Worst rule ever…

Subs and transports do not block sea movements and do not prevent amphibious operations.

It seems realistic. Non combat ships have a difficult time in trying to stop a squadron of warships. Subs usually stay below the water looking for targets and so they do not even try to stop enemy movements. They lurk in the shadow, silently waiting their chance (i.e. their turn) to hit.

IC block blitz, and I see no reason for which they should not.

@Romulus:

IC block blitz, and I see no reason for which they should not.

Definitely. Nobody runs thru a Built-Up Area.

It seems realistic. Non combat ships have a difficult time in trying to stop a squadron of warships. Subs usually stay below the water looking for targets and so they do not even try to stop enemy movements. They lurk in the shadow, silently waiting their chance (i.e. their turn) to hit.

Not really, only if transport and merchant ships were escorted could they escape subs with any sort of odds. Transports alone shouldn’t be able to ignore subs, the only way I can explain this is that they thought it’s a rare occurence and they didn’t want to complicate the game. I’ve seen it happen in games and it’s a frustrating sight!

Excuse me, but according to you the only way to conquer Moscow for the German is by mean of a massive blitz of panzer? One have to use a “can opener” move to win? It is not possible to conquer Moscow in other way?

Then use Italian forces: attack the territory during Italian turn, conquer the territory, conquer the AA and then blitz all the panzers across the territory.

AA is a unit. No matter if it roll dices or not it requires a battle for being captured, this is acceptable for me. Also defenceless transports require a battle to be destroyed even if there is no one die rolled. Also this is acceptable to me. Moreover it is simple to be explained and it is easy to be remembered.

Gaming the system? No I believe it is called “keep it simple strategy” (KISS). Making a rule and then introducing several exceptions is the way to create a complex ruleset that may cause problems to new players and quarrels between experienced player when one of them did not remember Exception 1.3 “Blitzing through ostile territory with only an AA Gun present and no other ground unit” to Rule 4.17/A “Moving tanks of two spaces during Combat Move”.  Moreover, the more are the rules, the greater is the possibility of errors, misprints, and other problems in the rulebook that have to be corrected, with FAQ, Errata etc.

Considering your solid russian strategy, I have some doubt.

Consider a stack of russian unit in Belorussia and an AA Gun in Eastern Ukraine. Consider a German Stack in Poland.

If German is strong enough to move its stack in Eastern Poland and Russian Army is not strong enough to destroy it or at least strafe it, then your strategy is in problem. Because now the Russian army is in a dead zone created by the German stack present in Eastern Poland. Next turn Russia have to make a choice: stay and die or run to live. If they select to stay, next turn German player will attack Belorussia, killing the Russian Army and preparing to invade Moscow, while other panzers and/or fighters in NCM move to Eastern Poland. Panzer will blitz across Belorussia next turn.
Otherwise German army may move in Eastern Ukraine, capture the AA Gun, using it to cover its advanced army.

In your scenario, moreover it is possible also to do the move that you would like to do. If Germans attack Eastern Ukraine and capture the AA Gun then the Russians have to counter during russian turn. Problem: AA Gun, being involved in combat, even if they do not roll dice, may not be moved. So the Russian have the problem to cover the territory where the attack come from: Belorussia. AA Gun cannot be moved to Belorussia, being involved in combat. If Russians leave only an inf there… then the can opener move may be performed: using Japanese airpower to clear the blitz path for the panzers.

If Germans are not able to deadzone the territory in wich Russian army is placed then they do not deserve to conquer Moscow.

What I am trying to say is that A&A is a game that requires sounding strategies. Tricks and expedients may work in few games against some players but there is no solid strategies based only on “gaming the system” approach.

Said this, you may use and propose a House Rule in which AA Gun are not able to stop the blitz, every one is in his right to play the game in the way he enjoys more. So if you feel that the rule is wrong ignore it or make an exception to it. Everyone that likes that HR may use it.
However, there is no need to try to change the OOB rules, because other player, like me, may enjoy to play the game with the rule as they are.

@Panzer:

@critmonster:

what about subs not being able to stop defenseless transports? Or subs not being allowed to stay on the surface during a battle that does not include enemy destroyers?

I am not sure where you reading this from but I check the rules again for AA50 under submarine page 16 of 16, and the only thing it mentions in reference to defending submarines is that -if there is a attacking destroyer present they have to roll a defense roll and cannot use the submerge option instead. If there is no attacking destroyer then they can submerge instead of defending.
This is from the rule book: “If there is at least one attacking destroyer on the battle board, defending submarines will participate in combat during the defending units fire step of the General Combat sequence. Otherwise, each defending submarine may submerge or fire. Remove each submerging submarine from the battle board and place it on the gameboard in the contested sea zone. Roll one die for each remaining defending submarine.”
So I interpelate this as been subs can stay in a battle if they want, but they must stay if there is an enemy destroyer attacking. If you attack a sub without a destroyer then your ships must withstand a free sneak attack and remove any casulties before they get to fire. If they miss then the sub can now sneak attack again or submerge. Also remember planes canoot attack subs without a destroy to help and subs cannot attack planes so they hit only boats.

