Air can't attack subs rule?

Ahh. so in naval battles with air and subs, air units must be rolled seperately from naval units? This isnt in the rules either, but a logical conclusion from this thread. How else so you know what are air unit hits or not. On the converse, a DD present allows air to hit subs, but not vice versa. So if a DD is present, then subs must now roll seperately from other naval units. Well, i guess they are the only unit that defends at 1, so this is a mute point on defense, but on offense, it an annoyance. This is complicated!!

When i play this with my borther for the first time, I can see an arguement ensue when i try to explain all of this to him, and it is not clearly stated in the rulebook. ahh well!!

@AxisOfEvil:

Ahh. so in naval battles with air and subs, air units must be rolled seperately from naval units? This isnt in the rules either, but a logical conclusion from this thread. How else so you know what are air unit hits or not. On the converse, a DD present allows air to hit subs, but not vice versa. So if a DD is present, then subs must now roll seperately from other naval units. Well, i guess they are the only unit that defends at 1, so this is a mute point on defense, but on offense, it an annoyance. This is complicated!!

-) if no DD is present, subs anyway hit during surprise strike, so then you roll for them seperately anyway.
-) if a DD is present, you just need to remember how many hits you had with subs. as the amount of sub hits equals the amount of naval units you have to pick as casualties.
-) if there are air units, but NO DD, you have to roll air units seperately, so you know how many surface warships are subject to be removed from the game.

Since when did the submerge feature become manditory? This sounds like a house rule waiting to happen. I think this rule is so confusing to people b/c the defender has never NOT had the option to use a piece as fodder.

Submerging is not mandatory.  Air unit hits simply cannot be assigned to subs unless there is a destroyer.  This works in exactly the same way as the rule that sub hits can’t be applied to air units, except there’s a condition attached (the destroyer).  Sea units can still hit subs if there is no destroyer, unless the sub chooses to submerge.

the air vs sub rules are starting to make more sense since subs do not have control of a sea zone.  I just wish it was pointed out in the rules more clearly.

ie fig could clear out the surface ships to allow TR to pass safely to another sz even though subs are there.

@jeffdestroyer:

the air vs sub rules are starting to make more sense since subs do not have control of a sea zone.  I just wish it was pointed out in the rules more clearly.

Me, too!

ok so if UK planes attack German Baltic fleet which contains both subs and destroyers…can the German player take the sub as a hit? I suspect the answer is now no?

and its no unless UK brings in a destroyer of their own right>?

@Imperious:

ok so if UK planes attack German Baltic fleet which contains both subs and destroyers…can the German player take the sub as a hit? I suspect the answer is now no?

and its no unless UK brings in a destroyer of their own right>?

You are correct.

I got a question regarding this rule.

In my last game, the us player attacked my jap fleet.

I had 3 transports, 1 cruiser, 1 battleship, 2 carriers and 4 fighters.
He had 4 subs, 2 destoyers, 1 battleship, 1 fighter and 1 carrier.

My fighters could only hit his surface ships, while my other ships were hitting his subs.

So what remained was that i had 4 fighters left vs 3 of his subs.
I also had 3 transports. So my question is: do you sink the transports and land the fighters at the island? Or do the transports remain and the subs have to submerge? We decided to sink the transports and land the fighters, but there was alot of discussion about this.

You played it correctly.  The subs couldn’t hit the fighters, and the fighters couldn’t hit the subs without a destroyer.  The subs weren’t forced to submerge, since they couldn’t be hit.  This left the transports defenseless.

This left the transports defenseless.

meaning that the transports all die? So if he retreated before he faced a situation where all he had was fighters…he could have saved his 3 transports by a retreat of his other naval units?

He couldn’t retreat, as he was the defender.  If he was the attacker, he could have saved whatever transports weren’t actually hit by retreating.

Ok, another followup: So the subs can actually hit transports during the resolve combat phase, but only when the transports are the only ones left to hit? So for instance if he still had some surface ships for my fighters to hit, he would roll subs vs my transports?

Technically, yes.  However, practically it doesn’t make any difference, since under the circumstances it would eventually just come down to the subs and transports anyway.

If he had alot more surface ships that was going to be destroyed by fighters, the option of a later retreat would make it important to roll vs the transports. But i see now how the fight was resolved so thanks for the quick replies.

That’s true.  I didn’t think about that.  :oops:  If he retreated before all the transports were hit by the subs at least some of them could survive.  Good catch!

Krieghund,

So, to further clarify, here’s the following situation:

My Fleet of 9 Super Subs, 2 Destroyers, and 1 Battleship attack my opponents fleet of 3 transports, 3 Aircraft Carriers, 1 Cruiser, 1 Battleship, and 6 Fighters.

My Super Subs all hit, but my other ships all miss.  My opponent must choose all of his ships as casualties, including his 3 transports, right?  Then his Fighters fire back hitting 3. I “soak” 1 hit on my Battleship, and take the 2 Destroyers as casualties.  Round 2, I choose to retreat, because the only units firing would be my lone Battleship against the 6 Fighters.

Is the correct interpretation of the rules?

If so, then my opponents big mistake was having no Destroyers with his fleet.

Yes, this is correct.  Having no destroyers is a pretty big mistake.