrier and destroyer (best possible defensive punch they can afford on R1) and America units.  Now, the Russian submarine, I presume, is blocking SZ 12 so that America can reinforce the now empty England with some ground troops.

Germany has 3 submarines, 5 fighters, 2 bombers against battleship, 2 destroyers, carrier, 3 transports, 2 fighters

FROOD:

Attacker wins decisively with at least two bombers left most of the time.  The defender BARELY has a chance to keep her battleship alive.  And I mean BARELY.  We’re talking less odds then I’d be happy with as an island nation with no capitol ships within range to defend new transports.

And that’s assuming you are correct!  If you are incorrect it’s even WORSE because now you are trapped without the American Transports and Destroyer for help!

You’ve made two assumption errors here.

1).  Why would you put a better defensive piece out of a key battle as a blocker.  I would take a US tpt into sz12 with ground units to take algeria with 2 more ground units into an already weakened German Africa.

2).  Unless both subs hit, UK could lose a ftr to maximize their defensive capability in sz8 (we ARE listing max defenses, right?)

this gives 3 subs, 5 ftrs, 2 bmrs on
3 tpts, sub, 2 DD, A/C, BB, 2 FTR

I see 40% win for Germany.

I STILL say I would trade my entire allied navy in this example for the German airforce and no Germans in Africa.

@axis_roll:

You’ve made two assumption errors here.

1).  Why would you put a better defensive piece out of a key battle as a blocker.  I would take a US tpt into sz12 with ground units to take algeria with 2 more ground units into an already weakened German Africa.

I didn’t, someone said use the Submarine to block, I believe it was Switch, but I don’t remember for sure.  Anyway, the Transport would be needed to defend England with troops assuming England did not attack SZ 7 and spent all it’s money on navy.  That would mean that the only defenders in England would be 2 infantry, artillery, armor, bomber.  America would need to bring 2 infantry, artillery, armor, fighter, bomber just to make sure there was no Sea Lion success story.  That negates using a transport to block in SZ 12.

Also, I do not agree that 2 ground troops in Algeria weakens Germany at all.  I can easily block England from attack SZ 13, and retake Algeria and take Egypt with convenience if I want too.  However, it does weaken the allies because now they have no units in Africa.

2).  Unless both subs hit, UK could lose a ftr to maximize their defensive capability in sz8 (we ARE listing max defenses, right?)

this gives 3 subs, 5 ftrs, 2 bmrs on
3 tpts, sub, 2 DD, A/C, BB, 2 FTR

I see 40% win for Germany.

Losing a fighter makes little sense.  Losing the bomber maybe, but you’ll want the fighter for defense in SZ 8, I would assume.

I STILL say I would trade my entire allied navy in this example for the German airforce and no Germans in Africa.

But that is not the trade you are suggesting.  You are asking to trade the entire Allied Navy + most of the allied ground forces (and all but 1 infantry in Africa) without doing any serious damage to Germany in return.  Okay, you take out 5 fighters leaving Germany with 2 bombers, transport, battleship.  That’s plenty.

Top it off with Germany being able to rebuild fighters cheaper then you can buy carriers and battleships and I fail to see how this trade is in your favor?  And that’s assuming Germany bothers.  With no real navy to worry about (and two bombers can can reach out and touch any unprotected transports you build, forcing you to build warships first) why shouldn’t Germany and Japan go 100% armor dash for Moscow?  Even unbalanced trades where they lose more than the Russians will eventually let them take Moscow and probably before you can get the American transport train up.

@Cmdr:

@axis_roll:

You’ve made two assumption errors here.

1).  Why would you put a better defensive piece out of a key battle as a blocker.  I would take a US tpt into sz12 with ground units to take algeria with 2 more ground units into an already weakened German Africa.

I didn’t, someone said use the Submarine to block, I believe it was Switch, but I don’t remember for sure.  Anyway, the Transport would be needed to defend England with troops assuming England did not attack SZ 7 and spent all it’s money on navy.  That would mean that the only defenders in England would be 2 infantry, artillery, armor, bomber.  America would need to bring 2 infantry, artillery, armor, fighter, bomber just to make sure there was no Sea Lion success story.  That negates using a transport to block in SZ 12.

I already said I would buy an inf, DD and AC and hit SZ7
so no Transport in SZ7 unless you bought a tpt on G1 (and an A/C to protect that tpt)

UK would have defending:
UK: 3 inf, art, tank, 2 ftr
US: inf,tank,bmr
10 units, pretty good.

Even IF Germany were to go for London, German airforce is greatly diminished, UK could easily take it back and the allied fleet now rules the atlantic.

Also, I do not agree that 2 ground troops in Algeria weakens Germany at all.  I can easily block England from attack SZ 13, and retake Algeria and take Egypt with convenience if I want too.  However, it does weaken the allies because now they have no units in Africa.

Didn’t germany already NOT attack AES?  wasn’t that part of this grand master plan? 
Doesn’t UK original AES units + 2 more US units > German units in Libya?

Oh that’s right JENFORZES!

2).  Unless both subs hit, UK could lose a ftr to maximize their defensive capability in sz8 (we ARE listing max defenses, right?)

this gives 3 subs, 5 ftrs, 2 bmrs on
3 tpts, sub, 2 DD, A/C, BB, 2 FTR

I see 40% win for Germany.

Losing a fighter makes little sense.  Losing the bomber maybe, but you’ll want the fighter for defense in SZ 8, I would assume.
maybe I should’ve said bomber instead (depends on if Germany did buy a transport to still threaten London) .  Two american ftrs can land on a SZ8 carrier.