If you attack my fleet with your air and you do not have a destroyer then my subs cannot soak any hits from your planes, my capital ships have to take it in the shorts. I disagree with this because if I order my subs to stay engaged on the surface and not submerge then they should be eligible for casualties from the planes.

@critmonster:

@Panzer:

@critmonster:

what about subs not being able to stop defenseless transports? Or subs not being allowed to stay on the surface during a battle that does not include enemy destroyers?

I am not sure where you reading this from but I check the rules again for AA50 under submarine page 16 of 16, and the only thing it mentions in reference to defending submarines is that -if there is a attacking destroyer present they have to roll a defense roll and cannot use the submerge option instead. If there is no attacking destroyer then they can submerge instead of defending.
This is from the rule book: “If there is at least one attacking destroyer on the battle board, defending submarines will participate in combat during the defending units fire step of the General Combat sequence. Otherwise, each defending submarine may submerge or fire. Remove each submerging submarine from the battle board and place it on the gameboard in the contested sea zone. Roll one die for each remaining defending submarine.”
So I interpelate this as been subs can stay in a battle if they want, but they must stay if there is an enemy destroyer attacking. If you attack a sub without a destroyer then your ships must withstand a free sneak attack and remove any casulties before they get to fire. If they miss then the sub can now sneak attack again or submerge. Also remember planes canoot attack subs without a destroy to help and subs cannot attack planes so they hit only boats.

If you attack my fleet with your air and you do not have a destroyer then my subs cannot soak any hits from your planes, my capital ships have to take it in the shorts. I disagree with this because if I order my subs to stay engaged on the surface and not submerge then they should be eligible for casualties from the planes.

i guess the take on this situation is that sub have very poor or none surface firepower compared to the other ships to justify that enemy planes would even consider shooting at them

@Octopus:

There is a huge difference between an infantry and an AA.  The difference is, the infantry can be destroyed…

Someone mentioned the idea of capturing the gun…except a solid Russian strategy is to not bother defending both zones that protect Russia (Belorussia and Eastern Ukraine). A single mass of units exist in one zone (along with an AA), while only the AA exists in the other. If the Germans try to capture the gun, they will be taken by the mass in the other zone.

The use of the AA to block the blitz allows the Russians to protect both zones effectively while only occupying 1 zone and risking no units.

Sorry Octopus, but the huge difference is that infantry has a chance of killing a panzer. AA just gets captured. It doesn’t even provide air cover for Moscow since it doesn’t fire on moving AC.

IMHO this does not appear to be a solid Russian strategy.
Besides, if you make a House Rule saying the AA doesn’t block a blitz then the Russian would produce the same cheap road block - actually a 2 IPC cheaper one - that also fights back by placing a single infantry in the non-stacked space. At least that way they get a 1:3 chance of killing a panzer rather than leaving my thrust untouched.

@allboxcars:

@Octopus:

There is a huge difference between an infantry and an AA.  The difference is, the infantry can be destroyed…

Someone mentioned the idea of capturing the gun…except a solid Russian strategy is to not bother defending both zones that protect Russia (Belorussia and Eastern Ukraine). A single mass of units exist in one zone (along with an AA), while only the AA exists in the other. If the Germans try to capture the gun, they will be taken by the mass in the other zone.

The use of the AA to block the blitz allows the Russians to protect both zones effectively while only occupying 1 zone and risking no units.

Sorry Octopus, but the huge difference is that infantry has a chance of killing a panzer. AA just gets captured. It doesn’t even provide air cover for Moscow since it doesn’t fire on moving AC.

IMHO this does not appear to be a solid Russian strategy.
Besides, if you make a House Rule saying the AA doesn’t block a blitz then the Russian would produce the same cheap road block - actually a 2 IPC cheaper one - that also fights back by placing a single infantry in the non-stacked space. At least that way they get a 1:3 chance of killing a panzer rather than leaving my thrust untouched.

Really in Anniversary AAGun cost 6 IPC, then it is possible to buy two infantries that cost the same adn have 2/3 chance of killing an enemy unit.

@Romulus:

Really in Anniversary AAGun cost 6 IPC, then it is possible to buy two infantries that cost the same adn have 2/3 chance of killing an enemy unit.

:| Sir, I stand corrected. I must have been having a MB moment.

@critmonster:

@Panzer:

@critmonster:

what about subs not being able to stop defenseless transports? Or subs not being allowed to stay on the surface during a battle that does not include enemy destroyers?