But you didn’t comment on the only 40% win I find.  Sounds like a losing battle to me

I STILL say I would trade my entire allied navy in this example for the German airforce and no Germans in Africa.

But that is not the trade you are suggesting.  You are asking to trade the entire Allied Navy + most of the allied ground forces (and all but 1 infantry in Africa) without doing any serious damage to Germany in return.  Okay, you take out 5 fighters leaving Germany with 2 bombers, transport, battleship.  That’s plenty.

Top it off with Germany being able to rebuild fighters cheaper then you can buy carriers and battleships and I fail to see how this trade is in your favor?  And that’s assuming Germany bothers.  With no real navy to worry about (and two bombers can can reach out and touch any unprotected transports you build, forcing you to build warships first) why shouldn’t Germany and Japan go 100% armor dash for Moscow?  Even unbalanced trades where they lose more than the Russians will eventually let them take Moscow and probably before you can get the American transport train up.

What about the ‘opportunity cost’ of not attacking any Russia ground units with German air support?  ESPECIALLY if you’ve added a bomber G1 (and tpt and a/c?), your ground unit count might be a bit down. 
As the allies, I would ensure I gave Germany PLENTY of targets, especially Russia ground units.  EVEN JENFORZES have a limit … (in theory)

@Cmdr:

So, in your mind, Mr. Switch, do you think that Submarines submerge before or after the attacker decides to engage again?

By your own admission (and I agree that’s how the OOB rules read, I disagree on LHTR until I get a page and paragraph) the submarines submerge in the same “sub-part” of a combat round.

The following is from LHTR 2.0, page 14, about 2 inches below the paragraph you quoted

@LHTR:

See the paragraphs below for a more complete description and limitations of each kind of
withdrawal.

In step 7, combat continues unless one of the following conditions occurs (in this order of sequence):
Condition A) Attacker withdraws all attacking units (See detailed explanations below);
Condition B) Defender withdraws all submarines by submerging, leaving no other defending
units in play;
Condition C) Either or both sides lose all units

Box rules are definitely ambiguous, but there is absolutely no question with LHTR.

Okay, so attacker can chicken out before defender does.

Seems backwards, IMHO.  At least in LHTR.

Anyway, the potential threats are:

England is stuck in a forward position without American naval aid thus allowing Germany a significant attack with minimal risk
England and America cower in SZ 8 with every last piece of equipment they have, letting Germany unite her forces and have no risk in Africa at all
England jumps the gun, putting all their eggs in one basket hoping to catch Germany sleeping by putting her RAF in Russia

England does something smart and sails around S. Africa with the IO fleet or attempts to annoy Japan with it.

Any of those 4 options is a win for Germany.  Germany has lost NOTHING.  England and America have bowed to Germany and not only given her the initiative, but delayed their own moves by at least a full turn.

Axis:

Your numbers are incorrect.  Frood has the SZ 8 battle (assuming you left something in SZ 12 to stop the battleship/transport) at 49% attacker, 47% defender with most likely outcomes being 2 bombers and a fighter survive for the attacker.  And if defender survives, most likely outcome is you have a battleship and nothing else.

Again, I’ll take that with Germany.  Since Russia will now have at least 3 rounds with no support from the allies, I can mass produce tanks iwth Japan and Germany and just run over her without resistance.  And, without English or American navies, there will be no assistance in Africa, which means Germany can expect to be up in the low 50 IPCs in a matter of rounds.

Sure, I’m short on fighters, but fighters die to AA Guns, tanks don’t.  Fighters cost twice as much as tanks.  I’ll take 8 tanks over 4 fighters any day against Russia if England and America are fleetless.

@axis_roll:

I STILL say I would trade my entire allied navy in this example for the German airforce and no Germans in Africa.

Totally agree. In fact I can’t really think of an example where I wouldn’t make this trade. The Allied navy can be rebuilt if necessary. The German air force on the other hand will never return in equal numbers once decimated unless the Allies are already on the ropes.

@Zero:

@axis_roll:

I STILL say I would trade my entire allied navy in this example for the German airforce and no Germans in Africa.

Totally agree. In fact I can’t really think of an example where I wouldn’t make this trade. The Allied navy can be rebuilt if necessary. The German air force on the other hand will never return in equal numbers once decimated unless the Allies are already on the ropes.

The problem is he does not get the entire German Air Force, nor is he getting ANY of the Germans in Africa.  Not according to my plan.  He’s getting all the fighters at the cost of all the british fighters and all the british battleships and all of Britians first round of purchases AND Germany is getting Africa for little or no cost.

Germany should have, in Libya on R2: 3 Infantry, Artillery, 2 Armor and that’s with NO EUROPEAN UNITS TRANSFERED.  England, according to his plan, has brought nothing to the show in Africa and has spent the entire first round putting boats in the water.  America likewise has brought nothing to the show in Africa, instead, bringing units to England to counter Sea Lion (as if that’s a real threat.)

Anyway, with the alteration of the rules, thanks to Tim the Enchanter (not sarcastic, honest thanks, if someone hadn’t nerfed my karma generating ability, I would have given you some karma for that) I’d say the SZ 5 fleet goes to SZ 6.  It can still be hit, but now England cannot possibly hit and run.  Meanwhile, the Germans can still use them in SZ 12 if they are NOT hit.

Before this gets off topic…

Is everyone in agreement now that SUBs may NOT submerge immediately after opening fire, despite Jen’s previous posts to the contrary?