I am not sure where you reading this from but I check the rules again for AA50 under submarine page 16 of 16, and the only thing it mentions in reference to defending submarines is that -if there is a attacking destroyer present they have to roll a defense roll and cannot use the submerge option instead. If there is no attacking destroyer then they can submerge instead of defending.
This is from the rule book: “If there is at least one attacking destroyer on the battle board, defending submarines will participate in combat during the defending units fire step of the General Combat sequence. Otherwise, each defending submarine may submerge or fire. Remove each submerging submarine from the battle board and place it on the gameboard in the contested sea zone. Roll one die for each remaining defending submarine.”
So I interpelate this as been subs can stay in a battle if they want, but they must stay if there is an enemy destroyer attacking. If you attack a sub without a destroyer then your ships must withstand a free sneak attack and remove any casulties before they get to fire. If they miss then the sub can now sneak attack again or submerge. Also remember planes canoot attack subs without a destroy to help and subs cannot attack planes so they hit only boats.

If you attack my fleet with your air and you do not have a destroyer then my subs cannot soak any hits from your planes, my capital ships have to take it in the shorts. I disagree with this because if I order my subs to stay engaged on the surface and not submerge then they should be eligible for casualties from the planes.

I hear what your saying. In real life subs did have an anti-aircraft gun mounted on its deck for this very reason to protect against planes, but they were only of limited effect. This is probably why the A&A designers decided to allow subs to be hit from planes only if a friendly destroyer is present and to not allow subs to hit planes. Becasue a sub would normally submerge away from planes and planes could fly out of subs range easily. Think about it this way: if you were a fighter pilot engaging a fleet you would target the more visible and valuable surface warships anyway. I know it is supposed to be the defenders choice to remove calsulties, but it does clearly state subs cannot hit planes in the rules. Planes are an expensive piece and subs are not, so I suppose they are trying to “equalize” the pieces being removed. Therefore your fleet should always be comprised of lesser value destroyer pieces to protect the capital pieces from planes and subs, because A&A have eliminated “canon fodder” naval pieces by not being allowed to select a transport as a hit anymore. I believe this is why they added cruisers and made destroyers cheaper to buy. They are the battleship and aircraft carrier protectors.
Even in the original game rules subs could not attack planes, but planes could attack subs without a destroyer (they did not have them in the game yet), so a sub sitting alone in a sea zone was almost toast if a plane could reach it, it had to wait to see if the plane missed then it could submerge. Now a sub can submerge right away before being hit by any piece if there is not a destroyer present. I guess you have to take the good with the bad.
I also think changing the rules so that subs and transport do not control the seazone has changed the way everyone plays, because that was an old trick and it used to bug me how that could be use to slow down your fleet at every turn. :-D

The tanks have to stop to capture the AA Gun, interrogate the AA Gunners, and wait for the lazy MPs to show up and collect the prisoners before they can continue on.  That’s why the gun (and IC) stop blitzing.

ha ha interesting theory you got there jen

@critmonster:

what about subs not being able to stop defenseless transports? Or subs not being allowed to stay on the surface during a battle that does not include enemy destroyers?

second one sucks most

@Frontovik:

@critmonster:

what about subs not being able to stop defenseless transports? Or subs not being allowed to stay on the surface during a battle that does not include enemy destroyers?

second one sucks most

Actually as I said previously, subs CAN stay in a surface battle with other enemy surface warships if the enemy has no destroyers, or it can submerge on its turn, BUT it has to stay and cannot submerge if an enemy destroyer is present.
Subs have no zone of control therefore they are ignored by ALL enemy ships except destroyers, which have to stop if entering a sea zone with an enemy sub, and combat occurs.
Hope this helps clarify. :-)

Destroyers don’t have to stop when they enter a sea zone with an enemy sub.  It’s the other way around.

Ref the subs not stopping transports…. yeah that’s not sitting right eh?

I’m thinking Transports passing thru the sub zone can (at sub owner’s discretion) be subject to a single strike before going on their way…

Transports stopping in the sub zone should be snuff-able (again at the sub owner’s discretion) like any other warship.

Transports disembarking amphib assault in a sub zone… maybe the single strike after which all cargo is considered safely ashore.

hmmmm…

@Krieghund:

Destroyers don’t have to stop when they enter a sea zone with an enemy sub.  It’s the other way around.

I explained that kinda wrong. You are correct if a sub enters a seazone that contains and enemy destroyer they MUST stop there. However, if a destroyer enters a seazone with an enemy sub they MAY stop there if they want to conduct combat, or they can choose to ignore the sub and continue past it. That is the correct explanation. :- :mrgreen:

panzer: my point was that I cannot take hits from air to my subs unless you bring a destroyer so if you attack my fleet without a destroyer it is actually to your advantage because all your hits must be taken on my airforce and capitol ships rather than taking them on my subs. I know that my subs get a “deadly” first shot (@1) without your DD but I hardly find that equitable, you sink my fleet (except subs) then move your DD over in non combat to neutralize them on my turn. I feel that as the controlling nation I should get to decide if they submerge. I am with Octo on this, I play the rules as stated and avoid house rules (excpet perhaps bids).

Perhaps I have not played enough games to see the air/sub balance.

I also find it odd that the U-Boat commander sits and watches transports unload troops onto his homeland rather than firing a torpedo at them